By : ( Terry Meyssan )
Over the past 20 years, Western media have had to face the economic competition that free improvised journalists publish online, followed by a barrage of protesters who refute the quality of that media information.
This forced them to defend themselves by also publishing their articles for free on the Internet, noting that some of their opponents did not have good professional qualifications and were therefore less reliable than them.
Nevertheless, the public was attracted to reading free journalists’ websites, and turned their faces away from subscription newspapers. It was no secret to the public that, despite the mood swings of some blogs, others, on the contrary, were more reliable than the major newspapers.
European media are currently trying to impose an indirect reward on their articles through search engines that pay them for advertising.
At the same time, they succeeded in creating confusion between impromptu journalists and President Donald Trump, and suggesting that both groups behave the same way on the Internet.
The second, according to the media’s conviction, encourages improvised journalists to say anything and report fake news , which are not lies, but approaches that distort reality.
Clearly, 18 years ago, NATO created a new type of political communication that combines truth and lies.
In contrast to the traditional propaganda methods of mobilizing public opinion in preparation for war, the new pattern is intended to convince the masses not to oppose any war, and to present such methods in a very complex way that forces voters to refrain from complicating those wars.
This principle has been extended not only to news of armed conflicts, but to all operations related to regime change run by NATO.
Accordingly, in 2014, in Estonia, NATO established a military command called StratCom COE, dedicated entirely to falsification of information and news about Russia.
This military command works with the 77th Brigade of the British Army and the 361th Brigade of Civil Affairs in the US Army. A parallel leadership was established within the EU, tasked with fabricating hostile pretexts through a weekly newsletter and emailed to all Western journalists.
Their work, in fact, is strongly apperant on everything published on the “war on terror”. Perhaps the latest example of the results of the work of these two leaderships is the announcement of the death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
NATO began with the announcement of seven helicopters transporting US special forces soldiers from Erbil to Parisha.
They then followed up by leaking many details about the process. But soon the masses in the West realized that the story of the arrival of special forces was a lie, after Russia immediately declared that its radars had not picked up any trace of the helicopters entering the airspace of that area.
But the Western masses tended to believe that this little lie was merely the details imposed by the necessities of “national security” and engaged in discussing other elements of this “superstitious” tale to make sure it was in principle correct.
Eventually, they admitted that only the US military knew what had happened and that the public was ignorant and irresponsible to know what had happened. Thus NATO remains in control of the game.
In contrast, President Bashar al-Assad refused to discuss the whole story during his meeting with the Syrian news and satellite channels.
Instead he adopted the only truth that has been confirmed by Russian radars, it is, in his view, a “fabricated tale.”
Do not go too far to find out the strengths that have enabled President Assad to resist the West so far: While Westerners were lying to themselves and each other, no longer distinguishing between facts and lies, President Assad was sincere, logical in his speech, and did not budge from that logic throughout the years of the war on his country.