Military Review

How the United States and the United Kingdom prepared for information aggression


Provocation as a way to create a pretext for action is as old as the world. Arson of the Reichstag gave the Nazis a reason to start repressions against the Communists and other parties, which led to the creation of the Third Reich with one NSDAP. Proof of? The Reichstag is on fire, and in its corridors the Dutch Communist Van der Lubbe was detained. What other evidence? None Yet obvious! Van der Lubbe smiled the whole process (probably drugged) and went to the guillotine. Evidence of the communists' involvement in the arson was never found; therefore, Georgi Dimitrov’s Bulgarian even the Nazi Themis justified and freed. But the goal of the provocation has already been achieved - the Fuhrer of the NSDAP gathered in his hands all conceivable power.

Today, the Anglo-Saxons apply a similar scheme in Syria.

Someone used sarin in the suburbs of Damascus. On the Internet there were videos with dying people. Everything is clear - applied chemical weapons Bashar Asad. Proof of? Do you have enough clips on the Internet? Then the UN inspectors found fragments with inscriptions in Russian with traces of sarin. True, such trifles that these fragments from the 60's Soviet warhead, which is not in service with the Syrian army, are not taken into account.

Theme "weapon mass destruction (WMD as a pretext for invasion) "for the West is not new. That is how the United States and Great Britain justified their invasion of Iraq. One of my readers, who asked not to publish his name, sent a material on the analysis of how the West created the necessary public opinion through fraud and falsification during the invasion of this country. Parallels are visible to the naked eye.

Here is this material. This is a chronology, a step-by-step analysis of the actions of London, since the one who sent the material in those years lived and worked in the Russian mission in Great Britain. The peculiarities of the strike by the United States and England on Iraq in 2003 were the fact that at that time the aggressors did not even consider it necessary to get UN approval. Just invaded without any resolutions. 10 years have passed. See how the situation has changed - today the same countries cannot afford it. And it is gratifying.

But back on 10 years ago ...

“Every day it becomes obvious to the world community that the reason for the war with Iraq, as well as the accusations of the regime of S. Hussein that he harbored weapons of mass destruction, and was ready to use it against his neighbors, were fictitious and fraudulent. The leadership of the United States and Great Britain, using methods and methods of manipulating consciousness on a global scale, literally wrested consent to a military action from their peoples. In other words, there was a grand propaganda campaign on a global scale. Of great interest to researchers are the actions of the leading powers of the “coalition of good will”, the United States and Great Britain, in de facto forcing their citizens to support aggression against Iraq.

The purpose of this article is to attempt to describe the chronology of actions and reveal methods of manipulation during a public relations campaign, with the help of which the British government, in full compliance with the existing legislation of the country, was approved by the British for their actions.

Before the beginning of the narration, it is necessary to say that British specialists in the field of public relations divide operations carried out in the information field into operations in the media and information operations. In this case, the first type of operation is aimed at its own population in order to inspire him with the necessary thoughts of Her Majesty’s Government Other informational operations are carried out to influence the enemy.

Great Britain took an active part in the 1991 war against Iraq, and its aircraft since then for over ten years have been patrolling Iraq’s restricted areas for Iraqi flights. aviation. However, in the end, the leadership of the United States and Great Britain decided to overthrow S. Hussein and create a "democratic government" in Iraq.

Due to the fact that the relevant media authorities in the UK have a detailed psychological analysis of the British population with clearly defined target audiences, the task of introducing the most original, memorable and strategically correct metaphors into the minds of the British were crucial in the “operations in the media” to change the picture world of ordinary Britons. Since the beginning of the Iraq-Kuwait war, the British authorities and the media constantly “fueled” the Iraqi theme, publishing materials aimed at “demonizing” S. Hussein to implement the campaign. Here are just some steps towards achieving the conceived goal - the creation of the necessary public opinion in order to eventually attack a sovereign country.

