The “Philip Cross” MSM Promotion Operation Part 3 278

“Philip Cross” has just 200 Twitter followers, but has more MSM journalists following him than are to be found among my 42,300 twitter followers. Despite the fact a large majority of “Philip Cross’s” tweets are mere retweets, with Oliver Kamm and Nick Cohen most frequently retweeted. “Philip Cross” has never broken a news story and the few tweets which are not retweets contain no gems of expression or shrewd observation. In short, his twitter feed is extremely banal; there is literally nothing in it that might interest a journalist in particular. Do not take my word for it, judge for yourself.

Why then does James LeMesurier, founder of the “White Helmets”, follow Philip Cross on twitter? Why does ex-minister Tristram Hunt follow Philip Cross on Twitter? Why does Sarah Brown, wife of Gordon, follow Philip Cross on twitter?

Why then do so the following corporate and state journalists follow “Philip Cross” on twitter?

Oliver Kamm, Leader Writer The Times
Nick Cohen, Columnist The Guardian/Observer
Joan Smith, Columnist The Independent
Leslie Felperin, Film Columnist The Guardian
Kate Connolly, Foreign Correspondent The Guardian/Observer
Lisa O’Carroll, Brexit Correspondent The Guardian
James Bloodorth, Columnist The Independent
Cristina Criddle, BBC Radio 4 Today Programme
Sarah Baxter, Deputy Editor, The Sunday Times
Iain Watson, Political Correspondent, The BBC
Caroline Wheeler, Deputy Political Editor, the Sunday Times
Jennifer Chevalier, CBC ex-BBC
Dani Garavelli, Scotland on Sunday

Prominent Freelancers

Bonnie Greer (frequently in The Guardian)
Mason Boycott-Owen (The Guardian, New Statesman)
Marko Attilla Hoare (The Guardian)
Kirsty Hughes
Guy Walters (BBC)
Paul Canning

Let me recap, The official story is that “Philip Cross” is an obscure and dedicated Wikipedia editor who edits every single day for five years. His twitter feed has never contained any “news”. Yet among the 160 followers he had last week before the media spotlight was turned upon him, were all these MSM journalists, many more than follow anyone but the most prominent individuals, more than follow an activist like me. Plus big figures like Sarah Brown, Tristram Hunt and James Le Mesurier. What does this tell us about who Philip Cross is.

The largest single category of Philip Cross’s historic 160 followers is anti-left and anti-Corbyn twitter accounts, especially those that specialise in making accusations of anti-semitism against left wing or anti-war figures. These include:

UK Media Watch “promoting accurate coverage of Israel”; ALT Putin’s Capitalist Wealth “@medialenswipe”; Antinat; Jeremy Corbin Prime Minister; Jewish News; Anti-Nazis Utd [which thinks I am a Nazi]; Labour Against Anti-Semitism; Jews Aganst Jeremy Corbyn. A very much larger number of individual followers of “Philip Cross” have twitter streams which predominantly consist of attacks on Jeremy Corbyn or the anti-war left in general, and of vociferous support for Israel. Of personal interest to me, there are at least seventeen of Philip Cross’s supporters who have made utterly unprovoked attacks on me on social media over the last twelve months.

So let us recap what we know. “Philip Cross” spends a quite astonishing amount of time on Wikipedia making malicious edits to the entries of anti-war or anti-corporate media figures, while at the same time polishing and protecting the Wikipedia profiles of corporate and state media figures. “Philip Cross” had done this obsessively for 13 years and not had a single day off, even at Christmas, for five years.

“Philip Cross” is not very active on twitter, mostly just retweeting, and as you would expect has therefore not had many followers. But an extraordinary percentage of that very limited number of followers are MSM journalists or senior Establishment figures. There is absolutely no reason on the face of his Twtter stream why Philip Cross would attract this particular type of following. His retweets are mostly of Nick Cohen and Oliver Kamm, and his followership is concentrated in the Guardian and Times, which nowadays have very similar neo-con agendas.

