Has the Elite’s Slavish pro-Israel Agenda Finally Gone Too Far? 612

Hezbollah’s defeat of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in the July war of 2006 was heroic and an essential redress to the Middle East power balance. I supported Hezbollah’s entirely defensive action then and I continue to applaud it now. That, beyond any shadow of a doubt, makes me guilty ofn the criminal offence of “glorifying terrorism”, now that Sajid Javid has proscribed Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation. I am unrepentant and look forward to the prosecution.

A large majority of the public, and certainly almost everyone who remembers that 2006 invasion, would revolt from my being prosecuted on those grounds. The very absurdity of it is a sure measure that Sajid Javid has simply gone too far in naming Hezbollah – the legitimate political party representing in parliament the majority rural population in Southern Lebanon – as a terrorist organisation.

Together with the largely manufactured “Corbyn anti-semitism” row, Javid’s move is aimed at achieving in the UK the delegitimisation of political opposition to Israeli aggression and absorption of the occupied territories and the Golan Heights, in the way that has been achieved in the USA. However, there is a much better educated population in the UK and a great deal of popular awareness of decades of Israeli crimes. In fact, the continuing resilience of the Labour vote shows that at least over a third of the British population does not buy the “anti-semitism” tag applied to all those concerned at the continued plight of the Palestinians.

Hezbollah has never been implicated in any terrorist attack on the UK. Its military posture in Southern Lebanon vis a vis Israel is entirely defensive; it evolved as a military force in reaction to wave after wave of Israeli invasion of Lebanon, in which the Israeli “Defence” Force casually decimated Shia communities en route to attacking Palestinian refugee camps. Hezbollah has never invaded Israel. Hezbollas played an effective and laudable role in assisting the defeat of Isis and their Jihadist allies in Syria.

Oh look, I just “glorified terrorism” again.

Javid’s move is primarily aimed at pleasing Israel and looking to score political points over Jeremy Corbyn, whose past contacts with Hezbollah can now be deemed terrorist. But it is also a move to please the UK elite’s other paymaster, Mohammed Bin Salman, by further forwarding his attempt to delegitimise and to subjugate Arab Shia communities. Coupled with the irony of announcing DFID support of £200 million for Yemeni victims of our very own bombs and “military support”, this is a shameful week for British foreign policy.

I first became devoted to the Palestinian cause as a first year student at Dundee University, when I watched a film about Israeli destruction of Palestinian olive trees in the occupied territories, to devastate their economic base and force families to leave. That film made me cry.

It is a matter of despair that, 42 years later, this practice continues, and indeed has been ongoing for that entire time. I find this almost as heinous as the continuing killing and imprisonment of Palestinian children. I find it a useful exercise every morning to ask yourself this question:

How many children has the Israeli “Defence” Force killed since the MSM last reported one?


Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the articles, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations


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>

612 thoughts on “Has the Elite’s Slavish pro-Israel Agenda Finally Gone Too Far?

1 2 3 4 5
    • Paul Barbara

      @ Sharp Ears February 27, 2019 at 19:32
      Agree Watson is a bad ‘un.
      Now ‘The Lobby’ have their biggest scalp yet:
      ‘Labour suspends Chris Williamson over antisemitism remarks’:
      I totally agree with what Williamson said about ‘..Labour had been “too apologetic” about complaints of antisemitism…’
      Notice, it wasn’t “too apologetic” about antisemitism…’, as it has been shortened to at the beginning of the Guardian article – a very misleading rendition of what he had actually said. Par for the rotting corps of a once great newspaper.
      And again, I would like to bring folks attention to Shalomit Aloni’s admission in an interview with Ami Goodman:
      ‘..In a 2002 interview with American journalist Amy Goodman, Aloni said that charges of antisemitism are “a trick we use” to suppress criticism of Israel coming from within the United States, while for criticism coming from Europe “we bring up the Holocaust.”
      The whole anti-Semitism ploy is directed against Jeremy Corbyn, who is obviously seen by very powerful forces to be a very real threat to their plans for endless wars, ‘Austerity’ for the people and plundering Britain’s and every other country’s resources, making ever greater gaps between the mythical 1% and the rest.
      And it is all based on lies – no one is less racist than Jeremy Corbyn.

    • Dungroanin

      I’m going to quote in full a comment on the Grauns Politics Live blog made this evening before they shut comments.

      It deserves a thousand votes – pass it on.

      By ‘Toooom’ https://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/126359035
      ‘As a Lefty who only joined the Labour Party a couple of years ago, but has moved in Lefty circles for years as a trade unionist and shop steward, I find the anti-semitism debate confounding.

      I’ve simply never encountered it, it’s just not been an issue in my experience. While racism and Islamophobia have been hot topics, anti-semitism has always been associated with far right neo-nazi creeps.

      So this all came out of the blue to me, and while I might be way out of touch, it’s very hard to judge what’s really going on. For what it’s worth, I think there are different elements in play here.

      Presumably in a group of half a million members there will be bigots, nutters and creeps, including anti-semites. They need rooting out, nobody wants them in the Labour Party, any Party – well maybe UKIP.

      Then there’s a generally growing sensitivity about how bigotry can work without us necessarily noticing it, if we’re not familiar with particular ins and outs of being on the sharp end. It’s like awareness of ‘micro-aggressions’ and certain tropes, some people note how normalised language and particular behaviours can contain a subtext which only some people recognise.

      There’s the Israel/Palestinian issue, where Labour has long since sided with the Palestinians. And there are accusations about this being based in anti-semitism, or veering into it – hence all the kerfuffle about accepting this definition or that. And on the other side, a reluctance to be silenced on this issue by threats of being called anti-semitic.

      Then there’s a rump of MPs in the Labour Party who have never accepted the direction the party’s going in now, who have attempted coups, smeared Labour on all sorts of issues, and this is more ammunition.

      Then there’s the media who will be all over anything which discredits Labour.

      So my own view is that all of this is in play. And priority should be given to those raising the issue, they should be listened to, there should be greater awareness of the tropes involved, and thorough investigation should follow – not knee-jerk witch hunts. But there’s also an onus on people to stop shit-stirring for the sake of it, because using bigotry that way is just as nasty. And we need to be told what language is acceptable to use when discussing the Israeli government and its policies, because much criticism is legit and shouldn’t be silenced.’

      • Dennis Revell


        I’ll pass on the voting for it. It’s largely either trivially obvious veering towards Corbyn-like capitulatory rubbish.

        My take on Corbyn-The-Cowardsly-Capitulator-Too-Far:_

        [BEGIN fbook post @ JeremyCorbynMP]:

        I’m not suggesting that this video doesn’t have points to make, but it comes DANGEROUSLY close to conflating anti-Zionism, or my preferred modification to that: anti-ZioNAZIsm, with anti-semitism; when clearly one is anti-fascist, and the other is racist – diametric opposites of each other. I am not ONLY anti-Zionist, apart from not being religious myself, I am also in complete alignment with the sizeable organisation of religious Jews known as Neturei Karta, who are not only anti-Zionist, not only against the creation of the Zio-NAZI state of Israel in the first place, but also firmly in favour of its disestablishment.

        I’m not suggesting that this video doesn’t have points to make, but Corbyn-The-Cowardly-Compromiser-Too-Far in having felt the need to post it, is demonstrative of just another in a long line of in the end self-destructive capitulations – as the Sputnik article attached alludes to, firstly to the long-line of Blairite Iraq War Voting War-Criminal members of the Shadow Cabinet he inherited – of which Jeremy Corbyn fired NOT a one (until later over the leadership backstabbing – yet still over 50% of his Shadow Cabinet who were MPs in 2003 voted FOR the Iraq War-Crime), then getting close to the War-Criminal thing himself in outrageously allowing a free vote on bombing Syria, and now appeasing the fascistic lobbyists and other supporters of the Zio-NAZI state of Israel.

        Shame on you.




        :[END fbook post @ JeremyCorbynMP]

      • Clark

        Dungroanin, thanks.

        “…how bigotry can work without us necessarily noticing it, if we’re not familiar with particular ins and outs of being on the sharp end. It’s like awareness of ‘micro-aggressions’ and certain tropes, some people note how normalised language and particular behaviours can contain a subtext which only some people recognise.”

        THIS is exactly what I’ve been going on about. I’ve been on the sharp end, facing conspiracy theorists, and that’s why I recognise it. When it’s anti-Semitic, which it often is, it understandably scares the Jewish population, and that gives the false smears credibility they would otherwise lack.

        We need to root out the rubbish, or its contamination leaves us open to criticism.

        • Dungroanin

          Clark, I agree that the majority of the British public, who like most people don’t travel far from their ‘ancestral’ villages/towns and city boroughs, have parochial views of the (each~) ‘other’. Petty prejudices between neighbouring tribes go back a long way and are evident at most football games with their uproarious songs of the shortcomings of the opponents.

          Stereotypes have always abounded. The jewish landlord, the indian cornershop,the Chinese takeaway, Etc.
          Often the banter when put to rhe test is met with ‘i have a friend who is (nationality,religion, etc) , but he/she is not like the rest of them!

          If we start taking that over seriously and telling people what they should think, rather than letting them evolve, it becomes a very slippery incline – who decides? Who elects who decides? – it ends up running into the brick wall, under all that vibrant local bantz, the traditional common british character who will not be made a fool of, or though stupid.

          As an example you try telling my Hackney born and bred irish catholic lifelong fan of Spurs that him and all the tens of thousands of fans drop their proud and joyous ‘Yid army’ anthem!

          Anyway as I have posted below the David Hearst Middle East Eye article, clearly maps the AS stategum and ‘who’ is telling us what to think and why.

          • Clark

            I agree that people have to change their attitudes for themselves. But we shouldn’t just let be. First we should expose it; the conspiracist mindset is that any non-subscribers are ‘sheeple’, so they make their little digs thinking that everyone else is too ‘brainwashed’ to notice. There are two examples on this page. I challenged them. Then we should point out the company they’re keeping; hopefully that will get them thinking (at last):


          • Clark

            And no one elects; we all decide. But we must decide and speak back. The convention until now has been to ignore and scroll past, and that’s why it has got as popular as it has.

          • Rowan Berkeley

            Clark, you are a provocateur in league with the moderators. This set-up is hypocritical, but that’s liberals for you.

