"Al Qaeda" on the Loose, Fallujah, within memory. Video from UK Daily Mail (Online).
The recent Fall of Fallujah to "Al Qaeda" is one of the most interesting propaganda efforts I've seen in some time. This time, there is no counter-propaganda or competing propaganda involved. Well, unless you accept the several staged and posed "Al Qaeda on the loose" videos and images as counter-propaganda. I see them as part of the original propaganda message, not "counter" at all.
Apparently, this most recent Fall of Fallujah has shaken Washington to its core. That's what they say, anyway. And further, most of the discussion and debate around this issue has to do with all the "sacrifices" Americans made back in the day to "secure" Fallujah from "Al Qaeda" and how all of that was being "thrown away."
They even trotted Old Man McCain out and his MiniMe Little Lindsey to piss and moan about it, and how Obama has once again shown how ineffective he is in battle with The Enemy.
Do any of us, including Old Man McCain, have any idea what actually happened? Who the players are? What any of it has to do with "Al Qaeda?"
Of course, there are stories buried on the back pages that tell of all the years of uprisings and torment of the people of Al Anbar province, of the repeated assaults on Fallujah and Ramadi, of the rounds and rounds and rounds of death and destruction wrought on the cities and towns and farmsteads of the region, in a futile effort to "pacify" the region (shades of Vietnam) and destroy rebel strongholds, yadda, yadda.
The stories are out there, but the propaganda assures us that the capture of Fallujah and Ramadi was a demonstration of the power of Our Enemies, ie: "Al Qaeda" -- sometimes with qualifiers, but usually not -- and how all the "work" we did -- American Troops, Glorious and Triumphant, did -- in Iraq has been frittered away by the No-Account Negro in the White House.
Sorry, but there can sometimes be a heavy racist tilt to the propaganda, which is often a clue to where it originates.
I saw a report that featured an image of the Masked Rebels in front of the Old Iraqi Flag, the one that Saddam flew. The report said the Rebels were flying the Flag of Al Qaeda (which I'd never seen, not that I could recall.) But they were standing in front of the flag of the Republic of Iraq (under Saddam), and what the rebels have to do with "Al Qaeda" (assuming there is such an entity) is nebulous at best. Non-existent, probably.
The propaganda machine is telling us ("us" being the peoples of the Anglo-American Imperial sphere of influence) that any successful rebellion is by definition an "Al Qaeda Terrorist" operation, as is the case with Fallujah in Iraq, where so very many Americans fought and died to secure the city when time was. "We" must be ever-vigilant against such rebels and "we" must seek revenge. Again. And again. And ever again.
Never mind -- or even acknowledge -- the Iraqi losses. They don't matter, and for propaganda purposes, they don't exist.
It is all about the Empire, failed pacification efforts, sacrifice of Our Valiant Ones (for Nothing) and seeking revenge.
If you've ever seen or read Starship Troopers, you know exactly what this is about...