1. In the fall of 2002, the government made the first salvos in the information war against its own people. In September, in the respected newspaper The Financial Times, on one of the pages a collage was printed - the twin skyscrapers in New York in puffs of smoke and in this smoke the profile of Saddam Hussein. And although there has not been to this day any evidence of Saddam Hussein’s cooperation with the terrorists accused of organizing the 11 events of September 2001, a “hotbed of excitement” appeared in the British mind. The "bust" using the image of S. Hussein against the background of burning twin towers was later explained by the chairman of the British Joint Intelligence Committee Scarlett, as "the realization of freedom of speech in expressing one's opinion."

2. Further, during the September 3 2002 press conference in his constituency, British Prime Minister E. Blair made a statement in which he noted that Iraq with the current ruling regime is a threat to the UK, the entire world community and the government will soon provide direct evidence of that. The publication of "direct evidence" was preceded by a meeting of the government cabinet, at which Prime Minister E. Blair enlisted the support of the majority of ministers for "the unprecedented publication of sensitive information prepared by the joint intelligence committee."

3. Later, in September 2002, the government file “Weapons of Mass Destruction of Iraq” published by the media and posted on British government websites was published. The publication was a truly unprecedented step, as for the first time a serious document that implied the adoption of relevant political decisions was provided with thoroughly prepared material for manipulating public opinion, without a real factual and evidence base.

Even a cursory scrolling of the material “dossier” created the impression of a document, the main purpose of which was to have an impact primarily on the feelings of the British. Using carefully selected photos, explanatory inscriptions to them, numerical data, as well as just unfounded statements. It is characteristic that in the preface the Prime Minister himself essentially acknowledged that the report was, in general, unsubstantiated, since it did not contain, “for reasons of maintaining state secrets” references to the sources of the information contained therein. The British public was given only government assurances about the quality of information.

4. Some applications required special attention. So, in the dossier it was said that S.Hussein is able to use weapons of mass destruction after 45 minutes after making the appropriate political decision. By this, it was assumed that the Iraqi regime is very dangerous and requires immediate dismantling. At the same time, the "reconnaissance" and "carefully prepared" dossier did not contain data on what means of delivery would be used, what is the range of destruction of these means and who S.Hussein is going to attack. As it turned out during the hearing of D. Scarlett, Chairman of the Committee for Intelligence, before a special committee, it was a question of tactical (!) Means of delivery, such as: hand grenades, mortars and barreled artillery. It is clear that all these "delivery vehicles" to the UK from the territory of Iraq clearly did not reach. But it all surfaced ALREADY AFTER the invasion of the Anglo-Saxons in Iraq.

5. As a result, at an extraordinary meeting of the House of Commons, held in late September, E. Blair as a whole managed to provide restrained support by the majority of parliamentarians to continue his course on the Iraqi issue. The basis of the conviction of members of parliament lay government records on WMDs of Iraq. Using the figures and facts taken from the file, the prime minister tried to show that S. Hussein already used chemical weapons against the Kurds and Iranians, he constantly sought and now seeks to possess WMD, does not fulfill the requirements of the UN Security Council resolutions, he cannot be trusted. The Baghdad side is growing, and deterrence through sanctions does not work here. It is interesting just as the question of voting on the problem of Iraq was put before the parliamentarians. Members of the British Parliament were only required to support the “government activity to disarm Iraq,” although in reality it was a question of starting a war against a sovereign state.

5. In early October, an action was carried out to create the illusion of objectivity of state bodies of Great Britain in solving the problem of Iraq. Publicity was the “confidential advice” of the British Attorney General to the Prime Minister, which warned that a military action against Iraq with a view to regime change would violate international rights, and if such a decision is made, the Labor government risks becoming a “client” of an international criminal court for a frank violation of the UN Charter. October 15 The British Prime Minister 2002 declared that he considers it possible and necessary to fight simultaneously with international terrorism led by the Al-Qaeda organization and the S. Hussein regime. He reiterated that Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism are new threats to peace in the current context.

