So as most people will be aware of here, a leaked audio recording of various high level Turkish officials reveals they were discussing the implementation of an attack on themselves to start off a war in Syria which could possibly invoke article 4 or article 5 of NATO. It has had quite a lot of coverage here but I'm still flabbergasted at how little attention it has got all over Reddit considering how incredible of a revelation it is.
Here is the leaked audio converted to a transcript...
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/turkey-youtube-ban-full-transcript-leaked-syria-war-conversation-between-erdogan-officials-1442161
Hakan Fidan:
"I'll send 4 men from Syria, if that's what it takes. I'll make up a cause of war by ordering a missile attack on Turkey; we can also prepare an attack on Suleiman Shah Tomb if necessary."
This is obviously the most damning part amongst other high level corruption which proves beyond doubt that a false flag attack was a consideration.
The next part of the post is the absolutely incredible wording (or the lack of wording) from some of the most 'trusted' and widely used media sources from the US and UK.
Reuters - The account posted what it presented as a recording of intelligence chief Hakan Fidan discussing possible military operations in Syria with Davutoglu, Deputy Chief of military Staff Yasar Guler and other senior officials.
CNN - The Turkish government said its YouTube block came as a response to the leak of a conversation between top government officials purportedly discussing the possibility of going to war with neighboring Syria.
NBC - The ban comes after conversations implicating Erdogan of corruption were leaked on YouTube last month. Important local elections are scheduled to be held on March 30, 2014. A "source at the prime minister's office" in Turkey told Reuters that the ban was related to leaked conversations about a potential military operation in Syria and that it might be lifted if the offending videos were removed from YouTube.
Bloomberg - Turkey defended its decision to block YouTube after a leaked recording of a meeting where top officials discussed a possible military incursion into Syria appeared on the site.
USA Today - An audio recording leaked on YouTube appears to reveal that top Turkey officials were plotting to fake an attack against their own country as an excuse to wage war on Syria.
At least USA Today made it clear that it was going to be a false flag, I guess the writer didn't get the memo.
BBC - It relates to a discussion of possible military operations in Syria, which was apparently attended by Turkey's intelligence chief, its foreign minister and the deputy head of the armed forces.
Channel 4 News - In the Turkish government's second online intervention in as many weeks, it has blocked the video-sharing site YouTube after a recording was posted on the site which apparently shows top security officials in Turkey discussing possible military operations in Syria.
The Guardian - The move by the TIB came hours after an anonymous YouTube account posted a leaked audio recording allegedly of a confidential conversation between Turkish intelligence chief Hakan Fidan, foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu, undersecretary of the foreign ministry Feridun Sinirlioglu and deputy chief of the general staff, Yasar Gürel, discussing possible military action in Syria.
The Independant - YouTube has been blocked in Turkey after alleged leaks of high-level security talks regarding Syria were uploaded to the site.
Sky News - Thursday's recording purports to be of senior Turkish government, military and spy officials discussing a military intervention in neighbouring Syria - a hugely contentious issue in Turkey. The officials allegedly debate plans to stage an armed clash in Syria or a missile attack that would serve as justification for intervention. The context of the conversation is not clear.
Context not clear Sky News?
There's an obvious trend barring USA Today and that is all of them do not once mention the attacks would come from Turkey themselves or completely ignore it and frame the article around high level discussions or corruption.
I have some questions for people who don't find this incredibly strange...
Skeptics argue that the media only discuss things people are interested in and they post stories to attract views for advertisement purposes. With all the constant reporting on terrorism in these media outlets, why is this case being treated differently? The constant terrorism reporting obviously interests people if your argument is that they only cover things that people are interested in. Is this not enough drama to attract viewers attentions as well? it could be a plot for a Hollywood movie which again, people seem to be interested In. Why do they all use the same wording as if it comes from the same report although each writer differs?
Why is the USA Today article worded so that the reader gets the most important and explosive core of the article and understands that Turkey would be faking an attack on itself? What happened at USA Today that makes them stand out from the rest?
