No, I'm not talking about the influence of the great farcical newpaper. Instead, I'm talking about layers of propaganda.
I've often argued that, regarding Iraq, America will try to justify doing virtually whatever it wants. If things improve in Iraq, "we" can take the credit and even stay there to make sure things keep improving, and if things worsen we can stay to "make things better."
For example, the opportunistic Bechtel Corporation signed [an] infrastructure repair/rehabilitation contract on April 17, 2003: "One of the agreements of this contract states that
Bechtel is to repair or rehabilitate critical water treatment,
pumping, and distribution in 15 urban areas in central and southern
Iraq within the first 6 months.
Sadr City, obviously, is not too high on their priority list."
6.3 Baghdad Dispatches
Note how avoiding Sadr City could function in terms of propaganda. If Bechtel (or some other corporation) ever would fix some of their infrastructure, they could take credit and perhaps receive credentials and accolades. If, on the other hand, they refuse to repair certain areas deemed as "terrorist strongholds," then it's a victory because they're taking a stand against aiding and abetting terrorists. It's a fascinating position either way, and the propagandistic (bullshit) possibilities are endless. So, in a way, you have an "onion effect" with propaganda. One layer leads to another.
Now, how might the onion peel for the following story?
Quote:
BAGHDAD — When Gen. David H. Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker brief Congress this week, they will be hard-pressed to depict Iraq as moving toward stability in the wake of recent violence that sent deaths soaring to their highest level in seven months.
Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's move against Shiite Muslim militias has revealed the gravity of the country's Shiite rivalries, just as U.S. forces are decreasing their presence.
Officials foresee no ebb in Iraq violence |
Grandpa h.