American Politics – Lie, False Flag, & Videos

Translated by Ollie Richardson & Angelina Siard



To justify the meddling in the affairs of others, Washington demonstrates at the same time a true genius of affabulation and an obvious lack of imagination. US leader never forget to invent a tall story, but it always has an air of déjà vu.  The most amazing thing is not that Washington shows such repetition in its repertoire, it is rather that we seem to discover it every time. In the meantime, the facts speak for themselves. The analysis of conflicts of the past half a century reveals the same modus operandi, it shows the same visible traces.

The first textbook case – the war of Vietnam. In August, 1964, the famous Gulf of Tonkin incident suddenly flips over American opinion in the warmonger camp. Washington accused the the north Vietnamese torpedo boats of attacking the Navy destroyer “Maddox” in the middle of international waters on August 2nd.

The White House, in the context of tensions between Washington and Hanoi, insists that this communist provocation cannot remain without an answer. Put under pressure, the US Congress authorises President Johnson, on August 7th, to respond militarily. In the months that follow, hundreds of thousand soldiers fly to the aid of the South Vietnamese regime and US bombers bombard north-Vietnamese positions.

At that time the Western relay word for word the official version, accrediting the thesis of aggression of north-Vietnamese communist forces, which would be responsible for a military escalation. However, this narration of the incident is completely fictitious. It was fabricated from A to Z. In reality, no attack took place. “Maddox” was in north-Vietnamese territorial waters, and not in international waters. It indeed shot 350 shells, but in empty space, against a perfectly imaginary enemy, to make believe that an attack happened. But it doesn’t matter much. It was necessary to show the criminal aggressiveness of the opposing camp, to make it carry the responsibility of total war, which will result in.three million dead, and US will lose.

The second textbook case – the war against Iraq. The terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, give to the Bush administration an ideal pretext to launch a large offensive in the Middle East. It passes first by the destruction of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan (which however was installed with the blessing of Washington), then by the attack against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq (March, 2003). Deprived of any international legitimacy, this military aggression against a State that doesn’t threaten anybody boasts, officially, a double “casus belli”: Baghdad would keep weapons of mass destruction, representing a lethal danger for collective security, and the Baathist regime would give logistical help to the terrorist organisation Al-Qaeda.

As for the incident of the Gulf of Tonkin, this double accusation is a monstrous affabulation. They tried their best to pretend to search for them, they didn’t find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and no connivance between the Iraqi regime and the terrorist organisation founded by Bin Laden. But in contrast, the involvement of American and Saudi secret services in the attacks of 9/11 is an open secret.

So, the official version allows therefore to occult this responsibility (which remains obscure in its details) by devoting itself to an accusatory inversion. To justify the liquidation of a State that opposes to its ambitions, Washington accuses it of its own infamy. Habitually believing anything, the Western media will reproduce slavishly the arguments against Baghdad.

The third textbook case – Syria. From the Spring of 2011, a minority and encouraged outside protest, on the prefabricated model of “Arab revolutions”, claims the discharge of the Syrian president. Provocations and attacks create a climate of civil war, aggravated by massive help that the Western powers and petromonarchies of the Gulf supply to the armed rebellion. Being cooled down by the Afghan and Iraqi failures, Washington prefers to intervene against Damascus by using “proxies” and mercenary organisations. But a part of the establishment, which is tenacious, wants to cause the fall of Bashar Al-Assad by persuading Barack Obama to inflict air strikes on the Syrian Army.

To justify this intervention, a pretext is of course needed. It will be quickly found! By the horror that it inspires, the usage of chemical weapons against civilians constitutes an ideal motive. On August 21st, 2013, pictures of gassed children in the suburbs of Damascus go around the world. For lack of proof, the U.N. investigating officers indicate no culprit. A study led by the prestigious MIT will reveal that this attack could only have come from rebel areas.

But it is too late. The machine of lies turns in full capacity. Accredited by Washington, supported by its allies, the official version is taken back by the media and subsidized NGOs. It becomes “the truth” about the Syrian conflict, the pretext of foreign interference, and the disguise of neo-colonialism.

Vietnam, Iraq, Syria – three examples among so many others! The list of the countries that have suffered interference fomented thanks to the manipulation of opinion is interminable (Cuba, Cambodia, Sudan, Nicaragua, Somalia, Serbia, Libya, Yemen, Chile, Venezuela, Honduras, the list is not exhaustive). And every time, this manipulation is based on a inaugural lie, preferentially huge, which fabricates the casus belli requested by interference by paralyzed international opinion. A US specialty, this production of war by a pure and simple invention of its motive is the trademark of the headquarters. Lyndon Johnson invents torpedo ships, Colin Powell brandishes his vial of apple juice to the UN, Barack Obama indicates the culprit of a chemical attack organised by his protégés. All means are good to create obedient subjects.

The key formula of this politics is “lie, false banner and videos”. The lie is the generative element of imperialist war, its raw material, its fuel. The false banner (“false flag”) is its favourite operative mode, because it allows accusatory inversion, imputation of its own crimes to the adversary whom they want to slaughter. The videos, finally, are the instrument of communication that gives body to the founding fable. With the convincing force of the pictures, with its effects of the real, they allow to substitute the post-truth built a la simple veracity of facts. It is not by chance that the Pentagon spent 500 million dollars to fabricate false jihadist videos, and that the White Helmets in Syria were making their videos against the decors of cinema.

Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.