          • Clark

            Rowan, I was a moderator here, and your personal accusations breaks the most important moderation rule. Maybe it’s you that is on the wrong site, and if you’re in the Labour party, maybe you should either alter your opinions, or leave.

          • Clark

            Rowan, I notice you’re no longer linking to your own site. I suppose the vicious invective against Jews could be the reason for that.

        • Dungroanin

          Clark – I mostly find that people are not as trenchant as the banter they employ.

          I also find that by over reacting to their petty prejudices they become defensive – right or wrong!

          The very few overtly naively prejudiced I have come across in my life I have learnt to try and communicate with by attempting to understand their fervent belief.

          It is an effort worth making – and is almost always sucessful (only fails with aristo and nuvo-rich poseurs) – by putting yourself in their shoes and understanding why they think what they do. And most importantly, AGREEING with them. (“I’d think exactly the same if I had only your experience”)

          Only when people believe that you truly understand them and are still happy to aquaint with them and not judge them on the single issue, do they relax enough to stop being defensive.

          Often they talk and think themselves out of their petty prejudice from that point. I just have to agree and confirm their insight, and its over, just like that, then back to some bantz for funs sake!

          It is of course different here because we don’t really know who each other is. There aren’t just innocent prejudices but actual mind control, narrative control, consent manufacture – gaslighting. This is a battlefield in that war. I take sides here and fight and resist. One day I may be forced to take them on in the streets if they insist. I’ll go alone but have no doubt that many others who feel the same will also turn up. That is what the status quo always fears, the people!

          That is why there is no GJ coverage from France – never mind further afield.

          That is why they invent weapons such as AS to stop Labour with the ABC bs.

          That is why their media whores spew bile like some possessed Blair child from the Exorcist!
          As the Groans Harris does today as he dons his latest hair-shirt (he has a closet full) pushing the ‘Labour is the AS choice of political party’ lie, in the conspiracy to split the Labour vote with the funny tingers.

          Fortunately Steve Bell on his Belltoons site takes us back to the future with the formation of SDP1 – 1982!

          Let it be a warning to all tempted by the same old sirens that sold out the hard won post war social democracy and public services to the neocon aristos.

          • Clark

            Dungroanin, thanks again. Yes, I sort of know; it’s a matter of negotiating people’s egos; leading without provoking resistance. On the other hand, someone has to spell out the problem and point out the fallacies and myths.

            Too many of us have been too soft on such matters for too long, and this is what has permitted these attitudes to become associated with the anti-neocon, anti-neoliberal, anti-war camp. On the 9/11 thread, occasionally someone would post or link to anti-Semitic material, but if I pointed this out, a chorus of voices would opine that false accusations of anti-Semitism were routinely used to smear the 9/11 Truth movement. Sigh; it was right there on the page, and yet still they would not disown it, still they would claim it was merely a smear. Similarly with anti-science; how can we expect any support from anyone skilled in any hard science when a sizeable minority are insisting that blatant contradictions of science have to be not merely tolerated, but treated as valid? How much credibility can the anti-war movement garner if we are also an anti-science camp, and turn a blind eye when some of our number link or post anti-Semitic material?

  • J

    From a thoughtful article by Jonathan Cook here:

    Were Macron and the IHRA right – that anti-Zionism and antisemitism are all but indistinguishable – then we would have to accept some very uncomfortable conclusions.

    One would be that Palestinians should be uniformly damned as antisemites for demanding their own right to self-determination. Or put another way, it would be impossible for Palestinians to demand the same rights as Jews in their homeland without that being declared as racist. Welcome to Alice Through the Looking Glass.

    Another conclusion would be that a significant proportion of Jews around the world, those who oppose Israel’s self-definition as a Jewish state, are also antisemites, infected with an irrational hatred of their fellow Jews. This is the “self-hating Jew” trope Israel has long relied on to discredit criticism from Jews.

    On this view, those Jews who want Palestinians to enjoy the same rights as Jews claim for themselves in the Middle East are racist – and not only that, but racist against themselves.

    And if Macron’s efforts to criminalise anti-Zionism prove fruitful, it would mean that Palestinians and Jews could be punished – maybe even jailed – for demanding equality between Palestinians and Jews in Israel.

    Preposterous as this reasoning sounds when laid out so bluntly, similar approaches to dealing with antisemitism are being readily accepted by actors across Europe and the US.

    The extent of this insanity was evident in the decision of Germany’s Bank für Sozialwirtschaft, or Bank for Social Economy, to shut the account of a Jewish anti-Zionist group, Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East, over its support for a boycott of Israel. It was the first time a German bank had closed down a Jewish organization’s account since the Nazis were in power.

    The bank took the action after complaints that Jewish Voice was antisemitic by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a group that masks its fervent support for Israel behind campaigning for Jewish rights.

  • Dave

    The problem is, clearly vexatious complaints are being treated at face value as legitimate complaints. This happens because in a (futile) attempt to placate those making the complaints the rule book has been changed to suspend members pending an investigation, costing thousands, if a complaint is made against them and this change is a litigants charter that is being used to sink the Labour Party.

    Its becoming beyond ridiculous, but the rules are the rules, and if they’re changed to stop the sabotage, will be deemed more evidence of “anti-Semitism”. The Lobby are overplaying their hand, but they know that and don’t care, because they think its working, and presumably it is if leading members and MPs are being suspended on a vexatious complaint.

    The rules will have to be changed to allow an pre-examination of a complaint without an automatic suspension, as must have happened (or were the rules ignored?) when one of the chief protagonists made a complaint against JC himself for “anti-Semitism”, which sensibly wasn’t followed by the suspension of JC pending an investigation.

    I appreciate such a move would be better made when the membership are heartily sick of the witch hunt, a feeling illustrated by the applause to CW speech, but which in turn attracts the charge of “anti-Semitism” against those applauding.

    So the question becomes, continue turning the another cheek or wait until a time when a fight back can be won without making matters worse.

  • Sharp Ears

    Yesterday’s PMQs.

    James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)
    Q6. Yesterday, we heard of the horrific antisemitic attack on an elderly Jewish gentleman in north London. Tonight, right hon. and hon. colleagues from across the House will be breaking bread with the Community Security Trust, a charity that exists to defend against antisemitic violence. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we can never be blasé about antisemitism, we can never be tolerant of antisemitism, and the Labour party can never be too apologetic about antisemitism? [909477]

    The Prime Minister
    First, I join my hon. Friend in recognising the work done by the Community Security Trust. It does such important and valuable work throughout the year, and I am pleased that the Government are able to support the work it does. He is absolutely right to say that one can never be too apologetic about antisemitism, but I think what we have heard sums up Labour under ​its leader: it loses the hon. Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Luciana Berger) and it keeps the hon. Member for Derby North (Chris Williamson). That tells us all we need to know about the Labour leadership: they are present but not involved. Perhaps if the Labour leader actually wants to take action against racism, he would suspend the hon. Member for Derby North.

    Vile little exchange there between the PM and the Dep Chairman of the partei since January last year.


    Cleverley is a member of the CFoI. He visited Israel with them in 2015.

    I read that the attack on the elderly Jewish gentleman referred to was carried out by a shaven headed neo-Nazi male so nothing to do with Chris Williamson/Labour.

    • IrishU

      Where did you read about the attack on the elderly Jewsih man?

      Perhaps you could copy and paste the link? Was it the BBC, ITV, a newspaper or perhaps it was another Twitter account?

    • Tom Welsh

      “Yesterday, we heard of the horrific antisemitic attack on an elderly Jewish gentleman in north London”.

      As we all know, elderly gentlemen (and ladies) who are not Jewish have never, ever been attacked in north London.

      • Deb O'Nair

        It was a deplorable act of mindless violence witnessed by members of the public in Jeremy Corbyn’s constituency.

        The assailant first asked the victim if he was Jewish which seems bizarre, i.e. did the assailant stop other members of the public enquiring if they were Jewish, did the assailant just happen by chance to pick on someone who was Jewish or was the victim already known to be Jewish by the assailant? The assailant seems to be deliberately telegraphing that he was committing an antisemitic hate crime in a very busy location in front of members of the public.

        It’s reported that a suspect was detained under the MHA, why not simply detain him using the law that he has contravened, as that is what he is being charged with? Also a witness used the word “manic” in describing the manner in which the assailant ran away, which happens to be a medically correct term for a mental health disorder.


        • Borncynical

          “…in Jeremy Corbyn’s constituency” “…first asked the victim if he was Jewish”.
          Hmmm. Whilst I do not for one minute deny these are the facts, and I do not condone physical attacks on anybody, I can’t help but think this has the hallmarks of a purposefully contrived incident. I should stress that I am not suggesting that the elderly man may have been complicit.

      • Franc

        Well said Tom.
        And whilst I’m here, the little reported, Independent Commission of Inquiry report, set up last year by the UN’s human rights council, accuses the ‘ Defence ‘ force of killing demonstrators ” who were not posing an imminent threat “….
        Israel, of course, dismissed the report as ” hostile, mendacious and slanted”
        If bringing this type of information to the general public’s attention constitutes anti-Semitism, all I can say is bring it on!

  • Laguerre

    Lovely exposé in Private Eye current issue 1490 of three pages on the Israeli national, Ehud Sheleg, who’s treasurer of the (British) Tory party. Donor of £2 million to the Tories. So where does that money really come from?

  • CraigMurrayForPM

    If Sajid Javid’s forthcoming bid for the leadership of the Tory party fails, can we expect him to jump ship and join the British Zionist Party – or whatever the ‘Independent’ cabal ultimately decide to call themselves?

  • ronan1882

    Obviously an effort to smear Corbyn as an associate of and apologist for terrorists, perhaps with an early election in mind. Strange, because the tactic did not stop him achieving one of Labour’s largest ever votes last time.

    • Dave

      I don’t think it damages the Labour vote who, like most people, treat it as background noise, but it matters internally and depends on whether the centre ground, who worry about other things, sides with the Israeli’s or Palestinians, because apart from that the mantra for the many not the few is popular and only threatened by a “disunited party image”.

  • Dungroanin

    Steve Bell managed to get his prescient ‘If’ cartoon strip submitted and published in a timely manner this week – was La Whiner still on half term?