“Philip Cross”‘s own twitter stream makes no effort at all to hide the fact that he has the strongest of neo-conservative biases, hates the Left and anti-war movement, and strongly supports Israel. “He” is part of an active social media network trolling these views. The purpose of “his” continual Wikipedia editing could not be clearer. I suspect strongly that this particular Philip Cross twitter follower gives us a clue:

That is a twitter account founded by a collective of Guardian writers to attack MediaLens, whose Wikipedia entry “Philip Cross” has edited over 800 times. I suspect “Philip Cross” is a similar collective effort, which may hide behind the persona of a real life individual called Philip Cross. The intention of this effort to denigrate and demean alternative media and anti-war figures through their Wikipedia entries, and at the same time to burnish the Wikipedia entries of mainstream media figures, is proven without doubt, as is the continued complicity of Wikipedia in enabling and defending the long-term operation.

Analysis of “Philip Cross” tweets.

FOOTNOTE Since Philip Cross’s activity was brought into prominence throughout social media a few days ago, his Twitter followers have increased, mostly by people who dislike his activity wishing to keep an eye on him. I have disregarded these new followers, and it in no way diminishes my argument for trolls to point out that he now has left wing followers as well.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

278 thoughts on “The “Philip Cross” MSM Promotion Operation Part 3

1 2 3
    • Charles Bostock

      Your name for Wikipedia purposes is “Mojito Paraiso” . On here it’s “Njegos”. As a matter of interest, do you use a different handle for every website you visit, post on, etc (not interested what they are, just whether you use different ones).

      • Njegos

        No, I have used the same handle for different websites. Any specific reason you ask?

        • Charles Bostock

          Just curious – a lot of people who comment here and on other websites adopt a different name for each site. So Mojito Paraiso is your real name?

          • Njegos

            No. “Mojito Paraiso” literally means mojito heaven which should you give you a clue about my favourite cocktail 😉

          • bj

            I am finally beginning to be very curious who you are, mister or missus Bostock.

            I think with all your curious inquiries as regards to the identities and usernames of commenters here, always the just short-of-sleight ad hominem angle, maybe it’s time for some Full Disclosure, don’t you think, eh?

          • Charles Bostock


            I’m very partial to mojitos as well – an excellent refresher!


            Just one inquiry, actually (not ‘inquiries’) and it wasn’t about an identity, just about a handle that’s all. Relax!

  • Bob Dixon

    Does anyone remember when the Sun Newspaper was told by the courts that it couldnt call itself a newspaper anymore because it was basically a load of lies? did that happen or did i imagine it? if it didnt happen that would explain why I cant find a mention of it on the internet.

    • Shatnersrug

      That didn’t happen, I heard Fox News was told that but it turned out to be a April 1st joke in the huff po

  • Paul

    Seriously – enough! The point is made, and made well. But your next point needs to be something else.

    • Njegos

      On the contrary. This is the tip of the iceberg. Craig Murray is doing excellent work exposing the Wikimafia. Keep up the excellent work Craig.

    • kbbucks

      Sorry Paul, yes of course you are correct – nothing to see here, let’s all move on and leave this one to the great memory hole…

      • Paul

        Of course there’s stuff to see here, but my point is that Craig is viewed by many as being on the boundary of the loony fringe (and many of the commenters here are clearly well past that point). Appearing to be obsessive is not going to help any of the various causes that Craig has highlighted.

        • Njegos

          “Viewed by many as being on the boundary of the loony fringe”

          “(and many of the commenters here are clearly well past that point).”

          “Appearing to be obsessive”

          Nice try, Philip.

          • Paul

            Thanks for proving my point.

            For what it’s worth I support Craig financially and I feel he performs a very valuable role with this blog.

          • Luc


            Calling three non-redundant blogposts “obsessive” seems like a rather unjustified description to me. If it is true, and the so far published information strongly suggests so, that “Philip Cross” is a propaganda operation, then doing research on the topic and laying out the evidence is pure and simple investigative journalism of the kind you would expect from the MSM in Checks-And-Balances-Theory.

        • flatulence

          Not that I’ve noticed many round here, myself excluded, but what have you got against people with mental health issues?

        • D_Majestic

          Do give details of your extensive list of psychiatric qualifications for our perusal. Or not, as the case may be.

          • Squeeth

            It takes no qualifications to sniff out a fraud, only the ability to breathe in through the nose.