6. To track the results of propaganda impact on the minds of the British regularly conducted public surveys. Thus, during a public opinion survey in the country, conducted by 14 in October 2002, by independent analytical organizations and leading media outlets, it turned out that the number of supporters of the use of force against Iraq increased by 10 percent and reached 42 percent of the total number of respondents , with 37 percent opposing and 21 percent without a definite opinion, the 41% of citizens supported the prime minister and did not link the Iraq problem with the fight against al-Qaeda. However, according to the same survey, the overwhelming majority of respondents believed that the participation of the British Armed Forces in the operation against Iraq is possible only with a UN mandate.

7. In early December 2002, the UK Ministry of Defense prepared and published a report on alleged mass crimes and human rights violations in Iraq by the regime of S. Hussein. The document mainly used the testimony of Iraqi immigrants and materials collected by representatives of humanitarian and human rights organizations. It contained sections: torture, violence against women, prison conditions, murder, persecution of the Kurds, persecution of the opposition.

8. British Foreign Secretary D. Straw 6 January 2003 at a meeting of British ambassadors in London outlined the main directions of the country's foreign policy for the next decade and for the first time connected troubled states and international terrorist organizations into a single unit. According to D. Straw, the likelihood of a war with Iraq has recently decreased, but he noted that the situation around this state changes daily. The government’s position, he said, is based on the need to prevent any possibility of international weapons acquiring weapons of mass destruction from problem countries.

9. 7 January 2003 Minister of Defense D.Hun announced the start of 1,5 mobilization of thousands of reservists, primarily logistics and combat support specialists, and on January 8 2003 visited Ankara on a one-day working visit and held talks with the Turkish military and political leadership on obtaining consent to use the territory of the country as a springboard for deploying the US-British land grouping in preparation for the war against Iraq.

10. To intensify hysteria and create a sense of danger, the installation of concrete blocks around Parliament and other government facilities began in January of 2003, amid claims that “no imminent threat to London”, there is no clear threat to London. “They were afraid” of trucks with explosives, which, of course, were not. In the future, no attacks on the territory of the United States and Great Britain from Iraq and the “accomplice of terrorists” Saddam Hussein did not happen.

11. British Prime Minister Blair during the January 13 press conference, 2003, said that, if necessary, the British government would provide full US support in resolving the Iraq problem by force. It was emphasized that military action is possible without an additional UN resolution. The main argument in justifying such an approach is called a direct threat to the national interests of the state from the side of Iraq, which has weapons of mass destruction.

12. Under the cover of the “debate in power”, when 15 in January more than 130 deputies of the British parliament signed an appeal against a single US attack on Iraq, the UK Navy group already 17 in January 2003 began the transition from the metropolitan waters to the region of the Arabian Peninsula. 21 Jan Blair declares that al-Qaida’s attack on Britain is inevitable and there are no limits to the potential danger from terrorists in the country. Before this statement, the bombings in Kenya and Bali (and who carried them out on time?) Just happened, and a group of “activists” Al-Qaida in European countries was arrested. The prime minister of Great Britain aggravated the situation, linking Iraq with terrorists. He said that he believes that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction and is trying to rebuild its nuclear program.

13. 25 January 2003 received publicly the “documents” allegedly received by the “opposition group”, written by hand, proving that the Iraqi military had purchased some of the components necessary for the production of WMD. The Daily Telegraph of 25.01 has the same information. Big and serious article with names. According to the government, this data is reliable. Meaningful information, Hussein is ready to use the MP weapon. Two days later, Time magazine (27.01. 2003) publishes information about "North African terrorist cells in Britain." Four of the seven appeared in court. About others arrested in November, they write that they wanted to organize a gas attack in the subway.

14. 29 January E. Blair during his speech in the British Parliament said that he was aware of the links of the regime of S. Hussein with the terrorist organization Al-Qaeda. However, he avoided a more detailed answer to the question about the content of these links.

