Sunday 27th of May 2018

democracy can rot your mouth with cancer if you keep smoking the government and media rubbish...

cancer

To have been in ‘democratic’ Britain for the past eight weeks has been quite an educational experience.

We've seen how the NeoCon Establishment works, how dissent is policed, and how 'gas-lighting' techniques are used to try and make us think we're going crazy for questioning the 'official narrative' — a narrative which we know just by employing simple logic, doesn't make sense. 

Here's a list of the most important things we've learnt- that's if you weren't aware of them already.


1. The presumption of innocence doesn't apply to NeoCon targets.

Innocent until proven guilty? Not if you're in the line of fire of the Endless War Lobby, comrade. Russia was accused of trying to poison the Skripals before a proper criminal investigation had even begun. The Syrian government was blamed for a chemical weapons attack, before we had independently verification that a chemical weapons attack had even taken place. The ‘Official Narrative' on both cases has unravelled spectacularly. No 'smoking gun' evidence of either Russian involvement in the Skripal case or of the Douma CW attack has been produced. On the contrary, witnesses testified last week at The Hague that the Douma attack didn't happen. 

 

READ MORE: Douma Doctors, Witnesses Reveal Lies Behind White Helmets' Provocation (VIDEO)

But we're  expected not to notice — as the news cycle — conveniently for the accusers- moves on to other stories. 


​2. Rupert Murdoch's Times newspaper plays an utterly pernicious role in British public life. 

It was the Times which demanded action from Theresa May against Russia. It was the Times which  has demanded (repeatedly, and again after the Skripal incident) that  Ofcom acted against Russian media in the UK, such as RT. It was the Times, which accuses Russian media of peddling 'fake news', which reported Sergei Skripal as dead on its 12th March front page.

It was The Times which, on 14th March, falsely reported that 'almost 40' people had needed treatment in Salisbury, prompting Dr Stephen Davies, Comsultant in Emergency Medicine to write to the paper stating 'May I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning.'

​​It was The Times, which on the day the US/UK and France launched illegal attacks on Syria in response to the unverified chemical weapons attack at Douma, carried a front page attack on British academics who dare to challenge the War Party line on Syria. It was The Times which smeared other critics of western foreign policy as 'Russian trolls', including a peace campaigner from Finland who had been battling cancer. 

John Wight has called the Times, the in-house organ of the neocon Henry Jackson Society. Its days as Britain's respected newspaper of record have certainly long gone.


​3. Britain is only what is called a 'Democracy'.

Just think back to that Parliamentary debate on 14th March. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was attacked from his own side, for his cautious approach towards the government's unproven claims about the Skripal case. To add insult to injury a number of Labour MPs then signed Early Day Motion 1071- which stated 'This House unequivocally accepts the Russian state's culpability for the poisoning of Yulia and Sergei Skripal'. Labour's Shadow Defence Secretary Nia Griffith showed her support for Theresa May by saying 'We very much accept what the Prime Minister said.' 

 

Corbyn, coming under enormous Establishment pressure did buckle, saying the Russian authorities ‘needed to be held to account', even though later he still quite rightly insisted that 'absolute evidence' was needed.

READ MORE: UK Shouldn't 'Rush Ahead of Evidence' in Skripal Investigation — Jeremy Corbyn

In bombing Syria on 14th April, Theresa May not only refused to recall Parliament, she also ignored public opinion which showed only 20% in favour of air strikes.  In a genuine democracy that would have  ruled out action. But May treated public opinion with utter contempt. That wonderful passage from ‘The Comments of Moung Ka' by the Edwardian comic writer Saki springs readily to mind. 

'The people of Britain are what is called a Democracy' said Moung Ka. ‘A Democracy?' questioned Moung Thwa. What is that?'

‘A Democracy' broke in Moung Shooglay eagerly, ‘is a community that governs itself according to its own wishes and  interests by electing accredited representatives who enact its laws and supervise and control their administration. It's aim and object is government of the community in the interests of the community'.

‘Then', said Moung Thwa, turning to his neighbour, ‘If the people of Britain are a Democracy-‘

‘I never said they were a Democracy', interrupted Moung Ka placidly.

‘Surely we both heard you!', exclaimed Moung Thwa.

‘Not correctly, said Moung Ka; ‘I said they are what is called a Democracy'.


4. The ‘free press' doesn't act as you'd expect a ‘free press' to act.  

The striking thing about the Skripal case and Syria bombings from a journalist's point of view has been the uniformity of the media coverage.

