Wednesday, 18 February 2015

Terror, Lies and Video Tape?

Comments on Craig Murray Cheveline Massacre Thread

Jorgen C. Madsen
18 Feb, 2015 – 7:36 am is a good illustration of a point I made a couple of days ago and then lost by a slip of the finger. (A variation on the tongue) It has never been explained how the son of a tradesman from a provincial town could write with such confidence about the Court and foreign nations that he had never visited. Controversy has raged over authorship without resolving the issue, however coming from another angle it would have made the greatest sense for an aristocratic/educated author to hide his personality behind a suitable “front”. Indeed he could not have done otherwise in 16th C England. Even a hundred years later Defoe was being prosecuted for writing political pamphlets and another (roughly) until Tom Paine’s trial, famously defended by Irskine, one of the greatest English (though Scottish) barristers. In some ways Shakespeare could maybe regarded as an early ‘Patsie’, though never destroyed for it.

The point I am making of course is that in Shakespeare’s time, no less our own, the line between fact and fiction, truth and lies, reality and artifice is often very hard to distinguish. It has been said “History is literature” and “History is made by the winners”. So too the narrative of current events can be shaped more by a political agenda than by what really happened. This is the power of the internet: to circumvent the MSM and so create a different narrative as Russell Brand is so keen on saying, and to some degree been successful at. It is why government is clearly worried and needs an excuse to introduce control, effectively censorship, by the backdoor under the guise of some generally agreed objective. Hence the very belated conversion to “doing something about child pornography” after actively ignoring it, indeed promoting it, in the highest levels of government, for decades.

In the English-speaking world, the world view has been largely shaped by a Hollywood based industry for at east eighty years. Its reach has extended far beyond the English speaking world and a distinctive European “voice” has been submerged by it. It is therefore not irrelevant to ask who controls that machine and the sub-conscious message it puts out. Increasingly it is being challenged by India and the far East, both by a separate industry and financial/management takeover. (“Today, Disney is the only member of the Big Six whose parent entity is still located near Los Angeles The five others report to conglomerates headquartered in New York City, Philadelphia, and Tokyo.” WIKI)
Columbia is owned by Sony. 20th Century Fox is owned by Murdock’s News (!) empire. Warner Bros by an AOL comglomerate. Paramount by “National Amusements”(?) Comcast, an internet provider, amongst other things, has taken control of Universal. Metro Goldwim Mayer (note names) is now controlled by bankers, Credit Suisse, JPMorgan Chase, Carl Icahn amongst them. United Artists has merged into MGM. The point of all this, and it would take far more space to unravel the relationship, is that television, news, internet, entertainment and films are gradually being merged so that the ethos and techniques of one sector merge into another. Who is ultimately in charge and sets the agenda becomes the critical question. Bill Cooper (before he was shot dead by police obviously soon after 9/11) claimed he himself has been duped and been used to promulgate diversionary stories about aliens. Of course it didn’t help his other arguments to admit it as it could then be reasonably said he was “bonkers”. Nevertheless he asserted that this was the “Age of Deception” and it cannot have passed our attention that this is the very motto of a certain intelligence operation can it?
בתחבולות תעשה לך מלחמה, loosely translated to “By Way of Deception, Thou Shalt Do War.”

So returning to the criminal “terrorist” cases in hand, from 9/11 onwards, who can mistake the hand of the “film-maker”. I use the term loosely. By now the whole world should be awake to the fiction that was 9/11 and put us on our guard for ALL subsequent ones whether “genuine” or not. Our leaders of course want us to believe this is a sign of madness, of paranoia, of conspiracy theory. It is their only defence but it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain the illusion. When Cameron threatened criminal sanctions against those who held such views it demonstrated just how desperate they have become. It is also indicated by the level of brutality and violence required to provide the necessary shock effect. Notice how the latest event (“outrage”?) in Denmark was used by Netanyahu to urge Jews to move to Israel! What a strange suggestion unless he is actually part of the problem? Fortunately it would seem the Danish public is not quite playing ball with this one, and not so ready to demonstrate irrationally or be manipulated, as did the French. Nevertheless we would be wise to take nothing at face value from this latest incident. Every assertion needs to be tested against the evidence. Centrally, was the 22 year old who was shot dead by the police the same man who carried out the two alleged shootings? In the case of Boston and Charlie Hebdo the balance of probabilities is actually against it! But there are many ancillary matters to be tested for veracity also before they can be taken as read. Why for example was he shot dead rather than arrested? Did he really “come out shooting” as was claimed rather implausibly in the French case. (In this one the story is he started shooting when challenged”) The police and security services have a long history of capturing dangerous individuals alive. Why has shooting to kill become the preferred option it seems? Have they lost the knack?

Michael Norton
18 Feb, 2015 – 3:16 pm – quite! Indeed rumours have circulated that in fact he was INTENTIONALLY targeted, the theory being he had crucial information on the 7/7 bombing that had the potential to undermine the official story. Again in this case we see the highly suspicious tell tale signs of a planned operation and cover up. As per Diana, all the relevant cameras fail to work; the police lie on evidence particularly in relation to Menenzies leaping the barrier; there was no way his clothes suggested he could be carrying explosives or otherwise posed a risk; at the time he was shot he was already disabled and overpowered and there was no reasonable ground for firing at him; it was never explained why he was targeted in the first place but if it was a case of mistaken identity, why was the true target subsequently arrested or at least identified?; he was shot multiple times at close range – his death was undoubtedly the intention; the policemen/special branch that did the killing were protected from any form of accountability; the person in charge of the disastrous operation – Cmdr Dick – was promoted not censured as incredibly were all the service personnel that allowed the worst attack on American soil. Can’t you just smell the rat in the cupboard?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.