C-51: Excellent video, Glenn Greenwald. Propagandized population. Terrorism is a word to legitimize the violence we do and de-legitimize the violence of others against us.

I HIGHLY recommend this video.  I would love if every person in Canada and in the U.S. could see it.

. . . violence engaged in by Muslims against the West.  (Terrorist)  It’s really just a term to legitimize the kind of violence that we do ourselves and de-legitimize the violence that is used against us. …

WATCH:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq2Hi_SD8pQ

(Greenwald has been awarded a Pulitzer Prize:  http://reliablesources.blogs.cnn.com/2014/04/20/exclusive-glenn-greenwald-reacts-to-pulitzer-prize-victory/)

 

Alas! I cannot transcribe the whole talk; and I cannot find a transcription on-line.

I transcribed a few excerpts.  Which will be a disservice, if it causes some people not to watch the video which contains much, much more.

 

At about the 12:50 mark:

(In relation to the two incidents (in a Quebec community and the other in Ottawa):

. . . instantaneous injection of the most inflammatory, but also the most meaningless word, in our political lexicon which is terrorism.

Almost instantly, before anybody knew anything about the perpetrators of either event, the media and political class in this country and then in the U.S. and throughout the West all agreed by consensus that both of these attacks were adequately and even necessarily described as being terrorism.  There was no discussion, as usual, of what the word means or what an act has to do in order to qualify. It was simply a label instantly that got applied almost reflexively – – – the word is inflammatory . . .

 

At about the 27:00 mark:

 

That’s another way of saying that the citizenry has been propagandized. That is the definition of that term, that they have been led to believe pleasant things about their Government that actually is disparate to the reality of what the Government does in the world. And this to me is the crux of the entire Post 9-11 era and the events that we saw this week . . .

 

I remember really vividly the immediate aftermath of the 9-11 attack … the days and weeks … I was in Manhattan on 9-11 … The prevailing emotion triggered … in the immediate aftermath, not months down the road once the Government began massaging the messaging.

The immediate aftermath was not one of anger or vengeance or sadness. It wasn’t those things. The immediate prevailing emotion was bafflement, shock and surprise. And the question (approx 28:00 mark) that was on almost everybody’s mind is why would somebody possibly want to do this to the United States? Why would somebody have such hatred for Americans that they would be willing to blow themselves up to kill as many people indiscriminately whom they don’t know?

What kind of causes could have led them to that mindset? And this was being asked not rhetorically … most Americans genuinely did not understand the answer.

 

The U.S. Government knew that it had to provide an answer.  Because everyone knows that there was some reason. … (Approx 29:29 mark). The explanation that it ended up providing was one that we now, 12 years later, can scoff at pretty readily, but at the time it was what huge numbers of Americans believed because their Government told them that and the media told them that. … The answer was the reason they hate us isn’t anything we’ve done , perish the thought!, it has nothing to do with anything that we’ve done.  The reason they hate us is because we’re so free that they hate us for our freedoms. That was the genuine answer with a straight face of the U.S. Govt and then the U.S. media delivered to the American population. What was so extraordinary about that … it was not difficult at all to find out the reason.

 

That not only the group that perpetrated the attack but a huge part of the Muslim world had been openly discussing for many, many years. You could have gone and read Muslim newspapers, you could have visited Muslim countries, you could have talked to someone who was Muslim, you could have sought out any of that dialogue. The Grievances were all very clear. They were embedded into the culture for a long time. It wasn’t just things like the U.S. putting troops on … holy soil in Saudi Arabia. It was much more substantial … imposing a sanctions regime on Iraq that killed several hundred thousand Iraqi children or overthrowing their democratically elected leaders and propping up the most heinous despots and tyrants, ones that ruled Egypt and still rule Saudi Arabia or steadfastly supporting militarily, economically and diplomatically the country of Israel as it engages in all sorts of violence against its neighbours in Palestine, Lebanon and elsewhere.

 

This list of grievances was fully aired in that part of the world and yet, remarkably, Americans didn’t just reject the validity of those grievances, they didn’t reach the conclusion that it didn’t justify the attacks, they literally were completely unaware of the existence of that dialogue from that part of the world. They had no idea that their Government was even doing these things. And that is stunning …

 

(Greenwald goes on to the situation in Canada.)

At about the 54:00 mark:

(The event in Quebec)

… Whatever terrorism means, and it’s impossible to define, but the one common usage that it typically has, is it requires the deliberate targeting of civilians with violence for political ends.  And yet here is somebody who seems to have deliberately avoided targeting  civilians (waited two hours in his car for a sildier to target)   . . .  clearly illegal and unjustified  … but how and in what sense is that terrorism?  . . .  (Ottawa shooter … mentally unstable…

The word terrorism, as significant as it’s become really has no meaning other than

. . .  violence engaged in by Muslims against the West.  It’s really just a term to legitimize the kind of violence that we do ourselves and de-legitimize the violence that is used against us.  …

 

Alas! It would take far too much time for me to transcribe more from this excellent talk by Glenn Greenwald.