The Terrifying Rise of the Zombie State Narrative 365


The ruling Establishment has learnt a profound lesson from the debacle over Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction. The lesson they have learnt is not that it is wrong to attack and destroy an entire country on the basis of lies. They have not learnt that lesson despite the fact the western powers are now busily attacking the Iraqi Shia majority government they themselves installed, for the crime of being a Shia majority government.

No, the lesson they have learnt is never to admit they lied, never to admit they were wrong. They see the ghost-like waxen visage of Tony Blair wandering around, stinking rich but less popular than an Epstein birthday party, and realise that being widely recognised as a lying mass murderer is not a good career choice. They have learnt that the mistake is for the Establishment ever to admit the lies.

The Establishment had to do a certain amount of collective self-flagellation over the non-existent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, over which they precipitated the death and maiming of millions of people. Only a very few outliers, like the strange Melanie Phillips, still claimed the WMD really did exist, and her motive was so obviously that she supported any excuse to kill Muslims that nobody paid any attention. Her permanent pass to appear on the BBC was upgraded. But by and large everyone accepted the Iraqi WMD had been a fiction. The mainstream media Blair/Bush acolytes like Cohen, Kamm and Aaronovitch switched to arguing that even if WMD did not exist, Iraq was in any case better off for having so many people killed and its infrastructure destroyed.

These situations are now avoided by the realisation of the security services that in future they just have to brazen it out. The simple truth of the matter – and it is a truth – is this. If the Iraq WMD situation occurred today, and the security services decided to brazen it out and claim that WMD had indeed been found, there is not a mainstream media outlet that would contradict them.

The security services outlet Bellingcat would publish some photos of big missiles planted in the sand. The Washington Post, Guardian, New York Times, BBC and CNN would republish and amplify these pictures and copy and paste the official statements from government spokesmen. Robert Fisk would get to the scene and interview a few eye witnesses who saw the missiles being planted, and he would be derided as a senile old has-been. Seymour Hersh and Peter Hitchens would interview whistleblowers and be shunned by their colleagues and left off the airwaves. Bloggers like myself would be derided as mad conspiracy theorists or paid Russian agents if we cast any doubt on the Bellingcat “evidence”. Wikipedia would ruthlessly expunge any alternative narrative as being from unreliable sources. The Integrity Initiative, 77th Brigade, GCHQ and their US equivalents would be pumping out the “Iraqi WMD found” narrative all over social media. Mad Ben Nimmo of the Atlantic Council would be banning dissenting accounts all over the place in his role as Facebook Witchfinder-General.

Does anybody seriously wish to dispute this is how the absence of Iraqi WMD would be handled today, 16 years on?

If you do wish to doubt this could happen, look at the obviously fake narrative of the Syrian government chemical weapons attacks on Douma. The pictures published on Bellingcat of improvised chlorine gas missiles were always obviously fake. Remember this missile was supposed to have smashed through ten inches of solid, steel rebar reinforced concrete.

As I reported back in May last year, that the expert engineers sent to investigate by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) did not buy into this is hardly surprising.

That their findings were deliberately omitted from the OPCW report is very worrying indeed. What became still more worrying was the undeniable evidence that started to emerge from whistleblowers in the OPCW that the toxicology experts had unanimously agreed that those killed had not died from chlorine gas attack. The minutes of the OPCW toxicology meeting really do need to be read in full.

actual_toxicology_meeting_redacted

The highlights are:

“No nerve agents had been detected in environmental or bio samples”
“The experts were conclusive in their statements that there was no correlation between symptoms and chlorine exposure”

I really do urge you to click on the above link and read the entire minute. In particular, it is impossible to read that minute and not understand that the toxicology experts believed that the corpses had been brought and placed in position.

“The experts were also of the opinion that the victims were highly unlikely to have gathered in piles at the centre of the respective apartments, at such a short distance from an escape from any toxic chlorine gas to much cleaner air”.

So the toxicology experts plainly believed the corpse piles had been staged, and the engineering experts plainly believed the cylinder bombs had been staged. Yet, against the direct evidence of its own experts, the OPCW published a report managing to convey the opposite impression – or at least capable of being portrayed by the media as giving the opposite impression.

How then did the OPCW come to do this? Rather unusually for an international organisation, the OPCW Secretariat is firmly captured by the Western states, largely because it covers an area of activity which is not of enormous interest to the political elites of developing world states, and many positions require a high level of technical qualification. It was also undergoing a change of Director General at the time of the Douma investigation, with the firmly Francoist Spanish diplomat Fernando Arias taking over as Director General and the French diplomat Sebastian Braha effectively running the operation as the Director-General’s chef de cabinet, working in close conjunction with the US security services. Braha simply ordered the excision of the expert opinions on engineering and toxicology, and his high-handedness worked, at least until whistleblowers started to reveal the truth about Braha as a slimy, corrupt, lying war hawk.

FFM here stands for Fact Finding Mission and ODG for Office of the Director General. After a great deal of personal experience dealing with French diplomats, I would say that the obnoxious arrogance revealed in Braha’s instructions here is precisely what you would expect. French diplomats as a class are a remarkably horrible and entitled bunch. Braha has no compunction about simply throwing around the weight of the Office of the Director General and attempting to browbeat Henderson.