    It hasn’t half annoyed the Hasbarists commentators there – even as gawd knows how many true social democrats have been silenced btl by the Grauns secret police – there are ever more indy minded readers who are not buying the AS BS.

    There will be a price to pay after the election.

    Why hasn’t the Obsessive Groan gone behind a paywall? Except to not lose its feeble access to the social democratic decision making readers ?

    I’m ready to invest in a new indy daily news multiplatform publisher

    • Dungroanin

      I just posted this at Off-G, it is apt to this article too (enjoy SE – the counter attack is gathering pace!)

      David Hearst is the Editor in Chief of the Middle East Eye. He left The Guardian as its chief foreign leader writer…
      He has written from first hand experience, it’s a must read!
      Maybe Owen Jones can be asked to comment on Hearsts’ latest article on the AS ABC campaign?
      “Milne went on the MEMO trip as a columnist. When pressure grew on The Guardian to acknowledge paid trips, Milne discovered that the British pro-Israel lobby, BICOM, had arranged over 50 visits for Guardian journalists to Israel in recent years without any paid visit being acknowledged by the newspaper.
      Many Guardian journalists had been on BICOM freebies more than once. I was one of them.”
      And the protagonists of the campaign:
      “These interventions by yesterday’s spooks are not casual, nor are they ill-timed. They are a direct attempt to stop a popular and democratically elected leader from becoming prime minister.
      They are, therefore, actively, consciously and cynically subverting British democracy. You may like Corbyn or loathe him. That’s up to you, but you may never be allowed to express your opinion at the ballot box, if these guys have their way. And how would you feel if the tactics used on Corbyn were used on you? What would you do if your character had been assassinated repeatedly and you had no means of redress? Is this the way you want politics conducted in ” the mother of all parliaments”?”
      Who else does Hearst think is ultimately to blame for the AS campaign!
      “The problem lies with the Board of Deputies which claims to speak for all Jews in Britain. These are the leaders who have appointed themselves judge, jury and hangman in each and every allegation of anti-Semitism.”

  • Ciaran

    I cannot but think the use of the term ‘antisemitic’ is confusing the issue. A quick dictionary search of the word Semite should make this apparent. If an Arab is accused of being anti-semetic then by definition he/she must hate themselfs.Would the term anti-Zionist not be more apt?

      • ciaran

        It certainly is Clark, and that is why I think it affects the discussion/debate/blog. Let’s call a spade a spade. If you have a problem with people who speak an arabaic language you may well be antisemitic. If you have a problem with the Jewish faith you may well be anti Jewish. If you have a problem with the creation or expansion of the state of Israel you might be anti zionist. However if you feel that Israel doesn’t treat the Palestinians well it does not make you an antisemite. It is a term that is thrown about to easily. A convention of language, yes. An abuse of language,perhaps well there are worse things happening in the world, I suppose.

        • Clark

          Jews are the victims of anti-Semitism. Out of respect I use the term that the victims do.

          Go on, go ahead and misinterpret what I wrote; I’m just waiting for it…

          • ciaran

            Clark I am not picking a fight. you have explained your position and I respect that and your reason to do so. If you believe it is anti-Semitism you call it anti-semitism if I think it is anti-Zionism I hope you respect that equally.

          • Clark

            I’m sorry, I may get over-sensitive. But below you have endorsed Paul Barbara’s comment about “Jon Lansman, who is Jewish”, as if that implies automatic guilt. You see what you’re encouraging here? Anyone can invent nonsense, but if a Jew say’s it’s false, then that Jew is automatically a liar, a traitor. The “deceptive Jew” smear is straight out of the Nazi propaganda manual.

            People aren’t thinking this through. How do accusations, smears, of anti-Semitism work? Only by leveraging upon the fears of the Jewish community, who are not, thank God, irrelevant, isolated in some ghetto, but are an integral part of our society, connecting daily with their friends, neighbours and colleagues. The anti-Corbyn spokespeople who make the false accusations are manipulative, but everyone who harbours anti-Semitic bias are handing them credibility.

            We fix this by fixing ourselves.

          • Clark

            Dave, by definition. By widespread convention, bias against Jews is called anti-Semitism. Dictionary definitions derive from widespread convention, ie. “language is defined by its usage”.

            In the long run, enough people can change common usage, but right now is not a wise time to attempt that.

  • Paul Barbara

    ‘Anti-Semitism and Labour: Jeremy Corbyn must stop apologising and start fighting back’:
    ‘The argument must be re-framed to reflect what it is actually about: not anti-Semitism, but Palestine. Corbyn mustn’t surrender’.
    ‘…The multi-faceted Palestinian tragedy, caused by deliberate Israeli policy, should have been the centre of debate in Britain. But attention is focussed instead on a witch-hunt of allegedly antisemitic Labour Party members and their leader…’
    Article is from last August, but is still highly relevant.

  • Ciaran

    Craig I should have began my previous post by expressing my appreciation for yet another great post and also extending it to many of the other excellent commentators who regularly post here. Charles bostick I feel you would be much more appreciated on a sado masochistic forum, freedom of speech is indeed a wonderful thing.

    • Dave

      Its not about rational debate, the “anti-Semitic” canard is used by the Zionists against the “Left”, as they previously used “Racist” against the “Right”. Its ridiculously over the top for a reason, its the Zionists making clear you are either with them or against. So everyone is faced with the choice of agreeing all critics of Israel, including Corbyn, are “anti-Semitic”, or being dammed themselves as “anti-Semitic” by the Zionists, which of course carries a serious health warning.

  • Paul Barbara

    I was shocked when Jon Lansman came out and said there was a widespread anti-Semitism problem in the Labour Party (‘Labour has widespread problem with antisemitism – Momentum founder’:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/25/labour-has-widespread-problem-with-antisemitism-momentum-founder-jon-lansman ).
    And he cracked on about ‘conspiracy theories’ – this really got me wondering about who he was working for:
    ‘…He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the party was not institutionally antisemitic, and instead attributed the problem to “conspiracy theorists” who had joined the party since 2015.
    “The party trebled in size,” said Lansman, who is Jewish. “Amongst those are members attracted towards conspiracy theories.” He added: “The Tory party is a smaller party and an elderly party and the role of social media in fomenting and spreading some of the poison is therefore more of a problem in the Labour party……”
    Then I got an email from Momentum which I have been a member of for three years, which so sickened me I decided to leave Momentum , and have stopped my subscription.
    The email contained the following short video: https://www.facebook.com/PeoplesMomentum/videos/822727831414432/?v=822727831414432
    Ridiculing ‘Conspiracy Theories’ and whitewashing the most voracious Banksters in the world (‘All wars are Banksters’ wars’) is just total BS, and I hope the Momentum ‘troops on the ground’ aren’t all swayed by the whitewashing of Banksters and demonising of ‘Conspiracy Theories’, though far too many ‘Left’ Sheeple have already swallowed the StW and other anti-‘Conspiracy Theory’ BS.
    I had thought Momentum was doing a great job, but when they join the AS smearing plot, and treat it as a reality rather than a ‘trick’, as Aloni Shalomit admitted, then I can no longer support them.

    • J

      It’s a common tactic. Pure strawman caricature. To discredit a serious argument entirely it helps to constrain parameters for discussion. Which those intent on leaving their crimes and actual activities beyond the scope of the discourse frequently manage to do. By reinforcing imaginary categories it is a simple task to evaluate any resulting dissent as false by inclusion in said category, then highlighting only the exceptions, the loudest, most deviant or illogical.

    • Clark

      Paul Barbara wrote:

      “And he cracked on about ‘conspiracy theories’ – this really got me wondering about who he was working for:
      ‘…He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the party was not institutionally antisemitic, and instead attributed the problem to “conspiracy theorists” who had joined the party since 2015. “The party trebled in size,” said Lansman, who is Jewish…”

      TYPICAL anti-Semitic conspiracy theory nonsense, EXACTLY what I got for years on the 9/11 thread.

      I DO PHYSICS. Did you hear that? I DO PHYSICS.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Clark March 2, 2019 at 15:37

        Not nearly enough people are aware of the murderous War Criminal crimes of the Banksters in their funding of wars and revolutions, often funding both sides.
        If you buy the BS whitewashing of the Rockefellers and their linked Banksters, try reading ‘Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War’ & ‘Prolonging the Agony: How the Anglo-American Establishment Deliberately Extended WWI by Three-And-A-Half Years’, both by Jim MacGregor and Gerry Docherty. There are enough real War Criminal ‘conspiracies’ in those two books to shock anyone into the reality of conspiracies, and of Banksters’ vile crimes.
        I’m pretty sure you won’t bother, but if you do read them, you will get a really good idea of the reality of the NWO/One World Gulag that has been planned, and is not a fantasy, unfortunately.
        Most, well over half, of my friends and acquaintances are Jewish, and know where I stand re Israel, and I am part Jewish, so your classifying me as anti-Semitic is on a par with your knowing more about engineering and architecture than over three thousand QUALIFIED A&E’s.

        • Clark

          Jim MacGregor – James MacGregor Burns – was a notable historian and Gerry Docherty is a scholar; their book builds upon The Anglo-American Establishment by notable historian Carroll Quigley, who documented actual, extremely influential secret societies associated with Cecil Rhodes and Alfred Milner, so I expect that Hidden History is a serious and well researched book.

          However, such work has a history of being over-interpreted by conspiracy theorists such as yourself. Quigley himself wrote:

          “They thought Dr. Carroll Quigley proved everything. For example, they constantly misquote me to this effect: that Lord Milner (the dominant trustee of the Cecil Rhodes Trust and a heavy in the Round Table Group) helped finance the Bolsheviks. I have been through the greater part of Milner’s private papers and have found no evidence to support that. Further, None Dare Call It Conspiracy insists that international bankers were a single bloc, were all powerful and remain so today. I, on the contrary, stated in my book that they were much divided, often fought among themselves, had great influence but not control of political life and were sharply reduced in power about 1931-1940, when they became less influential than monopolized industry”

          ..so I very much doubt that Hidden History supports “the reality of the NWO/One World Gulag that has been planned”, and given your fevered imagination of international science conspiracies, and your gullibility towards utter charlatans like Dane Wigington who works with a CIA man and openly bamboozles his audience with simple, easily understood stroboscopic effects, I see no reason to take this latest warning seriously.