15. On January 30, The Times published an article signed by the leaders of eight European countries (Great Britain, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Hungary, Poland, Denmark and the Czech Republic). Received the title "Appeal New Europe" and calling for support of the UK and the United States in their fight against the danger posed by Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction. An anti-Iraq propaganda campaign continues in the UK media. Some information has been published on the content of the American dossier on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. According to the findings of British experts, this file is a data of space and aerial reconnaissance, the interception of Iraqi telephone and radio communications. As well as the testimony received from the militants of the Islamic Taliban, who are in American captivity.

16. In the first half of February, the British government is taking active measures to protect the population from possible terrorist acts using components of chemical and bacteriological weapons. As part of the ongoing activities, the Cabinet of Ministers announced plans to deploy a single network throughout the country, including 1500 stationary and mobile points for detecting and identifying components of bacteriological weapons.

17. 14.02.2003 UK government is conducting a large-scale anti-terrorist operation in London. In its implementation involved special services (MI-5, MI-6, ShKPS), the police, as well as the forces and means of the UK Armed Forces. The reason for the start of the operation was the information received through the special services on the possible conduct of a major terrorist act using a portable anti-aircraft missile system. During the action, it is allegedly provided for the destruction of one of the airplanes when they take off or land at Heathrow International Airport. In order to ensure flight safety and prevent a possible terrorist act, 1000 police officers (usually 300), reinforced by 450 troops of the Grenadir Gards Army of the ground forces, are stationed around the airport. In addition, the security of other airports, government and military facilities, as well as central London has been strengthened. Scotland Yard’s antiterrorism department is directly involved in identifying and verifying suspects.

18. However, the information campaign does not go like clockwork. A massive protest against a possible war in Iraq is taking place on February 15 on February 2003 in London. Its main organizers were the Stop the War coalition, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, and the British Muslim Association. More than 1 of a million London residents and representatives from 250 cities in the UK took part in the protest in general. The participants of the rally spoke against both unilateral actions of the US and UK governments to start a military operation against Iraq, and for resolving the crisis exclusively through diplomacy.

19. In addition to the informational whip, material gingerbread is also used. 17.02.03 military and political leadership of Great Britain decided to increase from 1 on April 2003 of the pay for all categories of military personnel. It is envisaged to increase the cash payments to the officers by 3,2 percent, and to the junior command and rank-and-file staff - by 3,7 percent. At the same time, the average annual level of basic salaries in monetary terms for military personnel, depending on the level of the tariff scale, will be: for the Brigadier General category - from 76 to 79,3 thousand pounds sterling, for officers in the rank of colonel - from 63,4 to 70,1 thousand f., Captain - from 31 to 36,9 ths., lieutenant - from 12,7 to 26,7 thous., for military officers and sergeants - from 24,5 to 38,2 thous., for the rank and file - from 13 to 27,1 thous.

20. Oiling the military with increased salaries, the atmosphere is again being pumped up. It is already a question of war, as a completely resolved matter. By 20 February 2003, the UK government has completed a set of preparatory measures for admitting British military personnel affected by chemical and bacteriological weapons to the hospital on the territory of the metropolis, who will take part in a possible military operation against Iraq. During the first four days of the fighting, thirty medical institutions of the Ministry of Health and six military hospitals will be ready to receive up to 6 thousand troops affected by WMD after their evacuation through the air from the Persian Gulf zone.

21. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw is giving an interview that 1 of March is publishing in Russia, the Izvestia newspaper. It is entitled: "We cannot and should not believe Saddam." We will not talk about the fact that both the title and the text of the interview itself are maintained in a semi-negligent and familiar tone with respect to the leader of the sovereign state of Iraq, S. Hussein, which is extremely strange for an experienced diplomat. (I wonder what Mr. Straw would have said if the then foreign minister of the Russian Federation I. Ivanov had said in the English newspaper We Can't And Should Not Believe Anthony, ”even before deigning to the pronunciation of the surname of the British Prime Minister? Or today Sergey Lavrov was interviewed under the title “We cannot believe Barak”. We will not also point out that any war is a way of a radical resolution of an acute political crisis, and is resorted to only when diplomatic means have proved ineffective; to rush into war is the property of the generals, and a diplomat calling for war, in a situation where there is at least a small opportunity to continue the dialogue, is thereby recognized as impotent and unprofessional.

22. 5 March 2003, the UK government is taking active measures to prepare state and municipal services for action in conditions of terrorists using weapons of mass destruction. To this end, the Cabinet of Ministers decided to conduct comprehensive exercises in London and other major cities of the country to eliminate the consequences of terrorist acts using WMD components. The first teaching in this series will be held in London 23 March. G. In the vicinity of one of the central metro stations. During the event it is planned to work out the questions of actions in the conditions of using chemical weapons. In the exercise, more than seven thousand volunteers from the reservists will be involved.

23. Propaganda and forcing the British sense of danger is bearing fruit. Representatives of the British think tanks noted that, as of 12 in March 2003, 52% of British citizens oppose the country's participation in a military rally without UN approval, 24 percent against forceful action, even if it is sanctioned by the UN Security Council, and only 19 percent - for a military solution to the Iraq problem. In February of this year, these figures were 62, 24 and 11 percent, respectively.

24. By 18 March 2003, the command of the Armed Forces of the United Kingdom completed the deployment of the national air force grouping in the Persian Gulf. Once the figures are set apart, the discussion about the “necessity or uselessness of war” is also rather quickly folded. 19 March The House of Commons of the Parliament of Great Britain approved the policy of the government of the country to resolve the Iraq problem by force and the participation of the British Armed Forces in the military operation against Iraq. When voting on 1.00 MSK on March 19, at a meeting of the lower house of parliament to discuss the Iraqi conflict, deputies by a majority vote (396) rejected the proposal of a group of parliamentarians that there is currently no reason to begin military action against Baghdad. Following the debates, parliamentarians also supported the government’s decision to engage the British military contingent in the hostilities in Iraq. At the same time, 412 voted "for" and 149 deputies voted against.

25. The formalities are met - the UK armed forces on the night - from 20 to 21 in March 2003, they began full-scale participation in a military operation against Iraq.

In summing up, I would like to note the following: the main method of Western diplomacy in the situation with Iraq, and even today in the situation with Syria, was and remains the substitution of the problem. The media and Western politicians with their “Fifth Column” inside Russia manage to divert the discussion away from the substance of the matter with the help of this technique. Indeed, all-and the proponents of aggression and opponents speak of disarmament. Some argue that Iraq (Syria) has WMD, and it should be disarmed by military means, having displaced the government of Hussein (Assad), others are in favor of a peaceful way of disarming Iraq (Syria).

But another question should be asked: on what basis do the US and its supporters demand from a sovereign state, which is formally the same subject of international law, to disarm unilaterally, that is, to cause obvious damage to its defense capability, and even in a situation of probable external attack?

We will not get an answer to this question. "

A source: Nikolay Starikov blog
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Stiletto
    Stiletto 25 September 2013 16: 00 New
    Once again I am convinced of two common truths:
    1. Winners are not judged (often - to my great regret);
    2. If you want peace, get ready for war.
    1. Tambov we ...
      Tambov we ... 25 September 2013 16: 53 New
      And why chatter on the whole tyrnet about his insight?
    2. Tambov we ...
      Tambov we ... 25 September 2013 16: 55 New
      I wanted to incriminate, but accidentally pressed the wrong way. Those. Minus you from me.
      1. Stiletto
        Stiletto 25 September 2013 17: 16 New
        Quote: Tambov we ...
        And why chatter on the whole tyrnet about his insight? I wanted to incriminate, but accidentally pressed the wrong way. Those. Minus you from me.

