Matthew d’Ancona and his fake news
Philip Roddis from Steel City Scribblings
Matthew d’Ancona, in yesterday’s Guardian, is concerned about the threat to democracy from fake news. He wants to see ‘social media giants’ …
…legally redefined in a new, third category that radically enhances their accountability for the content they host, without imperilling free political discourse. Striking the right balance in this jurisprudential task will not be easy. But who expected it to be?
He also wants…
…a new system of “credible annotation of standards, so that people can see, at a glance, the level of verification of a site” – essentially, kitemarking of the sort that is standard in almost every other sector of consumption.
I am less sure that the government should “initiate a working group of experts” to oversee this process. If there is one thing worse than what the committee describes as the “wild west” of today’s digital prairies, it is anything that even resembles a Ministry of Truth, or an Oftruth regulator. Better that independent charitable bodies perform this grading task – gaining the public’s trust incrementally, as the admirable Full Fact and other fact-checking organisations have done in recent years.
Matthew d’Ancona being on the liberal wing of British Conservatism, that last paragraph is to be expected. He sees the dangers, earnest democrat that he is, of state censorship but believes, credulous liberal that he is, these can be averted by a few judicious mechanisms of the classic ‘checks and balances’ sort. I’m not going to argue with him on that. With bigger fish to fry, I’ll confine myself to pointing out that his ‘admirable’ Full Fact is led by Mayborn Group CEO and Tory Party donor Michael Samuel, while so many of those ‘other fact-checking organisations’ have on closer inspection proved to be at best self righteous – and self appointed – custodians of truth; at worst risibly tainted.[1]
d’Ancona’s complacency is neither the inevitable nor exclusive product of a costly education and privileged lifestyle, but is nurtured and at every turn reinforced by both. How do you think the man would respond to the question put to one similarly placed, the BBC’s Andrew Marr, in a 1996 interview with Noam Chomsky?
The media are selling privileged audiences. These are big businesses, big corporations selling privileged audiences to other corporations. Now what picture of the world would a rational person expect to come out of such a structure?
Marr had no answer and I don’t suppose d’Ancona has either. Neither man is a liar; both are the successful products of an ideological matrix upheld, confirmed and reaffirmed in those myriads of conversations and everyday acts which define – if we don’t ask about the nature of power – ‘common sense’ and what is ‘moderate’. It’s through such conversations and acts that normality is most thoroughly demarked, lines most durably drawn between ‘moderate’ and ‘extreme’. But those conversations and acts do not take place in a vacuum. They arise within particular social relations of class division, their heavy ideological lifting done in the education, entertainment[2] and news industries.
Specifically here, many read a superficially broad spectrum of media views on small to middling matters – Mail at one end, Guardian at the other – as proof of an ‘open’ society whose forms of democracy they take at face value. Others call that spectrum a slit-window view on the world, a painfully limited vista constrained not by Truth – though that can’t be entirely bypassed: it has in normal times to be accommodated – nor yet by blunt censorship. Liberal media do indulge in crude onslaughts of the kind directed at Corbyn, Assad and Putin.
They do not, however, make a habit of telling outright lies. To do so entails risks only undertaken when the alternatives pose an unusually stubborn impediment to ruling class[3] interests. In the main, liberal media lie by omission. (When did you last read a Guardian or Independent piece on how those who took the decision to invade Iraq and demolish Libya have profited from their reconstruction? When did such media last run a piece on the extent of Syria’s privatisation? Come to that, when will we get a fearless Guardian investigation of the implications, as ad revenues fall, of growing donor dependence on American liberals well to the right of Britain’s?) And they spin with scant regard for consequence, as with the demonisation of Assad and Putin by daily repetition of unproven allegations to the point where inflammatory claim [4] can no longer be distinguished – ‘no smoke without fire’ – from proven fact.
Chomsky, with his gift for framing subtle truths and complex observations in simple but never simplistic terms, raises the issue of that ideological matrix more than once in his BBC interview with Andrew Marr. When Marr asks with incredulity if Chomsky supposes he and his colleagues profess beliefs not sincerely held but calculated to advance their careers, Chomsky responds:
No, I am sure you believe everything you say. What I am saying is that if you believed something different, you wouldn’t be sat in that chair interviewing me.
Neatly put. Similarly, the owlish Mr d’Ancona wouldn’t be sat where he is but for his touching faith that the core aim of his various media employers is to pursue truth, as opposed to selling privileged audiences to other big corporations. To be a useful idiot you have to be, well, useful.
NOTES:-
- 1. See for instance this Spiked piece, which asks “Who exactly will judge which news is ‘real’ and what’s ‘fake’, and decide whether the world’s citizens are ‘properly informed’? While ensuring ‘those in positions of power are held accountable’ is a laudable aim, the question remains: accountable to whom? The people in a democratic system? Or our self-appointed ‘fact-checkers’ in a software package. And perhaps most pointedly – who will the fact-checkers be accountable to?”
- 2. While education and news media are routinely and rightly decried by capitalism’s critics, I’m coming firmly to the view that the cumulative effect of decades of soft propaganda from TV and cinema is every bit as vital to its ideological underpinnings. That near infinite accumulation of subtexts, seldom intended as propaganda – rather, as Giving The Public What it Wants – is all the more effective for that ‘innocence of intent’ in its nurturing of deeply orientalist assumptions of Western and especially American beneficence. And of Arab and Slavic villainy for villainy’s sake.
- 3. My concise definition of a ruling class is its monopoly ownership of some essential of wealth creation. Under capitalism this is the big money and production infrastructure without which wealth cannot be produced. Of course there is far more to say, but all else derives from this one central reality.
- 4. Of all the charges to be laid at the doors of BBC, Guardian and Independent, none is graver than that their coverage of Russia, Syria and Ukraine – and mix, on Yemen, of near silence with unsubstantiated claims of Iranian backed Houthis – has the effect, regardless of intent, of promoting the high tech and highly lucrative delivery of death to the near defenceless peoples of the global south.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
In July I published a study of MuralGate that alleged a conspiracy; here I analyse the data on those who viewed the essay. It shows how a dozen or so around the world (and two in particular) took my investigation very seriously, tried to limit its influence, but inadvertently widened its scope insofar as the reception of MuralGaga led to further discoveries. Please share.
https://www.academia.edu/37690505/GagaPhooey_Understanding_the_Reception_of_MuralGaga
I accuse the British Press of complicity in the atrocities – just two pages. Please share:
https://www.academia.edu/s/e2b86af96f/black-and-white-and-red-all-over
The issue of the smear campaign has not been resolved. My work in the last 100 days:
https://www.academia.edu/37453940/One_Hundred_Days_of_MuralGaga
And do please retweet, share – especially at the Labour Party Conference.
On the fascist tendencies of the “centre” despite itself:
https://www.academia.edu/s/e67fba03d7/fascism-and-dual-loyalty
More about Sauron, I’m afraid. A review of a review:
https://www.academia.edu/37436334/Cohen_and_Susskind_Living_Together
I take another look at that mural off Brick Lane. I do so in the context of (a) local identity politics, (b) global geopolitics and the “clash of civilizations.” I do so because I have detected the “all seeing Eye of Sauron” observing both battles.
https://www.academia.edu/37401358/Brick_Lane_Revisited
If anyone wants a clue as to what has been going on in UK politics, look at this. It shows how from 2015 Cohen had shown himself hostile to Corbyn, yet surprisingly, the accusation of antisemitism was not made, despite the fact that Cohen had been told of Corbyn’s infamous mural comment shortly after he was elected leader. More significantly, the Twitter trail indicates that Cohen was instrumental in that comment becoming weaponised. 2 pages 5 minutes.
https://www.academia.edu/37365397/The_Tweets_of_Nick_Cohen_Concerning_Jeremy_Corbyn
And further to this on the hawks – who never, actually, used to think of Corbyn as antisemitic.
https://www.academia.edu/37379708/Who_Let_the_Dogs_Out_-_MuralGaga
Wrote this today. In my opinion the Israel Lobby needs some careful thought.
https://www.academia.edu/37352856/How_Does_Israel_Do_It_–or–_We_Help_Them_Actually
Some moderate Jews are worried about the irony statement – as if Corbyn was proposing a cricket test (Tebbit) for English Zionists. I give a short defense of Corbyn here:
https://www.academia.edu/37320263/Corbyns_Cricket_Test
I’ve just tried twice to provide a link for your work so far in the Politica Live thread of the Graun.
No luck. It got modded immediately.(along with four other quite innocuous and truthful comments)
Freedom of speech, freedom of thought. are now distant memories.
I defend Corbyn from the attack of Rabbi Sacks. I look at true and false prophecy in the light of the smear campaign. I give detail – but just 15 minute read:
https://www.academia.edu/37309944/Prophets_True_and_False
D’Ancona has been attacking Corbyn for those irony comments. I take a one page look at the person involved based on his own tweets:
https://www.academia.edu/37293658/The_Lamb_in_Millets_Clothing
Such a disgusting article full of deliberate distortions.
And we’re not allowed to question him, or point out the lies.
Having just read the latest Jonathan Cook on the witch hunt, utterly depressing to
realise how successful they’ve been at the brainwashing. They are actually EVIL.
I extend my analysis of the smears on Corbyn with two pages written this morning on IronyGate:
https://www.academia.edu/37288873/The_Locking_of_the_Gates
I have a short piece comparing the strategy and tactics behind two smear campaigns, MuralGate and CemeteryGate. I call for an investigative journalist to look into the “usual suspects.”
https://www.academia.edu/s/c094267b6f/the-strategists-smearing-corbyn-a-plea-for-journalism
In praise of ambiguity … and Peacemakers:
https://www.academia.edu/37238622/They_came_back
Matthew D’Ancona is couching his – possibly unconscious – desire for censorship in comfortable terms.
The danger is that people like him may be quite sincere in their desires for genuine news reporting, but like many liberals he mistakenly believes that his views are the only ones that are valid. Thus if he gets his way the news will be censored. He won’t view it that way though.
The Jewish Chronicle under Stephen Pollard has been in the forefront of the anti-Corbyn smears, a recent example being the recording and coverage of Peter Willsman. In their article, however, he is grossly mis-represented and this distortion is put into the mouth of the well-respected progressive Rabbi Laura Janner-Klausner. When I showed her a screen-shot of her “words” she was aghast, and told me she had said no such thing. I then complained to Pollard who dismissed my complaint as ridiculous and refused further correspondence. A summary of my complaint to IPSO can be found at:
https://www.academia.edu/37222738/Mis-attribution_in_the_Jewish_Chronicle
I wrote a reply to Alex Sobel and Hannah Weisfeld who advocated the full IHRA. I argued that they were naive to ignore the concerted anti-Corbyn campaign going on:
https://www.academia.edu/s/7db50ea29f/words-that-carry-weight
An interesting little parallel I noticed in the linked article in which Andrew Marr interviews Chomsky: Chomsky states that New York Times journalist Anthony Lewis claimed that the Vietnam war “began with blundering efforts to do good”.
This is exactly the same response I got in a private email from the Guardian’s Patrick Wintour when I questioned his utterly one-sided (anti-Russian, pro-bombings) article following the alleged chlorine gas attack in Douma.