          I have a copy of The Anglo-American Establishment which I got about a third of the way through in 2013/14. I hope to finish it when I can.

          Without doubt you entertain anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. When at the High Court your behaviour was obsessive and selfish in the extreme. With the the legal team suing Craig within earshot just up the corridor, you insisted upon interrogating me about a link I had criticised as being an unreliable source, because it referred to an overheard conversation in Hebrew before 9/11. As you later found out, I had already found the original of the article and linked to it. It was impossible to discuss such matters in that environment but you seemed to think that in me you had identified a “Zionist agent”, and this somehow outweighed the importance of the legal threat against Craig. You should be ashamed of yourself.

          What is anti-Semitic is that I openly discussed all the evidence and presented my reasoning on the 9/11 thread – absolutely in public – and therefore you could have had it checked by anyone you like. But you trust no one on the basis of their expertise. Instead you asked me if I was Jewish, so this is clearly the primary basis upon which you make your judgements.

          The “three thousand QUALIFIED A&E’s” have already exposed their incompetence by failing to declare their rejection of Chandler’s “Downward Acceleration”, which is provably wrong. This is NOT an opinion; it is a scientific FACT. Instead they continue to link to it. I’m an amateur, but my position aligns more closely with the 90,000+ AIA, the 150,000+ ASCE, every professional engineering body, and every university engineering department in the world. Oh, and Craig, site owner, whom I protected from association with anti-Semitic conspiracy theories on a very critical day.

          What’s your theory about AIDS, pray tell? Obviously you’re technically competent to make an assessment. I bet you refuse to answer.

      • George

        “Why lace two buildings full of explosives to make them do exactly what they would have done without it?”

        The only way you could verify that statement is by building two sets of twin towers, lacing one set with explosives and then subjecting them to two sets of identical plane attacks. Can’t see it happening.

        • Clark

          That is not so. It is a simple matter to calculate that, should structural failure occur by any means at the damaged zone, bringing the vertical columns out of alignment, the lower section would be unable to resist the weight of the top section and accelerating collapse would ensue. No explosives necessary, and Chandler’s theory is provably wrong. I covered all this extensively (and suffered much verbal abuse for my trouble) on the 9/11 thread, which is still there; get someone competent in physics to check it with you.

          Twin Tower demolition theory is an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory because it is the sole foundation of the accusation that the collapses were an insurance fraud by Larry Silverstein, against whom no other evidence exists.

        • George

          The notion that the twin towers controlled demolition was an insurance fraud is a bizarre case of misdirection, to say the least. The notion is that the towers would not have fallen without controlled demolition and the fall was necessary to create the biggest imaginable spectacle to ensure the “war on terror”. (If there was an insurance fraud too then that would have been an added advantage.) I fail to see what any of this has to do with anti-Semitism. (Although the accusation of anti-Semitism is an excellent means of scaring people away from these lines of thought.)

        • Clark

          I do not believe that you have managed to miss that accusation, nor the numerous anti-Semitic comments under, for instance, the many YouTube videos promoting this nonsense. Please tell me what you think of Chomsky’s assessment of this conspiracy theory:


          It’s a conspiracy theory because 98% of the global engineering / physics community, including every such professional body and university department would have to be helping to cover it up. How do you explain that?

        • Clark

          I really don’t believe you never heard the term “Lucky Larry”.

          But then most conspiracy theorists are not honest; honesty with one’s self is incompatible with the theories.

        • George

          Chomsky does his usual fudging around. He admits there ARE conspiracies and sometimes something hidden beneath the surface but this kind of talk “usually” turns out to be “a pathology”. He blathers a bit about “the normal workings of institutional structures” (what is “normal” and which structures?). We then get a complete misdirection about JFK who apparently wasn’t a “nice guy” at all – as if this has any bearing on whether a conspiracy killed him. There’s a bit about how conspiracy theories are good if they’re right and bad if not. Well DUH! And so on…

          But then Chomsky also said this about 9/11:

          “And even if it were true, which is extremely unlikely, who cares? It doesn’t have any significance. It’s a little bit like the huge energy that’s put out on trying to figure out who killed John Kennedy. Who knows? Who cares? Plenty of people get killed all the time, why does it matter that one of them happened to be John F. Kennedy?”

          Let’s just consider that for a moment. Chomsky is considering the possibility – however remote in his view – that 9/11 may indeed have been an inside job. And he’s saying it doesn’t have any significance that the US government carried out an attack on its own population! It doesn’t have any significance that the “war on terror” was launched on the basis of a lie!

          I have not “managed to miss” the accusation about Silverstein? I couldn’t care less about it. I see it as a peripheral issue. I have not managed to miss “the numerous anti-Semitic comments …”? Au contraire! I have missed all of them.

          “It’s a conspiracy theory” because there had to have been a conspiracy. Some group or other had to be behind 9/11.

        • Clark

          George, Mark Lewis, the lawyer who would have conducted the libel suit against Craig, is Jewish, and he had this to say:

          “If these people would have rational debate, I would do that [instead], but they are nutters who have conspiratorial theories and I will never change their outlook.”

          So imagine I’m Jewish, one of the people you want peace with, for the Palestinians. One of the people you’re trying to convince that you’re not anti-Semitic, so they won’t be worried about a Labour government.

          Now you may have turned a blind eye (bit of a bad start), but I have seen many references to “Lucky Larry” and his alleged insurance fraud, and the anti-Semitic comments under Twin Tower demolition videos on YouTube. On the face of it, Larry Silverstein looks like a victim of 9/11, right? His entire complex of buildings was destroyed, and probably people he had worked with regularly were killed. And like me, Silverstein is Jewish. And the experts say the buildings collapsed like you’d expect they would if they weren’t rigged throughout with explosives. So there’s no obvious reason to expect explosives, and there’s this awful premeditated-mass-murder-for-money allegation against a fellow Jew, that would take a highly elaborate, highly secret conspiracy to achieve, and all these horrible anti-Semitic comments about it on the Internet.

          OK, So now see if you can prove Lewis wrong and convince me that you’re not anti-Semitic, and that you will engage in rational debate. What’s your reason for suspecting “controlled demolition”?

  • Dennis Revell


    Just posted at Corbyn’s facebook page; of course, no gurantee as to longevity:-


    I’m not suggesting that this video doesn’t have points to make, but it comes DANGEROUSLY close to conflating anti-Zionism, or my preferred modification to that: anti-ZioNAZIsm, with anti-semitism; when clearly one is anti-fascist, and the other is racist – diametric opposites of each other. I am not ONLY anti-Zionist, apart from not being religious myself, I am also in complete alignment with the sizeable organisation of religious Jews known as Neturei Karta, who are not only anti-Zionist, not only against the creation of the Zio-NAZI state of Israel in the first place, but also firmly in favour of its disestablishment.

    I’m not suggesting that this video doesn’t have points to make, but Corbyn-The-Cowardly-Compromiser-Too-Far in having felt the need to post it, is demonstrative of just another in a long line of in the end self-destructive capitulations – as the Sputnik article attached alludes to, firstly to the long-line of Blairite Iraq War Voting War-Criminal members of the Shadow Cabinet he inherited – of which Jeremy Corbyn fired NOT a one (until later over the leadership backstabbing – yet still over 50% of his Shadow Cabinet who were MPs in 2003 voted FOR the Iraq War-Crime), then getting close to the War-Criminal thing himself in outrageously allowing a free vote on bombing Syria, and now appeasing the fascistic lobbyists and other supporters of the Zio-NAZI state of Israel.

    Shame on you.




  • Wikikettle

    I always look forward to listening to Talk Radio (DAB), on Friday evenings at 1900 to George Galloway. He powerfully says what I think and feel. I also watch ‘The Duran’ on You Tube. Tom Watson, Hillary Benn and rest will not succeed in removing Jeremy from the leadership. They have however succeeded in the past and will again in the future prevent any chance of a Real Labour government. Just as the Gang of Four who formed the SDP. The forces lined up against Jeremy and Real Labour seem to be overwhelming. Chris Williamson’s suspension has been the last straw for me. Its now or never Jeremy, call an Emergency Conference, kick out Tom Watson and his like and the membership will double again !!

    • Wikikettle

      Its also very ‘strange’ why we never see John McDonnell sitting next to his leader on front bench……

  • Paul Barbara

    ‘A concerned citizen phones up Tom Watson and exposes his anti-Corbyn sabotage live on air’:
    The above article also includes this petition:
    ‘Tom Watson Must Go Now #ResignWatson’: https://www.change.org/p/labour-nec-tom-watson-must-go-now-resignwatson
    ‘..“Killing the Labour party from within”
    Lee from Swindon took Watson to task about constantly briefing the media against his own party:
    ‘You are, right now, sitting… on a revolution that could transform this country for the better. And people like yourself all you do is spend your time killing the Labour party from within. How dare you?’
    Couldn’t agree more. Watson is not for ‘The many’, but for Numero Uno and his lucrative benefactors.

    • Paul Barbara

      This Change Petition looks like they are massaging the figures, as usual. I just signed, but it did not register, and it shows the last signer as signing 2 hours ago.
      At present the number is 4,680. Before you sign, leave the site for about five minutes, to let the number settle, then sign and see if it registers.

  • Garth Carthy

    I notice that Tony Blair is billed to perform (perform being the operative word) on the Andrew Marr show this morning.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Garth Carthy March 3, 2019 at 09:46
      I thought he said he was due to perform in the the Pinocchio Panto last Christmas, but he lied again.

      • Garth Carthy

        But according to Toxic Tony: “most people think I’m a pretty straight sort of guy”.

  • Garth Carthy

    Angela Epstein, supposedly an experienced journalist, keeps cropping up on the BBC and is a regular panellist on the Jeremy Vine show on Channel 5.
    I know it’s essentially wrong to be abusive and make ad hominem comments about someone, but this gobby woman is driving me up the wall. Why is she getting so much air time with her racist views i.e. that Jews are more important than other races.
    Any excuse she gets, she brings up anti-Semitism in order to undermine Corbyn.
    I wonder, Is she connected with the Integrity Initiative or the Israeli State propaganda machine?

  • Sharp Ears

    Luciana Berger has previous. Medialens tweeted.