      • Charles Bostock

        I agree with Paul – you’re beginning to sound obsessive. All the more so because you have skin in this particular game. As Paul says, appearing obsessive isn’t likely to help your causes – remember Tam Dalyell and the Belgrano. Having said that, I also agree with Paul when he implies that you come across as perfectly sane compared to a good many of your commenting followers. Keep up the work on more important issues than this one, which does not even merit the appellation “affair”.

        • George

          I think I can see a pattern here or the continuing emergence of a certain tone: that of the “impartial observer” who is ever so concerned that Craig may be alienating all the “sensible people”. Thus do these self-proclaimed guardians of sanity arrogantly assume to know “the public mind” and what it will allow.

          • Paul

            I don’t proclaim to be the guardian of anything – I simply speak my mind. I hope that if sufficient similarly-minded people (such as Charles Bostock) say similar things then Craig will heed the message.

            But it’s entirely Craig’s call. My few quid each month is not going to swing things!

          • Squeeth

            “More in sorrow than anger”. I write history on Wiki and view the modern stuff as a perfect example of corp-0-rat corruption. If it isn’t swaddled under the zionist cloak (or is that cloaca?) the admin bias towards the status quo is palpable. You might as well try putting a dissenting comment on the Graun. Mind you, anyone who looks in here can see the same process of diversion, time-wasting and denigration of human decency. I wouldn’t advocate scouring the comments section like the Graun lackeys do but an ignore button would be invaluable.

          • Njegos

            Exactly. What is the problem with exposing a serial defamer like Philip Cross especially as clues emerge that he is associated with an underhanded campaign with possible links to establishment media figures?

            Anyway, we will be hearing much more about Kamm and Cross (or do I repeat myself?) when Neil Clark’s lawsuit comes to trial.

          • George

            Paul – I was thinking more about Mr Bostock’s comments along the lines of “appearing obsessive isn’t likely to help your causes” where by he appears to be setting himself up as arbiter of admissable procedure. but having said that, your comment

            “I hope that if sufficient similarly-minded people (such as Charles Bostock) say similar things then Craig will heed the message.”

            has a rather sinister air. You are not contibuting opinions but sending messages?

          • RogerDodger

            Yes, the concern trolls are out in force. What a strange coincidence that,just as a light is shined on a hugely embarrassing project of sustained and organised disinformation, so many impartial observers would emerge to provide Craig with friendly and impartial advice as to the urgent need to temper his efforts.

          • Charles Bostock

            Not setting myself up as am arbiter of admissable procedure either, George – you’re setting up a strawman again.
            What I said about Craig not helping his causes was just my opinion. An opinion which I actually hope he will not heed because I disagree with many of Craig’s causes (not all!) and would not like to see them prosper.
            Finally, your concern about Paul’s use of “message” is entirely fake and serves only to set up another strawman.

        • flatulence

          We’re all on the spectrum somewhere Bostik. Having seen a fair few of your posts (and there are a LOT), you may want to look at how balanced you are, and I hope you get or are already getting the care and support you need. My heart goes out to anyone who is close to you.

          • Charles Bostock

            I’m sorry you think there are too many comments from me, old fart. But be fair and do a word or line count and you’ll find that I comment rather little compared to many others….including, perhaps, yourself.

          • flatulence

            I’m flattered, both that you think I’m old and also that you think I comment anywhere near as much as you do. My comments must stand out larger than life. Oops that’s me slipping down that delusional spectrum.

            No, don’t have a problem with the amount of your comments, the number of lines, or the number of words (seriously hope you’re getting help pal), trolls keep on trollin’ far as I’m concerned! There’s a lot of ticks this year too, but it’s not their fault. No, just wishing you well and anyone who remains close to you.

        • J

          Habbs, you’re repeating your ‘old’ tropes again. I heard you were banned.

      • Charles Bostock

        Hi Tatyana. I see that you’re slowly but surely extending the range of issues you’re commenting on. It was just the attacks on Russia at the beginning, wasn’t it.

        But I digress. Thank you for the few Russian websites/blogs of the Craig Murray type. But they don’t seem to have a comments facility, do they? Or have I missed something. Another thing – they are all on Russian ISPs, I think (whereas this blog, for instance is not on a British ISP). Is that just coincidence or are Russian bloggers legally obliged to use a Russian ISP?

        I do hope we can keep corresponding, there lots of things I’d love to know about Russia and who better to tell me than a simple Russian housewife cum businesswoman who actually lives there and has no connection with the Russian state?