If there is any big mainstream source you've seen that specifically point out it was a false flag, please post a link.
64 comments
35 Spacetrooper 2014-03-30
OP is spot on. I also noticed that the most important point of the Turkey Youtube-ban story - the most explosive part - was conspicuously missing from any and all media reporting.
Every story I read seemed to sidestep it; and I looked. At first, I thought is was just sloppy reporting. But like the OP, it now seems to me that the editors are all staying on script - which is quite concerning seeing that a free press was always regarded as the Forth Estate of a functioning democracy. It now all seems so coordinated.
It's obvious that an any reference to a NATO ally utilizing a false-flag as a casus belli was forbidden by the editors of the articles the OP used as examples. Perhaps, information such as this might point to the elephants in our own room, or fuck up the administration's plans for Syria. I don't know. But it's clear that the main point of the Youtube ban story been purposely redacted and kept from the readers/viewers.
I have really lost faith in even respected press that I once trusted; jounals such as the Wa-Post and NYT. I feel like I can't trust them to tell me what's really going on in the world anymore. And I can't trust most of the garbage I read written by the internet-fringe that basically amounts to recycled rumors published from people's basement bunkers.
I feel that everybody is lying to me and I can no longer discern truth from deception.
This is an important post and should be voted up.
15 Conspiracy_Account 2014-03-30
I wanted to put the various sources in one place so people could see that it was the same style of reporting which to me is highly suspicious.
What makes it so important to point out is that some of these sources are the default news organisations that hundreds of millions of people get their news from. The BBC is often left out of these discussions and seen to be above all the others in terms of journalistic integrity when it's clear they aren't.
It's crystal clear that pointing out Turkey was going to utilise a false flag was a big no no. Why are they scared of printing those two words?
I think you have to not be at either end of the extremes in terms of conspiracy or mainstream points. The truth is often somewhere in the Middle and you don't need to cite some obscure blog, it's available in either mainstream, academic or from the source anyway. If people complain about bad sources, start accommodating them by giving a source they find acceptable. That's how you get people on side.
A lot of people are lying to you, the only truth is the one you can confirm to yourself with your own mind using yours and other peoples material. Never take anybody's word as stated, that goes for anyone.
Thanks a lot.
5 cuckname 2014-03-30
this is why RT is the best news source (sadly)
6 Letterbocks 2014-03-30
There is no 'best' source. They are all pretty narrow in focus and none are objective - without a spectrum of reports you have small chance of getting a rounded idea of what is going on.
2 cuckname 2014-03-30
firstlook intercept
2 foxfaction 2014-03-30
I used to watch it all the time, but after seeing the way they reported on Crimea I can't take them seriously anymore.
3 dubdubdubdot 2014-03-30
What about their reporting on Crimea? You do know the US state department spent $5 billion on regime change in Ukraine?
http://youtu.be/diyZtuF7NUs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWkfpGCAAuw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y0y-JUsPTU#t=447
1 foxfaction 2014-03-30
Yeah I do. RT was acting like it was no big deal at all when Russia invaded Crimea. It was disgraceful.
1 dubdubdubdot 2014-03-30
It was reactionary to what the US was doing, overthrowing the elected government of Ukraine, that wasnt covered on any other western news station to my knowledge and that was disgraceful. Did Al Jazeera cover it?
1 foxfaction 2014-03-30
Yes
1 cuckname 2014-03-30
what do you watch instead? here is a hidden gem: http://taima.tv/r/wooo
1 foxfaction 2014-03-30
Mostly Al Jazeera English and the a compilation of news sources from reddit.
2 dubdubdubdot 2014-03-30
Isnt Al Jazeera owned by the same person/people who own Fox News?
1 foxfaction 2014-03-30
Rupert Murdoch? No, it is not.
1 dubdubdubdot 2014-03-30
It was bought by a billionaire gulf Arab.
1 foxfaction 2014-03-30
Fox News was?
2 dubdubdubdot 2014-03-30
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Waleed_bin_Talal#Business_interests
0 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
You should have been zapped after the Sandy Hoax.