    ‘In 2005 she resigned her post in national student politics after claims that the National Union of Students “is turning a blind eye” to anti-Semitism on university campuses; an independent inquiry later threw her complaint out and said most of her complaint was malicious: ‘


  • Sharp Ears

    ‘A man has been arrested after an egg was thrown at Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn in north London.
    It happened as Corbyn was visiting a mosque in Seven Sisters Road, not far from where the MP lives, just before 16:00 GMT on Sunday.
    The Metropolitan Police said a 41-year-old man was “quickly detained by officers on scene” and arrested on suspicion of assault.
    The man is in custody at a north London police station, the force said.
    Mr Corbyn had been visiting the Finsbury Park Mosque and Muslim Welfare House to coincide with Visit My Mosque Day.’

    3 hrs ago

    No words.

    • Antonym

      An egg was thrown!! No words.

      Could have been a Jew as they don’t foster throwing grenades into (foreign) civilian crowds; original Christian also possible, Jesus being quite the pacifist.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Sharp Ears March 3, 2019 at 21:32
      Actually the egg wasn’t thrown – a man calmly walked up behind JC and hit him on the head with an egg.
      He is really going to have to reconsider his protection – supposing it was a knife, not an egg?

      • Dungroanin

        Just like the crown of thorns was slapped on JC’s head?

        This Easter is going to be biblical!

        And yes Antzy, words were said, they always are when attacks are primed.

        Of course a Shiran Shiran type patsy is always available from the Murder Inc catalogue.

  • Paul Barbara

    Meanwhile, back in hell:
    ‘Without Saying a Word, Israeli Troops Beat Up a Blind Man in His Bed’: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51195.htm
    And all the MSM here want to do is steam full speed ahead, 24/7 on the AS scam.
    At least Haaretz carried this story (it was reprinted in ICH). Haaretz is a better newspaper than our sold-out rags.

    • Paul Barbara

      In the article above, part reads ‘…Munzer is convinced that the assailant wore brass knuckles. His face began to bleed, with a lot of blood streaming from his nose, as well as from the wounds on his hands, which ultimately failed to protect his face.,,’
      I have previously noticed that the so-called ‘IDF’ appear to sport gloves with a hard plastic ridge across the knuckles, which I had presumed served the purpose of brass knuckles.

      • Antonym

        Good example of a “one trick pony”, his little Universe is completely filled with Zionphobia.

        • Paul Barbara

          @ Antonym March 4, 2019 at 13:59
          Who’s, Munzer’s or mine?
          Do you have no expletives to address to the IDF for such Gestapo operations?
          If you were referring to me, my ‘Damascene awakening’ occurred with the Northern Ireland ‘Bloody Sunday’, sweet FA to do with Palestine. And it continued from there, essentially Latin America and later East Timor.
          When I eventually giot round to Palestine, a fellow campaigner (Jewish) who I did not know said ‘About time!’
          He was spot on – I had tried to blank off what I knew was Israeli atrocities, because of Jewish sensibilities over WWII Nazi atrocities against them.

  • David Smythe

    The fact that Troika of Tyranny – Pence, Pompeo and Bolton – are now using the theoretical presence of Hezbollah in Venezuela as a pretense for US military invasion, an extension of GWOT, is an even crazier notion. I guess it’s easy to see who’s pulling the neocon strings.

  • michael norton

    That Hodge woman was on R4 spouting her poison, again, this morning, why do they keep giving her air-time?

    Labour anti-Semitism row: Hodge claims Corbyn ‘misled’ her
    In a letter to Jeremy Corbyn, she claims she has been misled over assurances that his office was not involved in any disciplinary process.

    “Either you have intentionally misled me or your staff have been misleading you,” she complained.

  • michael norton

    Independent Group ‘in talks about becoming a political party’

    Their spokesperson Chukka Umunna has said
    “The group had to become a party in order to present an alternative to the broken political system”.

    Eight MPs quit Labour and joined forces with three former Tories to form the group, which is joint fourth-largest in Parliament,
    with the Lib Dems.

    By registering as a party, the group can contest seats in future elections.

  • Garth Carthy

    Hodge was on Channel 4 news. She came across as completely deranged and looked like a ghastly ventriloquists dummy version of Betty Boop with those hideous painted on eyelashes! She was gobby like a ventriloquists dummy too.

  • Paul Barbara

    ‘Ilhan Omar’s “Tropes” Are True’:
    Corbyn needs to take a page out of Ilhan Omar’s book, and tell it like it is, instead of piling apology on apology over the trumped-up scam of AS. Even a US J*wish publication, and ‘The Nation’, admit Omar is right:
    ‘…But in the wake of Ilhan Omar’s tweet, many voices that would normally denounce “anti-Semitism” have instead admitted that Omar is right: AIPAC’s power really is “all about the Benjamins.” The Nation, America’s leading Establishment Left magazine, published Israeli Jew Ady Barkan’s confession “What Ilhan Omar Said About AIPAC Was Right.” The Jewish Daily Forward responded with Peter Feld’s “No, Ilhan Omar Is Not Anti-Semitic For Calling Out AIPAC.” Feld put it bluntly, “There are plenty of Jews, like me, whose beliefs are voiced by Omar, not AIPAC.” Mehdi Hasan of The Intercept summed it all up, “There Is a Taboo Against Criticizing AIPAC and Ilhan Omar Just Destroyed It.”…’
    Unbelievably, ‘…Omar’s words seconded those of former six-term Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who has exposed the fact that new Congressional representatives are ordered to sign a loyalty pledge to Israel, and are told their careers will soon be over if they don’t…’
    How long before our MP’s are told the same thing, or are they told that already?

      • Clark

        Paul, if I was a conspiracy theorist, I could accuse you of trying to get people’s web activity tracked, but I’m not; my guess is that you just don’t understand what you did there.

        Firstly, you pasted a link specifying the http protocol (unencrypted) instead of the httpS (encrypted) protocol. The unencrypted protocol enables all intervening Internet nodes to read who is visiting your link, and what they’re reading. Nearly all sites went over to https after Snowden’s revelations.

        Secondly, you included a load of coded data in the link; everything after the question mark. This contains information about you from, I reckon, Facebook; therefore, any party that can decode that data can discover quite a lot about what you have been doing at Facebook.

        Even I can guess that you got that link from Facebook, because after the question mark it begins ‘fbclid’. ‘fb’ is probably Face Book, and ‘id’ probably ‘identity’. And that is where my limited knowledge ends.

        Interesting that Facebook is not converting links to the encrypted protocol.

        • Paul Barbara

          @ Clark March 6, 2019 at 13:12
          Thanks for the information, you’re right I don’t know much about the web, or protocols (not web ones anyway!) and I did get the link from Facebook. I know Facebook is a spook scam, and I will try to remember if I get a link on there that I want to pass on, I will try to find another source for it.

          • Clark

            Paul, web addresses are pretty easy really. Just look through the text from left to right – it’s called a ‘string’, ‘cos it’s just alphanumeric characters strung one after the other. It always starts ‘http://’ or ‘https://’ – that’s the protocol; either HyperText Transfer Protocol, or the Secure (encrypted) version. Next comes the ‘www.’, or not; most sites it doesn’t matter whether it’s there or not, and a few sites need it. It doesn’t do anything; it’s just a convention.

            Next comes the domain name, eg. ‘craigmurray dot org dot uk’; that’s the name of the site, and you can do a whois lookup to tell you who owns the site, which can be a proper bit of sleuthing sometimes; I’ll paste one below. After the domain name comes a forward slash.

            Next come a series of terms separated by forward slashes; so for this page we’re on it goes:

            /archives/2019/02/has-the-elites… etc.

            This is a directory structure, just like the folders-within-folders of your computer – (except on a Micro$oft filing system; unlike everyone else, they use backslashes – typical bloody deliberate incompatibility to enforce customer lock-in, confuse everyone and thereby disempower them). – ‘archives’ contains ‘2019’ which in turn contains ’02’ which contains this page. Then the web address ends with a final forward slash.

            The above is all you need to reach a page. If there’s a hash ‘#’ next, that specifies how far down the page; on this site (and all WordPress blogs) each comment is specified, I’m seeing ‘#comment-838285’ in my browser’s address bar at present, which is your comment that I’m replying to.

            As you can see, the above is a lot like the address on a postal letter, except backwards; it gets more and more specific with each term.

            The above are always pretty much the same. Now the fun starts, almost always with a question mark ‘?’. That’s a query, and passes additional information to the server software, such as – on YouTube, terms to specify which video to display – on Google (and this site), what to search for – on any site with a Facebook ‘Like’ button, all sorts of undecipherable stuff about the hapless user.

            Generally, to specify a page and a place on it, you don’t need the question mark or anything beyond it, so you can just highlight that bit and delete it. If the protocol isn’t https, just add an ‘s’ in the right place and see if it works.

            Incidentally, no one taught me all this. I just worked it out by looking at web addresses and noticing what differences they had and what they had in common. Below is a whois request for this site. The first line is the command I used. It starts with my username on my computer, followed by the computer’s hostname, then the whois command itself followed by the domain name that I want info about:

            clark@Old-HP:~$ whois craigmurray.org.uk

            Domain name:

            Data validation:
            Nominet was able to match the registrant’s name and address against a 3rd party data source on 01-Dec-2014

            Fasthosts Internet Ltd [Tag = LIVEDOMAINS]
            URL: http://www.fasthosts.co.uk

            Relevant dates:
            Registered on: 15-Mar-2005
            Expiry date: 15-Mar-2020
            Last updated: 15-Feb-2019

            Registration status:
            Registered until expiry date.

            Name servers:

            WHOIS lookup made at 21:01:13 06-Mar-2019

      • Clark

        The coded gobbledegook after ‘?fbclid=’ can take about 1.5 times ten to the power of 110 different values. That’s about a trillion values for every atom in the visible universe; there could be some pretty specific stuff coded into that.

          • glenn_nl

            Shhh…. we are! But this sort of thing gives us a bit of cover, boosts our credibility – right?

          • Clark

            Of course. I can find more authoritative links, insist on good evidence so that peace activists’ arguments don’t get held up for ridicule, state my objections to Israeli expansionism and abuse of Palestinians, go on demonstrations, engage in direct action, edit Wikipedia headings to read ‘Interrogation under Torture’ where they said ‘Harsh Interrogation’, back it up with links to the UN and the Court of Human Rights, but really I’m protecting the vaccine conspiracy and covering up mass murder. Obviously. (evil laughter)

          • glenn_nl

            I think our greatest achievement to date, frankly, is getting everyone to forget about the deadly ChemTrails, which our paymasters are using to poison everyone and bring the population under control. Reduce it 100% if we’re lucky.