        Talk soon!

        • flatulence

          Weren’t you just accusing someone else of being a bully further down this page? I must admit, I do seek out your comments somewhat, because you do make me laugh.

        • Tatyana

          Hi, Charles, happy to hear from you!
          There’s no way I could think you’re trolling me 🙂 Or, no, not since the ceasefire (May 18, 2018 at 20:55). And I’m sure that actions of such a respectful participant as Charles Bostock now match his words!

          I wish I could inform you on that ISP question, but I’m sorry, Google seems like a better choice.

          I enjoy communicating with open-hearted and open-minded people, who in fact you are, aren’t you? 🙂 But ability to open eyes a bit wider then usual is the most valuable feature, it brings even more profit than kindness or smartness. E.g. you could notice
          a comment facility,
          or a wide range of my social-media links,
          or even e-mail address,
          or phone number?
          Just to message me directly, Charles, to know more of Russia, or russian housewives, or russian businesswomen who actually live here and have no connection with the Russian state:-)

  • Dr. Ip

    Well, there is this “Irish Murderer” Philip Cross (one “l” in Philip) who Wikipedia carry a story about.

    Could be the name origin, aligned with the twisted humour that pervades the services. You know, a poisoner, poisoning the “enemies of the state” apparatus. Murdering them. But of course he does, according to the story (spoiler alert), get caught and hanged, despite being an aristocrat.

    Anyway, the identification and pursuit of these nefarious figures posing as Cross is not the point, is it? The point is that alternative information sites must be set up that people can go to and trust as far as unbiased political news is concerned, a kind of “alternative” Wiki. Surely there are enough tech-savvy people out there who can perform this service and thus create a detour which will avoid the pits (and the pendulums) of the Cross.

  • teganjovanka

    This would explain why I got blocked by Oliver Kamm despite not following him, and never having had any interaction at all with him. I did have a few exchanges with Cross however, which Kamm clearly saw.

    Cross could be an overzealous Kamm fanboy, but why Kamm himself follows this obscure man on twitter is a far more interesting question.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Another notable group of people who follow Philip Cross on Twitter are members of the Labour right and their associates who specialise in attacking the left on the specific grounds of anti-Semitism. They have had a long and bitter battle with Greg Hadfield after he took exception to their comments. Among these are Nathan Comiskey, Euan Philipps, “The Bare Bones”, and Emma Picken.

    It is interesting that the first three of these people are ones to whom Cross first ironically tweeted the news of George Galloway’s thousand pound reward offer. I think it likely that Cross forms a part of this group and they are the people who know him best.

    • Charles Bostock

      Speaking of George Galloway, could I repeat the question I asked a day or so ago? It was to enquire where things stood currently re his £1000 reward – has anyone supplied the info George was after and has George paid up. As George and Craig are acquainted, perhaps George reads this blog and could even reply personally, but of course any of the commenters with information could also do so.

      • Disinterested Bystander

        Habb, you don’t ask questions you demand answers. If Galloway has got any sense he’ll either ignore you or, as some on here do, ridicule you.

    • Christopher Dale Rogers


      I have a lot more names than that to throw into the mix, among them Saul Freeman, who posts as Nuddering on Twitter, its worth checking him out, never mind a few other maniacs I’ve been attacked by this past month – if they are sock puppets and are outed they go ballistic – Luke Akehurst as presently gone mad as I called him a ‘Gammon’, which means I’ve had a few more of the looney tunes Israeli apologist brigade pick up on me – fun it is not, but identifying who they are certainly is.

  • quasi_verbatim

    Caitlin Jihnstone gives the background scuttlebutt. We gotta believe the Official Narratives if we know what’s good for us.

  • Hmmm

    Keep up the good work against these vile pediaphiles. ..
    I myself am gonna join as an editor and change boring science related entries to add a sentence Midway through to the effect of:
    “Do not trust Wikipedia with any information relating to politics”

    • Clark

      Don’t bother; they’ll just get removed, and rightly so. It’s not being an editor that makes edits ‘stick’. It’s verifiability and references to what are regarded as reliable sources.