3 SpudgeBoy 2014-03-30
NYT = yellow cake
WA Post = Valarie Plame outing
I haven't trusted them for a very very very long time.
3 Spacetrooper 2014-03-30
I always tried to forgive the NYT for the yellow cake debacle by believing they were duped by a very effective propaganda effort that Judith Miller fell prey to. But it's clear that all mainstream media has been squelched by an external force that they have to answer to.
This is the nail-in-the-coffin event for me when it comes to believing any of our mainstream media can be called members of the free press. I'm going to stick with the independents like Amy Goodman and Greenwald to report and analyze what's going on with world events. Anyone working for corporate media cannot be trusted.
-1 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
Greenwald is likely a corrupted agent as well.
4 Spacetrooper 2014-03-30
I've read his blog going years back when he was still writing for Salon. He always used his reporting and legal skills adeptly, and without reservation to point out glaring government violations of constitutional law. Now he is living in, what amounts to, exile.
I understand the double-agent premise, but without some proof, I will continue to consider him, and Snowden, true patriots that have shown a light on unconstitutional acts of our government. Both have sacrificed much to bring the conversation to the forefront. The guy's alright in my book.
2 dehehn 2014-03-30
I'm with you man. All I've seen is gut paranoia reactions to them more than evidence.
-2 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
When they control everything, its difficult to know who you can trust. Who isn't in on the take. It's an obvious limited hangout. And if this is the case, he is unquestionably involved.
3 Ryan2468 2014-03-30
You might be interested in No Agenda.
2 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
Going to get the truth tattooed onto my heart.
20 YankExpress 2014-03-30
They don't report it because they do not want to introduce into the minds of the general publc that governments consider false flag attacks as legitimate tools in their arsenals.
The logical extension would be to look to the Gulf of Tonkin incident that kicked off Vietnam and ultimately re ask the question, "What really happened on 9/11."
4 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
Pearl Harbor. 9/11. Et al.
7 MKBetaKitty 2014-03-30
I think they get their news from press exec's who spin it before it even reaches the writer.
3 Conspiracy_Account 2014-03-30
I think a lot them do actually have news wires from Reuters but that doesn't explain why they nearly all chose to word it how they did. Why two little words that don't seem to be that interesting or important couldn't be printed is indication that they are the opposite of that. I think that the mere mention of it sets off peoples interest and then those people will Google the words and then what comes up is not good for the people that do it.
They also have plausible deniability by calling it a 'military operation' which it is essentially but it doesn't paint the picture the way it needs to be.
I'm a bit disappointed that this didn't blow up and become a massive thing. I don't really know what needs to be printed or announced on the news for people to really take notice and it seems the media are getting more brazen with their lies as well. That maybe to do with the fact they are allowed to do it now with no repercussions, not that they had any anyway.
3 MKBetaKitty 2014-03-30
They also use buzz words intentionally, words they have chosen to have a particular effect on the audience. I am too. People don't have any compelling reason to become involved in politics deeply, or they at least feel they don't. I don't get why they want others to tell them what they should know, rather than discovering the truth personally.
1 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
This is how most of them were built from a young age. Television 'PROGRAMMING.' It takes only half open eyes to see the truth.
7 utunga 2014-03-30
Thank you very much OP for point out this needs more attention. It's because of the occasional gem like this that I stay subscribed to /r/conspiracy. In trying to do further research I definitely wanted to see what Sibel Edmonds had to say about it. Her name should be well known for the work she did as a brave whistleblower exposing corruption in the US intelligence apparatus especially as regards its relationship to turkey.
Anyway her website has a piece which puts this whole thing in a bit more context. Definitely worth a read. http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2014/03/29/bfp-exclusive-turkish-power-struggle-impedes-natos-campaign-in-syria/
One quote of interest
7 funkarama 2014-03-30
I do not speak Turkish so I do not know what is on those tapes.
I do not know the people involved so I cannot match the voice to the person at all, much less scientifically.