            Indeed, it’s _such_ a diabolical plan, that it even kills the families of the engineers who put these things together, the pilots, the people who thought up the plans, and agents (such as ourselves) who are providing cover for them!

            ( Cue even more evil laughter…. hahahhhahhahahhahhaaa!!!!)

          • Paul Barbara

            @ glenn_nl March 6, 2019 at 19:43
            One doesn’t need to be a Nazi to be a War Criminal – US, IDF, NATO, UK, all have far more than their fair share of War Criminals.
            Take for a (fairly mild) example this:
            Te US keeps the Syrian civilians captive, won’t allow them to leave (even though most want to), keep them short of water and food even though they have ample opportunity to fully provision them, and refuses to let a Syrian convoy of buses enter the illegally-occupied area of al Tanf to transport the Syrians who wish to leave to safety in their old homes.
            Meanwhile, the Yanks are said to have stolen some 40 tons of Syrian gold from ISIS, who stole it from Syria.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Clark March 6, 2019 at 18:34
            There you go again, cracking on about vaccines where you only take the government regulatory bodies’ and Big Pharma’s slanted information ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIAXG_QcQNU ) and ignoring or slagging off alternative doctors, scientists, nurses and parent’s information.
            ‘Vaccine Correlations Graphically Confirm CDC-FDA-Pharma Skewed Vaccine Efficacy Science’:
            ‘Robert F Kennedy Jr speech’:
            ‘HG in vaccines’: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-jYsdHZuRhCcGtPandhT0llT0k/edit

            At least check out the ‘Robert F Kennedy Jr speech’ – it is only 3 minutes 32 seconds long.

            Robert F Kennedy Jr. actually spells out when and where the CDC actually admitted the link with vaccines and autism (and held it in a special venue rather than CDC HQ so they wouldn’t be liable for Freedom of Information Requests, but unfortunately for them a transcript of the meeting was leaked), and then ‘lost’ all the data, sending someone to Europe to tinker with studies done in Europe and come up with the opposite answer, the one they and Big Pharma wanted.
            Faced with all this blatant fraud (which you more or less accept) you still cite official and Big Pharma info.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ glenn_nl March 6, 2019 at 19:29
            ‘Chemtrail Whistleblower ~ Ex Military ~ Kristen Meghan, Hauppauge, NY, January 18th, 2014 HD’:
            Is Kristen Megan a liar? She is either lying (in which case the two USAF base commanders, or the Air Force or government itself could sue her, imprison her and throw away the key on all manner of pretexts) or Geoengineering (Chemtrails) really is going on.

          • Clark

            Paul, I can’t remember how many hours of your videos I’ve watched. I watched Vaxxed. Yes, it has a section about a vaccine banned in Canada and yet subsequently introduced in the UK; corruption. BUT. That information is in the public domain anyway. You can look it up on Wikipedia. And it does NOT get Wakefield off the hook for what he did. And Vaxxed did NOT provide evidence for the allegations you and Wakefield make ie. autism. It seems like you muddle everything up together; “Merck concealed serious side effects of Vioxx, therefore homeopathy works”.

            Look, it’s high time you started treating me as an equal; it’s a simple matter of respect, not assuming that I’m a dumb sheeple and that you have secret knowledge.

            WHEN you have read Bad Science, you will have the tools to discuss these matters, not before. Until then it is impossible to have a sensible conversation with you. Given all the hours I’ve put in reading your recommendations, it’s time it went the other way for a bit. STOP assuming I’m a closed-minded dolt; it is not a Christian way to treat your neighbour.

          • Clark

            Yes I’ve watched that Chemtrials YouToob; it’s part of the hours and days I’ve wasted taking such stuff seriously.

            “Is Kristen Megan a liar?”

            No I don’t think she is.

            ” She is either lying […] or Geoengineering (Chemtrails) really is going on.”

            No, that isn’t the case. Just ONE point; Megan’s story is about USAF. But your claim is that COMMERCIAL jets are all releasing ‘chemtrails’. There’s a whole load of “leaping to the opposite conclusion” going on. That. Isn’t. Logical.

          • Clark

            “you still cite official and Big Pharma info”

            NO. I. DON’T. It isn’t a “this OR that” question.

            What I say, over and over and over again is:
            Read Bad Science and Bad Pharma.

            Then you will have some powerful tools to help you assess all this. Until then you are at the mercy of polemicists, on both sides.

          • Clark

            Paul, have you actually read the 262 page Simpsonwood transcript? I’ve only reached page 15 so far, but it appears to be a bunch of experts taking mercury exposure very seriously. Thiomersal was phased out in the EU anyway!

            That’s a question: have you read it?

          • Clark

            OK, here I am, taking your links seriously yet again Paul Barbara; when are you going to return the compliment? At the present rate, never.

            Six minutes into the Kristen Meghan video, so far there has been a load of global warming denial, stuff that has been utterly debunked (and yes I have checked the science) which we know from leaks, documents revealed through court cases etc. to be funded by the fossil fuel industry working through front organisations to obscure the funding sources. There has been a lot of alarmism, highly selectively edited clips from, er, two US comedy shows (this is meant to be science?!) and absolutely no revelations or whistle-blowing, and no serious science. This, so far, is absolute tosh. What little fact it contains is in any case available from public, reputable sources, which is that Stratospheric Aerosol Injection has been proposed and tested as a remediation for global warming. It is strongly opposed by the climate science community.

          • Clark

            Right. 09:30, Kristen Meghan tells us that in 2006, after four years in her USAF job, she was approached by chemtrail, er, activists? And she tells us that she looked into the on-line chemtrail stuff. So from then onwards, she’ll have been looking at what’s going on at work and asking herself if this could be evidence for chemtrails.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Clark March 6, 2019 at 23:01
            Great news, you have found and are reading the report. No, I have not read it, but will if I can find it.
            The problem is not that they didn’t take the problem seriously, it’s that CDC did not want their deliberations made available via Freedom of Information Requests, to the point of not having the meeting in their HQ. And then conveniently ‘losing’ all documentation of I believe RFK Jr. mentioned 100,000 cases across America, where mercury was undoubtedly to blame for not only autism but a range of other serious ‘side effects’.
            I will happily comment with you in a civilised manner, but it is you that keep flaring up with antagonisms.
            I don’t believe you would happily endorse vaccines if you knew the harm they can do, and I accept that some may well have helped eradicate dangerous diseases.
            Your beliefs just happen to coincide with ‘Official Narratives’ and the interests of Big Pharma, mine with what parents say and the findings of alternative practitioners or doctors, scientists and nurses who have ‘seen the light’ and in almost every case, have paid heavily for telling their ‘truth’, rather than ‘going along to get along’.
            Re Kristen Megan, I have always believed it is principally the military and their contractors who do the spraying, and at least at first found it hard to believe civilian airlines were involved at all, but I now accept they probably do.
            I don’t believe I have ever put the emphasis on civil airlines.
            If you accept Kristen Megan is not lying, then she must be telling the truth, so how do you account for her treatment by USAF?
            As for Goldacre, I read a lot of his articles in, I believe, the Guardian, when I used to get the paper (which used to be very good, IMO) four or five times a week. I was not impressed with his articles.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Clark March 6, 2019 at 23:21
            The video is only 22 minutes long, but you take time out to criticise it only six minutes in (finding fault with ‘no whistleblowing’ which she comes to later), then again taking time out to criticise it at 9:30 minutes in! (‘…Right. 09:30, Kristen Meghan tells us that in 2006, after four years in her USAF job, she was approached by chemtrail, er, activists? And she tells us that she looked into the on-line chemtrail stuff. So from then onwards, she’ll have been looking at what’s going on at work and asking herself if this could be evidence for chemtrails…’
            I’m sure you have an attention span that can adequately deal with a 22-minute video, make notes, and then criticise it (or not, as the case may be).
            Anyhow, thanks for the Simpsonwood info, I’ve found it an will read it all, before I comment.

          • Clark

            14:17, Kristen Meghan has told us her three pieces of data.

            1) Various orders for chemicals were vague; Large amounts of these chemicals, she says, are used in shot-blasting, bead-blasting and other such processes, but the record keeping seems inadequate, and more seems to have been ordered than can be accounted for.

            This is not necessarily evidence that these chemicals were being sprayed from aircraft. There are many possibilities, eg. it’s just poor record-keeping; maybe someone has a scam going where a shot-blasting company gets excess military supply and some officer gets a back-hander. Money makes the world go round, didn’t you say Paul?

            2) She took some samples and found some of these chemicals. Very little detail. She doesn’t say where she sampled (near where shot-blasting was done maybe?), how she sampled, whether she’d ever done it before.

            3) She ends up getting transferred. She tells us that at the new site, she starts asking an officer about her results, and he starts trying to intimidate her. Maybe. Or, from what she says, maybe the officer really was worried about her mental health. It’s very difficult to tell; it was clearly a conflict situation, and she may well have been making accusations, because she did say she was looking for evidence of ‘chemtrailing’.

            So where did she test? Is this officer she refers to really keen that he’s being poisoned by what she’s discovered? I mean, OK, money makes the world go round, so how much money do I have to offer you to get you to poison yourself? What use is money if you sacrifice your health for it?

            17:22, she’s just told us what sort of material she’s been looking at on-line – “weather warfare, weather modification, Agenda 21”. Ever heard of confirmation bias, Paul? You suppose you’re immune? You suppose Kristen Meghan’s immune?

            She’s said that she’s met people who load “the canisters”. I’m quite prepared to accept that she’s met people who load canisters, but what’s our evidence that these are “the” canisters?

            19:56; she’s just said that she’ll e-mail the address of the lab she wants people to use for testing samples. Sigh. This is such a scam. Yes, a lab that always gives positive results – because that gets them trade from chemtrailers! And all the other labs are not to be trusted! Why? Because they don’t test for low enough concentrations! The throws in the sciency term “nanoparticles”, but the size of the particles has no bearing upon the concentration.

            And she said she’d tell us where her funding comes from but never did.

