The Western media touts a bizarre array of so-called experts on Russia. These range from Western academics who simply live in delusional universes of their own making to dissidents who, like most dissidents, know which side their bread is buttered and will say what their new masters in MI6 and NATO require. (The media usually slavishly reports whatever they say without doubting a morsel). Many of these experts work for “think-tanks” with clear links to the Western war machine. Continue reading “Russia experts in the West”
The UK has backed the US in supporting Juan Guaidó, head of the parliament in Venezuela, against the elected President Nicolás Maduro. Even if Maduro fixed the election it is a short-circuit to go from there to intervention – as we have now.
The UK’s Foreign Secretary has said: “This regime has done untold damage to the people of Venezuela, 10% of the population have left Venezuela such is the misery they are suffering”. “Regime” is a keyword. Despite doubts over the integrity of the recent elections in Venezuela the current President still has more claims on democracy than, say, the leaders of Saudi Arabia who we are unlikely to find the UK Foreign Secretary calling a “regime” (bad for business). “Regime” legitimises intervention. And we know where that ends up… Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya. No stand-out success stories there. Just lots of corpses.
As for people leaving because of the economic problems caused by the “regime”. It may be true that the government is partly responsible for the economic crisis in Venezuela. However; US sanctions have played a significant part. These sanctions include prohibitions on US citizens financing government debt or investment in the state oil company in Venezuela. The effect of this will have been to make oil production more expensive which means in turn less government revenue. The crisis, the “misery”, which Jeremy Hunt cites as a reason to conduct a regime change operation in Venezuela is in fact something which has (at least partly) been caused by them. (US and UK are synonymous in Foreign Policy terms). An enormous lie. And one which will most likely pass by 100% unquestioned by the media – as it does, for example, in this Guardian article.
There is plenty to criticise about Russia. Even if we take an intelligent approach and start from the position that Russia is a different country, with its own history and traditions and values, and criticism should take this into account, not simply be based on the expectation that Russia should automatically adopt all Western values and trends, even then there is still plenty to criticise about Russia. Continue reading “Why tell lies Mr Harding?”
As readers of this blog will know I divide my news consumption time equally between the Guardian and RT.
Reading the Guardian is to read a never ending series of whinges about how women, black people, gays, and people confused about their gender are oppressed – implicitly if not explicitly by white middle-aged men. (Young white men present something of a conundrum for this ideology and their position in the scheme of things is obscure). Continue reading “Victims to the end”
The pseudo-left in British politics likes to bang on about “austerity”. “Tory austerity”. Is it true? Is there such a thing as “Tory austerity”?
This is one of these dreamy, naive to the point of absurdity, articles we come across so often in the Western press these days. Of course, like your bank’s “errors” always seem to be in their favour so the naivety always seems to coincide with the interests of the imperialists. Still, in many cases, it probably is simply extreme naivety. These children who went to school, enjoyed their “circle time” (a programming system used in schools to infantilize and control young students by getting them to “share their feelings”), believed every last word the teachers said and then went on to “Uni” (probably on their horsey) where their parents accompanied them to the interview and their lecturers were careful to avoid “trigger words” in lectures. Maybe they go on to take a Masters in “War Studies” at King’s College, London. Then they came out and got a job as a “journalist” writing down every word that the US State Department and MI6 tells them to.
Christmas and the propaganda never stops.
I very rarely watch the BBC news. (Only if I am staying with someone who does watch it).
Last night’s 24 hours bulletin was the usual fare of shoddy reporting and propaganda for political class  ideologies. As usual (at least when I watch it) the majority of the presenters are women and/or black and/or obviously gay. Last night out of several presenters/reporters only one was not a black woman. The token man was not an attractive specimen – huge and overweight with a bland sagging face. I couldn’t help wondering if he hadn’t been chosen deliberately – to mock the genre. He certainly didn’t know how to report, referring to the 20 ‘other charges’ against actor Kevin Spacey for historical sexual assault. In fact he meant allegations. There is only one charge. The media often take advantage of someone under pressure on sex abuse/assault charges and drop the normal standards by which allegations should be reported as allegations and charges as charges. (Presumably the media has a good sense of when someone is under too much pressure to be able to respond to each and every piece of false reporting). The ‘reporter’ was introduced by a third-rate presenter who in effect giggled as she read the piece – as if to say out loud “hysterically funny but he denies these charges which we all know are true”. And, of course, they are “true” – given that, these days, sexual assault verdicts are reached against (almost entirely white men) in public media trials, not by the courts and the doctrine that “allegations must be believed” means in fact that all allegations are treated as true anyway. News reporting in the Western media is no longer anything to do with facts – it is all about creating media narratives. In this case one in which white men are always the villain.
Meanwhile over in today’s Guardian there is a report on the case of the two Americans who have been arrested in China. This is widely seen as retaliation for the arrest of a Chinese businesswoman in Canada following a request for extradition by the US. The US wants to try Meng Wanzhou for breaking US sanctions on companies doing business with Iran.  Wanzhou was snatched as she was transferring through Vancouver. The attempt to extend US law all over the world is rightly described by Sergey Lavrov, Russian Foreign Minister, as “revolting”. The Guardian ends its report with “She [Wanzhou] is living under electronic surveillance in a luxury home in Vancouver, welcoming visitors daily and updating her social media page. Kovrig and Spavor [the 2 US Citizens held in China] have been held under more difficult conditions and denied access to lawyers.”. This is interesting because it mixes up political and legal matters. Wanzhou has been released under a large bond and under stringent bail conditions by a court following Canadian law and a court hearing. Kovrig and Spavor are also being treated in accordance with the law – Chinese law.  This comment invalidates China’s right to have a different legal system to that of the US and indeed shows a failure to even understand that there is such a thing as a legal process. This report is credited to AFP – a media organisation owned by the French state. Such blatant imperialism is precisely the mindset of the new media class in the West.
A campaign at home to undermine all the former bastions of authority – the law, white men, the family (all this presented as the height of progressive thinking) – and a crude and retrograde colonialism abroad. Such is the ideology of the new media and political classes in the West.
1. The Triumph of the Political Class. Peter Oborne. Simon & Schuster 2007