      • Squeeth

        Yes; sadly, Mickey Mouse propaganda rags, state and corp-0-rat propaganda rags and freelance propaganda rags are treated as RS. Stick to the Great War articles and you’ll be all right, albeit somewhat late.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    A person who follows Philip Cross and is followed by him is Twitter user Bob From Brockley, who is well worth investigating on his own account. We may well be hearing a good deal more about Mr Bob From Brockley in the near future. Certain people who have been attacked by Philip Cross are very interested in him.

    When Philip Cross decided to take a break from Wikipedia a week ago, Bob From Brockley took over some of his editing, and displayed a very similar attitude to that of Cross.

  • Sharp Ears

    Try the Israeli Embassy, Palace Green, Kensington! Mr Masot isn’t still around is he.

    Your list of Cross followers is very illuminating. I suspect that there are many more within the MSM and Whitehall who remain anonymous.

    btw I think it’s BloodWorth.

  • Clark

    The activities of “Philip Cross” suggest that Wikipedia is considered important. Therefore, rather than abandoning it we should get on in there, learn the rules and edit it!

    It is vital to learn the rules, because that is both what will make your edits ‘stick’, and what will show up the likes of “Philip Cross” for what he is.

    Note that “Philip Cross” is not a covert operation. The transparency of Wikipedia permits everyone to see precisely what “Philip Cross” has been up to:

    In fact, edits by “Philip Cross” are a rich source of information about this propaganda operation.

    • Njegos

      I agree with you Clark but the obvious question is who has the time and energy to counter “Philip Cross”, especially if it is a round-the-clock group effort.

      Then again, maybe all it would take is a few well-publicised focused “edit wars” to shift the balance and draw bigger attention to the rot at the heart of Wikipedia.

      • Clark

        Frank Zappa once said; “To all the cute and beautiful people in the world… … there’s a lot more of us ugly mutherfuckers than you”. If one percent of the people reading about this issue learn to edit Wikipedia, the tiny number of propagandists won’t stand a chance.

      • Yalt

        Went for a walk yesterday, saw a swarm of gnats bedeviling a small worm on the trail. They would cluster on it–for some reason they seemed to prefer the head end–and every so often the worm would roll over on its back and thrash about, shedding them. Sometimes it would roll itself into a ball to squeeze them off. And then straighten itself off and set out again…in an entirely new direction, as it had lost track of which way it was going.

        And of course within a few seconds the gnats were back. The worm wound up doing a random walk in the middle of the trail, never getting where it was going.

        We’ve got to stop getting distracted by the bullshit. Their capacity to create it is greater than our capacity to carefully debunk it.

    • Squeeth

      Yes, yes a thousand times yes but it will be a full-time job. Someone spent ages putting misleading material about the Italians in the Western Desert Campaign articles and once the deceit was uncovered, taking it out was pretty much a formality. “Philip Cross” is a professional outfit; only a war of attrition will see him off.

      The Italian chauvinist would object to a revision then use false accounts to create a spurious consensus, leaving the dissenter outnumbered. I bet that individuals who have tried to contradict PC without relying on RS (and not putting commas next to conjunctions) have found something similar, if they haven’t been banned already.

    • Neil

      I strongly endorse Clark’s call for people to learn how to edit Wikipedia. I have little time or patience for the “Time to ditch Wikipedia?” mentality. Rather than sit here whining, get off your arses and fix it! But FFS, learn how to do it properly.

      See my two comments on the first page of Craig’s first post on Cross. Here:

      I mention some very good Wikipedia editors (I’m sure there are others I’ve missed). You can look at their example to learn how to edit Wikipedia effectively. Among those is User:Nishidani. Here’s his user page:

      If you look near the bottom of that page, you will see that he has been blocked or banned multiple times, but each time he has come back again, even stronger. Follow his contributions:

      We all owe him a huge debt of gratitude for what he has achieved on Wikipedia. The first major bust-up for which he got banned resulted in major changes which made it much easier to edit Isr**l/Palestine effectively. There have been a succession of smaller changes which have again improved the situation on Isr**l/Palestine articles, and each time Nishidani has been a major player.

      More recently, Nishidani has been creating a series of articles on the Aboriginal Australian peoples, around 700 in total, and the series is now nearly complete. I’ve been helping him on these (mostly on technical aspects), and it’s been a joy to work on them, because we’re not working against any vested interests. But it’s still an important record of the genocide created by British settler-colonialism. We now have an extra bit of infrastructure that helps in dealing with modern settler colonialism – the deadliest form of colonialism.