            Paul, this proves nothing except that there are a lot of gullible people. Y’know, er, sheeple? And I’ve used up another hour of irreplaceable lifetime examining bunk.

          • Clark

            Paul, I don’t care that you want an argument. I’m interested in evidence.

            She’s a global warming denialist:

            “Within the first week of President Obama being reelected into office, his administration was already reigniting the infamous carbon tax. President Obama and his administrative supporters touted the needed for increased environmental regulations. With these new regulations comes revenue generating fines imposed on businesses throughout the United States. This propaganda misleads the public into thinking the revenue generated from these fines would decrease our country’s historical debt. What one Infowars reporter explains is how the enforcement of these proposed environmental regulations actually would cost tax payers an approximate $700 billion, Dykes (2012). What could be the driver behind the “green” agenda designed to reduce debt and save the environment? Specifically, Rappoport authored a recent story illustrating how the New World Order (NWO) has hijacked the “Save the Planet” initiative by instilling fear and promoting collectivism; if we do not “go green” together we cannot prevent global warming. Rappoport states, “The fatally flawed science of man-made global warming has emphasized yet another form of striving together to avoid another holocaust.” This all ties into the mindset that we are no longer individuals, we must be grouped and act in a group. The masses cannot be deceived without first thinking for them. This is a way our country, guided by the United Nations and the NWO, has been able to pull off the biggest acts of environmental pollution!
            We should ask ourselves, should our President answer to its people, or the U.N.?”

            Those are her own words, at Metabunk:


          • Clark

            What Simpsonwood info? You posted that link! Why are you thanking me for information you posted the link to yourself?

            If I were a conspiracy theorist I could ask “are you more than one person? Are you a team?” But my guess is that you’ve been linking it because Kennedy said it was a ‘smoking gun’, but you’ve never actually read it yourself!

          • Clark

            Paul, I agree that the Guardian has deteriorated, specifically since it took on the US market, and now we have the theguardian.com domain when formerly there was only guardian.co.uk.

            If you don’t like “alternative therapists” being criticised, you won’t like the Graun’s Bad Science column. But really, what is the alternative to _evidence_based_medicine_? NOT based on evidence? How does that work? Just believe whatever someone charismatic tells you? And you talk about sheeple?

            I still think you should read Bad Science, the book. It’s more of a learning tool; each story is complete as opposed to being a disjointed set of blog posts, and he’s arranged the topics in order, from simplest to most complicated, so that you pick up the skills and experience you need as you go along. A masterpiece, in my opinion.

            Then you can progress to Bad Pharma; not before, or you won’t have the intellectual tools. This is an Opus Maximus, and its target is the pharmaceutical industry and the regulators. This is how pharmaceutical data distortion is actually achieved, in all its sordid detail. It’s like the difference between saying “oh yes, I know there’s torture and they suppress whistle-blowers” and actually reading Murder in Samarkand.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Clark March 7, 2019 at 00:30
            You do like making mountains out of molehills, and coming to odd conclusions. My hearing is very poor, so I could not make out what meeting RFK Jr. was talking about – you wrote it as ‘Simpsonwood’, so that was the info I was thanking you for. Now i suppose you will go on about ‘if my hearing is so bad, no wonder I get everything wrong’.
            Why don’t you just watch the videos, or read the articles or transcripts, and then put all your arguments together?
            As it is, you are just likely to take up so much space on the comments, and cause your antagonist to do the same in replying, that you will p*ss the moderators off big time? Perhaps that is your intention.
            Again, thanks for ‘Simpsonwood’ – more damning than I expected.

          • Clark

            Kristen Megan at Metabunk in 2013:

            “My whistleblowing is not related to chemtrails, it is related to industrial ground activities that overexposed the workers and they didn’t want it reported, and since I took the samples, they wanted to demonize me in case I spoke out.

            – Mick, the confusion lies with people who aren’t familiar with my activism, my whistleblower label is not related to chemtrails.

            – Jay, I wasn’t a whistleblower in regards to chemtrails. It was a completely different situation about overexposures to carcinogens on base they wanted to keep quiet.”


          • Paul Barbara

            @ Clark March 7, 2019 at 00:50
            I did read ‘Murder in Samarkand’, but knew about Craig’s brave whistleblowing before them from reports in the MSM, including I believe the Guardian.
            It was through my previous knowledge of his activities that I volunteered to campaign for him in Blackburn, I believe in 2005. I had never done anything like that before, which shows how impressed I was with his whistleblowing.
            Good luck if you try whitewashing Simpsonwood!
            Why don’t you forward the links to Ben Goldacre? That should be interesting.

          • Clark

            Paul, sorry I post a lot of comments. I deal with a chunk at a time, so I don’t get overwhelmed. Details matter – especially in scientific discussions.

            When you’ve found the most damning evidence in the Simpsonwood transcript, please post the page number and the first few words as a reference.

            I acknowledge that there’s distortion of pharmaceutical data; no one who thought otherwise would repeatedly recommend Bad Pharma! But it’s important to get matters straight. If person A assaults person B, there’s no point charging A with B’s murder, because all A’s defence has to do is ask B to appear at the trial and that’s it; case dismissed.

          • Clark

            “Why don’t you forward the links to Ben Goldacre?”

            Really, read the book, as it was designed to be read, from the beginning to the end. I promise you won’t regret it; the mainstream media comes out of it very badly. So do Tony and Cherie Blair, and the pharmaceutical companies. Really, as a complete work, it’s a masterpiece.

          • Clark

            Paul, I’m certainly not going to criticise you for being hard of hearing; you have my condolences. I get tinnitus at times which is horrible. I’m an audophile at heart; I love live music and top notch PA systems, worked as a sound engineer on and off all my life, with the National Youth Jazz Orchestra for a few years until a nervous breakdown put a stop to it. I love music and sound, so I think of any impairment of hearing as a tragedy.

            Your hearing troubles did trouble me at the High Court, because I couldn’t speak my replies loudly, or we’d have been sure to attract the attention of the hostile legal team just down the corridor, and what with the subject matter, that really wouldn’t have helped!

          • Clark

            Oh, sorry, I misinterpreted; you meant I should send the Simpsonwood transcript to Goldacre. I think Goldacre has enough on his plate, as you’ll discover if you read Bad Pharma. He’s trying to address the whole problem; his work has already led to a parliamentary review, and some improved regulations. But those only scratch the surface; there’s still far more to be done.

            Gotta get to bed. Goodnight Paul.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Clark March 6, 2019 at 22:34
            ‘ “you still cite official and Big Pharma info”

            ‘…NO. I. DON’T. It isn’t a “this OR that” question….’
            If you’re not quoting Big Pharma and government statements that vaccines and adjuvants are safe, who are you quoting?
            By far the majority of ‘safety testing’ is done by the companies that sell them, or by their paid ‘researchers’.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Clark March 7, 2019 at 01:19
            ‘…When you’ve found the most damning evidence in the Simpsonwood transcript, please post the page number and the first few words as a reference…’
            I’ll do better than read through that transcript (a prodigious task) and point out the most damning evidence, I’ll let an expert doctor, Dr. Blaylock, do it, with the page numbers! He is dealing with the same transcript, so there is no point me reinventing the wheel.

          • Clark

            Paul, thanks for acknowledging that vaccines have done some good. From that it follows that they need to be considered using risk-versus-benefit analysis. So that’s lots of work; in a world of very varied patients with very varied lives, various different risks have to be assessed to see how many of them were caused by a vaccine or by something else, and likewise with the benefits. It is far too much work for the likes of you and I to accomplish, but thankfully there are thousands of people working on it.

            That process gets distorted; by pharmaceutical companies and regulators, but also the other way to some extent, eg. by the likes of Wakefield, who was collaborating on getting his own patent for an alternative to MMR, and by companies who could, for instance, make more money out of three separate jabs for measles, mumps and rubella than they do out of one combined vaccination. This is a whole lot more complicated than “big pharma colluding with government against the people”; there’s a whole lot of competition between the companies too, plus professional rivalry, and the “natural health” crowd who also have an agenda of selling their food supplements (a market worth fifty billion, and often just another branch of the pill industry, with supplement companies often wholly owned subsidiaries of pharmaceutical companies).

            I had a quick search on Blaylock and got a polarised set of results – here are a couple of negative ones: “Blaylock also promotes chemtrail conspiracies alleging cancer-causing nanoparticles as being purposefully released into the atmosphere in a government-corporate scheme”, and “The quack behind the MSG scare is still stoking fear for profit”. But his Wikipedia page is more interesting:

            Blaylock has called the American medical system ‘collectivist’ and has suggested that health-care reform efforts under President Obama are masterminded by extragovernmental groups that wish to impose euthanasia. He blamed the purported collectivism of American medicine for the retirement of his friend Miguel Faria. According to Blaylock, the former Soviet Union tried to spread collectivism by covertly introducing illegal drugs and various sexually transmitted diseases into the United States. Schwarcz characterized these positions as “conspiracy theories.”

            – Blaylock has also been a longtime supporter of the Institute of World Politics, and has praised its founder, John Lenczowski, for his “…dedication to sound principles of transcendent law, moral absolutes and the teaching of these principles within the scope of statecraft…”

            Institute of World Politics and John Lenczowski? They have pages too:

            Institute of World Politics – The Institute of World Politics (IWP) is a graduate school of national security, intelligence, and international affairs in Washington, D.C.. It was founded in 1990 to develop leaders in the intelligence, national security, and diplomatic communities, while teaching the ethical exercise of statecraft. The curriculum exposes students to international realities, including history, political culture, current and potential threats, and the strategic role of ideas, values, and belief systems in world politics. It emphasizes various elements of statecraft, including: counterintelligence; counterpropaganda; economic statecraft and warfare; information operations; political warfare; strategic soft power; and public diplomacy.