We see now how the OPCW managed to produce a report which was the opposite of the truth. Ian Henderson, the OPCW engineer who had visited the site and concluded that the “cylinder bombs” were fakes, had suddenly become excluded from the “fact finding mission” when it had been whittled down to a “core group” – excluding any engineers (and presumably toxicologists) who would seek to insert inconvenient facts into the report.

France of course participated, alongside the US and UK, in missile strikes against Syrian government positions in response to the non-existent chlorine gas attacks on Douma. I was amongst those who had argued from day one that the western Douma narrative was inherently improbable. The Douma enclave held by extreme jihadist, western and Saudi backed forces allied to ISIL, was about to fall anyway. The Syrian government had no possible military advantage to gain by attacking it with two small improvised chemical weapons, and a great deal to lose in terms of provoking international retaliation.

That the consequences of the fake Douma incident were much less far-reaching than they might have been, is entirely due (and I am sorry if you dislike this but it is true) to the good sense of Donald Trump. Trump is inclined to isolationism and the fake “Russiagate” narrative promoted by senior echelons of his security services had led him to be heavily sceptical of them. He therefore refused, against the united persuasion of the hawks, to respond to the Douma “attack” by more than quick and limited missile strikes. I have no doubt that the object of the false flag was to push the US into a full regime change operation, by falsifying a demonstration that a declared red line on chemical weapon use had been crossed.

There is no doubt that Douma was a false flag. The documentary and whistleblower evidence from the OPCW is overwhelming and irrefutable. In addition to the two whistleblowers reported extensively by Wikileaks and the Courage Foundation, the redoubtable Peter Hitchens has his own whistleblowers inside OPCW who may well be different persons. It is also great entertainment as well as enlightening to read Hitchens’ takedown of Bellingcat on the issue.

But there are much deeper questions about the Douma false flag. Did the jihadists themselves kill the “chlorine victims” for display or were these just bodies from the general fighting? The White Helmets were co-located with the jihadist headquarters in Douma, and involved in producing and spreading the fake evidence. How far were the UK and US governments, instrumental in preparing the false flag? That western governments, including through the White Helmets and their men at the OPCW, were plainly seeking to propagate this false flag, to massively publicise and to and make war capital out of it, is beyond dispute. But were they involved in the actual creation of the fake scene? Did MI6 or the CIA initiate this false flag through the White Helmets or the Saudi backed jihadists? That is unproven but seems to me very probable. It is also worth noting the coincidence in time of the revelation of the proof of the Douma false flag and the death of James Le Mesurier.

Now let me return to where I started. None of the New York Times, the Washington Post, the BBC, the Guardian nor CNN – all of which reported the Douma chemical attack very extensively as a real Syrian government atrocity, and used it to editorialise for western military intervention in Syria – none of them has admitted they were wrong. None has issued any substantive retraction or correction. None has reported in detail and without bias on the overwhelming evidence of foul play within the OPCW.

Those sources who do publish the truth – including the few outliers in mainstream media such as Peter Hitchens and Robert Fisk – continue to be further marginalised, attacked as at best eccentric and at worse Russian agents. Others like Wikileaks and myself are pariahs excluded from any mainstream exposure. The official UK, US, French and Spanish government line, and the line of the billionaire and state owned media, continues to be that Douma was a Syrian government chemical weapons attack on civilians. They intend, aided and abetted by their vast online propaganda operations, to brazen out the lie.

What we are seeing is the terrifying rise of the zombie state narrative in Western culture. It does not matter how definitively we can prove that something is a lie, the full spectrum dominance of the Establishment in media resources is such that the lie is impossible to kill off, and the state manages to implant that lie as the truth in the minds of a sufficient majority of the populace to ride roughshod over objective truth with great success. It follows in the state narrative that anybody who challenges the state’s version of truth is themselves dishonest or mad, and the state manages also to implant that notion into a sufficient majority of the populace.

These are truly chilling times.

In the next instalment I shall consider how the Establishment is brazening out similar lies on the Russophobe agenda, and sticking to factually debunked narratives on the DNC and Podesta emails, on the Steele Dossier and on the Skripals.

——————————————

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 every article, 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



 

Alternatively:

Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.


365 thoughts on “The Terrifying Rise of the Zombie State Narrative

1 2 3
  • Ingwe

    And the lies continue. The BBC spin on the illegal assassination of the Iranian military commander (along with Iraqi personnel) in Iraq, is that America has taken preemptive action to prevent “rumoured” or “suspected” Iranian actions. So any American military action can now be justified on “rumours” and undisclosed “threats”. No discussion by the appalling Nick Robinson as to the illegality of it all. Similarly, the simpering “questioning” by Mishal Hussein of an American state department representative, allowed for a totally uncritical exposition of the US’s crime as being justified, with more to come.

    • fwl

      You are forgetting that Mishal Hussein allowed Professor Marandi to comment at length and quite explicitly about the Iranian perception of what UK and US have been up to together with KSA in Syria and Iraq.

  • Tom

    What the actual minutes say:
    ‘The experts were also of the opinion that the victims were highly unlikely to have gathered in piles at the centre of the respective apartments, at such a short distance from an escape from any toxic chlorine gas to much cleaner air.’