      To all the naysayers who say it isn’t worth bothering on Wikipedia, I say: Fuck you! Don’t let the hell that Nishidani has been through go to waste!

    • bj

      I agree.

      The hinge point however is mister Jimmy ‘Jimbo’ Wales.

      Name & Shame. The screenshots are there.

  • Njegos

    Just before I was banned, I lodged a complaint about Cross’ hatchet job on Professor Tim Hayward under the “Neutral Point of View Noticeboard for Biographies of Living Persons”. Cross’ partisan rubbish was referenced to (surprise, surprise) The Times as well as several pieces in the Huffington Post UK by Chris York, who has a bee in his bonnet about “Assad apologists”. Fine objective stuff, obviously.

    I was shocked when my complaint was initially upheld by an editor called Nomeskedacity who essentially purged everything Cross had posted leaving a simple factual line about Hayward. This angered Cross and there was an exchange (which is no longer accessible) which has resulted in Tim Hayward’s page becoming semi-protected – ie. it is no longer open to edits from the public.

    Shortly afterwords, my little experiment (referred to above) sealed my fate as a contributor to Wikipedia.

    There is much that is wrong with Wikipedia but one big step forward would be to eliminate anonymity for those who edit Biographies of Living Persons. There should be some sort of “blue-check” verification system as with Twitter.

    Then again, Twitter has “verified” something called “The US Embassy Syria” which does not exist. It was closed years ago…..

  • SO.


    Philip cross is just going to be the generic collective login used by an organisation. You’re basically trying to fight air.

    It’s there, it’s pervasive, its everywhere and you can’t do anything about it cos there’s no “one” truth that’ll stop or change it’s momentum..

    Here: have one of your chemist friends look at this OPCW report.

    and see if you can make any sense out of it…

      • SO.

        Not the slightest chance in hell.

        You need to know the source IP’s of the mods over time. Correlate those ip’s with a department and machine usage. Then prove those mods were acting in a deliberately biased manner under the explicit direction of your guilty party before a court who actually gives a shit.

        Fat chance.

      • Kay

        Sure, actions based on civil or, ideally, criminal harassment would be a good place to start.

        Wikipedia would doubtless drag its feet in turning over records that could identify the person(s) behind the Philip Cross account but that’d only draw more attention to the matter.

        Also, this is almost entirely about the court of public opinion so even an apparently failed legal challenge might reveal such damaging information or provoke such extreme attempts at a cover-up as to prove the anti-Cross thesis for all practical purposes.

  • Andrew Ingram

    Craig is being portrayed as being on the loony fringe for shining a light on the Forces of Reaction and their underhand methods.

  • Caratacus

    Why am I reminded of poor old Winston Smith beavering away in the Ministry of Truth? This blatant manipulation of information by the Unspeakable Ones is disgusting – and entirely predictable.

    • lysias

      Orwell was writing about his own experiences working two years in the wartime BBC. He was writing and producing programs for the India Service.

      • Charles Bostock

        He was writing about that but of course not only that. There were other, far more important influences, such as the policies, methods and practices of the then Soviet Union. As regards knowledge of these,, Orwell had the benefit of his experiences in Spain as well as friendship with a number of former Communists (eg Arthur Koestler) who had been in the belly of the beast so to speak.

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    I must say that I find this this mania about what Wikipedia posts about you and your wife baffling. It has reduced my work to what I have posted about the Palme assassination apparently by Anglo-American covert government. dismissing it without any explanation among other theories as the least likely on record.

    • J

      Tip of the berg.

      $21 trillion (or $133 million per hour for eighteen years) is missing from the pentagon budget. That buys a lot of covert destabilisation, a lot of ‘humanitarian’ war, and as much astroturf as anyone could hope to lay. It could also have averted global warming, alleviated poverty, launched a new in era in space exploration and whatever the hell else one could wish to create or invest in for each and everyone. But that isn’t the game.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    You missed at least one freelance journalist: Padraig Reidy, editor of that well known reliable source “Little Atoms” magazine. Quick to remove obscure sources as unreliable when they do not support his favoured narrative, Philip Cross is so eager to cite Reidy’s attack on Professor Piers Robinson that he does so even though the article is apparently not available on line (see references).

