Neil Clark writes:
To have been in ‘democratic’ Britain for the past eight weeks has been quite an educational experience. We've seen how the NeoCon Establishment works, how dissent is policed, and how 'gas-lighting' techniques are used to try and make us think we're going crazy for questioning the 'official narrative' — a narrative which we know just by employing simple logic, doesn't make sense.
Here's a list of the most important things we've
learnt- that's if you weren't aware of them already.
To have been in ‘democratic’ Britain for the past eight weeks has been quite an educational experience. We've seen how the NeoCon Establishment works, how dissent is policed, and how 'gas-lighting' techniques are used to try and make us think we're going crazy for questioning the 'official narrative' — a narrative which we know just by employing simple logic, doesn't make sense.
1. The presumption of innocence doesn't apply to NeoCon
targets.
Innocent until proven guilty? Not if you're in the line of fire of the Endless War Lobby, comrade. Russia was accused of trying to poison the Skripals before a proper criminal investigation had even begun. The Syrian government was blamed for a chemical weapons attack, before we had independently verification that a chemical weapons attack had even taken place.
Innocent until proven guilty? Not if you're in the line of fire of the Endless War Lobby, comrade. Russia was accused of trying to poison the Skripals before a proper criminal investigation had even begun. The Syrian government was blamed for a chemical weapons attack, before we had independently verification that a chemical weapons attack had even taken place.
The ‘Official Narrative' on both cases has unravelled spectacularly. No 'smoking gun' evidence of either Russian involvement in the Skripal case or of the Douma CW attack has been produced. On the contrary, witnesses testified last week at The Hague that the Douma attack didn't happen.
2. Rupert Murdoch's Times newspaper plays an utterly pernicious role in British public life.
It was The Times which demanded action from Theresa May against Russia. It was The Times which has demanded (repeatedly, and again after the Skripal incident) that Ofcom acted against Russian media in the UK, such as RT. It was The Times, which accuses Russian media of peddling 'fake news', which reported Sergei Skripal as dead on its 12th March front page.
It was The Times which, on 14th March, falsely reported that 'almost 40' people had needed treatment in Salisbury, prompting Dr Stephen Davies, Comsultant in Emergency Medicine to write to the paper stating 'May I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning.'
It was The Times, which on the day the US/UK and France launched illegal attacks on Syria in response to the unverified chemical weapons attack at Douma, carried a front page attack on British academics who dare to challenge the War Party line on Syria. It was The Times which smeared other critics of western foreign policy as 'Russian trolls', including a peace campaigner from Finland who had been battling cancer.
John Wight has called The Times, the in-house organ of the neocon Henry Jackson Society. Its days as Britain's respected newspaper of record have certainly long gone.
3. Britain is only what is called a 'Democracy'.
Just think back to that Parliamentary debate on 14th March. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was attacked from his own side, for his cautious approach towards the government's unproven claims about the Skripal case.
To add insult to injury a number of Labour MPs then signed Early Day Motion 1071- which stated 'This House unequivocally accepts the Russian state's culpability for the poisoning of Yulia and Sergei Skripal'. Labour's Shadow Defence Secretary Nia Griffith showed her support for Theresa May by saying 'We very much accept what the Prime Minister said.'
Corbyn, coming under enormous Establishment pressure did buckle, saying the Russian authorities ‘needed to be held to account', even though later he still quite rightly insisted that 'absolute evidence' was needed.
In a genuine democracy that would have ruled out action. But May treated public opinion with utter contempt. That wonderful passage from ‘The Comments of Moung Ka' by the Edwardian comic writer Saki springs readily to mind.
'The people of Britain are what is called a Democracy' said
Moung Ka. ‘A Democracy?' questioned Moung Thwa. What is that?'
'A Democracy' broke in Moung Shooglay eagerly, 'is a
community that governs itself according to its own wishes and
interests by electing accredited representatives who enact its laws
and supervise and control their administration. Its aim and object is
government of the community in the interests of the community.'
'Then', said Moung Thwa, turning to his neighbour, 'If the
people of Britain are a Democracy-'
‘I never said they were a Democracy', interrupted Moung Ka
placidly.
‘Surely we both heard you!', exclaimed Moung Thwa.
‘Not correctly, said Moung Ka; ‘I said they are what is called a
Democracy'.'