    What Craig the conspiracy theorist concludes:
    ‘So the toxicology experts plainly believed the corpse piles had been staged, and the engineering experts plainly believed the cylinder bombs had been staged.’

    This isn’t ‘plain’ at all. They cast major doubt that the bodies got there by piling up and being poisoned by chlorine gas, which they already said did not exist. The minutes contain no information whatsoever on how the toxicology experts believe the bodies did get there. You’re simply filling in the blanks with your own desired narrative of blah blah White Helmets blah blah fake victims blah blah media fakery.

    It’s like listening to those wankers who claim no one died at the Boston marathon bombing…

      • Tom

        This sort of response is what I’ve come to expect from the Bartlett/Beeley ‘everything is about the White Helmets and media fakery’ crowd. Every single time I’ve criticised their arguments, their lack of evidence, even their excuse-making for torture as long as it’s done by the Assad government, I get accused of being a disinfo agent, a zionist or just insulted.

        It speaks volumes for the quality of a belief that no one can present a good argument for it.

        • salvo

          “What Craig the conspiracy theorist concludes”

          that’s the reason I called you as what you are : an asshole

        • Ken Kenn

          That is yesterday’s news compared to what Trump has just done and what is going to come.

          The question for your possible beloved hero( Johnson ) is: Is he and his cabinet of weirdos going to send troops/military to Iraq or anywhere else for that matter if the US demands ( sorry asks ) the UK for back up?

          I suspect revenge will come in Saudi Arabia- Israels friend and ally.

          We can discuss the ins and outs of all that later if you wish?

          If we are all still here – of course?

    • Ros Thorpe

      Yet I’m willing to believe that ‘highly likely’ was in your mind proof that Russia was responsible for the Skripal attacks even though there was no evidence presented at all. Here at least we have evidence that the positioning of the bodies was not consistent with the claims made.

      • Tom

        Wrong. I have been writing against the Russia-Novichok-Skripals conspiracy theory since it happened. I am opposed to the war on Syria. I just don’t believe that someone else’s scepticism about the condition/position of some bodies is positive evidence of anything. Because it isn’t. Scepticism about one claim isn’t substantiation of a rival claim.

        Perhaps if anyone here, including Craig, had actually studied logic or criminal investigations or any relevant field instead of just believing anything that embedded Assadist journalists like Bartlett and Beeley say, then you’d get somewhere. But until you actually apply the same logic to your desired beliefs as you do to government narratives, you’ll remain nothing more than a suspicious speculator i.e. a conspiracy theorist in the truest sense of the words.

    • pretzelattack

      there was a conspiracy, using logic. if there wasn’t enough chlorine to kill anybody, then how did all those people get there? your’e just parroting the propaganda line.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Tom January 3, 2020 at 10:14
      ‘…blah blah White Helmets blah blah fake victims blah blah media fakery….’
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0mjLq_fwHc&feature=share
      And someone definitely did get murdered at the ‘Boston Bombing’, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who was seen unharmed in police custody, and next was declared dead on some cock & bull narrative about being run over by his brother.

    • V

      a) It’s plain if you’re familiar in the least with the way things are phrased in official documentation and communication. Same way, when you’re writing an email to another department. “You fucking moron, you have skipped over the relevant paragraph in the guideline I sent and now waste my time with rubbish” becomes. “It would appear so, but on closer reading of paragraph 4 a), it is obvious that…”

      b) Let’s go with an analogy. You are investigating a crime scene, and there’s a guy sitting at a desk, with a gun in his hands and a hole in the side of his head. Upon closer inspection, you find that there are no post-discharge fumes on his hands, and despite being left-handed, he’s holding the gun in his right hand.

      Is saying that the scene has been staged as a tl;dr a leap to a conclusion? I’d call it the application of elementary logic.

  • J

    It’s an act of war certainly, but what American foreign policy isn’t? Is this the Archduke moment for our century?

    • Laguerre

      The Iranians aren’t going to retaliate instantaneously. There’ll be a lot of thinking before the reprisal is is chosen, no doubt in consultation with Russia. Weaker countries have to do that, when faced with the world’s military super-power.

      • Tom Welsh

        We can be sure that a lot of thinking has already taken place. Given what the world knows about the moral imbeciles who run the USA, the death of General Soleimani was a matter of “when”, not “if”.

        Obviously contingency plans already exist. However nothing is likely to happen until the three days of mourning are over. At that point those of a nervous disposition can start counting…

        • Laguerre

          They’d do better to keep it hanging a bit longer than that. Revenge is best enjoyed cold.

        • Andyoldlabour

          Tom Welsh

          I would hope that it is a measured response – major US politician or possibly an aircraft carrier in the Gulf.
          Iran has not attacked another country in over 400 years.
          Trump is the worst kind of person, a narcissist with unbridled power at his command. He will do this again if not checked.

          • John L. Mann

            I’m in complete agreement with your assessment of Trump’s malignant narcissism. However, a nagging thought occurs: if he’ll “do this again if not checked,” how will the man-child react if his hubris sustains a direct, telling insult? The tantrum this prepubescent personality can throw down is a real doozy.