Right-wing papers like the Telegraph and liberal ones like The Guardian have taken exactly the same stance ie anti-Russian and anti-Syrian government. Whether its because of DSMA-Notices (see 6, below), or not, there's been no proper questioning of the UK government's claims about Salisbury — and not much on Syria either. Investigative journalism? What's that?    

The mainstream media is actually less diverse in its opinions now (on the things that really matter) than at the time of the Iraq war where publications like the New Statesman (now a 'centrist' Blairite organ), spoke out strongly against intervention. If you want a different perspective on Skripals and Syria you have had to tune in to Russian media, such as Sputnik and RT, and that of course is threatened by the NeoCon Thought Police, who want everyone to be singing from the same pro-war hymn sheet.


5. The role of the security services in the promotion of 'official narratives' is very important.

Every time a wheel has come off the Skripal narrative, we've been fed information to bolster it from 'official sources'. After the head of Porton Down said that the  laboratory there was unable to confirm that the nerve agent allegedly used to poison the Skripals came from Russia, the line was pushed that ‘intelligence-led assessments' pointed to Russian guilt. Could we see these ‘assessments'? Of course not! We just have to believe that they're there. Then as the 'nerve agent placed on the door handle' theory began to gain a head of steam we were told that 'British Intelligence' had ‘evidence' that Russia had been testing the nerve agent on door handles prior to 3rd March. Could we see this ‘evidence'? No, of course not.

Alex Thomson of C4 News reported on 12th March that a ‘D-Notice' had issued by the UK authorities to stop the media from fully identifying Sergei Skripal's MI6 handler who lived nearby.

​Were other DSMA-Notices issued too regarding the reporting of Salisbury?  If it was so clear that Russia did it, why would they bother?


6. The British public aren't mugs (or sheep).

​Despite all the propaganda, all the hysterical headlines, all the blatantly biased coverage, the British haven't bought it. Literally or metaphorically. Inside the Tent gatekeepers have relentlessly attacked those brave individuals who have questioned the official narratives, but its these individuals- smeared as ‘crackpots' and ‘conspiracy theorists' who the public are turning to for their analysis. Compare the number of retweets the former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray gets when he publishes on the Skripal case, with those who try and denigrate him. My own Twitter following has increased by several thousands since early March. Citizen Halo got a big boost in followers after she was smeared by The Times. After the lies told about Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya people no longer tamely accept what the NeoCon Establishment tells us. We're at an  ‘Emperor's New Clothes' moment in British politics where more and more people have found the courage to say out loud 'The Emperor has no clothes!'. The elite have been lying to us and they know that we know they've been lying. The question is: what are we going to do about it?

Follow Neil Clark on Twitter

 

Read more:

https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201805021064096451-modern-britain-skr...

7. the assange case

Here we ARE witnesses of a MASSIVE Dreyfus affair in the UK. After having been falsely accused of "rape", Julian Assange is still hold up in London under the fabricated pretence that he jumped bail... Had he not jump bailed, he would have been hanged by now in the USA for telling the truth. Nothing new about America, but we expect better from the UK and a Queen's fart.

At the moment, England is very smelly despite Michael Portillo's "England". Pretty landscape, efficient railways, but rotten politics as far as the present government is concerned. The Queen has the duty to intervene. Hopefully Assange won't die from isolation before the present UK government is thrown out and the new guard sees fit to let him go, which is still a non-possibility.

Meanwhile, there are enough people around the world ready to pay ten times the money of the bail to get get him out. Assange deserves to be free. Come on Mr Murdoch, start pressuring for Assange's release. You have the power in your rotten media to do so. Yes we know the previous government pissed on you because you spied on celebrities with "The News of the World".

Well, it's time to revive this sheet as a leftist and global warming clarion.... 

Am I demanding too much? 

 

FREE ASSANGE.

media on trial...

Media on Trial has released the following statement:

Today, on World Press Freedom Day, Leeds City Museum, a city council owned and operated venue, cancelled the Media on Trial’s booking for the event we had planned for 27 May.

The fact that the event was cancelled is perhaps bad enough. What became clear as the day has progressed, though, is that Leeds City Museum appear to have informed the press and media of the cancellation before they informed Media on Trial organisers. Indeed they waited for the Media on Trial representative to arrive at the venue for a planned meeting following a four hour train journey before giving us the news.

