Abuse of propoganda

[PhilM]

Propaganda is inevitable in any war, partially to confuse and misinform the enemy and partially to ensure continued support of your own cause. I feel both Bush and Blair need to think a lot more about the type of propaganda they are using.

Both of these mean have recently made public statements claiming their captured troops had been executed by the Iraqis, whilst being held as Prisoners of War. In both cases their staff have had to issue withdrawals, as they had no proof supporting these claims, simply a feeling it may have happened.

For the relatives and friends of the troops who have died it is a painful enough experience to know they have lost a loved one; however if they feel that loved one lost their life on the battlefield fighting for a cause they believed in at least they could take some comfort from that. Bush and Blair’s propaganda will have taken that small comfort away from them by leading them to believe their loved ones were killed in cold blood after being captured.

Yet another example of how Bush and Blair will say anything that can be used to support their position without a care about the pain it may cause others. It is tough enough on our troops out there as it is, leading them to believe they will be shot if taken as Prisoners of War is hardly likely to help their peace of mind. - Shame on them both.

[Manc Man]

Can you abuse propaganda? That seems redundant to me.

I thought propaganda was by definition the abuse of truth.

[PhilM]

Manc Man - If you look at the original definition you just called the Pope a lier. Just wait until the Swiss Papal Guard gets on your case!

propaganda

\Prop`a*gan"da\, n. [Abbrev. fr. L. de propaganda fide: cf. F. propagande. See Propagate.] 1. (R. C. Ch.) (a) A congregation of cardinals, established in 1622, charged with the management of missions. (b) The college of the Propaganda, instituted by Urban VIII. (1623-1644) to educate priests for missions in all parts of the world.

[Manc Man]

So you're accusing Bush and Blair of assembling a dissembling group of 17 th century cardinals to assist in the prosecution of the war?

Now understand your dismay.

As far as accusing the Pope of being a lier, I assume he does occasional lie or else how would he sleep? (Might explain all that shaking if the bloke hasn't had a nap in 20 years though).

I also have reason to believe he may be a liar, but that's more based on some advice I received from my Great Grandfather who once took me on his knee, puffed on his pipe, gazed into the middle distance and said "Mancky, my boy, never trust a fella in a funny hat..."

Words of wisdom that have never failed me.

mm

[This message has been edited by Manc Man (edited 28-03-2003).]

[PhilM]

Bush Propoganda or day dreams?
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/uclickcomics/20030327/cx_bs _uc/bs20030327&e=1&ncid=

P.S. This was Bush reading Blair his bed time storey at Camp David.

[This message has been edited by PhilM (edited 28-03-2003).]

[PhilM]

The parents of one of the British Soldiers killed in action were interviewed on BBC World yesterday. They stated the Miltary of Defence had confirmed their son was killed in action and not executed as Blair claimed. They were very upset over Blair's untrue claims.

A spokesman for Blair's office merely said it was "Unfortunate" there could be some misunderstanding over this. Blair as you would expect has not been man enough to apologise for the upset his lies caused the Soldiers parents.

[Imagine]

PhilM,

What are you so worried about?
The fact that assumptions are presented as being the truth?
Aren't both sides guilty of the same thing?

When I first started reading and responding to these Iraq treads on this board, I have read statements as:
"When US attacks Iraq, 10.000nds of innocent civilians will loose their lives"
and
"US will launch the first attack with thousands of rockets on Baghdad"

This is also a form of propaganda.
Both scenario's never happened.
Where is the public excuse of those who proclaimed these scenario's to be the truth on this board?

If you want Blair to be man enough to make his apologies, then how about Saddam, Me, Yourself etc etc etc

A man of your intelligence should know that in a war unreasonable claims will be made by both sides. It shouldn't bother you and if it does... you live in complete denial of what is so obvious.  

[PhilM]

Imagine, I feel you need to read my initial post a little bit more carefully. I fully understand the rationale of propoganda and the fact both sides in a war will practice it.

Propoganda should have an adverse effect on the enemy and a positive effect on your own people. I do not feel false claims of our troops being executed meet either criteria.

[Imagine]

PhilM,

"Propoganda should have an adverse effect on the enemy and a positive effect on your own people. I do not feel false claims of our troops being executed meet either criteria"

If it doesn't meet the criteria to be called 'propaganda', then why did you label it 'propaganda' in you initial post?

[PhilM]

There I will bow out, I thought we were having a discussion not scoring points over semantics.

[pacifist]

PhilM, forget about it. It's impossible to have any intelligent discussion with that child. He doesn't have a clue about anything, and this prevents the construction of logical thoughts.

[Imagine]

Sorry Phil,

I lost track of the discussion when suddenly the pope turned up in one of the replies, and when a link to a cartoon was placed to support the truthfullness of the statement made.  

And didn't I hear a vague echo from a guy with a yahoo.com email address, to boycott American products?

[Imagine]

By the way.
Cannot make it tomorrow evening.
Hope you have fun with the other guy.

Wishfull thinking.