      • Tom Welsh

        “We learn nothing from history”.

        Contrariwise!

        “We” (the ordinary fairly decent people) learn that we are completely powerless, and that no one with any power cares what we think or want.

        While those in power learn that wars reliably make them far richer and more powerful.

  • Republicofscotland

    As some commentors have already mentioned the US assassinated Iranian General Suleimani.

    Suleimani was an Iranian war hero, it was his fighting naunce that helped to defeat ISIL in Iraq ansd Syria. The illegal killing of Suleimani, is a good result for the Great Satan.

    Like Obamas assassination programme, where individuals or groups were killed by drone bombing without judge or jury, but on the whim (passed off as intel) of the US, Suleimanis and his second in command were both victims of the Great Satans elimantion programme.

    A close friend and supporter of the ayatollah, his murder is bound to spark reprisals all over the Middle East and in South East Asia.

    Trump who sanctioned the killings didn’t run it by Congress first, though most of the Republicans if media reports are correct agreed with the strike. The Democrats did not and Elizabeth Warren condemned the strike.

    Trump may yet get his defining war, Iran is moving ever closer to war with the Great Satan, Trump as with Obama, knows that war is good for re-election, and it diverts minds away from the impeachment by the Democrats.

    Israel is now on high alert with its borders on Syria and Lebanon, welcome to the new year, but the same old same old.

    • Laguerre

      “The illegal killing of Suleimani, is a good result for the Great Satan.”

      No it is not, it was an error.

      One of the reasons why the act was a grave miscalculation, to take an example, is Iraq. The Iraqis are certainly capable of making life for the US very uncomfortable in Iraq and Syria, even if not force withdrawal. The present US structure and numbers depend on Iraqi acquiescence, and that’s about shot, even before the assassination. If the position is to be maintained without Iraqi acquiescence, then thousands more troops would be required, and that wouldn’t go down well back home in the States.

      • Republicofscotland

        You’re missing the bigger picture here, the assassinations are an attempt to provoke war with Iran. Any killings of US troops or US civilians in Iraq, will be again blamed on Iran, and used as an excuse to implement all out war with Iran.

        Remember Iran is now pushing ahead with its nuclear weapons programme, the Great Satan must act now or face a nuclear Iran in the region. Israel and Saudi Arabia won’t want that.

        • Laguerre

          No, I’m not. Of course I’m aware that the assassinations are an attempt to provoke war with Iran. Everyone thinks that. But I doubt the Iranians will allow themselves to be drawn. They would be foolish to do so. Better to work on the situation in Iraq.

          • fwl

            The basic fact of the assassination is that Trump has challenged Iran to take the current US / Iran conflict out of the proxy / Cold War context and into a traditional war i.e. he has moved a piece on the main board and has taken more than a pawn.

            That is shocking and is going to take a while to be understood. Obviously Trump doesn’t want a war (I hope). There is going to be a hell of a lot of argument in the States about this. Even his supporters like his isolationism although I supposed it would not be difficult to bang the drum and get them marching, but what about everyone else in the US how on earth are they going to fall in line. This may even play to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren…. Trump probably feels he can more easily defeat them then he could Mike Bloomberg.

            Presumably Iran may prefer to duck the challenge of all out open traditional warfare. They may be tempted to see Cold War proxy conflict increase, but presumably they have to weigh that up against the fact that Trump has signalled his willingness to engage in an open and traditional conflict.

            In a strange way Trump’s behaviour is the opposite of the underhand covert / special & psy op behaviour which Craig criticises in his post at the top of the page i.e. because it is (whether legal or illegal whether justified or not ) overt, obvious and open.

            Still I suspect that it will probably lead to more not less proxy stuff.

            Putin may appreciate Trump’s ability to make sudden moves (because Putin is himself quite adept at that sort of thing) so it would be interesting to hear his advice to Iran.

    • Tom Welsh

      “As some commentors have already mentioned the US assassinated Iranian General Suleimani”.

      Those commentators include the Pentagon and Mr Trump himself (by implication).

      But I prefer the honest word “murder” to the slimy prevarication “assassination”.

  • David

    uk based MI6 staff of all accents now doing the “first time caller, James” and spreading FUD about Iran (&Trump) on LBC…. heralding “a new arab spring”….

    So holiday season has ended in Vauxhall Cross, back to work

      • Tatyana

        and this tweet by Bolton:
        https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton/status/1213044218689720321

        hmmm … congratulations on death, because this death perhaps brings his desired purpose closer…
        I think he may be one of those mad maniacs with no moral regulators inside.
        Happy to see that most commentors do not approve the tweet. There is still hope for humanity.

        interesting observation by Maria Zakharova:

        “…To condemn attacks on their embassies, states turn to the UN Security Council with a presidential statement draft. Washington did not apply to the Security Council. So, the world’s reaction did not interest him.
        (Clarification. It turns out, it’s still more interesting. The Americans submitted a draft statement to the UNSC Press (*office) and it is held on the “default procedure” until January 3, 10 a.m. NY time. That means, the missile strike first, and then everyone else’s opinion. So far, there have been no appeals to hold a Security Council meeting on this issue, or even to discuss this topic in SC consultations in the format “miscellaneous”.)…”

        source in russian
        https://www.facebook.com/maria.zakharova.167/posts/10221672558072921

          • Tatyana

            and here is the statement of US defence depertment
            https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2049534/statement-by-the-department-of-defense/

            that’s how they see it: “action to protect U.S. personnel abroad” – as if those are civil personell.
            and: “The United States will continue to take all necessary action to protect our people and our interests wherever they are around the world.” – as if it is normal to have interests and military around the world.