    I would not be at all surprised if Philip Cross was the go-to Wikipedia guy for all these journalists who are either too busy or too lazy to edit Wikipedia themselves. If they pay him for it, that is against Wikipedia rules. J

    • craig Post author

      I did indeed spot him, but decided he couldn’t be categorised as MSM. But I cannot tell you how appalled I was that this fourth rate Establishment toady is Chairman of Judges of the Paul Foot Awards! Possibly even more astonishing than Murdoch hack Aaronovitch being chairman of Index on Censorship.

      • Pouncing Nick

        I was disgusted to learn that aaronovitch wrote the foreword on a recent edition of the communist manifesto which I purchased.

  • Resident Dissident

    Oh dear those who support the “ersatz” left supporters of Putin, Assange, Assad, Saddam, Maduro, the Kim Dynasty, The Chinese Communist kleptocrats, Lenin, the Castros, Stalin, Hamas, Iranian clerical headcases, Hezbollah et al (yes they have been supported in this forum from time to time – are all getting a little obsessed when the liberal left organises against them. What a shame!

    • Trowbridge H. Ford

      It won’t work dismissing the left because it SOMETIMES supports a list of alleged leftists! They can be made out to be right wingers by citing their support on occasion of the Reaganites and Thatcherites. You are just a cherry picking loon.

    • Charles Bostock

      Yes, Resident Dissident – they can hand it out but they can’t take it, can they. The mark of the intolerant bully-boy throughout the ages!

      • bj

        I thought you were going to ask him if ‘Resident Dissident’ is his real name.

      • Jo Dominich

        A lot like Tory Party reactions to negative news about them isn’t it Charles? House of Lords not doing what they say? Let’s change it; And so on and so forth

    • Dan

      Why would the left, ersatz or otherwise, support a hard right authoritarian like Putin? That’s the major flaw in the ‘Corbyn Is Putin’s Stooge’ smear which only the hard-of-thinking fall for.

    • Squeeth

      “Ooh-aah, Hezbollah!” Sing “Ooh-aah, Hezbollah!”

      What’s not to admire? They exploded the myth of zionist invincibility in 2006, they’ve nearly liberated all of south Lebanon and are killing US head-chopping, heart-eating rapers and slavers in Syria. The Washington barbarians are eating their livers over “Ooh-aah Hezbollah!’s success.

    • Njegos

      You left out three words:

      “are all getting a little obsessed when the liberal left organises A SMEAR CAMPAIGN against them.”

  • Resident Dissident

    The “ersatz” left have always been very keen on keeping their lists of traitors, and boy does this forum demonstrate this point. The left that cannot accept pluralism and freedom of speech is no left at all!

    • Trowbridge H. Ford

      While I have denounced unrevealed traitor MI5’s Peter Wright as a double agent who almost got us killed during the JFK plot, I have had a good word to say for Rick,Ames, Robert Hanssen, Alexander Litvinenko et al. who helped save us from similar cockups.

      I support free speech and pluralism in spades.

    • Dan

      I think you’re confusing pluralism and freedom of speech with mocking disagreement. Isn’t the freedom to disagree and to mock a freedom of speech issue too?

      • Charles Bostock

        Dissent with which I agree = freedom of speech

        Dissent with which I disagree = mocking disagreement.

