The spectacle of terrorism is being deliberately promoted by mass media.Do you have any evidence for this? I don't mean anecdotal evidence, or appeals to "common sense", I mean do you have citations to any academic studies that support your assertion?
But very little is known on the relationship between medias and terrorism.That seem unlikely to be true. A search on google scholar for "media terrorism" returns 3/4 million hits. A search for "media terrorism relationship" returns over 300,000. A quick scan of a few of the bits reveals that we actually know quite a lot about the relationship between the two.
My hypothesis is that medias may promote artificial terrorism through fear-based narratives and violence to justify offensive military operations in Syria and Iraq.Sorry, what is artificial terrorism? Do you mean terrorism that exists only on the pages of the papers, or screens of the TV news? And are you not, perhaps, confusing the intent of some governments to justify military engagement with the actions of the media reporting on them.
Furthermore, artificial terrorism may warrant unilateral military operations in foreign nations as retaliatory measures.Therefore, is the audience of synthetic terrorism taken in hostage to believe in the war propaganda ?No idea what that means! I'm afraid it doesn't parse very well. And what's the difference between artificial terrorism and synthetic terrorism, not that I know what either of them are.
How can civilians be excluded from war ?Unfortunately they can't be.
In our age there is no such thing as 'keeping out of politics.' All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.
How is artificial terrorism different than conventional warfare?I think that modern terrorism (real or artificial) is not fundamentally different from conventional warfare (real or artificial).
My hypothesis is that medias may promote artificial terrorism through fear-based narratives and violence to justify offensive military operations in Syria and Iraq.Sorry, what is artificial terrorism? Do you mean terrorism that exists only on the pages of the papers, or screens of the TV news? And are you not, perhaps, confusing the intent of some governments to justify military engagement with the actions of the media reporting on them.
without the media’s coverage, the act’s impact is arguably wasted, remaining narrowly confined to the immediate victim(s) of the attack, rather than reaching the wider ‘target audience’ at whom the terrorists’ violence is actually aimed.
...
That is to say, for terrorists, the media functions as a tool to shrink the power asymmetry between them and the entity they fight against in an actual and ideological warfare, create an atmosphere of fear and suspicion, legitimize their acts, and reach greater audiences
How can civilians be excluded from war ?I though the Geneva convention would protect civilians from war in Syria and Iraq. It seems likely that artificial terrorism is a method to avoid international treaties and to allow unilateral military operations in civilians zones.Quote from: OphioliteUnfortunately they can't be.
Are you sure of this? International terrorist organizations like Al-Qaida or ISIS are supported by a range of private individuals, not to say corporations, according to Vladimir Putin.
- Terrorism tends to be smallish groups, rather than a whole nation. This means that terrorists have less resources than traditional warfare. It also means that there is no single, large target to attack, so conventional warfare does not work as a response.
I provided examples based on our data on the financing of different Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) units by private individuals. This money, as we have established, comes from 40 countries and, there are some of the G20 members among them,”
"I’ve shown our colleagues photos taken from space and from aircraft which clearly demonstrate the scale of the illegal trade in oil and petroleum products,"
“The motorcade of refueling vehicles stretched for dozens of kilometers, so that from a height of 4,000 to 5,000 meters they stretch beyond the horizon."
We now have better education, and better access to scientific data and home-brew recipes via the internet. So small, untrained groups can now access the work of research groups around the world.
Upcoming accessibility of gene editing tools raises the specter of home biological labs. But this is a weapon that cannot be aimed, and will backfire on any group who dabbles in it.Is CRISPR really a biological weapon ? I doubt genome editing is designed to be a weapon rather than a scientific tool. In either case, I suspect that biological weapons may be designed to allow artificial terrorism to create the illusion of genocide.
Al-Qaida and ISIS terrorist organizations are pure propaganda created by the state to act as a proxy, the invisible enemy waging asymmetric warfare on America and it's allies.
the invisible enemy waging asymmetric warfare on America and it's alliesMel Gibson's character in "The Patriot" waged an asymmetric war against the British regular army.
How can civilians be excluded from war?Both regular and irregular fighters attack civilians; this can be in the form of targeted attacks or merely "collateral damage".
International terrorist organizations like Al-Qaida or ISIS are supported by a range of private individuals, not to say corporationsWhen organizations take control of an area by power, they also take over its industries - whether it be oil in the Middle East, Cocaine in Columbia or Diamonds in the Congo. They become the corporations.
My hypothesis is that medias may promote artificial terrorism through fear-based narratives and violenceI suggest an alternative view: terrorists get the most "bang for the buck" by targeting civilians and exploiting the media to get their message to people far beyond those involved. This causes psychological damage (including depression and even death) far beyond the blast radius.
So "Terrorist" is just a label of convenience, applied by the government as an excuse to take military action. In a totalitarian state (and "1984"), the media always echoes the government line; in a country with a free press, there will be some dissenting voices.
I don't think the governing regime in Syria would be classed as an American ally. Times do change, however, as any erstwhile brave Mujahaddeen freedom fighter will testify on suddenly finding himself rebranded as a Taliban terrorist. Not that it matters: as long as there is a fight going on, Chinese and American arms suppliers will have a market - they just swap customers from time to time.
The fundings and arms suppliers of ISIS should be investigated.1. Oil. 2. China. As always, except when the CIA provides both.
1. Oil. 2. China. As always, except when the CIA provides both.In simple terms, the CIA may steal the election...
The spectacle of terrorism is being deliberately promoted by mass media.
Do you have any evidence for this? I don't mean anecdotal evidence, or appeals to "common sense", I mean do you have citations to any academic studies that support your assertion?
So rather than blame the media and politicians, why not blame Joe Public for being so irrationally foolish, uninformed and innately cowardly as to be scared/terrified by such events?
Multiple documented precedent setting examples of these tactics having been employed over a span of at least fifty years. All the information anyone needs to aquire a good understanding of the False Flag process is right here (along with a number of other informative accompanying links describing other documented examples).
Operation Northwoods.... (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b1/NorthwoodsMemorandum.jpg/442px-NorthwoodsMemorandum.jpg)
The semi-automatic annotations and narrative structure describing the semantics of terrorist activity may be generated dynamically with Natural Language Processing technology. The neutrality of the media therefore appears compromised.
Could artificial intelligence create the illusion of terrorism?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_language_processing
Could any intelligence at all translate this into something I might understand?