I asked Wintour if he was aware of why the West is even in Syria, and if he was aware of the wider geopolitical context of the war, the role of the Saudis and the Israelis, US/UK funding for terrorist groups, the proposed pipeline, and the oil/gas supply war involving the Russians and the Gulf States.
I said that it was common knowledge that the West is in Syria primarily because of oil, but he disagreed, replying thus:
“Main point of disagreement is the belief the West is involved in Syria
due to oil. Think the initial aim was to support a democratic revolution.”
There you have it. A 64-year-old veteran journalist, and the Guardian’s Diplomatic Editor, no less, apparently has the political savvy of my conservative grandma, who also believes that we are just helping those poor Arabs to fight that nasty man. Alternatively, he’s a lying, opportunistic sleazebag hack like Anthony Lewis, who will change his views whenever his bosses tell him to. The main thing is, he gets to send his kids to Oxford so they too can watch our post-colonial bloody wars from the privileged sidelines like all the other Guardian journalists.
I seem to have got myself confused about the state of the IHRA definition and working examples. Judging by the apoplectic reaction: I thought that after a vote by the PLP: all eleven working examples had been rejected – which I took as a positive stand for communicative dialogue and the inclusive right to freedom of speech. Then I realised that seven had been retained, word for word. Now from Jeremy Corbyn (in the Fraudian): I read that ten and a half have been adopted (beyond the seven, adopted in the essence of the IHRA): and through a discourse with the Oppressors (I presume the BoD; embassy front JLM; LFI?), a final wording for the last one is to be agreed (he does not make clear which one of the free speech ending ‘definitions’ is to be reworded by the Oppression commission – I presume it is the “racist endeavour” clause?). So it appears we have ten and three-quarters of a quasi-legal charter of oppression and dialogue extirpation. To be violently and undemocratically imposed? The NEC has had the final say.
I view this as a major capitulation, that is in itself, a charter of freedom for racist hate-speech. Many legal commentators (notably, former Appeal Court Judge, Stephen Sedley), and 40 Jewish organisations worldwide [according to Asa Winstanley] had urged they not be adopted. The definition and examples lack the rigour of legal definitions. They employ woolly concepts and fuzzy logic which is relatively definable only by the Oppressors. That they are not ‘legally binding’, and therefore not subject to such rigour, is a classic, violent, and thus dictatorially oppressive strawman. They are the basis of the Code of Conduct for all members, and so have assumed quasi-legal status. Many have, and will, as the result of due process, be expelled on the basis of this Code. There is no appeal. Thus, they have the basis and finality of a Law within the confines of the Labour movement.
That they are the basis of hate-free speech within Labour’s discourse is thus a contradiction in terms. They have given an assumed authority to the Oppressor: who alone can (subliminally) define their own terms. What is hateful is not for debate, or for you and I to decide and define through discourse (the basis of dialogue) …the terminology is loaded and emotively charged in favour of the reactionary reactivity of a conferred victim status. The right to self-reflexively claim that an opposing point of view is hateful and hurtful is enshrined in these quasi-legal dictatorial and disciplinarian ‘working examples’. If I do not like you or what you say: I cry and turn to the waiting press and cameras, and claim to have been insulted …knowing that my actions will lead to expulsion (i.e. of Marc Wadsworth: see below). But I can only do this if I am Jewish and thus covered by the IHRA indefinable? Being a lifelong anti-black racism and antisemitism campaigner is no defence.
True hate-speech is intolerable: but creating an atmosphere for the manufacture and proliferation of supposed hate-speech is equally intolerable. It is a regression to the darkest days of the twentieth century. I can’t say when because that would be construed as hate-speech! The definition and examples are woolly enough to be a virtual discriminatory catch-all. Bad enough as they are on their own: they are intentionally ill-defined and variable enough to allow ‘concept creep’ or leached meaning transference to the even more inimical non-existent category of the ‘new left antisemitism’. What is this? Talk of ‘shadowy elites’, ‘oligarchies’, ‘shady bankers’, and a worrying addition ‘conspiracy theories of Israeli involvement in 9/11’. To mention ‘Lucky’ Larry Siverstein; or the dual nationality of the PNACers; as probable ‘persons of interest’ is now antisemitic hate-speech? Free-speech debate of 9/11 is now cause for expulsion.
Speak of such as “sinister global forces” and the supplemental meanings are implied for you. It is dictated that one must mean ‘Jewish’. This is a violent subversion of free speech and extirpation of truth-seeking. It is purely racist to impute that I am racist according to projected pre-loaded values – construed from a pre-manufactured code: a dictatorial code itself crafted from indefinable and unalterable terminology. Or with subliminal reference to a third party deliberately undecidable ‘IHRA definition’. One could manufacture almost anything with such fuzzy logic? And they probably will.
So anti-capitalism is antisemitism: or at least the dictatorial meaning can be stretched to include such an inference? 9/11 will be thus blanketed by a crudely manufactured antisemitism. Constructs such as ‘apartheid state’ or ‘Zionist entity’, well, its obvious. What can one say within such an emotive and one sided discourse? Well, one can blame the death of 60 Palestinians (including seven children) on themselves, or Hamas (as LFI did): and this is not antisemitism? Or I can call JC a “fucking antisemite and racist” to his face and I will be defended: not suspended? Well, I couldn’t, because I am not Jewish …but Hodge can? Well, fuck this definition of antisemitism then.
Labour has manufactured its own climate of hatred and suspicion. That the result of a perceived transgression is pre-determined came to light from Marcs expulsion. The NCC ‘kangaroo court’ is predominantly right-wing. If you are accused, you will be expelled, with no right of appeal. No wonder Labour has a worsening problem with antisemitism: they have imploded into their own self-created miasma of a Zionist witch-hunt. Jeremy Corbyn need look at the historic implications of his own article if he wants to understand where the dialectic of hatred has come from? Racists have been handed eleven (or ten and three-quarters) inscribed stone tablets; that sanction their right to denounce non-racist anti-racists (and black-activists) as racist. And this is supposed to end the racism?
https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa-winstanley/who-labour-partys-witchfinder-general
Racism and bigotry, I hope we all agree, are bad. But racism and bigotry are not that difficult to define. We are dealing with an expression of hatred or discrimination against X for being X (X might be Black, a Woman, a Jew, a Gay person, or a member of any other such group). This definition is universal and sufficient to tackle any form of racism including anti Jewish bigotry. In contrast, the IHRA’s working definition of anti-Semitism suggests that Jews are actually not people like all other people. We have yet to see an international working definition of racism against Blacks or a working definition that addresses anti Muslim bigotry. The IHRA’s working definition confirms that Jews, at least in their eyes, are somehow chosen. The fact that British institutions have adopted such an exclusivist definition may suggest that Britain is drifting away from its universal heritage. This is, obviously, an alarming news for everyone including Jews.
http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2018/8/1/for-the-few-not-the-many
Gilad’s reference to the Athens/ Jerusalem analogy I think is really helpful: the holy writ of the IHRA ‘definition’ seeks to replace any and all attempts at reasoned discourse (- as if racism cannot be defeated by reason!).
Skripal, Douma, 7/7, 9/11, JFK etc. etc. We are told to reject Socrates and accept the word of a ‘priesthood’ or face damnation.
Mog: it is not only the Socratic Method, but Paulo Freire also advocated meaningful dialogue in the classic “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”. A pre-requisite for this is for the oppressor and oppressed to be free of their discriminatory categories: then they can meet within the openness of their essential humanity. So, within a 21st century socio-political discourse, it would be progressive to break down the racist and ethno-religious barriers to dialogue – not concretise them for another century of hate?
Whilst seemingly compatible within a socio-political discourse: elsewhere, race, and thus racial identity, has long been regarded as a socio-cultural constructivism. We should be circumspect of how we continue to define race (and for what purpose), as perpetuating race as a discriminatory category also perpetuates the basis for racism. This is an insurmountable barrier to meaningful dialogue. So, if race is not a scientifically grounded Absolute: just who are the Semites that Labour seems culturally determined to keep hating?
It seems to me the full ‘IHRA+10.75’ Code generates two valences of Semitic construct: both predicated on race, and dialectically dependent on each other. The dominant is the ‘Chosen Oppressor Semitic Group’ (COSG) – with its conferred rights and impunity: its naturally subordinate corollary is a ‘contingent oppressed semitic group’ (cosg) – whose autonomy, sovereignty, and self-determination are contingent or denied. The capitalisation is purely demonstrative and in no way implies actual dominance outside of the linguistic constructions. No need to define which pertains to whom?
If you agree that these constructs follow from my own and Gilad’s reasoning, there is no need to labour my point – the actual dominance dynamics are self-evident? The ‘Chosen’ group’s right to self-determination comes at the cost of escalated subjugation. Thus, if it is stated that Labour supports the ‘Two State’ solution: in fact, these dynamics reveal that they are supporting the ‘Nation State’ solution instead?
So self evident are the dynamics, in fact, that reduced to an essentialised humanitarian level: the obvious criminality has no justification or legitimation and no racist shield to hide behind. A clear assessment of morality is lucidly apparent – to both oppressor and oppressed – and meaningful dialogue toward an essentially human resolution can progress.
All of this is lost within the definition of the IHRA ‘Code’. Centuries of baggage are Absolutised and meaningful dialogue is dead. To be explicit, yes, I did just frame the Holocaust as ‘baggage’: because any event, however monumental and traumatic, that is in turn used to anchor, internalise, and perpetuate the Oppression is ‘baggage’ toward the progress and evolution of lasting peace. The only way to honour the Holocaust and end the centuries of being oppressed, is to end forever the cycle of Oppression?
If, instead, the oppressed intentionally internalise the values of the Oppressor there is self-generating dialectic of hatred …enshrined in the new Code? Progress and peace are born of the oppressed meeting the oppressed in open-ended humanity? There can be no end to Oppression until this is achievable through the openness and essential humanity of the dialogical method?
“The oppressed, having internalized the image of the oppressor and adopted his guidelines are fearful of freedom. Freedom would require them to eject this image and replace it with autonomy and responsibility.” [Freire: p29]
BigB,
It’s telling that Gilad is criticised (demonised ?) as an anti-Semite (in the racist sense) when he goes to great lengths to make clear a distinciton between ‘Jewishness’ (identitarian), Judaism (religious ideas) and ‘the Jews’ (a specific but contested race)..
For me, race is a psuedoscientific construct. The issue is one of ideas and principles : universalism vs. exceptionalism (however demarcated).
By not standing up for the principles of Socrates or Freire, the Labour leadership are betraying their supporters and the traditions of socialism which carried the impulse of universalism into the modern world.
I fully agree with you, that the only way out is that of forgiveness. Sadly forgiveness is often distorted into capitulation.
I’m rather afraid that if you study the Talmudic, Rabbinical, Judaism that dominates religious affairs in Israel through the Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox hegemony in religious matters, and their pivotal role in hard Right political coalitions, and which also underlies much of the absolutism of Zionist demands, you will see that the ‘dialectic of hate’ is the very essence of the creed. There is no escaping it, and the bitter fruits of that essential fear and hatred of the Other (we’re all Palestinians as far as they are concerned)are there for all to see, in mangled Gazan children’s bodies, the inhuman devastation of Gaza, the devastation of south Lebanon, Syria, Iraq etc, and in the destruction of Corbyn and UK Labour and the criminalisation of BDS and all support for the Palestinians throughout the slave-states of the West.