        Thank you, colleague. Your minus for the right to have your own opinion took note. If you accidentally clicked the wrong way - it doesn’t matter. Go to my profile, there is an option to "lower the rating for the user", use it.
        1. Tambov we ...
          Tambov we ... 25 September 2013 17: 45 New
          It is very necessary to humiliate. Try it yourself.
      2. Tambov we ...
        Tambov we ... 25 September 2013 17: 43 New
        Thank you, you have a good reaction. Only your reaction smells bad. You did not serve in the Soviet Army.
        1. Stiletto
          Stiletto 25 September 2013 17: 53 New
          Quote: Tambov we ...
          Thank you, you have a good reaction. Only your reaction smells bad. You did not serve in the Soviet Army.

          Let's not label it. If under the reaction you had a minus affixed to you, then it is not mine, I do not engage in such nonsense (petty avenging out of the blue).
          1. Tambov we ...
            Tambov we ... 25 September 2013 18: 55 New
            Then, ... I'm sorry. There are errors.
      3. b-612
        b-612 25 September 2013 19: 18 New
        the person just expressed his opinion (and received support), and you like this: "chatter" ... on that and the forum, what would you say!
        1. Tambov we ...
          Tambov we ... 25 September 2013 21: 41 New
          You are late to "bridle". I apologized.
    3. 755962
      755962 25 September 2013 17: 49 New
      No comment ....
  2. andrei332809
    andrei332809 25 September 2013 16: 01 New
    in my opinion, this even blinkered Westerners began to understand. there, though not at all, but already at many eyes begin to see
  3. Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 25 September 2013 16: 05 New
    American and British politicians understand freedom of speech as the freedom to lie, covering up their true aggressive plans, talking more about the "democratic goals" of the NATO military in Iraq, Libya and Syria. In order to gain the support of its population, the propaganda machine of America, Britain, France rains down on the heads of the townsfolk streams of provocative statements, slanderous fabrications to justify the invasion of sovereign countries. But in the case of Syria, this number did not work. Obama's lie was so obvious that the closest US ally to the British Parliament did not believe the American president.
  4. smiths xnumx
    smiths xnumx 25 September 2013 16: 07 New
    Well, why go far for examples ...
    "Desert Storm" 1991-
    A huge role in shaping public opinion in the United States itself, supporting the 1st war against Iraq, was played by television frames, where a 15-year-old girl, who was portrayed as a Kuwaiti refugee, said that she saw with her own eyes how Iraqi soldiers pulled 312 Kuwaiti babies from maternity hospital, and put them on a concrete floor to die. They wanted to pick up the incubators where these babies were. Interviews with this girl were played on American TV hundreds of times before the war. I must admit that the girl performed her role masterfully, even cried, in the hall, too, many wiped away tears. The girl’s name was hidden because she allegedly left a family in Kuwait and could suffer from Hussein’s soldiers. In order to understand how important this video was, we add that President George W. Bush used the story of dead babies ten times in the forty days of the pre-war propaganda campaign. Members of the US Senate repeatedly appealed to the interview when deciding whether to send troops to The bay