They seem to have taken this decision on the basis of misinformed assumptions about the content of the event, and offered no right of reply to Media on Trial.

Leeds City Museum has cancelled an event that threatened mainstream media and UK Government narratives that have enabled another regime change war to be waged against Syria, financed by British taxpayers contributions.

The cancellation of the event denies public consensus a platform to express its profound dissatisfaction with the systematic disinformation campaign run by a British media that protects power from truth, rather than holding truth to power.

Media on Trial fully intends to hold this event despite these attempts to silence us. We will be in contact with ticket holders shortly to explain our plans.

Further information will be published at https://www.mediaontrial.uk in due course. If anyone in the Leeds area can suggest alternative venues, please let us know and we will pass the information along. In the meantime, please share this as widely as possible.

 

Read more:

https://off-guardian.org/2018/05/04/media-on-trial-event-banned/

democracy designed to prevent them from having a free choice ...

 

Elections alone do not make for democracy

by Thierry Meyssan

Seen from the West, three democratic elections have just been held in Tunisia, Lebanon and Iraq. But for the People of these nations, the votes had little to do with the democratic ideal, because the institutions that were imposed upon them by the West were designed to prevent them from having a free choice of their leaders.

The massive abstention during the Lebanese and Iraqi general elections (50 % Lebanon), (65 % Iraq), and the Tunisian municipal elections (77 %) was interpreted by the Western powers as proof of the immaturity of these populations. No matter whether or not they have been democracies for 7 or 75 years, they are irresponsible and must therefore be placed under supervision.

Forgetting the fact that in the West also, certain national consultations have been marked by similar rates of abstention, the Western powers explain the elections in Tunisia, Lebanon and Iraq as having been troubled by the poor economic results of their governments. As if the Arabs had not understood that they were able to deliberate on projects and choose their own future, but imagined that they were obliged to approve the performances of their past governments.

Anxious to restore a mandate in the Levant, the Western powers had interpreted the liberation of Saad Hariri from his Saudi jail as the victory of Emmanuel Macron The Magnificent. They had not mentioned either the humiliation of the French President inflicted by the Saudi Crown Prince at the airport in Riyadh, nor the efficiency of the work by President Michel Aoun at the United Nations. In their eyes, the Lebanese people were incapable of taking care of themselves. They could only obtain results if they were supervised by the West.

The Western medias speak about the unbelievable Lebanese institutions by describing them as « complicated », but without explaining that the communitarian system had been specifically designed by the ex-colonial power so that nothing would ever change. France is secular at home, but absolutely not in its ex-colonies. and the re-arrangements of the electoral laws, with the introduction of the proportional vote within the communities, not only maintain the colonial web, but also render it all the more complex.

Yes, it is ridiculous to see Tunisia elect its municipal advisors for the first time, Lebanon elect, after nine years, the same hereditary deputies, and Iraq divided into 37 political parties. But it is precisely because it is ridiculous that many voters refused to play such a humiliating game.

Contrary to the Western interpretation, these rates of abstention, while they do demonstrate a rejection of democratic procedures, certainly do not signify the rejection of democracy, but its distortion.

The Tunisians, who witnessed Ennahdha and Nidaâ Tounes found an alliance after having fought one another, had every reason to anticipate that the two major parties would be able to agree to share local positions as they had done with the national posts. The Lebanese, who know that they have no other choice than a « war-lord » for their community and his vassals to defend it against other communities, also rejected this imprisonment. The Iraqis, whose elected Prime Minister had been overthrown four years ago by foreign powers, know that their vote will not be taken into account if they should move against the desiderata of the self-proclaimed « international community ».

Only the Lebanese Hezbollah, born of the Resistance to the Israëli occupation, and the Iraqi Coalition of Moqtada el-Sadr, born of the Resistance to the United States occupation, carried all their voices with their allies.

Make no mistake about it, the Western powers implicitly applaud these abstentions, because they find in them the justification of their aggressions in the « Greater Middle East » over the last 17 years. Any expression of an organised will of the People is for them a nightmare, since their sole objective is to overthrow the states and destroy the societies in order to dominate them more efficiently.

Thus, when the Syrians, then embroiled in a war, invaded the voting centres to elect their President, the Western powers were petrified. They were obliged to postpone their plan for the overthrow of the Syrian Arab Republic.

The Arabs, just like all other people, want to determine their own destiny.

Thierry Meyssan

Translation 
Pete Kimberley