The Zionist elite in the UK have re-asserted their TOTAL control over the UK Labour Party, after the brief apostasy of the Corbyn eruption, with ease. The utter COWARDICE, the groveling, the back-stabbing betrayal of Labour giants like Livingstone, lynched for TELLING THE TRUTH, has ended, for decades, probably forever, any prospect of a ‘Left’ Labour Party attempting to undo the vicious social savagery and outright pillaging parasitism of the last forty years. And it was SO easy-just run amuk, hissing and spitting lies, slanders, foul abuse, with that hate-crazed ardour that the Palestinians know so much worse, and the cravens capitulate, as they always do.
This surrender just feeds the Zionists’ Brobdingnagian self-regard, narcissism and drive for power. If Corbyn thinks that by surrendering to the Zionist lynch-mob that he will placate them, he’s insane. The next time the Zionazi regime decides to obliterate a few hundred or thousand Gazan children, or attack Lebanon again, or pass more outright fascistic, racist, legislation, any goy who dares criticise it will be out of the Labour Party. In fact, the appetite for great demands only ever growing among these creatures who do firmly believe themselves ‘Gods Upon the Earth’, with souls more different from that of a goy than a goy’s soul differs from that of an animal, and the ‘most intelligent’ people on Earth, perhaps the day is in sight when they will demand David Milliband as Labour leader, or that all Labour members must convert to Judaism, (didn’t Nick Cohen once suggest something similar?)or that the entire organisation simply be wound up, and its leaders locked up for the Universal Crime of ‘antisemitism’. Don’t laugh.
I am wondering if the Labour party has served its purpose, and will now be destroyed.
Anti semites used to be people who hated or disliked Jews.
Now anti semites are anyone who extreme Zionist Jews and Gentiles dislike, or claim to have offended them.
Apparently, unlike Moslems and everybody else, they have an inalienable right not to be offended.
Excellent!
Even for one of your fellow Chinese-hating, Zionist, racists, that was a load of the filthiest, most Streicherian lies imaginable. ‘Millions’ of Uighurs ‘imprisoned’??!! At least it is typical Zionist hatred, crazed and hyperbolically extreme, like your loathsome fantasies of ‘Mongol maps’ for world conquest, that the Chinese are supposedly following, so readily dismissed as the ravings of a crazed, hate-driven, psyche.
One easily figures out why the Zionist hate China with that familiar Talmudic fury. Having gained total control over Western politics and the media, plus the heights of finance and the Internet, mass surveillance etc, and having Israel, as a consequence, be granted TOTAL immunity to all International Law in its brutality, barbarism and aggression as a result, only one fly remains in the ointment of Zionist ambition. China. The one great power and civilization that will never grovel to the Jews because they are ‘Gods Upon the Earth’ or some such narcissistic insanity. The Chinese have the audacity to see Jews as just fellow human beings, and Israel as simply a state like any other. THAT explains the Zionist hatred, bordering, as ever, on insanity, for China, and their relentless propaganda efforts to demonise it. Why, they even invented The Clash of Civilizations’ to justify their ferocious hatred of all cultures that do not place them at the apex of humanity, but just down in the ruck with the rest of us.
This diatribe is directed at Antonyl, far, far, below, and his pile of ordure from one of the Yankee hate-rags.
Ha ha ha the Electoral Commission rolls over and bares its gums.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/02/electoral-commission-drops-investigation-into-dup-over-brexit-spending
Trebels all round and over the cliff we go!
From: [email protected]
Subject: staggering
Date: 31 July 2018 23:30:25 BST
To: [email protected]
I was staggered tonight to see Louise Ellman MP telling Newsnight how shocked she was by hearing that Jeremy Corbyn had hosted a meeting on Holocaust Memorial Day in 2010 where a speaker compared Israeli and Nazi policies — staggered because she was actually present throughout that meeting!
I was there too, in that House of Commons committee room in 2010.
Nowhere tonight did Emily Maitlis or the Times reporter mention that the speaker, Hajo Meier, was a Holocaust survivor. The other speakers were survivors of Atlantic slavery, Native Americans, Bangladeshis, Roma and others who shared their experiences with the many Jewish survivors of genocide in the audience. (It was my own family’s experiences that drew me to the meeting).
As it happened Jeremy Corbyn had to leave the meeting after introducing it, to attend a debate in the House. Louise Ellman, by contrast, was present throughout the meeting.
She sat calmly by when the room was invaded by five members of the small but fanatical Zionist Federation, who proceeded to shout until no one else could be heard. I particularly recall their shouts of ‘Boring!’ whenever any other survivors were speaking. As an MP Ms Ellman could have called the Hous eof Commons security to evict the disruptors but she did nothing.
Ms Ellman’s attendance is a verifiable fact, and I have written before to Emily Maitlis calling attention to the biased way that this issue is being covered.
The IHRA definition is not ‘internationally recognised’: it was dropped by the EU and has been bitterly criticised by the very lawyer who drafted it.
The ‘examples’ outlaw terms which are commonly used by Israeli critics of their own government, such as comparisions with apartheid. One of the leading anti-apartheid campaigners, who is also Jewish, has said that the Israeli occupation-system is in some ways worse than apartheid. David Steel has also made the comparison with apartheid. Are all these people antisemites?
It is essential that a future Labour government should have an ethical foreign policy.
The shouts of ‘antisemitism’ from self-appointed community leaders are deeply upsetting to many of us of Jewish descent who do not identify with them or Israel. Tonight you claimed to interview ‘the whole spectrum of the left’. Where were our voices?
Amanda Sebestyen
Should anyone raise verifiable facts like this at the Guardian they are instantly dispatched to the memory hole – key opinion leaders like Cohen and Freedland simply will not permit anything to stand in the way of the bogus racism trope they have been busy cultivating.
Meanwhile expectations of the BBC are so low that when they are not doctoring images of Corbyn (to portray him as a Kremlin stooge) they are content to provide a forum for right wing Labourites to continue their ongoing war against anyone who refuses to swear an oath of allegiance to Tony Blair.
Now the execrable IHRA definition has been dropped: I’m wondering (out loud) if Jackie Walker will be reinstated? One of her fabricated crimes was a JLM set up: objecting to the definition during ‘retraining’ (which she was secretively filmed doing). No IHRA definition: no ‘crime’?
Further to this excellent letter: surely it would not be too hard to pinpoint those who are manufacturing the antisemitism agenda. For instance; who secretly recorded Peter Willsman; who framed Jackie; who set up Ken; who set up Mark; who found Jeremy’s ‘Rothschild Mural’ tweet; or Naz Shah’s re-Tweet? Surely these are the people bringing the party into disrepute and deserve discipline? Do they not want to be elected (LOL!)?
Re-instate Mark, Ken, Christine, and Jackie: bin John Mann, Ruth Smeeth, and child abuse apologist Hodge instead …
“Re-instate Mark, Ken, Christine, and Jackie: bin John Mann, Ruth Smeeth, and child abuse apologist Hodge instead … ” – and the sooner the better, but unlike Amanda Sebestyn I am slightly less staggered by the nature of Louise Ellman’s behaviour, nor the fact she attended the very same gathering cited as further evidence of Corbyn’s antipathy towards Jews (all complete bollocks, of course).
Seeing how effective the tactic is (when it comes to scalping those who refuse to to toe the line – most recently epitomised by the treatment of Peter Willsman) is it any wonder the net is now being cast deeper and wider in order to snare any remaining souls who dare deviate from right wing orthodoxy?
I’m miffed that Corbyn apologised for chairing a meeting that it appears he left? Now he “completely rejects” the legitimate views of the Holocaust survivors who spoke. With such a betrayal, is it any wonder the net is being cast deeper and wider? I don’t think do. Re-instate the victims: do not not appease the victimisers
Someone else who was at that event when Hajo Meier spoke was Tony Greenstein.
https://azvsas.blogspot.com/2018/
Lansmans betrayal of Willsman this afternoon is nothing other than a capitulation. Have Momentum not rolled over and raised the blue and white flag?
[BTW: I should have made clear that it was the IHRA working examples that were rejected: the definition is still enshrined in the Code of Conduct, as far as I am aware]
Corbyn’s treachery, as you note, will only incite the piranha further, but Lansmann looks like a Zionist mole to me. The loathsome Gabby Hinsliff is openly proposing that Labour split, today, but that’s hardly a scoop-of anything other than shite, her usual product. The whole Evil, sordid, open conspiracy is designed to save the Evil May regime, return UK Labour to direct Zionist ownership through Blairite Sabbat Goyim, and criminalise all criticism of Israel and support for the Palestinians. Surely that’s not too much to demand from lesser beings?
My guess is that Mark Regev at the Israeli Embassy co-ordinates the campaign using ‘research’ from the very efficient Hasbara apparatus which employs hundreds on a full time and thousands on a part time, basis.
There are two objectives in the campaign, the first is to de-legitimise any criticism of the fascist government in Israel, the second, much more important to some of the more prominent backers of the smears and slanders, is to characterise critics of capitalism as anti-semites. It is this latter objective which has produced the rather humorous exhibition of pretended concern over anti-semitism in the Labour Party (they wish!!) from the most notorious nests of anti-semitism in the world, the Tories and their reactionary ilk, lineal descendants of the appeasers of the 1930s who were ready to throw their support behind Hitler in May 1940.
These, headed, now as then, by the Daily Mail are among those Jon Lansman, Owen Jones, Aaron Bastani wr al are lining up with.
Better now that they expose themselves than after a Labour election victory when they would be betraying an expectant working class as well.
“These, headed, now as then, by the Daily Mail are among those Jon Lansman, Owen Jones, Aaron Bastani wr al are lining up with.”
That ought to read
“These, headed, now as then, by the Daily Mail are among those Jon Lansman, Owen Jones, Aaron Bastani et al are lining up with.”
(No) Apologies for repetition.
Bevin: we both know who ‘couch surfing’ Shai Masot was working for; and we both know that his removal from the Embassy staff was token and signaled the end of nothing. Regev was his “good friend” I seem to remember him saying: though it is hard to say whether there is an actual command structure – or they are all just zealots who think the same?
On the point of anti-capitalism:
This is inferential of thought-crime. The question is: whose crime? In imputing that someone holds the supplemental meanings true (”Jewish bankers”; “sinister global forces”): one must themselves hold the supplemental meanings in order to say “I know you think this” …but how? Telling people what they think they think they think is a dangerous nonsense! And a foreclosure of free speech?
From Corbyn’s Standard article. Banishing antisemitism by imputing antisemitism: where none existed before?
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/jeremy-corbyn-what-i-m-doing-to-banish-antisemitism-from-the-labour-party-a3821961.html
Much as I dislike Corbyn’s strategy and much as I would prefer him to come out and state the truth which is, as we all know, that the entire affair is a shabby attempt to smear him, I suspect that his ‘turn the other cheek’ and confess to being imperfect and a sinner, attitude will lead to his complete vindication.