          • michael norton

            Partially or wholly this will be about the “Iranians” taking out the oil refinery in Saudi Arabia.
            As been mentioned many times on this blog, oil is denominated in U.S.A. dollars.
            This is the pact that ensures the survival of the Saudi ruling family, were the Saudis to imagine selling their oil in a different currency, they know what would quickly befall them.
            However, Iran and Russia can sell their product direct to India and China, without American interception, or so they think.
            This could be a warning shot from America across the Iranian bows.
            Take out the Saudi Infrastructure again and America will take out Iranian Infrastructure – quickly.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ michael norton January 3, 2020 at 15:55
            You seem to be accepting the U.S. narrative that it was Iran that hit the Saudi refinery, but the Yemeni’s claimed responsibility, and like with the alleged Iraqi WMD and Assad’s alleged ‘CW’ attacks, and indeed OBL’s alleged attack, they provide no proof.

    • Ken Kenn

      Without doubt Jack.

      Patriotism in war time is an old favourite for any leader who’s in trouble.

      The strange thing is that Trump’s Poll Ratings had increased by about 5%.

      Other dark forces at work?

      And if so -always the question is: Why this and why now?

  • M.J.

    The wiki article “Douma chemical article” mentions the dissenting documents indicating that one photo at least could have been staged. However The BBC report of 10th July 2018 menitons 500 people turning up at medical facilities with symptoms indicating chemical poisoning.
    Even if the wikileaks document was right it does not negate the use of chemical weapons in other place,though staging a photo would be foolish as a propaganda exercise.
    Therefore the Syrians remain baddies. What else can you expect from dictatorships? Those who support them deserved to be flattened at the ballot box. Give me Western democracy every time!

    • Laguerre

      Astounding that you place any trust at all in a wiki article on such a subject, even for joking purposes. Philip Cross will have been at work.

    • Vivian O'Blivion

      The first “victims of the chemical attack” turned up at local medical facilities BEFORE the “attack” occurred. Other “victims of the chemical attack” turned up at medical facilities in Turkey a few minutes after the “attack” (an impossible feat). That is not to say that there weren’t civilian victims. The deaths appear to have been the result of hypoxia brought on by fine dust from conventional bombing or artillery.

    • Sarge

      Except Washington, London, Paris, etc., never intended giving Syria ‘Western democracy’ (a debatable enough concept in its own right in the neoliberal age.)

      No, they sought to replace the non-sectarian Assad with the black flag men of al-Nusra, Jeffersonian headchoppers and human heart eaters..

    • Paul Barbara

      @ M.J. January 3, 2020 at 11:16
      I believe a lot of these ‘victims’ arrived at the hospital before the alleged attack, if I remeber correctly. And why on earth do you believe such tosh narratives, with no proof? The OPCW shenanigans should be proof enough that the whole business was a sham, as many of us believed from the outset. Assad had no reason to use gas; nothing to gain, and everything to lose.
      History is replete with False Flag casus belli. If it quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck and looks like a duck, chances are it’s a duck.
      ‘…Even if the wikileaks document was right it does not negate the use of chemical weapons in other place,though staging a photo would be foolish as a propaganda exercise.
      Therefore the Syrians remain baddies….’
      Strange logic. How do you reason that because something hasn’t been negated, ‘..Therefore the Syrians remain baddies?’

  • Mrs Pau!

    I am massively behind the curve on the current role of Iran v. USA, in Iraq. Why was Qassim Sulaemi a target for the US when visiting Iraq.? Was it connected to him being the head of the Iranian Quds black ops force?, or was it in fact a mistake?

  • Hatuey

    Surprised to see so many of the enlightened ones fooled by the Iraq cover story. And surprised to see that so many still depend on the MSM to spoon-feed them information about stuff like this.

    The real story barely involves Iranians. The Iraqi people want the US and its puppet government out. This is why they attacked the embassy. They’ve been rioting for weeks.

    The US can’t admit that, of course. Admit that and you admit that Iraq is a colony and the US is the aggressor. As ever, this creates the need for an external enemy and a context that lends itself to pretending the US is there to defend the poor Innocent people from those evil Iranians.

    This is all kids’ stuff and people on here should know better. It’s basically been the M0 of the US since at least 1945 and it’s why they invented the Cold War.

  • Goose

    The Guardian has closed its comments today, no doubt fearing their readers won’t agree with Trump’s insanely reckless drift to war.

    Nick Robinson, BBC’s Radio 4’s Today programme host, described the event [in Iraq] as “a very early test for those who want to be leader of the opposition”. I.e., back the Americans in anything they chose to do or we’ll call you out as unpatriotic.

    • John Pretty

      American’s love war and bloodshed Goose. From the appalling genocide of the American Indians through to regime change war after regime change war since 1945. The American war machine rolls on.