            John Lenczowski – From 1981 to 1983, Lenczowski served in the United States Department of State as Special Advisor to then Under Secretary for Political Affairs Lawrence Eagleburger. His highest priority was strengthening Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, so that it could overcome Soviet jamming and rapidly disseminate news of resistance to Soviet authority. Lenczowski succeeded in getting $2.5 billion authorized to modernize Voice Of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.[1] In 1981, he became part of the newly founded Active Measures Working Group, which aimed to counter Soviet disinformation campaigns. Lenczowski encouraged the group to take a more proactive role in countering disinformation.[1] From 1983 to 1987 he was Director of European and Soviet Affairs at the National Security Council. In that capacity, he served as principal Soviet affairs advisor to President Ronald Reagan. He was involved in developing many of the policies that helped prompt the collapse of the Soviet empire.[2] One such policy came from a memo Lenczowski wrote to President Reagan outlining America’s strength and promoting military deterrence by better publicizing the truth and goals of communism and the Soviet Union

            – – – – –
            Right. Firstly I haven’t followed the citations upon which the Wiki articles are based. Secondly all this says absolutely nothing about whether Blaylock’s science is any good. But pretty clearly this guy isn’t neutral. What these sections indicate is that there’s a whole lot more work to do, and we can’t just take this guy at his word; he’s very close to a propaganda organisation.

            I can’t keep dong your research for you Paul; I can’t keep up! You can’t just keep picking links that confirm what you already believe; you need to check this stuff for yourself, because it’s a whole lot more complicated than “The NWO versus The People”. That’s why I want you to read Goldacre; he looks at this from all angles, and you get an outline of how complicated it is. And he gives some very clear, pretty simple, common-sense advice, too.

            Here; take a look at what I did to Wikipedia’s article on “Brain Gym” yesterday. This is a private company disguised under a US-nonprofit, pushing pseudoscience at kids through UK state comprehensive schools; the UK government has given them millions. They obviously wrote their Wiki page themselves, to use Google’s top search result as a gratis advertisement. My actions have prompted more editors to start cleaning the article up. Compare these two versions:



          • Paul Barbara

            @ Clark March 7, 2019 at 09:02
            Clark, you posted a long comment there, most of which was basically unnecessary and not to the point.
            The important point is you appear to accept that the transcript is genuine, that is the point.
            It doesn’t matter what you think of Dr. Blaylock, I am just using him to point out the worst of the CDC Simpsonwood Conference.
            The important point is not whether there is a potential benefit/potential harm balance to be taken into account, it is that all these agencies say there is no link between vaccines and autism (and other serious developmental problems). And the media and most vaccine advocates scream this out (some probably actually believe it) and castigate campaigners who are shown to be right by that Simpsonwood Conference.
            They deliberately lied, and massaged to figures, ‘lost’ huge amounts of data because it was so clear they could not massage out the fact vaccines did cause autism and many other serious neurological and behavioural problems, and kept changing the goalposts till they got info they could say proved the safety of their vaccines.
            The extent of their blatant lies completely pulls the rug out from under them.
            One of the doctors at the Conference even stated that his daughter was having her first child, a boy, and he did not want him vaccinated with thimerasol containing vaccine till it was known whether it was safe.
            Blaylock’s critique points the reader to the precise page numbers of the actual transcript of Simpsonwood, so making it a much more easily handled task to check the stuff out (Blaylock’s critique being 24 pages long, hardly too long for anyone who really is interested in whether the vaccines are safe or not, and just how much the regulators and Big Pharma have lied, and been parroted by the MSM.
            Realising how much the regulators have lied, do you still take their lies of safety as more important than the experiences of parents whose children have been drastically harmed?
            I obviously agree with Blaylock’s Chemtrails belief, and the MSG dangers., but again, his beliefs are not relevant – we are just using him to cut down the amount of work on the official transcript.
            Basically, what I and others have been saying is correct – the vaccines and their adjuvants (not just thimerasol, but also aluminium and other products, like squalene – suspected of playing a part in Gulf Syndrome) are not safe, and have caused irreparable life-long harm.
            So it follows I’m not Dr. Mengele’s apprentice, or some ghoul from hell who wants to see millions of kids come down with diseases, which you have more or less suggested in the past.
            The significance of the Simpsonwood Conference transcript is it lays the lies and truly criminal practices of the regulators and Big Pharma on the line. Notice any massive MSM coverage? No, just a studious lack of interest.
            No surprise there.

          • Clark

            Paul, I don’t have time right now to read all your comments; I’ll catch up with them later.

            I haven’t read Simpsonwood, and you haven’t either. Therefore your criticism must be based on others’ assessments, including Blaylock’s, which you recommended.

            I don’t think you’re Mengele’s apprentice, but you repeatedly championed Wakefield, who seems decidedly dodgy, and kept raising outrageous scares about vaccines. Basically I’ve been trying to shock you out of your “all or nothing” mindset. Things aren’t necessarily true just because they’re denied by the MSM. The whole beatification of Wakefield was vigorously promoted by the MSM in 2002.

          • glenn_nl

            Clark , when are you going to learn, and stop having your time wasted like this?

            Paul B isn’t interested in the truth. He’s only interested in having his whacked out conspiracies believed.

          • Clark

            Glenn_nl, that’s possibly true. On the other hand, Paul now says that he never said commercial airliners were spraying ‘chemtrails’ (though I feel sure I remember otherwise), and he says that vaccines can do some good, and have counteracted serious diseases. Maybe he’s somewhere else on the ‘net right now, reappraising sites he’s trusted with a more critical eye; who knows?

            Meanwhile, checking his sources, I discover interesting things about the likes of neurosurgeon and proponent of psychological warfare Blaylock.

          • Clark

            Paul: – “Realising how much the regulators have lied, do you still take their lies of safety as more important than the experiences of parents whose children have been drastically harmed?”

            Provisionally. Hundreds of millions, probably billions of kids have been vaccinated, and I’ve read that studies refuting the MMR-autism link examined half a million children over the course of a decade. That has to be weighed against a couple of dozen of testimonials, from parents who stand to gain large compensation payouts. Maybe those studies were misleading, but they were published, in the medical literature, so they have been examined by countless thousands of professionals.

            But this is the level you have to engage on, if you hope to be convincing. You have to know of the studies that have been done. You have to know where and how to look them up. You have to know how studies, meta-analyses and systematic reviews are performed, and what might be wrong with them. If you don’t have that knowledge and those skills, you’re condemned to merely repeating things that others have asserted.

  • Garth Carthy

    There’s a powerful criticism of the great anti-Semitism scam on Media Lens today.
    They provide lots of evidence that Jeremy Corbyn has never ever supported anti-Semitism.

    • Clark

      As best I know, Corbyn has consistentlyopposed anti-Semitism.

      MediaLens generally do very good work, in my opinion.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Clark March 7, 2019 at 14:28
        What does it matter how many studies have been done, when most are done or bought by the same regulators and Big Pharma companies as took part in the Simpsonwood Conference? You say the big companies are competing – well they may give that impression, but there were three big companies at that conference.
        Also, two of them got in touch with the CDC and said they could roll out two of the vaccines right away without Thimerasol, and the CDC thanked them but took no more notice, even though they said it was important to remove Thimerasol as soon as possible. It stayed in the vaccines, unnecessarily, for another three years, and put at risk some 120, million babies in that time, just in the US!
        Yet you carry on believing in the government and Big Pharma lies, as promoted by umpteen ‘studies’ (alternative studies of course get demonised and rubbished, and doctors and others risk losing their licences to practice for essentially opposing government and Big Pharma lies and obstructing profits).
        I am surprised you brazenly carry on with your ideas of vaccines having nothing to do with autism, after you have been guided to that damning Simpsonwood expose.
        That Conference will become my backup to any new vaccine horror stories I link to in the future, but there doesn’t seem much point in our continuing here – we both have our minds made up.

        • Clark

          OK, I give up. You’re exactly what Mark Lewis said, and glenn_nl is right; you’re more interested in winning than examining evidence, so there’s simply no point discussing with you, or taking notice of anything you say. Sorry Paul; bye 🙁

          • Clark

            “we both have our minds made up”

            No, not me. Science is always provisional, and the pencil is mightier than the pen. But you have consistently failed, nay, refused, to engage at the level of scientific evidence. All you can manage is “so-and-so lied, so the opposite is true”.

          • Clark

            One last attempt at reason. From the latest MediaLens article, an excerpt from a quote of Chomsky:

            “when Clinton bombed the al-Shifa pharmaceutical facility in Sudan, he and the other perpetrators surely knew that the bombing would kill civilians (tens of thousands, apparently)”

            By your logic, Paul, Clinton was doing the Sudanese a favour. Over and out.

  • Sharp Ears

    From Ireland’s IPSC against Eurovision.

    TOMORROW Friday 8th March, RTÉ will officially announce the name of the Irish Eurovision entrant – and the Irish Campaign to Boycott Eurovison 2019 is calling on supporters to mobilise for lunchtime protests outside RTÉ.

    ‘Zoe Lawlor, a spokesperson for the Campaign said: “Sadly, despite overwhelming support from singers, musicians and other celebrities, public figures, human rights campaigners and members of the public, RTÉ has refused to listen to the Palestinian call for Ireland not to take part in the 2019 Eurovision Song Contest. RTÉ say the event is ‘non political’, but every shred of evidence points to the contrary – Israel is overtly politicising and militarising the Eurovision, and is being allowed to do so by the EBU, and RTÉ.

    Ms. Lawlor continued: “We have learned that whoever the Irish entrant is, they will perform before 500 soldiers from the Israeli occupation forces; the show will broadcast propaganda showing illegal Israeli settlements in occupied territories; entrants will be hosted in a ‘village’ built on the ruins of a Palestinian area of Jaffa that whose residents were driven out in 1948 and who still cannot return; and that councils in illegal settlements are giving free accommodation to Eurovision fans as a way of promoting these entities, which are war crimes under international law; and, of course, Palestinian Eurovision fans will not be able to travel to attend any events due to Israel’s discriminatory checkpoint regime.

    Ms Lawlor noted that “Israeli officials openly boast of how they use culture to whitewash their crimes. In the words of a former top official in its Foreign Ministry, Israel promotes ‘culture as a propaganda tool of the first rank’ and ‘[does] not differentiate between propaganda and culture’. It is shameful that RTÉ is allowing itself, and by extension all TV license payers, to be used to bolster Israel’s ‘culture washing’ propaganda machine as it continues to oppress Palestinians and destroy their lives on a daily basis.”

    Ms Lawlor concluded: “We call on all people of conscience to give up an hour of your day to join our protest this Friday. Let our voices be heard, we do not want Ireland to be represented at an art washing exercise in Apartheid Israel.”’

    Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign https://www.ipsc.ie/

1 2 3 4 5

Comments are closed.