The support he is looking for and beginning to win is that of the casual follower of news, normally a slave to the opinions of the MSM.
His enemies have gone too far and they are making fools of themselves, such fools “Corbyn represents an existential threat to Jews everywhere” that they are isolating themselves. The few among the many, with the many simply unprepared to believe the lies about Corbyn and determined in future to distrust those telling them- the Beeb, The Guardian, Murdoch et al.
I am beginning to suspect that Corbyn is a mole. His capitulation won’t lead to vindication, but to destruction of the Left in the UK for decades, and the return of the Blairite Sabbat Goyim, and the consolidation of Tory rule. As the ecological Holocaust is rapidly accelerating, it doesn’t really matter, either.
But how can he justify throwing decent people to the wolves in the process?
Don’t they deserve some support?
“But how can he justify throwing decent people to the wolves in the process? Don’t they deserve some support?” – yes, yes they do, and as BB says above, the sooner Labour reinstate them the better.
On the other hand this is plain embarrassing! https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/03/jeremy-corbyn-antisemitism-labour-party
‘though to be fair the Guardian is working overtime to ensure nuance, or even basic fairness should not be allowed to compromise their preferred antisemitism narrative.
Corbyn’s latest groveling capitulation, in the Fraudian sewer, hasn’t brought any respite. One creature even spewed more venom that Corbyn’s apologia was released ‘on the sabbath’, a further calculated insult by the Nazi, Holocaust denying, ‘blood libeling’ ‘fucking racist antisemite’, apparently. That, plainly, a large proportion of UK Jews do not observe the stern, Orthodox, and bizarre, strictures regarding ‘the sabbath’, is inadmissably ‘antisemitic’. ALL Jews in the UK are Orthodox or Ultra-Orthodox and proudly Zionist, which is the ‘secular’ version of the same religious orientation. And Hodge, naturally, has refused to apologise for her foul-mouthed abuse-why the very idea is itself YET MORE ‘antisemitism’. The maelstrom ever quickens, ever widens and the hatred simply feeds upon itself.
It’s been wall to wall shills on the airwaves today, reciting the same crap
about the sabbath, and cut and paste, and action not words., etc
They all got the hymn sheet pretty quick. The interviewers ignoring all
facts that put things into context. So many decent questions or challenges
they could make, but they just let the shills dribble on, saying Yes Yes Yes.
It’s all so horrible.
Just realised also, that the editor of the Jewish Chronicle
is a founder member of The Henry Jackson Society, and an ardent fan of
privatisation of public services, and he’s been slandering Corbyn all day long.
If you follow Milton Friedman’ dictum, that ‘Capitalism is good for the Jews’ (he meaning the Jewish elites, of course)and remember that neo-liberal capitalism is very much another Jewish intellectual project like neo-conservatism, the accusation that ‘anti-capitalism is antisemitism’ has more than a particle of truth to it-even if inadvertent and implausibly deniable. One UK Zionist grandee let the cat out of the bag with his declaration that one of Corbyn’s inadmissable crimes against the ‘Jewish community’ was his ‘Leftwing policies’. Oops!!
The essence of the phony ‘antisemitism’ lynching of Corbyn and UK Labour is a mixture of chutzpah, seen in the brazen lying, hypocrisy and invention, crude pathopsychological projection of the lynch-mob’s own deep, existential and ineradicable hatreds of others and the drive to make Israel some sort of de facto global suzerain, a rather ancient Talmudic ambition. Corbyn is up against forces who truly believe that they are doing ‘God’s Will’, because, as Begin declared, they see themselves, consciously or unconsciously, as ‘Gods Upon the Earth’. In their pathopsychology, any interference in Zionist prerogatives, any support for the eternally brutalised Palestinians, is Nazism, ‘blood libel’, ‘Holocaust denial’ and ‘Tewwauwism’ all rolled into one.
This Zionist/Blairite/Tory Establishment war on UK Labour and Jeremy Corbyn at least beautifully illustrates just what a filthy lie ‘democracy’ is under neo-liberal capitalism in the West, when the centres of power, of which Israel and Zionism are plainly one of the most potent, are threatened in their totalitarian dominance.
Thanks, Amanda, for outlining one of the myriad hypocrisies of the Zionist lynch-mob, DETERMINED to destroy UK Labour if they no longer control it. Your people, pro-Corbyn Jews, do not exist, I hope you know. UK Jewry is united, 100%, in hating the ‘fucking racist, antisemite’, Corbyn, as the ENTIRE UK fakestream media sewer, led by the abominable travesty, the Fraudian, constantly declare. It is my opinion that Zionism represents for Jews what Nazism did for Germans in the 30s, what Hindutva does for Hindus, Wahhabism for Moslems and ‘Exceptionalism’ for Americans today. A chauvinist, supremacist, racist, aggressive ideology.
”It is my opinion that Zionism represents for Jews what Nazism did for Germans in the 30s.”
Hold on a bit Mulga. Throughout the 1930s the biggest party in Germany was the SPD. And the left bloc consisting of the SPD and the KPD got roughly 50% of the vote right up to the Reichstag fire the APPOINTMENT of Hitler to the Chancellorship by Hindenburg; this was followed by the enabling acts which banned all other parties and trade unions. The Nazis never got an absolute majority even after the enabling acts. They and Hitler were never voted into power – as is commonly understood – and their principal political weapon was the terrorism of the SA.
The same could not be said of Israeli Jews who overwhelmingly support the Likud. There are noble exceptions – Chomsky, Finklestein, and Cohen but they are few, and the zionist mobs are on the rampage. Rather like the lines in W.B.Yeats, The Second Coming:
”The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.”
Censored on the Guardians comments:
From: [email protected]
Subject: staggering
Date: 31 July 2018 23:30:25 BST
To: [email protected]
I was staggered tonight to see Louise Ellman MP telling Newsnight how shocked she was by hearing that Jeremy Corbyn had hosted a meeting on Holocaust Memorial Day in 2010 where a speaker compared Israeli and Nazi policies — staggered because she was actually present throughout that meeting!
I was there too, in that House of Commons committee room in 2010.
Nowhere tonight did Emily Maitlis or the Times reporter mention that the speaker, Hajo Meier, was a Holocaust survivor. The other speakers were survivors of Atlantic slavery, Native Americans, Bangladeshis, Roma and others who shared their experiences with the many Jewish survivors of genocide in the audience. (It was my own family’s experiences that drew me to the meeting).
As it happened Jeremy Corbyn had to leave the meeting after introducing it, to attend a debate in the House. Louise Ellman, by contrast, was present throughout the meeting.
She sat calmly by when the room was invaded by five members of the small but fanatical Zionist Federation, who proceeded to shout until no one else could be heard. I particularly recall their shouts of ‘Boring!’ whenever any other survivors were speaking. As an MP Ms Ellman could have called the Hous eof Commons security to evict the disruptors but she did nothing.
Ms Ellman’s attendance is a verifiable fact, and I have written before to Emily Maitlis calling attention to the biased way that this issue is being covered.
The IHRA definition is not ‘internationally recognised’: it was dropped by the EU and has been bitterly criticised by the very lawyer who drafted it.
The ‘examples’ outlaw terms which are commonly used by Israeli critics of their own government, such as comparisions with apartheid. One of the leading anti-apartheid campaigners, who is also Jewish, has said that the Israeli occupation-system is in some ways worse than apartheid. David Steel has also made the comparison with apartheid. Are all these people antisemites?
It is essential that a future Labour government should have an ethical foreign policy.
The shouts of ‘antisemitism’ from self-appointed community leaders are deeply upsetting to many of us of Jewish descent who do not identify with them or Israel. Tonight you claimed to interview ‘the whole spectrum of the left’. Where were our voices?
Should shed some light on the truth… even the edited version was censored on the Guardians site.
From: Amanda Sebestyen amseb@blueyonder.co.uk
Subject: staggering
Date: 31 July 2018 23:30:25 BST
To: [email protected]
I was staggered tonight to see Louise Ellman MP telling Newsnight how shocked she was by hearing that Jeremy Corbyn had hosted a meeting on Holocaust Memorial Day in 2010 where a speaker compared Israeli and Nazi policies — staggered because she was actually present throughout that meeting!
I was there too, in that House of Commons committee room in 2010.
Nowhere tonight did Emily Maitlis or the Times reporter mention that the speaker, Hajo Meier, was a Holocaust survivor. The other speakers were survivors of Atlantic slavery, Native Americans, Bangladeshis, Roma and others who shared their experiences with the many Jewish survivors of genocide in the audience. (It was my own family’s experiences that drew me to the meeting).
As it happened Jeremy Corbyn had to leave the meeting after introducing it, to attend a debate in the House. Louise Ellman, by contrast, was present throughout the meeting.
She sat calmly by when the room was invaded by five members of the small but fanatical Zionist Federation, who proceeded to shout until no one else could be heard. I particularly recall their shouts of ‘Boring!’ whenever any other survivors were speaking. As an MP Ms Ellman could have called the Hous eof Commons security to evict the disruptors but she did nothing.
Ms Ellman’s attendance is a verifiable fact, and I have written before to Emily Maitlis calling attention to the biased way that this issue is being covered.
The IHRA definition is not ‘internationally recognised’: it was dropped by the EU and has been bitterly criticised by the very lawyer who drafted it.
The ‘examples’ outlaw terms which are commonly used by Israeli critics of their own government, such as comparisions with apartheid. One of the leading anti-apartheid campaigners, who is also Jewish, has said that the Israeli occupation-system is in some ways worse than apartheid. David Steel has also made the comparison with apartheid. Are all these people antisemites?
It is essential that a future Labour government should have an ethical foreign policy.
The shouts of ‘antisemitism’ from self-appointed community leaders are deeply upsetting to many of us of Jewish descent who do not identify with them or Israel. Tonight you claimed to interview ‘the whole spectrum of the left’. Where were our voices?
I would like to disagree on a small detail here. The Independent’s reporting on Syria was actually pretty decent in comparison to others. Indy gave platform for Robert Fisk and Patrick Cockburn, which in itself is enough to claim the balanced coverage.
Now, BBC, Guardian and the entire American MSM though… ho boy.
As bad a fake news: hiding important news. Why DID they hide the truth on the Manchester bomber? Victims left angry after they were kept in the dark over the Royal Navy plucking terrorist from Libyan warzone http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6012701/Why-DID-hide-truth-Manchester-bomber.html
One possible reason: MI6 dropped Salman Abedi in Libya before to mess up “Gaddafi’s” place. They might even have tought him how to make IEDs ! The Navy had to pick up their loyal boy afterwards.
Later on blow back. How unexpected (for dummies).
Anyone who puts forward the proposal that information given to the public should be pre-judged as to its content matter is in effect assisting a dictatorship and insulting the intelligence of the public. Without freedom of choice democracy dies.
What ‘democracy’? What ‘freedom of choice’? Pepsi or Coke?
Tory or Labour; Democrats or Republicans. Easy to control for the Apparatus these “binary” set ups: just fake differences and catch them all.