    Subsequently, it was proved that the girl shown on TV was not a refugee, but the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States, who lived in the United States and therefore could not be an eyewitness to the occupation of Kuwait, moreover, she is a member of the royal family that administers Kuwait, her relatives have huge fortunes, estates abroad and live mainly in the USA and Western countries, so they could not suffer, even if she performed under her own name.
    1. smiths xnumx
      smiths xnumx 25 September 2013 16: 16 New
      Yugoslavia 1991-1999:
      Showing the ruins of Vukovar, destroyed after three months of fighting between the Neo-Ustashi and the Yugoslav army, Western television channels insisted: "These are the ruins of Dubrovnik, a UNESCO-protected city. Serbs barbarously shell the pearl of Dalmatia with artillery pieces." On May 1, 1995, the same Western television channels "did not notice" the Croatian invasion of Western Slavonia, which was under the "protection" of the UN. But on May 2, when the Krajina Serbs fired rockets at Zagreb (either a retaliation strike, or a gesture of despair), the Western media immediately raised a howl! But what about, “Serbian separatists fired on Zagreb - the capital of young European democracy!” In 1994, after the Bosnia-Croatian war ended and the anti-Serb coalition was restored, Bill Clinton gave the green light to supply arms to Croatia from the USA and Iran, sending military advisers MPRI, reconnaissance flights over Republika Srpska Krajina and Republika Srpska. Thanks to such support, the Croats capture Kupres, Livno, key heights in the Dinar Mountains, Western Slavonia, Glamoch, Grahovo and Kninsky Krajina. On August 28, 1995, an explosion occurred at Markale Market, which killed 37 people and injured 90. For two days, American television stations showed mutilated bodies of people and the wounded, blaming the Serbs for this. And on August 30, by order of Bill Clinton, US aviation began bombing the Republika Srpska infrastructure: radar installations, weapons and ammunition depots, command posts, air defense systems, bridges, barracks, telecommunication centers, radio and television transmitters, transformer substations, water tanks, etc. .. Under the cover of NATO aircraft, using the factor of destruction of the military potential of the Serbs, the Bosnian and Croatian troops launched a serious offensive and occupied 400 square meters. km Serbian territories and having expelled from there more than 50 thousand Serbs. Pali of the city of Egg, Mrkonich Grad, Ribnik, Sipovo, Vozucha. In these cities, massacre of the peaceful Serbian population was perpetrated. The Serbs were forced to capitulate. At the Dayton talks, Slobodan Milosevic, under pressure from Bill Clinton, agreed to the terms of the peace agreements humiliating for the Bosnian Serbs, and by the spring of 1996, Bosnia and Herzegovina was occupied by NATO.
      1. smiths xnumx
        smiths xnumx 25 September 2013 16: 23 New
        How Washington Prepared Its War
        "I know what terrorists are, and I can distinguish them. And I tell you that the KLA people are terrorists."
        Robert Gelbard, US Special Representative for the Balkans, February 22, 1998
        "According to the US, KLA is not a terrorist organization"
        State Department Spokesman, July 7, 1998
        Kosovo Liberation Army - terrorists or not? “Yes,” said Robert Gelbard, one of the US political representatives in the Balkans, three times in public in early 98. “No,” the US State Department refutes it some time later.
        And at this very time ...

        Well, in order to finally convince public opinion of the need for Serbia’s bombing, an “incident in Racak” took place - an anti-Serb provocation organized by Albanian terrorists on January 15, 1999 in the village of Racak (Kosovo and Metohija). According to studies by Finnish-Belarusian experts, later confirmed by the director of the Institute of Forensic Medicine Hamburg Klaus Püchel, the thirty-nine dead Albanians were UCHK militants killed in battles with the Serbian and police and transported to Racak from other places. This incident was presented by Western media as the “genocide of the Albanians” and served as a justification for NATO aggression against Yugoslavia. Subsequently, the Hague Tribunal excluded from the list of indictments brought against Serb generals the item “massacre of civilians in Racak”. Nevertheless, the bombing of Yugoslavia began ...
  5. Lech from ZATULINKI
    Lech from ZATULINKI 25 September 2013 16: 33 New
    Undoubtedly, information warfare is one of many effective tools for promoting the interests of the state.
    I would like to esteemed forum users to recall how Russia was represented in 2008 in the Georgian-Ossetian conflict.
    We and the barbarians and aggressors and enemies of democracy and other, other, other, in general, our very existence is a reason for declaring us enemies of the WESTERN VALUES.
    It is clear that if we put our heads in the sand we will be treated the same way as with the Serbs and Syrians, therefore we must conduct a constantly active attack on the information front without any mercy for the enemy.
    1. Scoun
      Scoun 25 September 2013 17: 32 New
      Quote: Lech from ZATULINKI
      Undoubtedly, information warfare is one of many effective tools for promoting the interests of the state.