    • Jo Dominich

      Resident Dissident, the left most certainly do accept pluralism and freedom of speech – that is what, on this blog, they are trying to protect and the erosion of which they are, quite rightly, shouting loudly about. There is nothing wrong with being Left wing and challenging the fascists that we call our Govt at the moment. This Govt cannot be said to be democratic, truthful or the supporters of free speech. They are eroding our right to that with the MSM as their propaganda machine. The bloggers on here are, 99%, genuinely interested in challenging lies and digging for truth. The establishment and Govt as it currently is is blatantly corrupt. The MSM couldn’t right impartial, truthful news to save their life. The Salisbury fabrication is a shameful disgrace to any Government the narrative of which deserves criticism and analysis in the most robust of terms. Same for their conduct over Windrush, for their bribing of the DUP to maintain power, for their significant failure to condemn of the massacre of innocent Palestinians by the IDF choosing instead to tow the line of their Paymasters, the Israel Govt, they deserve to be challenged about the monumental mess they are making of Brexit at the detriment of the nation, on BoJo’s appalling conduct as Foreign Secretary, which falls far below the standards of anyone let alone a Prime Minister, on their failure to admit the roll out of Universal Credit is a disaster and their unwillingness to change it. They deserve to be challenged on their decision to bomb Syria – an illegal act under international law. They deserved to be challenged on their proposed changes to the House of Lords because they do not like the fact they have amended various Brexit clauses to the fury of May. We are not a bunch of ‘Lefties’ that cannot accept pluralism or freedom of speech (you are talking about the Tories here) – we are seeking to preserve democratic values, speak truth to power, preserve freedom of speech against what is creeping Totalitarianism of a type that is Fascist, to call to account the liars, cheats and incompetents that comprise our current Govt. Need I say more. We speak for common human decency, political accountability, truth, prevention of creeping Fascism, discrediting the MSM that is no more now than a Propaganda machine for the Tories and so on and so forth. Some in this society has to stand up for decent values, morality, freedom and democracy. I don’t see the Right doing that.

  • Gary Weglarz

    To see how the tentacles of Wikpedia’s “limited hangout” approach works see their post for “Operation Gladio.” At one point in their post scholarly critiques of professor Daniel Ganser’s book on Operation Gladio, offering no actual evidence whatsoever, are trotted out as if they somehow discredit Ganser’s work. See Wikipedia entry as of today:

    “Peer Henrik Hansen, a scholar at Roskilde University, wrote two scathing criticisms of the book for the International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence and the Journal of Intelligence History, describing Ganser’s work as “a journalistic book with a big spoonful of conspiracy theories” that “fails to present proof of and an in-depth explanation of the claimed conspiracy between USA, CIA, NATO and the European countries.” (*note: having read Dr. Ganser’s book I quite disagree that we are dealing with either “conspiracy theories” or lack of “proof”).

    This entry is then used at the Amazon site in book reviews of Dr. Ganser’s work as “evidence” that it is bad history and one should not bother to read the book:

    ““Peer Henrik Hansen, a scholar at Roskilde University, wrote two scathing criticisms of the book for the International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence and the Journal of Intelligence History, describing Ganser’s work as “a journalistic book with a big spoonful of conspiracy theories” Amazon review #1

    “This has been widely panned by historians around the world for being bad history. I should have listened” Amazon review #2

    This is just a small example of how a propaganda operation like Wikipedia functions in interlocking ways with other establishment forces (Amazon book reviews in this case) to reinforce establishment narratives and to attack those who challenge such narratives.

    • Gary Weglarz

      Sorry for the either autocorrect or typing mistake listing “Wikileaks” whom I have tremendous respect for, rather than “Wikipedia” whom I do not in that last sentence of my post.

  • Resident Dissident

    Quite flattering to be called a loon by Trowbridge – perhaps he should realise that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

    • Trowbridge H. Ford

      Wonder if you work for Wikipedia. Little wonder that you don’t respond directly to my posts, and no geese are loons.

      • Resident Dissident

        The only reason I couldn’t respond directly is that the reply buttons didn’t work on my phone/PC for whatever reason – they now appear to be working on another machine. Read into that what you want – you usually do.

  • John Edwards

    I think the Sarah Brown is Sarah AB of the Harrys Place website rather than Gordon’s wife. Notice that the Alliance for Workers Liberty and one of their members Andrew Coates “Tendance Coatesy” are also represented. They can always be relied on to push the “left anti-Semitism” line among other things.

    • Disinterested Bystander

      I’ve spoken to Andrew Coates several times because we both live in the same town. I know he detests Muslims but I didn’t realise that he was a Zionist as well.

      Our local MP has recently supported Labour Friends of Israel which should please Coates no end but it looks like I’ll be voting for the Greens for the first time in my life at the next General Election.

    • George

      That Boyle show …..(jaw drops)

      Baddiel : “There’s no room for anti-Semites in the Labour party because it’s already full”.

      Joined by other hangers on from the “Have I Got News For You” faction i.e. the designated/ permissable/ showbiz opposition.

      But it is interesting that Baddiel refers to the notion of a powerful elite as an anti-Semitic notion. It is but a short step to saying that Marxism/ Socialism is anti-Semitic.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.