OT, but not by much – as one of Cadwalladr’s allegations against Vote Leave is that they sought to gain from her murder – Vanessa Beeley and Whitney Webb have recently published an excellent expose of the propaganda machine that sprung up (with indecent haste, the very day after) to leverage the Jo Cox murder. Is it justified to weaponise a murder towards the ends of humanitarian bombing and regime change, but not Brexit? The state ideological machine displays a PoMo relative morality that it makes up and applies as it arbitrarily sees fit: propaganda determines the means and ends of propaganda? And the super-rich cannot wait to sponsor the worthy cause of propaganda-driven perpetualised war?
https://www.mintpressnews.com/jo-cox-assassination-white-helmets-humanitarianism-regime-change/246646/
The irony was not lost on me that this report came out on the same day UKGov released its report on sexual predation among aid workers. I wonder, where is Brendan now?
The transcript reads:
“But what I’m saying is that if you believe something different, you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting.”
Not ‘be sat’. Chomsky used standard English.
Worth getting right, if you’re going to quote him, I think.
On the question of misquoting Chomsky, while I’m confident I convey with 100% accuracy his intent, you are right. I’m guilty of lazy journalistic practise.
On whether the gerund form (sitting) is more ‘correct’ than past tense form (sat) I disagree. In this context, either is an acceptable formulation in ‘standard’ English. More importantly though, Chomsky was a descriptive not a prescriptive grammarian – a scientist rather than a pedant. In fact, though I disagree with him over his ‘LAD’, Chomsy’s enduring contribution to lingusitics was to emphasise – at a time when the discipline was in the grip of behaviourists whose models of language acquisition reflected simplistic understanding – the complexity of language and immense cognitive achievement of humans who, typically, master that complexity at the age of three despite huge variation and diversity from ‘standard’ of the data inputs – ie the speech of their elders. In this lies the connection, surely, between Chomsky the linguist and Chomsky the progressive.
“I’m guilty of lazy journalistic practise.”
It’s worse than that Philip, you’re from Yorkshire. And if Chomsky was he’d have said “sat” too.
Some recognised linguists, who are certainly not prescriptivists, seem to disagree with you. ‘BE + sat/stood is regarded as a non-standard feature of English that is most often used in parts of the North and West of England (Hughes & Trudgill, 1987, Klemola, 1999), according to a recent study: Marielle Ledder, BA thesis, Univ.of Utrecht, 2016.
Note 2 about “soft” propaganda i.e. the ideas coming from entertainment is an important point. I’ve often thought that the programmes sold as “entertainment” tend to be the most propagandist. After all, propaganda works best where people don’t expect it. In that fantasy series “Lost” – about people marooned on a desert island – most of the cast were American or British but the exceptions were revealing. There was a Korean couple where the husband was working as a henchman for his wife’s father who was a corporate thug. (Subtext: this happens in other places but not in the West.) And in the biggest plot creak, considering that this programme was made just after the invasion of Iraq, there just happened to be an Iraqi who, predictably, turned out to have been a torturer. He was presented in a dewy eyed way which was presumably meant to be sympathetic. But nevertheless much of his plot revolves around his mission to find atonement for his terrible past. (Subtext: only those foreigners are torturers – and this claim is made regarding a country that the West “liberated”, i.e. destroyed, under false claims!)
The connection you draw is apposite: Skripalgate=McMafia – as referenced even in Parliament; Alexander Nix (ex-CEO of Cambridge Analytica)=Jeremy Thorpe in a Very British Scandal – an unfavourable comparison Carole Cadwalladr draws in one of her hitpieces …was Nix on trial for murder (of democracy and truth)? Yes, in her extended metaphoric opinion.
This is a minor example of the fuzzy boundaries of fact and fiction (faction): or, in its modern media/cultural industrial complex iteration – between propaganda (the FakeNews DCSM) and the extended stylised, sexualised, propaganda of the media. Carole is a seamless co-originator of state ideological faction: weaving real and unreal elements to advance a received pre-determined polity. The result is a ‘Russia ate my homework’ counterfeit information war that is the hypothesis of Carole’s imagination. That, or her ‘Handlers’?
“Neither man is a liar..”
Can’t agree. D’Ancona’s entire output has a single purpose: to put a phony smily-face facade on brutal Tory austerity. He is an artful manipulator of liberals on behalf of the same old Tory project of beggaring the poor and further enriching the richest.
The Guardian knows this is what he’s all about, which is why they employ him.
The fakestream media presstitutes, particularly the Fraudian species are ALL liars, hypocrites and hate-mongers, in my opinion at least.
I wholly agree ! (with you, James 😉 )
Whilst the article is a good piece and endeavours to be equitable to all , there are a few places where it is overly cautious, for example ..
“They do not, however, make a habit of telling outright lies.”
Well , after the Douma & other “gas attacks” , without a single reporter on the ground and the refusal to follow up on reporters who WERE on the ground and have researched thoroughly, like Dilyana Gaytandzhieva and Robert Fisk, in my mind the Guardian position has been proven as wholly unreliable and constitutes complete LIES !! with no evidence , just GovernMENTAL hearsay from the most unreliable deep state secret services in the world of censorship , today ..
Worse still, then they start to beg for money to finance the total propaganda .. “Whilst yer’ here..”
https://www.globalresearch.ca/even-more-us-made-anti-tank-weapons-are-turning-up-in-isis-hands/5647173?utm_campaign=magnet&utm_source=article_page&utm_medium=related_articles
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-missile-arms-deals-west-us-uk-saudi-arabia-a8459731.html
Whoah, the irony: ” End User Certificates ” for Weapons & Social Media & Infowars > No comment !!
One last point, it is not the “Wild West” , (which in itself is presently absurdly out of control, as we know), given the situation we are confronted with & discussing ! coz’ , the Western Corporate Cowboys of Communications have completely blown all & what little credibility that they ever had ! ! self evident ! (says a professional Media Research & Analysis guy, of 40 years business experience & objective observations of the global media scene & financial markets .. )
Nonono, it is the WILD EAST, today and I have even been making this reality joke with smart locals (in BG.) since 2004 .. I mean, come on, any individual or society or media publication or school curriculum or film studio that proposes that 9/11 & especially WTC 7 was not the result of ‘Controlled Explosions’ , really does not even deserve representation , politically speaking, anywhere in this world !! and especially any concept of a globally concerned ‘United Nations’ ..
Be reasonable & scientific.
History MUST be set straight , from which our children may learn the Truth and see what a complete & utter tool & fool , this Desperate Dan’Cona has been, alongside his so called guardian puppy buddies!
All credibility demolished .. the future lies in the EAST !
The ‘Ministry of Truth’ >>> ! ? ? !
“Can you keep a secret .. ? ” (John Cleese) >>
“Yep..” >>
“Right yer’ in .. ”
Johnny, have fun with the Pirates of the Caribbean ,
(John Cleese > disgusted with the state of play, in the UK, becoming today, an ex-pat. 😉 )
Just when the UK needed to ridicule the powers that be, johnny d’Depp buggers off ..
Thanks for the kind words but with respect, balkydj, I’m not “endeavouring to be equitable to all”. I’m trying to summarise, hard in so few words, a critique of media (and ideology) in an advanced capitalist ‘democracy’. Such a critique must go beyond name calling and crude assumptions that all or even most MSM journalists are subjectively dishonest. We have to go deeper, as do Media Lens, Glasgow Media Group, those guys whose name I forget at LSE and of course Chomsky – and look to the political economy of ‘our’ media. Beyond that we have to engage with the nature of ideology, as have thinkers as far back as Gramsci and no doubt earlier. It’s easy – and easily ridiculed – to call all journalists ‘whores’, ‘liars’ and ‘presstitutes’. Childish in my view, but easy. More challenging yet ultimately more powerful is the task of exploring how it is that subjectively honest men and women, many sincerely if self servingly believing they are a force for truth – come to prop up a reactionary and criminally insane world order.
Upton Sinclair’s words – “hard to get a man to see a truth his salary depends on him not seeing” – come closer to the truth, but even they only scratch the surface.
Phillip: not to go too far OT – but if we seek to understand the true nature of ideology, we have to go beyond even the language itself, into the phenomenological heart of perception. It is the basic pre-lingual misrecognition within our very perceptual continuum that is the basis of all ideological superimposition. I realise this is counter-intuitive: but where does language come from; what does language describe; what is the basis of communication? The short answer is that the primal signification of language is totemic personification and categorisation of the self conditionality. No language: no self …the self conditionality is contingent to a fully formed psycholinguistic conceptual metaphoric framework …just as a fully formed psycholinguistic conceptual metaphoric framework is conditional on the preconception of the self. They are co-dependent constructions that arose together and we have embodied. Lakoff and Johnson’s “Metaphors we Live By” is a classic text (from which I draw my own conclusions). Re: Chomskian linguistics – Lakoff and Johnson devote a whole chapter (in “Philosophy in the Flesh”) contrasting Chomsky’s “Cartesian formalism” with their cognitive linguistics …it’s a blast if you are into the philosophy of language! 😉
A bit of real news which you might have missed on the MSM:
Gaza Flotilla Ship Al Awda Violently Seized by Israelis, USS Liberty Survivor Amongst Those Captured – Link to Consortium News
“Consortium News reported on July 9 that Joe Meadors, a survivor of the 1967 Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, joined the 2018 Gaza Freedom Flotilla as the delegate from the United States. He boarded the Al Awda in Palermo, Sicily for the final 1,000 miles to Gaza and is now in Israeli custody. Meadors pre-recorded this video message in the event that he was captured:”
I never heard of Joe Meadors until today. It is only in the last year that I heard of Israel’s treachery against the USS Liberty. And this insignificant man, Joe Meadors, is today in the hands of the country that tried to kill him and kill all his fellow sailors — who were US allies of Israel — in a False Flag incident. Similar to Israelis dancing and congratulating themselves over the deaths of 3,000 people in their 911 False Flag.
The role of the Alternative Media is to preserve and disseminate these little seeds of truth, that perish in the barren ground of media owned by the AZC. The role of individuals like Joe Meadors is to remember his murdered comrades, and to bear witness that Israel committed treachery against its most faithful ally on the sea in 1967, and to remind us that Israel is committing unashamed piracy — not only against Gaza but against the free world and the freedom of the seas — right now.
Would readers kindly submit Links to MSM reports on this incident, I would like to see the responsible manner in which they treat it. Thank you.
https://consortiumnews.com/2018/07/09/uss-liberty-survivor-named-us-delegate-on-gaza-flotilla/
https://consortiumnews.com/2018/07/30/gaza-flotilla-ship-al-awda-violently-seized-by-israelis-uss-liberty-survivor-amongst-those-captured/
The last link should anger even the Pope , FFS !
Great comment, Vexarb , and a truly revealing honest admission from you within , for which I thank you ..
Honestly speaking, I have just moderated myself and filed my words of frustration (for later) at the public ignorance and lack of interest in cold blooded state murder & maiming by
ISRAELI APARTHEID & FASCIST scum of this scorched earth ..
yep, NetanYahoo that’s you, I am referring to ..