      • Ken Kenn

        They do – but not their own since Vietnam and a little in Iraq.

        The new Modus Operandi is to bomb the crap out of a place and when it’s safe to go in (i.e. everybody’s dead )
        then plant the flag.

        Great stories for the folks back home.

        Otherwise known as cowardice and fear of getting hurt.

        All bullies fear getting hurt.

        That’s why their police are armed to the teeth.

        They can give it but they can’t take it.

        • Goose

          @Ken Kenn

          Something definitely in that.

          Faith in politicians and institutions is so low due to being lied to, our populations simply wouldn’t tolerate losses of personnel at scale in a major war eg. 000s or 10,000s. Govts would find millions protesting on the street and they’d fall. Trying to explain the ‘national interest’ in a ‘war of choice’ with Iran would be be impossible. If Johnson ventures down that path the 80% of young people who didn’t vote Tory will doubtless make their feelings known. A surefire way for Johnson , Raab and co to become extremely unpopular very quickly.

      • Goose

        Iran is larger than western Europe and over 80 million people strong. The US couldn’t afford the price in blood and treasure to even attempt to invade and occupy.

        The aim appears to be to try to force Iran into retaliatory steps to justify further US action to the US population and other world leaders. If Iran have any sense they’ll resist such moves. Trump faces a tough reelection battle.

        Trump himself no doubt calculates this escalation will help him in that reelection bid (as his 2011-12 tweets about the then Pres. Obama suggest). I’d wager no one in the US, would be remotely comfortable or confident with someone as unpredictable as Trump conducting a war as commander in chief. Certainly not senior military personnel – James Mattis resigned remember.

        • John Pretty

          “Trump himself no doubt calculates this escalation will help him in that reelection bid”

          I’m honestly not sure if trump really thinks about it that deeply Goose. He is surrounded by military advisers and strategists who are in the game of the promotion of the American war machine abroad.

        • Republicofscotland

          “Iran is larger than western Europe and over 80 million people strong. The US couldn’t afford the price in blood and treasure to even attempt to invade and occupy.”

          You don’t need to occupy to destroy infrastructure and the economy, air superiority is the key factor. Saudi Arabia and Israel would also join in the sorties on Iran.

          I think 1967 when the US was stretched over what was going on in Indonesia, Israel first came to the fore as a potential numer one ally.

          The US had problems with Egypt and its growing secular/open society. They were tied up in Indonesia and Israel stepped in and all but destroyed the Egyptian airforce. Not long after that aid to Israel from the US shot up dramatically.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Republicofscotland January 3, 2020 at 13:29
            ‘..I think 1967 when the US was stretched over what was going on in Indonesia…’
            America had no probs in Indonesia in 1967. They had organised the False Flag ‘attempted Communist Coup’ and it’s bloody rollback by Suharto in 1965.
            The communists had no reason to launch a coup, as Sukarno was balancing the political and military forces very adeptly. The ‘Communists’ allegedly killed five nationalist pro-Sukarno generals, leaving alive Suharto, who commanded an elite army group, which then engineered a massive blood bath of communists and suspected communists (I believe up to a million and a half were slaughtered, and millions more imprisoned.
            Shortly before the ‘attempted coup’, a high American official had described Indonesia as a ripe plum just waiting to fall into US hands.

      • Mary

        I nominate Howard Zinn, the playwright, essayist and thinker.

        Also Gary Corseri, a poet who wrote this –
        https://www.poemhunter.com/poem/in-a-time-of-endless-war/

        Chomsky too and there are many more.

        Here is Howard Zinn in 2006 calling for an end to war. Note the mention of war planned on Iran.

        https://youtu.be/EK-0x5dXR-0

        ‘Green Parrots & Just War
        Dr. Gino Strada and historian Howard Zinn speak about their latest books at an event sponsored by Emergency (www.emergencyusa.org ), a humanitarian group that provides free medical care for civilian victims in war zones around the world. Dr. Strada, co-founder of Emergency, is the author of “Green Parrots,” a diary of his experiences working in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Bosnia, Somolia, and Sudan. During the event he talks about the civilian war victims he has encountered and argues for the need to abolish war as a means for settling disputes. Following that, Professor Zinn discusses the Bush administration’s invasion and occupation of Iraq, the possibility of an attack on Iran, and the American public’s appetite for war today. His latest book is titled “Just War.” Both participants answer questions from audience members following their remarks. This event was held at the Immanuel Presbyterian Church in Los Angeles.

        Gino Strada co-founded Emergency in Milan, Italy in 1994. Since that time Emergency has treated nearly 2 million civilian victims of war and landmines. Howard Zinn’s books include “A People’s History of the United States” and “Terrorism and War.”‘

    • John Pretty

      nevermind, I have read or heard somewhere that the full impeachment of Trump is extremely unlikely anyway.

      Put crudely, he was impeached in the House of Representatives because the Democrats have a majority there.

      He will not be impeached by the Senate (where it really counts) because the Republicans have a majority there and 2/3 of the 100 senators must vote in favour of impeachment.

      The evidence requirement is also more stringent in the Senate.