Assuming that everything is exactly as stated, I am not surprised at all.
The US media is controlled. We know this.
For me, the important point is that this is part of a series of attacks on various Islamic countries, that happen to surround Israel and/or the EU. Turkey probably has it's own designs on Syrian power of land, but it fit into the overall flow of the attacks. This all relates back to the effort to weaken Russia also.
6 jshanthonymayne 2014-03-30
This needs to be read more! Nice work OP. I didn't even notice how, coincidentally, every report beats around the bush but when it comes to the US, it doesn't. Hmmm...
6 colaturka 2014-03-30
True detective.
6 2045wewill 2014-03-30
Thanks for putting this together op! This is unbelievable. Arguably the biggest news story of the year so far and they play it down like that. These people are supposed to be journalists. How could they all miss to report the most important piece of the story. Reddit as usual do all they can to keep it from the front page. Scary time we live in. How can we fight this? This is a scandal! Everyone should know about this.
5 Usernamerestricted 2014-03-30
The establishment have a deep and profound way with words and their meanings. Don't forget they all use words and ancient symbolism that dates back to the early days. When these words are used in conjunction with Edward Bernays propaganda methods at targeting the individual's sub conscious mind the overall truth gets subverted. Language and words mean more than just the meanings we find in the dictionary.
We are kidding ourselves if we expect the media to give us the truth. One or two rogue stations might hint on the truth in clever wording but then it gets buried never to be shown again or the interviewee gets cut off.
Only reason I think USA today would do it is to keep us fighting with each other because we all have our own perception and different views.
They keep the slaves fighting amongst each other. Fuck it worked for the pharaohs what makes the process different for modern civilizations.
1 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
It only works when the people cannot see the game they are playing. Now that we can all see it, and are actively resisting, their plans fail horribly. We are witnessing the effects of this daily. Its an exciting time. Play your part. Expose the truth. Wake as many other people up as you can. Show then the truth.
4 Raesong 2014-03-30
My question is what would Turkey gain by wanting to go to war with Syria? Were they seeking to capitalize on the already unstable situation within Syria in the hopes of taking it over? Did they want to take control of any strategic resources withing the country? Was it to extort money from them?
13 Spacetrooper 2014-03-30
"My question is what would Turkey gain by wanting to go to war with Syria?"
The protests were forming again. The last time the people rose up in great numbers - over the planned destruction of a public park, no less - Erdogan and his people realized they came too close to being toppled. Maybe this was meant to rally support for the current regime by creating a cause the country would rally around. Thus, raising support for him.
Or, more sinisterly, the reason for this could have been the latest step in a cooperative effort by the US and it's NATO allies to create the opportunity to go into Syria and topple Bashar al-Assad.
That would be a real good reason the US would want the information to be suppressed.
6 Usernamerestricted 2014-03-30
I'd think it would be a mixture of everything you mentioned.
I think it's called "democracy" and "freedom" if I'm correct.
8 Conspiracy_Account 2014-03-30
It offers a legitimate window into how 'democratic leaders' operate. Democracy is nothing but a buzzword for people still inclined to believe lies.
4 Usernamerestricted 2014-03-30
All based on deception and lies. It's just sad the majority of people do believe it as truth and fight down anyone with a educated opinion.
1 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
In doublespeak, yes.
6 [deleted] 2014-03-30
It's a standard proxy war. It's about power (sphere of influence), resources and money. It's less a conspiracy than it is a trait of humanity.
The geopolitics is what's interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heUzDndfw8E
0 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
Calling it a trait of humanity softens its impact. It is 100% incorrect. Allowing such lies to propel a nation into bloodshed is criminal, and must not ever be allowed. What I hear on this tape is evidence of conspiracy, and should result in impeachment and criminal charges.
4 Conspiracy_Account 2014-03-30
I don't really know what the motive was and I'm speculating here but perhaps Erdogan wanted to look strong for up coming elections or he was being coerced by other people. Who knows but the intentions are quite clear.
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
They are NATO's bitch. NATO wants Iran. Need Syria first.