When one considers the true scale of ZioNazi Israeli state interference in so many external Sovereign State’s politics & sovereign budgets for Military spending & assistance , to service their politics of Apartheid, one really does have to laugh or cry , at the hounding of a few Russians alleged interference in US elections.. there is NO comparison in terms of scale !!
Which serves to demonstrate how essential LEVESON2 actually was ..
I best shut up, coz’ I’m too angered for any coherent words at this moment, other than
#FREEJOE from Israeli Fascist Scumbag Liars & Manipulators of all Western Media & History lessons !
@Admin >> No other subject warrants an article ASAP, more than Joe Meadors ..
Get serious , now .. a fine opportunity, to go ‘Viral’ ..
Don’t waste it ! Batton Hatches , & take Aim & FIRE AWAY
And hey, somebody ask AVAAZ to do a petition .. LMFAO ! ? ! ?
Even Two Birds, with one stone: that should put Ricken Petel in a Quandary & Quagmire of considerations regarding conflicts of interest ! !
#FREEJOE Blogs >> Simple 😉
(Aplogies to all Palestinians for the sardonic Black humour)
“No one can be free if one person is in chains, let alone a whole people. It is in the interests of all, Jews & Arabs, Europeans & Americans, Asians & Africans that the blockade of Gaza and the collective abuse of its people ends now!” (Yanis Varoufakis)
Some wise words …
D’Ancona quote isn’t formatted properly, so its final paragraph looks like author’s, not his (viewing on Android phone).
$ATAN$ $OLDIER$.
Running rampant.
I tend to judge articles partly on their content and that of the comments. Not allowing,or moderating comments is censorship. It is the ally of true propaganda.
Dear god, please spare us from the likes of Matthew d’Ancona from ever becoming a self appointed media watch dog.
On Syria d’Ancona says “Whether the case in hand is the use of a nerve agent on British soil or the deployment of chemical weapons in a Damascus suburb, the default position, especially on the Left, is that we need more evidence.To which one can only respond: how much evidence do you need?”
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/matthew-dancona-how-much-more-evidence-do-we-need-before-acting-on-syria-a3811251.html
Can someone sit Matthew down and gently explain to him, using colouring books if necessary, why accepting at face value narratives promoted by intelligence agencies seldom stand the test of time.
History seems to be a completely alien concept to some of these dunces and even when an event plays out in front of their very eyes such as the attack on 9/11 they still prefer to ignore a mountain of evidence once it conflicts with their preferred ideology western exceptionalism.
I suppose in the last resort, EVERYTHING that is wrong with western government today is ‘self appointed’…
WE certainly didn’t choose the decadent relics of WW1 which inhabit most high political positions today.
Well said Harry.
The WMSM is not free it is owned and because of that is only capable of creating debate around issues relevant to the owning ruling classes which is conservative capitalist with their liberal enablers at the Guardian.
With the current crisis in capitalism and the ruling classes the Guardian has clearly been seen for what it is by its steady drift to the right in all things geo-political.
The Fraudian sewer’s daily (there are at least two today) hate-spew at Corbyn today, over the false accusations of ‘antisemitism’, is a beauty. It includes the loathsome Mann, an open traitor to Labour with his vote to save May, and the swine who set up Livingstone with the hysterical confrontation over Livingstone’s ‘crime’ of telling the truth over the German Zionists’ brief collaboration with the Nazis to transfer Jews to Palestine. Yet this renegade remains untouchable, while Livingstone, a Labour hero, was lynched. But the craven and gutless groveling brings NO cessation in the deranged hate-campaign by the Zionist lynch-mob. Corbyn remains a ‘racist’ and ‘antisemite’, in their ranting hate invective, honed over 3500 years as it is. Any Palestinian can tell Corbyn what it’s like to have the Zionist jack-boot on your throat. Corbyn’s latest ‘antisemitic crime’? To appear with an elderly Jewish survivor of the Nazi Judeocide, who CORRECTLY compared Israel’s barbarity in one of its regular cowardly massacres of Gazan children to the Nazis. But the Zionists have an ancient line in hatred of any of their own brethren who dare to break ranks, too. Still the tsunami of hatred, lies and vilification pours on, and still Corbyn cowers and prostrates himself, as if that will stop the wolf-pack. Eventually they’ll demand that the UK Labour Party be disbanded, and a new one appointed by Israel. I wouldn’t be surprised if Corbyn agreed.
Nice! Worth picking up, incidentally, on d’Ancona’s breathtaking claim on “the default position especially on the left” re Syria being that we need more evidence. If only that were so! Both liberal and marx-leninist wings of socialism have with honourable exceptions been appalling on Syria, while the latter have offered sound analyses of the west’s motives in the middle east, they’ve blithely accepted the MSM charge sheet against Assad. See for instance this response to a Workers Power piece on Syria earlier this year.
I can’t provide the ‘smoking gun’ incriminatory evidence: but my gut instinct tells me this is part of a spook-run push for Russiagate 2.0: the UK Sequel. The all party DCSM – the “plucky little panel” – have been Meuller-Lite …a saccharin low-fat alternative, serving up a ‘taster’ for a full-fat Public Inquiry into FB, CA, Brexit “dark ads”, and, of course, Russian collusion and subversion of our democratic process.
The d’Ancona article is a mere echo-chamber – this is Carole Cadwalladr’s baby. It is hard for me to differentiate between her FakeNews SIS ghost-writings, and the FakeNews agenda of the DCSM …they appear to be processed in parallel …FakeNews predicated on FakeNews? Not all her facts are incorrect, of course: but the agenda is as synthetic as a broken perfume bottle full of FakeNews Novichok(ish) …I can only hope it turns out to be just as undeadly?
In a series of poison pen letters she has tried to undermine the last vestiges of democracy: linking Aaron Banks with the Yakovenko ‘gold deal’, and thinly veiled threats of death to our plucky heroine: Carole herself – we all know how Russia deals with journalists …she asks rhetorically? No, not really: pray, do tell? She ‘found’ the whistleblowers Chris Wylie and Shahmir Sanni – or were they part of the same operation? Even with no proof: I still strongly suspect the latter.
The general, and often unsaid, agenda is subliminally linking all this FakeNews, collusion, and interference with the dark shadow of Russia …standing in the digital penumbra: waiting to cyberstrike. So we need algorithmic auditing to protect us: to go with the algorithmic investigative journalism that it is bringing it to light?
https://www.theguardian.com/profile/carolecadwalladr
The BBC is on Banks case too. I’ve got little time for the man, but he is being accused of preparing papers, and NOT getting Russian investment in his diamond mines. Not getting investment: calls the whole Brexit misvote into disrepute, doesn’t it?
Talking of Russian involvement, or complete lack of it: the billionaire who started the Cold War – Bill Browder – was in front of the FakeNews DCSM; peddling his own brand of FakeNews; on the very day the FakeNews Skripalgate provocation was announced …how’s that for timing? Now, I don’t believe in the Tooth Fairy or Unicorns: so it will take an awful lot of algorithmic auditing or digital re-education to convince me that was a serendipitous coincident?
So after a long ingestion and digestion of FakeNews – much cooked-up and fed in by the Cadwalladr Catering Co – the FakeNews DCSM wants to put a FakeNews ‘Snopesmark’ on everyone’s thinking? Thanks for nothing, Carole.
I thought the perfumed ‘novichok’ was in a sealed box. Has the ‘laugh’ morphed again? I heard a BBC presstitute declare this morning that the ‘Internet Research Agency’, implicated in the ludicrous garbage that Russia is ‘meddling’ in the USA AGAIN (using the same organisation???!!) was ‘…the name given to that part of the Kremlin’. So, according to the BBC liars and droolers, everything in Russia is apart of ‘the Kremlin’. And who helped Farcebook ‘discover’ this dastardly but pleasingly amateurish ‘Russian meddling’? Why the Atlantic Council, that lovely amalgam of NATO and Ukronazis and other defenders of ‘Our Moral Values’, of course.
Thank you MM. Speaking of the Atlantic Council, has anyone heard from Sam Mifsud lately. He has gone deep underground after being inadvertently outed by Alexander Downer and his silly ‘assistance’ to the I hate Russia narrative from the Clinton Foundation.
Australia should bring back knighthoods and award one to Alexander for his sterling work in foot injuries.
Sam Mifsud is a really important key to much of the I hate Russia strategy that I guess he will join the Skripals somewhere or be perfumed with that same stuff.
Milfsud?!
I might like to try that.
If the conspiracy to frame Trump, or force him to resign, or find spurious grounds for impeachment was properly and vigorously investigated, I expect that the loathsome, arrogant (but with NO possible reason to be so)and plain despicable Downer would end up in SuperMax. But there’s no hope of that, alas. He spawned a female even, praise the Lord, more ghastly than himself.
I’m sure you mean Joseph Mifsud: the Maltese intellectual with fake ties to the Kremlin, who is, more likely, to be an MI6 intelligence asset and acquaintance of Bojo? He went to ground undercover of a D-Notice. Assange Tweeted out about his likely involvement is setting up the Trump Tower sting: in which both sides were deceived and the target seems to have been George Papadopolous. Elizabeth Vos wrote this piece for Disobedient Media. I’m sure the rest – like the involvement of Stefan Halper (another SIS asset) – will become apparent over time. So far, as the title testifies, all Russiagate roads seem to lead to London.
https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/04/all-russiagate-roads-lead-to-london-as-evidence-emerges-of-joseph-mifsuds-links-to-uk-intelligence/
“I thought the perfumed ‘novichok’ was in a sealed box.”
TWO sealed boxes, plural – one to get SKRIPALs and one for backup or disposal in anonymous public location.
News just in is that Dawn Sturgess has been cremated. For safety reasons (ha!) there were no pallbearers and the coffin was already at Salisbury Crematorium when the mourners arrived to farewell her.
Well that certainly was convenient – I bet no-one was allowed to look inside the coffin for fear that Novichok spores might be floating about inside, eh?
Whole thing done faster than a vampire burning up in bright sunlight. Gone the way of the restaurant table, the park bench and the hamsters and pet cat.
There also goes any chance of a future exhumation and autopsy.
Like Dr.David Kelly, RIP.
“News just in is that Dawn Sturgess has been cremated. For safety reasons (ha!) there were no pallbearers…”
Oh yes there were.
There must be a high-level committee working on each new hysterical obscenity to be foisted on the dull popular mass in this ‘novichok’ scam. No pall-bearers simply reeks of psychopathic delirium.
“No pall-bearers simply reeks of psychopathic delirium.”
There were pall bearers. I see some dumbass has already downthumbed my previous report of Rev Bromiley’s account of the most headliney funeral service in his Godly career. Difficult to say if said dumbass is just yet another MSM success story in their ongoing promotion of public gullibility, just another sad sack Dickie Dawkins fanboy/girl, or an incisive and perceptive cynic protesting a farago of disorienting disinformation. Or if the Rev is just a lying scumbag, like Trump’s ex-lawyer (according to Giuliani (whom Kimmel thinks might have rabies)).
There had been early reports that there would be no pallbearers at Sturgess’s funeral. These reports were made before the funeral took place. I have now seen BBC and Guardian reports that pallbearers did indeed carry Sturgess’s coffin into the crematorium though whether they did this before the funeral service or during the funeral service was not said.
