We are all familiar with the terms ‘conspiracy theorist’ and ‘apologist’ used by the establishment and media to smear independent journalists, experts and other commentators. For some time this has been particularly evident in the debates we see over the Middle East wars and Russia. It’s common knowledge that people who use these terms can’t argue rationally so resort to smears.
Western government support for terrorism, staged events and spreading disinformation via groups such as Integrity Initiative has come under closer scrutiny recently. As more revelations of wrongdoing by our governments and misreporting by our media have been exposed, the censorship and smears against independent media has intensified.
A disturbing new rhetoric
I’m sure some of us have noticed that the language used has been ramped up yet again. I came across one example recently of someone promoting the anti-Russia narrative on Twitter making an analogy between one researcher’s legitimate investigation and criticism of Integrity Initiative and the actions of the World War II traitor, ‘Lord Haw-Haw’. And I think many readers will be familiar with this post from John Sweeney of the BBC and clip from his programme on Sputnik News.
Here's our @bbcnewsnight film on Sputnik News in UK. With tensions between Russian and UK growing I was on my diplomatic best behaviour. 1st Q: "what's it like being a traitor?" https://t.co/nml6KTxc9S
— John Sweeney (@johnsweeneyroar) January 17, 2019
To call someone a traitor is probably the most serious accusation you can make so let’s look at its meaning:
traitor – a person who is guilty of treason or treachery, in betraying friends, country, a cause or trust.
And lets consider these ‘betrayals’ and who by extension these accusations of disloyalty might be intended to apply to:
- UK citizens who work for Russian media are traitors to their country. But I guess if you apply this warped viewpoint, foreign nationals working for the BBC are traitors too.
- Independent journalists operating in Syria and reporting the truth that the West and not Russia and the Syrian Government, holds the main responsibility for the war and for supporting Al Qaeda terrorists.
- Researchers, academics and an increasing number of Individuals on social media, who simply question and raise doubts about the anti-Russian and Syrian narrative by the UK press and others such as Bellingcat and Integrity Initiative.
- By extension this betrayal could apply to many western citizens troubled by the wars in the Middle East who care about all humanity and the truth and have grave concerns that the proxy-war in Syria could lead to a global conflict.
Obviously it is ridiculous to label the vast majority of the above groups as ‘conspiracy theorists’, Assad or Putin ‘apologists’ let alone traitors to their country. But this newer language suggests those making these allegations are losing the plot. Watch some of the old McCarthy hearings from the 1950s and compare the language to what we’re hearing and seeing in the media today.
McCarthy claimed he was trying to establish the truth that there were traitors within the US State Department (and everywhere else) and this paranoid and delusional language seems to be playing out more and more these days.
To find the real truth about events in the world, the last people you’d want on the case are the likes of McCarthy and Sweeney. As any detective will tell you, an open mind and studying motive is key.
Establishing the truthful narrative – follow the money.
It’s probably fair to say that there’s little to suggest the majority of the people challenging official narratives are motivated by money, power or ideology. Some sections of the mainstream press have come out with ridiculous notions that there is some huge pro-Russia network operating in the West which is trying to spread disinformation on social media.
This sounds very much like WMD in Iraq and Cameron’s discredited assertion that there were 70,000 moderate rebels in Syria. It sounds McCarthyite. It’s interesting to note that very little of the research carried out and findings (for example on the White Helmets) by independent media and researchers has been shown to be inaccurate. And as history shows, yesterday’s ‘conspiracy theorists’ challenging narratives such as Iraq and Libya have been shown to be spot on.
In contrast those pushing the official narrative over Russia and Syria (and Iraq and Libya before) are motivated by power, money and defending the wars. Murdoch and other newspaper barons have vested interests in Israel, Saudi Arabia and the outcome of Middle East wars. Arm sales and perpetual war sustains the establishment. Highly paid career journalists at the BBC and The Guardian are unlikely to deviate from a government narrative which pursues regime change and war. As recent events show some journalists are even prepared to blatantly lie to enhance or protect their careers.
The US and UK are declining in world power and influence. Illegal regime change is central to defending this empire against this decline and to distract from problems at home. Their track record of war and regime change speaks for itself. In summary, power, money and defending an increasingly under question narrative, to distract from their criminal behaviour in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen are the motives. The establishment is pulling out all the stops. As well as deploying a compliant media, it supports and funds the likes of Bellingcat and shadowy groups such as Integrity Initiative to muddy the waters further.
So the establishment has all the motives to orchestrate wars on false pretexts and mislead their public to maintain the deceit and their huge salaries. I think it’s clear which narrative on world events is the closest to reality.