4 [deleted] 2014-03-30
59 downvotes
5 Spacetrooper 2014-03-30
I know. Downvoting a fucking conversation. This isn't fringe shit either. It's an astute observation that's relevant to the subreddit that it was posted in. What do they want to talk about; George Bush's reptilian tongue?
2 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
They are called disinfo agents, and there presence here is clearly seen.
0 [deleted] 2014-03-30
Actually they are just delusional skeptards that hate truth. They have no comment on undeniable truth so they downvote it in hopes no one else will see it.
1 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
Sure. That's one great way to disregard the obvious truth of our occupation by paid disinfo agents utilizing persona management software to sway public opinion on our forum.
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
That's a great way to disregard the truth that there are legions of actual human bio-computers that are under a suggestion based hypnosis. It's extremely effective, way harder to disrupt through identification. That's how the big boys do it. They don't pay for clicks. They use suggestive hypnosis to push agendas. Not saying paid, automated clicking isn't happening.. it's just the most simplistic and obvious way social media is manipulated. More sinster are the systems in place managing programming that creates active true believers.
0 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
Except for what we already KNOW about how Zionists run their despicable online PR campaign.
4 Ryan2468 2014-03-30
Nice look at the coverage. Sounds like they're all basing it off a vague wire agency or press release.
5 Spacetrooper 2014-03-30
You're being too kind. The reporters know exactly what happened. Most are professional investigators who probably dig deeper than we do. Most reporting at the agencies noted by the OP, comes out of foreign bureaus, so they aren't just copy and paste amateurs. They are there on the ground. Articles get written and rewritten until the editors says they are ready for publication. This isn't just sloppy reporting, it's a purposeful concerted act to suppress a particular piece of information.
Edit: On a re-read, I now believe you were being sarcastic, and not naive. Sorry
2 Ryan2468 2014-03-30
I often tone down my true thoughts on here because often they aren't received so well, particularly outside of this sub. That sounds like I'm a massive racist or something, but I hope you know what I mean.
4 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
More proof that false flags are the way that every war is started.
4 _Roland_Deschain_ 2014-03-30
Watched bill mahr with my wife last night and I proposed the same question. He brought up the fact that Turkey had banned YouTube and Twitter then opened up the subject to the panel. I paused it and said, "he just skipped over the most important part of the whole reason why they would ban those outlets." He didn't even explain why they were blocked. I know he isn't a "reputable" news outlet but it goes to show how these things are discussed amongst talking heads.
Nice work op.
3 swansong19 2014-03-30
Great observation, OP. Noticed the very same thing watching the CBC this a.m. Talking head mentioned the blocking of twitter and yt because of false accusations being spread on social media by foes of the gov...
period...end of story...next.
The entire 20sec bit could have been written by a Turkish official.
On their website it appears they took it from Sky.
The four are allegedly heard discussing a military intervention in neighboring Syria, a sensitive political issue in Turkey, although the context of the conversation is not clear.
2 Conspiracy_Account 2014-03-30
"The context is not clear" is a cop out but you have to consider why they write what they write. They explain the story but dismiss it in the same paragraph. It's plausible deniability to post the article but basically say it's unsubstantiated. No one can complain it's not been covered but it has been dismissed as if the content wasn't immediately apparent. If you just read the transcript, which they don't link to, you can make judgement on that yourself. Most people won't bother looking for it which is why it isn't there.
0 ManOfTheInBetween 2014-03-30
When I saw this live I had that gut feeling that this gesture, Obama assisting the Marine with an umbrella that just so happens to be positioned over the Turkish flag, was in fact a signal, or symbol, because secret societies are big on that shit.
0 iamagod_ 2014-03-30
Calling it a trait of humanity softens its impact. It is 100% incorrect. Allowing such lies to propel a nation into bloodshed is criminal, and must not ever be allowed. What I hear on this tape is evidence of conspiracy, and should result in impeachment and criminal charges.
1 foxfaction 2014-03-30
Fox News was?