Before, when just the family and close friends arrived first for private contemplation, according to Rev Bromiley. My comment was not aimed at you unless you were the one (now two) who downvoted my “Oh yes there were” fact check. Downvoting of “free comment” should not be a problem for anyone; downvoting of a careful (and at that time time-consuming) obscure(d?) “sacred fact” check is just thick.
No, that wasn’t me who down-voted you.
Few may believe the official version of the Skripals poisoning, almost everyone does believe they were poisoned with Novichok, a deadly nerve agent.
This is exactly what those planning and executing the charade wanted, the unfolding story may sound bizarre beyond belief, but it’s already half off the radar, the mission’s over, the damage’s done. What matters is that the ‘fact’ that Novichok was involved got imbedded in people’s mind – deeply, firmly, irrevocably.
Novichok was chosen because the name derives from a Russian word, hence sounds Russian, the compound was originally synthesised by a Soviet i.e. Russian scientist, and because Russia, or rather the demonisation of Russia, was one of the primary goals of the operation.
The Skripals and the other two victims were poisoned by anything but Novitchok. If a nerve agent of Novichok grade were the ‘weapon’ of the assault, not only the four, but anyone else who has touched anything the four handled would be either dead or at least seriously impaired, the towns of Salisbury and Amesbury would be fully evacuated, cordoned off, thoroughly decontaminated, and the response by the government would not stop at expelling few second grade diplomats.
(For those tempting to argue that “Porton Down, the OPCW labs, others found the nerve agent in the blood samples taken from the victims, the police identified areas with traces of it” only this: How difficult is it to spike any blood sample with anything one likes?, and how difficult to plant ‘traces’ of any chemical compound in public spaces (e.g. polonium, if it’s true that such ‘traces’ were actually found?’).
In spite of the complications, unlikely envisaged by those in charge of it, the Skripals operation was an unqualified success. One can safely bet that from now on, every MSM scribbler, presenter never fails to add to the vile crimes committed by the Russians also the poisoning of the Skripals, and the two innocent victims. And that’s exactly what the aim of the operation was, not the only one, but one that will have a lasting value in the armoury of the habitual haters of Russia.
The latest, utterly deranged, chapter of the ever growing ‘novichok’ peril, is that the helicopters that were used by para-medics who attended the patsies are to be ‘de-contaminated’. Surely they are not going to neglect to de-contaminate all the properties and land that the helicopters flew over in the days since the ‘poisoning’? If not-why not? Don’t they care?
That would mean having to burn down the entire city of Salisbury.
Once that’s done, developers with $$$ in their eyes can move in and build more Grenfell Tower-style buildings.
And ‘novichok’ obviously gets into the soil, so that will all have to be scraped back to a depth to be decided by a high-level committee, and stored in giant bags, as at Fukushima.
Here’s are some good quotes:
”The British press is measurable on a continuum which ranges from soundly conservative to utterly reactionary.”
(Ralph Miliband – The State in Capitalist Society.)
”All knowledge of cultural reality … is always knowledge from particular points of view.”
(Max Weber – The Methodology of the Social Sciences)
That there is an area of ‘dangerous thought’ in every society is scarcely debatable. Whilst we recognize what is dangerous to think about may differ from country to country and from epoch to epoch, on the whole those subjects marked with danger signals are those which society or the controlling elements in it believe to be so vital and hence so sacred that they will not tolerate their profanation by discussion. But what is not so readily recognised, is the fact that thought, EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF OFFICIAL CENSORSHIP, is disturbing, and under certain conditions dangerous. For radical thought or dissent is a catalytic agent that is capable of unsettling routines, disorganizing habits, undermining deeply held faiths, and generating scepticism.
Such critical notions and dangerous thoughts will be blocked out of public consciousness by and education system and the production of mass produced cultural realities resulting in a half-educated intellectual class who are simply ciphers of the religious orthodoxy which they pass on to past, present and future generations. Until that is the belief system becomes untenable.
I was recently talking to quite educated friends who told me that Russia had invaded Ukraine. I asked when and where this invasion took place. What place on the border did they Russian armoured columns appear. Or did they use a cloaking device like the Klingons in Star Trek? What battles were fought between the Russian Army and the Ukrianian Forces. What cities fell and were captured. These are the events which usually happen in invasions. The response was total silence. They did argue that there were Russian servicemen present in Crimea which was proof of invasion. Yes 16,000 Russian servicemen were in Crimea since the Russian government had its base in Sevastopol with a lease which only expired in 2042 and also paid a rental of $500 million to the Ukrainian government. It was obvious my deluded friends didn’t have a clue what they were talking about. They were simply repeating, parrot-fashion, the imbibed orthodoxy.
This sort of blase detachment from reality has possibly always been the case in the past but it has reached existential crisis levels in the present context of contemporary western civilization. The increasingly widespread devaluation of the value of thought and fact and its repression (usually by omission) on the other hand are ominous signs of the deepening twilight of modern culture. Such a catastrophe may – and I would emphasise ‘may’ – be averted but only by the most intelligent and resolute measures.
The struggle continues.
Exactly.
In fact the only country to attack a country in Europe since WWll has been the US utilising one of their coalitions of the witless via NATO when they bombed Kosovar for 90 days in 1999. Although the build up to the war was completely miss-represented in the MSM at the time. As we see now with Ukraine and the so called Russian invasion which never was.
They didn’t just bomb Kosovo – they wreaked havoc and murdered civilians across Serbia: my cousin was in Belgrade as it was bombed. Since this aggression was conducted without UN approval, those responsible should one day be brought to book as war criminals.
It’s all rather sad, that these people can attain such positions of influence in our media; yet, in reality they haven’t a clue about what they are doing, how they got there and what the media is for. In fact almost everything they believe and think they know about the above, is, arguably completely wrong and at odds with observable reality. They live in a kind of dream world, only they are sort of awake. The worst part is, I think, that they seemingly sincerely believe they and the rest of us, are ‘Free’, really, really… ‘Free.’ I suppose compared to lots of people they are, but at what price?
The fantastic and fascinating thing about our form of society is, how deep-rooted social control, almost a kind of ‘slavery’ is marketed as ‘Freedom.’ Slaves who lover their masters and love their slavery. That is so ‘trick’ to pull off. The journalists are conformists. They have to be these days to get a foot in the door. They turn themselves into human ‘cogs’ and our chosen by a process of elimination similar to guys who want to join the Hell’s Angels, for specific roles as ‘cogs’ within the great, turning, media machine. Cogs in a machine. Now that’s what I call… Freedom!
The concept of the Information War clearly fascinates the ruling castes- a war conducted entirely by lying, suppressing evidence and carefully targeted propaganda is the sort of thing which sends shivers up the spines of careerists.
The military men, with their drones and ‘planes, wipe out wedding parties in the desert. Or send detachments of heavily armed men into villages to assassinate the slow footed and the elderly but the real heavy lifting is done by the war correspondents who carefully arrange the weapons to show that the dead children were armed,.or the bridesmaids were suicide bombers in waiting.
There is lots of fake news about, lots of false information relayed by anonymous sources in the government, lots of conspiracies, like the one concocted by Bill Browder to cover up his crimes.
There is The Guardian, pouring out the most extravagant falsehoods on the principle that if repeated often enough the most audacious canard sneaks into the public mind as something probable if not provable.
It is the Information War that allows people like Harding and Walker to rise in a service previously reserved for the man of action, ready to risk something more than the scorn of honest men.
Of course the problem with Information Wars is that the most elaborate and costly schemes may suddenly, even after the Victory March has been held and the cleverness of the liars and falsifiers rewarded publicly, implode into complete disasters, with nothing gained and everyone involved tainted forever.
A case in point of the Magnitsky affair, which has led not only to countless accusations against innocent parties but has been the occasion in several legislatures, In Washington, Westminster, Ottawa and across Europe, of promoting sanctions which amount to economic warfare against the Russian people, long suffering victims of the ‘west’ for more than a century. Now with multiple governments publicly committed to defending a crude and obvious fabrication designed to provide a master criminal with an alibi to go with the hundreds of millions he had stolen from the plain people of Russia, the truth is undeniable.
Which is why, as a deft tactical move in the Information War, Heaven and Earth is being moved to prevent us from viewing “The Magnitsky Act Behind the Scenes” by Nekrasov.
And right on cue we have a vintage Guardian turd burger: this time in the shape of Gaby Hinsliff parroting ludicrous accusations of antisemitism without taking a moment to properly explain how she arrived at such a damning conclusion.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/31/peter-willsman-antisemitism-labour
We all know how it works – a long running whispering campaign generating a sufficient degree of paranoia to imply it might just be possible that the Reich Chancellery has set up office at Labour HQ without Corbyn even noticing.
Its all too laughable for words as right wing Jewish political figures shamelessly invoke the holocaust to promote an all too obvious agenda (silencing criticism of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians).
Put simply who would trust any form of regulation when the media well is so polluted?
The manner in which these Zionist thugs all immediately invoke ‘the Holocaust’ ie, translating from the pseudo-religious verbiage, the Nazi Judeocide, to smear Corbyn and UK Labour is DETESTABLE. Not only is it a slanderous and villainous LIE, but it insults the memory of the victims, by so cynically using their suffering for the most sordid political purposes. These are really, really, vile creatures.
Everybody knows about The Holocaust: six million Jews murdered, mainly in gas chambers in Death Camps. We have grown up in a sea of holocaust stories told by people who miraculously survived.
But when one researches that holocaust, one soon sees that much of it is bogus. People in politics daren’t say that.
Anti-semitism? Not by Corbyn but quite active with a few commenters here.
OK, forget antisemitism, which nowadays has become such a slippery term that not even the Jewish community can agree about what it actually means (largely because of the way it has become indelibly linked with the way people think, and talk about the Israel / Palestine deadlock).
So what about this piece of goggle-eyed propaganda: an article which tells us (as if there was ever any doubt) the extent to which most western journalist have become utterly disconnected from the plight of Syrian families.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/01/emmanuel-macron-vladimir-putin-syria
Nougayrède who one minute is lauding the ‘white helmets’ is the next condemning Macron for his part in helping Russia deliver aid to East Ghouta.
Yes, you read that right – this woman’s views are so deranged she would rather people starve, or be denied medical aid rather than confront certain realities about the wests sinister role in precipitating the Syrian crises.
As we now know the west was at the forefront of backing Sunni extremists who have been responsible for god knows how much misery yet Nougayrède insists on stamping her bourgeois foot the minute Putin attempts to assist those who have suffered because of crimes committed by these Jihadis.
Its all too ghastly for words: the thought of such phoneys setting themselves up as arbiters of morality.
Compared to the anodyne nature of Peter Willsman’s comments shouldn’t it be the likes of Nougayrède who are be publicly vilified, but because of the narrative cultivated by right wing political elements it is Willsman who will be made to grovel while Nougayrède will no doubt be high-fiving with her neoliberal soul-mates when she next breezes into Guardian Towers: a club which can also count Matthew d’Ancona as a favoured member.