As I say, the narrative and language being used by the establishment is becoming more unhinged and desperate. When this happens the offenders become openly irrational, more brazen and project their wrongs on to their opponents. Projection is about shifting blame. Broadly, psychological projection is a defence mechanism in which an individual attributes characteristics they find unacceptable in themselves to others.
Examples of projection are evident in several world leaders involved in the Syria war. Encouraged by the lack of any statesmanship and moral leadership in the West, Erdogan and the Saudi leadership accuse their opponents of supporting terrorism while being the biggest supporters of terrorism in Syria and elsewhere. Likewise Netanjahu of Israel projects his criminal aggressive behaviour on to others such as the Palestinians and Iran.
Bolton and Pompeo in the US regime accuse other states of the same type of crimes they routinely commit and as recent statements from these two have shown, their delusions are off the scale. Like their predecessors these people are power freaks and dangerous psychotics who hide behind patriotism, projecting their lack of credentials in this respect on to their opponents.
Establishment ‘liberals’ justify their support for continuous war by hiding behind ‘humanitarian intervention’. They project their lack of humanitarian values and empathy on to their critics in a similar way.
This mind-set has become the norm to the media acclimatised to 25 years of war under Clinton, Blair, Bush and Obama. The media legitimises regime change, support for terrorism and mass murder, by projecting western crimes on to those states under attack like Syria and particularly Russia which is trying to prevent the chaos.
The media are the propaganda wing and an extension of a psychotic establishment, which explains why we are seeing more and more journalists reacting aggressively when challenged over their lies. And calling others traitors is shifting their share of the betrayal of the public on to their opponents and critics.
The enemy within – the real traitors
But for those of us living in the real world, what does all this mean? Well, we know the truthful narrative and we’re not the ones betraying our country. In fact, we are the patriots trying to stop our countries being obliterated by the selfish, ignorant fools who would cause a global war.
It seems from the lastest language being used that the establishment including the media are becoming increasingly delusional and dangerous. The media have a professional and moral duty to report the facts – not least because they have such a huge influence on world events. So they share the responsibility for all the wars which could have been prevented, had they done their jobs.
But calling someone a traitor is a serious business as I said before but perhaps by reflecting on the list of events below, this word can be assigned to where it really belongs. A reminder of the definition again:
traitor – a person who is guilty of treason or treachery, in betraying friends,country, a cause or trust.
And a list of some of the betrayals.
- The West invades Iraq under a false pretext – ISIS are created and terrorist attacks are later carried out in the West, allegedly by Al Qaeda and ISIS. Many refugees flood Europe from this conflict.
- The West attacks Libya and supports islamist groups against the government. Again, the same terrorists who the UK and the West support go on to attack the UK and Europe. Refugees arrive in Europe and to this day Libya is in chaos.
- Syria is attacked, the West using Al Qaeda as a tool for regime change. More refugees in Europe and after seven years the UK and other governments are still supporting Al Qaeda through taxpayers funds. Bombing has been carried out on Syria on no evidence of chemical attacks by the Syrian Government and parts of Syria are occupied illegally. On more than one occasion the continued interference and attacks have nearly caused a direct confrontation with Russia. The media misreporting of all these events have made these wars possible and encouraged escalation.
- The Salisbury incident, Ukraine and other events. Over the last few years, Russia has been blamed for various events. These accusations have been hasty and with little evidence. An anti-Russia propaganda media campaign has ensued, dramatically increasing tensions and the risk a spark which could start World War III. The rhetoric of some journalists has been reckless to the extreme and in some cases have been proved to be bare-faced lies. This climate of hysteria has been generated by the government with the assistance of the media. Anyone outside of this bubble with any common sense can see continuing on this path represents a grave risk to humanity.
- Further disinformation campaigns. Various organisations, like Integrity Initiative have been created specifically to shore up the establishment narrative on regime change wars and Russia. In the background of highly unstable leaderships in the West, Israel, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, these organisations through their lies and distortions only increase further the risk of a major conflict.
So I would suggest that if we are going to use a word such as ‘traitor’ in these debates the above would be a more accurate list of behaviours to attribute it to. Creating floods of refugees and terrorists to our shores and funding terror through our taxes goes against all our interests and is a betrayal. Recklessly creating the conditions in Syria and elsewhere for a full scale nuclear war is the ultimate betrayal.
If the likes of John Sweeney, Integrity Initiative, Bellingcat, Oliver Kamm, Luke Harding, Carole Cadwalladr and others can’t or won’t accept they share a responsibility for the escalating conflicts in the world, it may only be a matter of time before their dereliction of duty and betrayal comes back to bite them hard. That day could come quite soon considering the speed their credibility has been crumbling lately.