    • 6033624

      Any false flag to start an actual declaration of war would have to be sizeable. Trump has, despite being in every other way contemptible, very peaceful. To convince HIM is the problem for the hawks. It would have to be something that cannot be ignored, cannot be dealt with by diplomats and could not be dealt with in any ‘limited’ way. It would have to be big and also something that could not be considered a ‘legitimate target’ Perhaps it would also be an attack that seemed to be DIRECT not by a proxy.

      No one believes they have a nuclear capability, but perhaps a chemical attack on a larger scale, with film of Iranian Air Force dropping them, unprovoked in a large town? Maybe an Israeli town? Would the Israelis allow something so heinous on their on soil to further their aims? We’ll have to wait and see, won’t we?

  • Gary Scott

    The ‘body pile’ you mention seems eerily similar to that of Nazi gas chambers. This leads me to think that perhaps the victims DID suffer a has attack but only by being locked in a sealed room with it. Everything else, projectiles, timings etc was faked.

    As I write this is does sound a bit ‘tin foil hat’ but unless your source is a fake, then someone somewhere has taken a decision to start a war and I wouldn’t doubt their ability and willingness to kill innocent children in order to further their aims.

    NB the ‘lack of retractions’ reminds me of an older story but one I’ve never forgotten, Jean Charles de Menezes. If you remember he was the young Brazilian man shot dead (point blank headshot) on the London Underground on Cressida Dick’s orders. Well, you’ll no doubt remember he was innocent too so I won’t get into that. My point is that ‘The Sun’ ran a front page on it the next day and in the article they have reports from a ‘witness’ they interviewed at the scene (ie on the train) The ‘witness’ claimed that de Menezes rushed onto the train and (paraphrasing) ‘had something that looked like a bomb with wires etc’ BUT within 24 hours we had discovered that he was carrying nothing at all, there was nothing even to MISTAKE for a bomb. Obviously the interview was either faked by the journalist or handed to the newspaper before they knew they royally f*cked up but although there was an inquiry into the shooting itself (which if I recall found that ‘accidents happen’ and cleared Dick) no one every raised this to the newspaper, their readership being so sheep like they never even noticed the lie. It’s MORE worrying to me that no one reacted to that (ie the lie found out) than the lie itself. We are sheep…

    • G Evans

      Can you link pictures of gas chamber bodies, I’m not aware of actual pictures of gassing, though there are many pictures of dead bodies of course. As far as I’m aware most of the gas chamber allegations have been withdrawn other than for camps behind the iron curtain, in what is now Poland. Little actual evidence can be found for the gassing chamber. Check out Germar Rudolf of the Max Plank institute and the Leuchter (a US gas chamber manufacturer) report.

      In effect in talking about the big lie, you’ve possibly inadvertently repeated the big lie about the “gas chambers”. Half my family a Jewish and I am not a Nazi, I feel I need to state this because the usual reaction people make to having their historical narratives questioned in to get angry. I’m glad you mentioned De-Menezes and it is shocking how Dick could be promoted to Met Chief afterwards. The lies of the British Establishment go back far longer and are far bigger than people are willing to admit

  • SA

    You don’t even need experts to tell you that this orange cylinder did not come crashing through a hole through the ceiling which was created by the impact. Note that the cylinder is surrounded by a strip metal cage which is partly broken. That metal cage would have been ripped off the cylinder after such an impact, not to mention the cylinder iotself which would have been badly dented.

  • Rob Pettitt

    I still don’t understand why Blair and Bush didn’t plant some WMD at the time. Crooked cops will happily plant some drugs in your pocket or child porn on your laptop if they want a prosecution. Were they really so thick they didn’t think of it?

    • Trowbridge H. Ford

      Because they believed super liar Colin Powell claiming that Saddam had them but also was poisoning key Americans at home.
      ]
      Remember those false user certificates he was willing to supply from Sweden for Israel during Iran-Contra.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Trowbridge H. Ford January 4, 2020 at 11:40
        He was also the officer who tried to cover up the My Lai massacre in Vietnam.

  • Carol

    On the Con Party website, they were predicting “a near wipeout” in the London local elections at the time, hence firing billions worth of bombs did the trick and saved them from the predicted near wipeout, Hence the comparison with Thatcher and the Falklands, she waited until they were invaded before doing anything, to improve her popularity with the thick British public.

  • G Evans

    “in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily, and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it” – Hitler in Mein Kampf while talking about the lying Newspapers.

    No, Craig Murray, the establishment has not “learned” to never admit they lied, they are just doing the same thing they’ve been doing for over 100 years.

  • Antonym

    Here another official lie, a prediction from 2004 about 2020 by the Pentagon and published by the Graun: A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver

  • Joseph Olson

    “Breathtaking: Solving Nuclear 9/11” and “Exposing NIST Jenga Game” at
    VeteransToday(.)com > finally, WTC vaporized declassified
    Project for the New American Century, PNAC, released Sept 2000 said US must topple seven mid east nations, but needed a New Pearl Harbor. PRESTO….”Unequivocal 9/11 Nukes” > principia-australia(.)org
    Obombie & Reptillary launched Operation Zero Footprint to overthrow Tunisia, Yemen, Egypt and Libya. Then Operation Timber Sycamore against Syria. Fake gas attacks in Baghdad, Aug 2013, Putin intervened and all WMD incinerated by US Nvy MV Cape Ray. Another fake gas attack in Shayrat, April 2017 launched 103 missiles, 71 blocked by S-300 air defense. Then Douma false flag, now Soleimani assassination.