      That's why there are stuffs from anonymous sources that probe the relevance or the degree of tension of a particular topic.
  6. rugor
    rugor 25 September 2013 16: 50 New
    I sometimes get the impression that reliable and unbiased information cannot be found, because it does not exist at all. Each has its own truth. sad
    1. smiths xnumx
      smiths xnumx 25 September 2013 17: 04 New
      In short, something like this ...
    2. RUSS
      RUSS 25 September 2013 17: 09 New
      Quote: rugor
      I sometimes get the impression that reliable and unbiased information cannot be found, because it does not exist at all. Each has its own truth. sad

      True, the truth is always its own, the same amers perfectly understand the reasons for the recent wars: resources, support for their military-industrial complex, etc., that is, everything is done for the good of their country, their economy ... As they say - "everyone wants to eat," and amers are cheaper and more expensive than anyone ...
  7. brr7710
    brr7710 25 September 2013 17: 55 New
    Quote: andrei332809
    in my opinion, this even blinkered Westerners began to understand. there, though not at all, but already at many eyes begin to see

    Something I do not believe in it.
  8. Gur
    Gur 25 September 2013 18: 53 New
    What a long walk August XNUMXth on fox girl tell me how you were bombed by Russians not Russian Georgians Pss ... blunder go to the following information if we did so I would never believe again and looking at them if I read info from sources from different countries
  9. Harlampy
    Harlampy 25 September 2013 19: 46 New
    The article is good, but here it reveals the secret of Open Sign. To grab a piece fatter than the Yankees and Britons lie, they lie impudently, they always lie. Goebbels tossing and turning with envy. And I am glad that with the dilemma “I’m a creature trembling, or I have the right,” Russia has finally decided. Keep it up!
  10. Strashila
    Strashila 25 September 2013 20: 05 New
    The main task of the West is to maintain the conflict in Syria, it is a smokescreen covering their stall from Afghanistan. How many copies were broken about Ulyanovsk ... from Coca ... a lot ... but it wasn’t in demand, the conclusion is that one overland highway going through Pakistan began to work without failures ... that is, now there are no attacks on NATO convoys, and before they just blazed. The cries and tantrums in the West about the death of NATO military personnel in this region were silent ... no one now makes fun of them. Calmness in the provinces of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan ... there Americans do not drive anyone with UAVs, and the battles of radical Islamists with Pakistani government forces do not hear the same thing, but before all the time ... now there is peace and quiet. Only those who have not long fought in Afghanistan against NATO are increasingly flashing in Syria ... left at the mercy of radical Islamists.
  11. konvalval
    konvalval 25 September 2013 23: 04 New
    Well, what kind of partners are they after that?
    1. Sterlya
      Sterlya 26 September 2013 01: 20 New
      the same as they were 100 and 50 years ago. is always. what else can they be
  12. rpek32
    rpek32 26 September 2013 01: 08 New
    Is there an English version of the article?
  13. slacker
    slacker 26 September 2013 09: 32 New
    We need a new Nuremberg tribunal against George W. Bush, Clinton, Obama, their British and French colleagues.
  14. PValery53
    PValery53 26 September 2013 10: 00 New
    In the information war it is necessary to narrow down the information space of the enemy and expand our own, and then our influence will increase, in addition to military force. And our political strategists need to be more skillfully wagging their tongues.
  15. klavyr
    klavyr 26 September 2013 12: 44 New
    Thus, Russia with the current ruling regime may be a threat to Britain, France or the United States and the entire world community. It is enough to say: "Putin must leave!" It’s just that something doesn’t grow together - the “bloodthirsty” Putin ceases to be “bloodthirsty” in the eyes of the world community.