4. The ‘free press' doesn't act as you'd expect a ‘free
press' to act.
Right-wing papers like the Telegraph and liberal ones like The Guardian have taken exactly the same stance i.e., anti-Russian and anti-Syrian government. Whether its because of DSMA-Notices (see 6, below), or not, there's been no proper questioning of the UK government's claims about Salisbury — and not much on Syria either. Investigative journalism? What's that?
The mainstream media is actually less diverse in its opinions now (on the things that really matter) than at the time of the Iraq war where publications like the New Statesman (now a 'centrist' Blairite organ), spoke out strongly against intervention. If you want a different perspective on Skripals and Syria you have had to tune in to Russian media, such as Sputnik and RT, and that of course is threatened by the NeoCon Thought Police, who want everyone to be singing from the same pro-war hymn sheet.
5. The role of the security services in the promotion of
'official narratives' is very important.
Every time a wheel has come off the Skripal narrative, we've been fed information to bolster it from 'official sources'. After the head of Porton Down said that the laboratory there was unable to confirm that the nerve agent allegedly used to poison the Skripals came from Russia, the line was pushed that 'intelligence-led assessments' pointed to Russian guilt. Could we see these ‘assessments'? Of course not! We just have to believe that they're there.
Then as the ‘nerve handle placed on the door‘ theory began to gain a head of steam we were told that 'British Intelligence' had 'evidence' that Russia had been testing the nerve agent on door handles prior to 3rd March. Could we see this 'evidence'? No, of course not.
Alex Thomson of C4 News reported
on 12th March that a 'D-Notice' had issued by the UK authorities
to stop the media from fully identifying Sergei Skripal's MI6 handler
who lived nearby.
Were other DSMA-Notices issued
too regarding the reporting of Salisbury? If it was so clear that
Russia did it, why would they bother?
Every time a wheel has come off the Skripal narrative, we've been fed information to bolster it from 'official sources'. After the head of Porton Down said that the laboratory there was unable to confirm that the nerve agent allegedly used to poison the Skripals came from Russia, the line was pushed that 'intelligence-led assessments' pointed to Russian guilt. Could we see these ‘assessments'? Of course not! We just have to believe that they're there.
Then as the ‘nerve handle placed on the door‘ theory began to gain a head of steam we were told that 'British Intelligence' had 'evidence' that Russia had been testing the nerve agent on door handles prior to 3rd March. Could we see this 'evidence'? No, of course not.
6. The British public aren't mugs (or sheep).
Despite all the propaganda, all the hysterical headlines, all the blatantly biased coverage, the British haven't bought it. Literally or metaphorically.
Inside the Tent gatekeepers have relentlessly attacked those brave individuals who have questioned the official narratives, but its these individuals, smeared as 'crackpots' and 'conspiracy theorists', who the public are turning to for their analysis.
Compare the number of retweets the former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray gets when he publishes on the Skripal case, with those who try and denigrate him. My own Twitter following has increased by several thousands since early March. Citizen Halo got a big boost in followers after she was smeared by The Times.
After the lies told about Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya, people no longer tamely accept what the NeoCon Establishment tells us. We're at an 'Emperor's New Clothes' moment in British politics where more and more people have found the courage to say out loud, 'The Emperor has no clothes!' The elite have been lying to us and they know that we know they've been lying. The question is: what are we going to do about it?
Despite all the propaganda, all the hysterical headlines, all the blatantly biased coverage, the British haven't bought it. Literally or metaphorically.
Inside the Tent gatekeepers have relentlessly attacked those brave individuals who have questioned the official narratives, but its these individuals, smeared as 'crackpots' and 'conspiracy theorists', who the public are turning to for their analysis.
Compare the number of retweets the former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray gets when he publishes on the Skripal case, with those who try and denigrate him. My own Twitter following has increased by several thousands since early March. Citizen Halo got a big boost in followers after she was smeared by The Times.
After the lies told about Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya, people no longer tamely accept what the NeoCon Establishment tells us. We're at an 'Emperor's New Clothes' moment in British politics where more and more people have found the courage to say out loud, 'The Emperor has no clothes!' The elite have been lying to us and they know that we know they've been lying. The question is: what are we going to do about it?
No comments:
Post a Comment