Nougatbrain is, in my opinion, the most deranged and Evil of all the Fraudian feminazis. A really, really, vile hate-mongering individual. And Willsman, like Wadsworth, shews that anyone can be lynched by the Zionist thugs, over NOTHING, just so long as Corbyn and his invertebrates stand idly by. ‘First they came for Livingstone, then they came for Wadsworth, then Willsman…’. In the end, as the usual frenzy of hatred and certainty of total impunity no matter how grotesque their excesses, meld together, they’ll be screaming for the entire UK Labour Party be declared a ‘terrorwist entity’ and forcibly disbanded and its leaders imprisoned.
Nougatbrain – I loved that bro. and I can’t stop laffin’ , still , (trying desperately to type ..) 🙂
Desperate Dan’Cona & Nougatbrain , talk about ‘strictly’ too ‘sweet & sickly’ 🙂
Diabetes 100% G’teed ..
I can’t remember reading an article from Nougat-brain , (40 yrs long) that did not provoke & cause revulsion, shock & awe at her plain common ignorance, arrogance & naivety .. like she has never researched a single thing in her whole pathetic existence ! Let alone ventured out of her poached ivory tower ..
The only thing that surpasses their collective ignorance, is their arrogance ..
Absofurkin’lutely unfurkin’believable > Nougatbrain & Desperate Dan’Coma tows the Guardian to hell and financial ruin .. “Whilst yer’ here .. gi’us a quid”
(yep, I know the plural is they tow 😉 lol)
Yo MM, it won’t be long before the ole’ rocker-fellers ‘hell’s angels’ will feel the pinch and hopefully , a proverbial slap in the face book-ed. 4dat’ Kat Vineyarns .. or has balky got it wrong again ? Kat Vinegar ? ? Kat what’s her name, not important 🙂
Youngest brother still works in E.C.1 & i merely mentioned the OFF-Guardian to him the other day and he momentarily mis-understood , due to the heatwave and a pint, and off he went, I quote:-
“Can’t do the guardian .”
“W*nkers . Guardian of what ? Hidden agendas . Subterfuge at every level, totally disingenuous pseudo intelligentsia , shouting from their little ivory white entitlement towers in Islington.”
Say no more, other than he is normally the quietest, most inoffensive, non bigoted and least hypocritical person I have ever met .. 🙂 and a brilliant child minder, a single father, to whom any mother would entrust their child ..
(indeed they do, as he trains rugby & referees ..)
It amazes me that the guardian ‘journos’ haven’t noticed what a farcical discredit to any notion of ‘democracy’ they have become .. any rational principled person, who has travelled this world , would have upped and left: as one does, when one has a conscious awareness of corporate character , conscience & soul ..
in other words, you have to be more than a lil’ bit ‘thick’ & thick skinned to work for the guardian of nothing 🙂 a bit like working for the FED ..
At least we know lil’ bro. is on the right track , tack & tackling Nougatbrain & Desperate Dan’Coma toes head on, with full momentum .. reassuring 😉
Do you recall how Jonah Lomu ‘de-moted’ Will Carling, (Black Labelled) ?
R.i.P.
If only we could give the ball to Jonah, inside the front door of the Fraudian and tell him the try line is behind Kat Vineyarn’s desk & watch heads roll .. 🙂
Talking about sour grapes & gripes, it must soon be time to crush grapes again, after this heatwave .. i don’t mind stamping the last seed out of Desperate Dan’Coma’s grapes , errrr sorry i mean gripes >>
I wonder if he plays rugby ! ?
🙂
I get the feeling she writes ‘on behalf of” some organisation or other.
Can’t work out exactly who, but it’s NATOesque.
“…they’ll be screaming for the entire UK Labour Party be declared a ‘terrorwist entity’ and forcibly disbanded and its leaders imprisoned.”
Bad Hebrew. No sin though: there are lots of beginners arriving every week, as the endless despatches of blank, pre-stamped citizenship documents from the printers to the Immigration Desk at Tel Aviv airport attest. As Gilad Atzmon has pointed out, it is now well over a century since the Jewish religion was turned into a ‘land registry’, and all right-thinking Brits, Tories and Blairites alike, love land, bricks and mortar. But I digress (again). FYI, the correct pronunciation in modern Hebrew is “tewwauwist”.
More than balanced by the purest essence of anti-goyism from our resident Zionist smearer.
“Anti-semitism? Not by Corbyn but quite active with a few commenters here.”
You seem to be confusing Anti-semitism with Antifa-semitism. You think that fascists shouldn’t be called out?
Typo. Apologies. That should have read: “anti-fascemitism” (the righteous response to the grossly culturally, socially and politically deformed Frankenstate that has arisen from the illicit abortion on Palestine carried out by followers of Nazionism” and the self-serving gang of international facilitators that helped foment that ugly little creed).
WORLD CITIZEN, PROUD TO BE ANTI-<bFASCEMITIC
And now bad markup. Should read:
ORLD CITIZEN, PROUD TO BE ANTI-FASCEMITIC
“ORLD CITIZEN, PROUD TO BE ANTI-FASCEMITIC”
Oh, Jeremy Corbyn! Should have been:
“WORLD CITIZEN, PROUD TO BE ANTI-FASCEMITIC”
OK, I’ll go and take my medication now…
I’ll quote it again, this time with attribution:
“There’s no business like Shoah business.”
— Abba Eban, Israeli politician (Minister of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Prime Minister, etc.) and diplomat (US and UN; strong supporter of UN Security Resolutions 242 and 338) on the widespread, cynical deployment of the Holocaust (the “Shoah”) by many Jewish individuals and groups in pursuit of personal or organizational gain, financial or otherwise.
And another Eban quote:
“[Palestinians] never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”
It’s extraordinary that all the argument about Labour’s slight changes to a couple of sentences
relating only to how Israel can be criticised, is the reason for 67 Rabbis uttering condemnations
more appropriate for proven physical attacks. And now a perfectly reasonable angry response to
this, devoid of any hint of Judeophobia, is seen as proof of mass guilt. Did Hinscliff bother to read
the transcript? Surely she can’t have done.
And isn’t it extraordinay that anyone should think it reasonable for a foreign country , via it’s supporters, to tell the rest of world what actions we’re allowed to criticise, the exact language we are allowed to use and the penalties we should suffer if we transgress. It really is an emperor’s clothes
situation, kept going by threats of ex-communication from society. It’s completely untenable.
Is Hinsliff one of the ‘Gods Upon the Earth’, as Begin called his crowd? Her piece, in my opinion, is a monument to hypocrisy, mendacity and pure invention in the pursuit of slanderous vilification. These creatures are inventing charges of ‘antisemitism’ out of thin air, then hysterically vilifying anyone who dares point that fact out, as ‘antisemites’. There is a perfectly cyclical logic to this and an ever mounting frenzy amounting to a cascade of crescendos. The merest opposition to the God-ordained supremacy in all matters, including the opinions and moral consciences of ALL humanity, is definitely psychopathic. Isn’t it what Atzmon alled the ‘Pre-Traumatic Stress Disorder’?
Holocaust survivor Hajo Meyer said “Formerly an antisemite was somebody who hated Jews because they were Jews and had a Jewish soul. But nowadays an antisemite is somebody who is hated by Jews”.
It seems this kind of inversion has been weaponised by the likes of the Guardian and turned against those who dare threaten the neoliberal world order.
Hajo Meyer and his group of anti-Zionist Jews is featured in one of the FOUR, so far, hit-pieces by the Fraudian today, in its ongoing service to the ‘antisemitism’ lynch-mob in their increasingly frenzied attacks on Labour and Corbyn. Talk to the ‘wrong’ type of Jew, the ‘self-hating Jews’, and you’re dead meat. As is plain, the Zionist thugs are LYING through their teeth that their sacred IHRA ‘definitions’ will not outlaw all support for the Palestinians and opposition to Zionism, the moral equivalent of what Nazism was for Germans, or ‘Manifest Destiny’ for Americans, or ‘Hindutva’ for Hindus etc. Yet Corbyn grovels on, as a tiny elite of one tiny community, seeks, in OPEN collusion with the entire Rightwing media and the May Tory regime, the most incompetent and Evil in UK history, to destroy UK Labour and the efforts of tens of thousands of dedicated people, whose beliefs, hopes and moral consciences are being treated with ferocious contempt and hatred. Is there any equivalent obscenity in history?
There probably is an equivalent, and probably worse, but this is
as bad as it gets for so many of us who for decades gave up
on the possibility of ever having our views represented in government.
We were given real hope.
But also, if the bastards succeed, it’s a real tragedy for the country.
And to see him caving in to these vile bullies, and sacrifice decent
fellow politicians is very very disappointing
Today we get Morona Hydeous, with a witty little bucket of hate slime, equating those Corbyn supporters who have dared to oppose the fraudulent ‘antisemitism’ witch-hunt, to supporters of the fascist Tommy Robinson. She did this by implying, dishonestly, that tweets were from the Robinson crew, but when they were in fact from Corbyn’s army of Nazi, Holocaust-denying, ‘antisemites’.
No doubt at the Fraudian yeshiva this was considered a masterpiece of witty denigration, by Zionist and Sabbat Goy Blairite alike. The odd thing, however, is that the hate-spew directed at the Corbynistas far better describes her and the rest of the Fraudian ‘Army of Zion’. It does, however, shew just how deeply the Zionists and their stooges hate, not just Corbyn, but all those who have dared to try and rescue Labour from the Blairite vermin, and the UK from May and her vicious, sadistic, incompetent, Tory gang. But that’s OK-the more hatred, the better for the Zionists. It is their natural habitat, their favoured terrain, and they are no doubt hoping for, and doing their best to provoke, a single incident of violence, physical or verbal, directed at one of this filthy lynch-mob. And no doubt, if it does not materialise despite the relentless hate-mongering and abuse, they will provide it themselves. They are masters of the ‘false-flag’ operation, By Way of Deception, after all.
What can the Zionists learn from PR China? https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/ethnic-cleansing-makes-a-comeback–in-china/2018/08/02/55f73fa2-9691-11e8-810c-5fa705927d54_story.html
I attacked this filthy, racist, hate-crazed Sinophobic garbage from one of your fellow Zionists, but it was ‘disappeared’. Odd, that.
Even though I totally disagree with you on ~50% of issues, I still support you right to air your opinion just like I do mine. Tip: I do try to keep it civil though, it is not our own blog…
At the risk of being sued by Chris Rock for an unauthorized riff on his take on a different ethnic problem, “‘Kikes’ are the Jews that even other Jews don’t want to live next door to.”
“Yet Corbyn grovels on…”
‘Mmmmmaybe.’ — Sun Tzu, 544–496(?) BC
I knew Sun Zi-Corbyn is no Sun Zi.
Yep, fake News! Who are the mein perpetrators?
„Media, Independent and Mainstream: Fake News and Fake Narratives“: https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2016/12/18/media-independent-and-mainstream-fake-news-and-fake-narratives/
regards
“Matthew d’Ancona, in yesterday’s Guardian, is concerned about the threat to democracy from fake news”
What he doesn’t mirrors in his house !
The Guardian has morphed into Fake News Central in a stiff competitive race. The don’t see their own problem, only page three stuff with others. They wasted away their financial freedom during the New Labour years and the resulting baby is blind and deaf, but screams non stop for money.