  • Muscleguy

    It is deeply worrying for the next IndyRef as well. We have likely already seen the zombie state narrative being run in trying to take down Alex Salmond. Fortunately they don’t fully control our senior judges in the Inner and Outer Houses and Salmond was able to demonstrate how he had been set up and the rules brazenly broken.

    Whether the attempted takedown was entirely a creation of the ‘sisterhood’ or they were induced or used as useful idiots to do it by the Zombie State doesn’t matter. The court documents, including the increasingly angry judge making the prosecution produce unredacted documents. They clearly expected a govt patsy at the bench to play ball.

    The Spanish state is about to discover again that their new attempt to get hold of Clara Ponsati will not work. The Belgian courts are unlikely to play ball either. Oh dear, what a pity, never mind.

    Spain, ye cannae hae oor Clara, hands aff.

  • Strike

    When a person or organization lies to you, and you know that they have lied to you. And when that person or organization does not acknowledge or admit to the proven lies, meaning that they refuse to take any steps towards addressing those lies nor towards preventing further lies …… Then there is absolutely no reason to believe such a person or organization….. about anything …. ever again.

    At this point, the world simply has to label these people as liars, and never, ever believe again anything they tell us. That includes all the lies about how we have to be ruled by oligarchs and how our democracies are the best possible and every other damn thing they try to tell us every single day. This is especially true during the charades known as elections. Never believe a liar. Never trust a liar. Never do business with a liar. That of course means an entire policy of BDS must be implemented within our own countries towards our own liars and the people who back them.

    It is insane to do business in any fashion with any known liar. This means creating as complete a degree of non-cooperation as is possible within their authoritarian police systems. It sounds like its not doing much, but its amazing how much cooperation they need from us to make things work. Never cooperate with a liar.

  • Spencer Eagle

    The outrage in the liberal media over the death of Soleimani and a handful of staff is breathtaking, at no point during Obama’s reign of terror over the Middle East did anyone in the media question the civilian death toll resulting from his literal 24/7 bombing campaigns. Soleimani rocked up in Bagdad, bold as brass, following Iranian state orchestrated attacks on the US embassy and he paid the price.

  • Thom Prentice

    Watch the film “Where’s My Roy Cohn” to

    1) See where this modern version of the slash / accuse / bully / burn no-proof-required strategy came from and

    2) How Donald Trump, the Republicans and the Deep State internalized the Roy Cohn paradigm of doubling down, tripling down on lies and then accusing opponents of having done the very wicked things that they themselves were doing.

    I knew of the despicable immoral/amoral Cohn who executed the Rosenbergs, got his start browbeating and bullying with Joe McCarthy, and first tried his hand at manipulation of the levers of power in trying to get a cushy Army deal for his boyfriend G. David Schine.

    I not only didn’t understand how well he systematized his vile, venal repugnant personal wickedness in his corrupt snake pit law practice — which eventually got him disbarred — but how much rubbed off on modern Republican and Deep State strategies let alone how Donald Trump basically morphed into a blow dry Cohn. Hence all the lying bullshit following the assassination of General Qasim Sulemani.

    The film finally places in context Cohn’s sneering defiant serial lying denial at the end of his life that he was homosexual and, even worse, his denial that he had AIDS. Cohn was lying whenever his mouth was open and he was also a basic grifter, something else I didn’t know and which the film depicts. What he did to his own family!

    Cohn is the single, sole authentic Jungian “shadow” of the postwar United States and his malevolent ghost lives on. One is enough.

  • V

    I guess the west is quickly catching up with us in terms of broadcasting.

    I still remember the beautiful moment from sometime 2011 or so when our then-neoliberal government sold platinum microsieves from state valuable material reserves to some private company for like, one fifth of the market price, journalists dug it up, and then a spokesman for the company appeared on TV and stated that the microsieves have been sold under-price because they have been devalued by corrosion.

    And guess what, nobody went to jail or answered, either.

  • .Geoffrey

    I hadn’t realised that Private Eye had become an establishment propaganda outlet. It attacked Hitchens personally concerning his OPCW criticisms. Hitchens laments in a letter that PE no longer backs independent journalism. This blog mentioned by another letter writer.

  • Lyle Courtsal

    There is an on the ground report on the Khan Sheykoun attack/bombing of an ISIS weapons depot cleared by the US, that hit chem weapons precursors, killing 89. Did you hear about the swedish doctors exposing white helmets media stunt pretending to attempt resuscitation of infants that were actually long dead? The way they are playing with corpses makes staging of alleged douma attack easily done. Had an independent there who claimed there was no attack in douma. All I saw was a dark, dust filled room, light slicing into darkness with some people moving into it. Not even great staging. Then finally, there were the two dead peasant farmers, one in Algeria and one in Colombia, dressed up after death as terrorists by paramilitaries in both places. Seen the movie Swordfish with Halle Berry?

1 2 3

Comments are closed.