How bad is Modern Warfare 2, anyway?

You may want to read others' opinions on this matter too:
- Information Liberation
- Raw Story
- Infowars (mirror w/ comments)

Basically, there was a controversy over a paticular segment of popular videogame Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, in which the player participates in a terrorist massacre at a Russian airport. Russia actually banned the game as a result.

Depending on your sensitivity and/or satanic bloodlust, you may want to look away or watch intently.



Now, what I want to discuss, is what kind of influence this is going to have on people. Some discerning citizens reacted to this when it was posted at Infowars, saying it is a piece of propaganda portraying participating in a massacre of unarmed citizens as a good thing.

What you don't get from the video above, is the short video introduction to that level, providing the narrative background to this event, which to me is worse than the actual level. As I played this I couldn't help but think what was going through the heads of the guards at Abu Grahib...or a marksman positioning himself on the infamous Grassy Knoll.



General Shepherd is talking to Private Allen, the CIA operative whose character you assume for the above level. Transcript is as follows:

Two men took down an entire base. I ask much more from you now.

Yesterday you were a soldier on the front lines. But today, front lines are history.

Uniforms are relics. The war rages everywhere. And there will be casualties.

This man Makarov is fighting his own war and he has no rules. No boundaries.

He doesn't flinch at torture, human trafficking or genocide.

He's not loyal to a flag or a country or any set of ideals. He trades blood for money.

He's your new best friend.

You don't want to know what it's cost already to put you next to him.

It will cost you a piece of yourself.

It will cost nothing compared to everything you'll save.

At this point, it is important to discuss the issue of violence in videogames more broadly. Some may shrug this off as insignificant, because after all there is nothing new about machine gunning masses of innocent people in videogames (GTA?)

The difference is that in something like Grand Theft Auto, you are playing a CRIMINAL.

Call Of Duty series games are literally indirect military recruitment tools - violent, yes, but always moral. Respectable. "Patriotic". Heroic 'Merikans saving the world from the Newk wielding Terrusts. No civilians ever hurt by aforementioned heroic 'Merikans. All evil terrusts hater 'Merika, and they deserve a bullet between the eyes, which is just what they get. That's what you get when you mess wither 'Merika!!!111

The featuring of such grotesque scenes in an otherwise 'respectable' videogame (in which, usually, strict military 'morality' - i.e. invade somewhere and only shoot the people shooting back at you - is applied) leaves me uncertain as to what kind of effect this will have on the sheeple.

Either: BAD - People are being shown a scenario in which the CIA kills innocent people, but it's all 'for the greater good', just like in the movie The Watchmen
Or: GOOD - People are being introduced via videogame to the undeniable reality of false flag terror operations (historically and today).

I should add, because it's relevant context to this post, that the story (which is in many ways the antithesis of the good guy SAS and USMC against the ebil terrusts of the previous instalment) ultimately has the player killing General Shepherd. Long story short, the massacre at the airport (and the subsequent Red Dawn-style Russian invasion of America) had all been cooked up by him. Why? Essentially, he had a personal vendetta to raise Army recruitment, and write his own version of history.

I can't explain everything here, you'll have to read the plot to understand the propaganda fully:
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_2#Plot

So let me get this straight:
1. Player told to kill loads of innocent people 'but it will save many more'
2. Player is betrayed by Shepherd, the very man giving the orders for the above massacre
3. Player must surely realise how this relates to the real world? That they were being used then thrown away, much like real soldiers, by their boss? That their boss was willing to stoop to staging terror attacks to reach their own selfish ends? (now I know, here the General is staging terror, when in reality it would not be one man, but covert groups within the intelligence agencies as ex-CIA man Ray McGovern says)

"History is written by the victors. History is filled with liars." - another home truth players of MW2 are confronted with later in the game

Remind me again why people are complaining about MW2? Because, if the impression I got from the game is accurate, and I tried to think like a sheeple while playing, it is (intentionally or not) the most anti-NWO piece of propaganda I've ever seen from such a mainstream piece of media.

How's that for a surprise conclusion?
________________________________________________________________

IMHO: Someday I'll have to write about this in depth, but I believe the increased violence etc in media is the worst thing the elites have ever done to harm their cause. Desensitisation may have been designed for young soldiers, but to me it seems that by making cynics out of the rest of us, it actually helps people to understand more easily how the global control structure truly works. Less cognitive dissonance...people almost EXPECT to find true evil in power. Which, with the right information available to them, they of course will.