‘MSM’ wakes up to possibility of WW3

Those of us with the time and energy to research, and look outside the ‘mainstream’, concluded long ago that the situation in Syria could well lead to WW3, via any potential direct conflict with Russia.

It has been clear for some time that western powers have been pushing an agenda to demonise the Russian leadership, who have stifled the west’s plunder of the Middle East, via their intervention in Syria to assist with the defeat of the west-backed ‘rebels’ (jihadists).

We feared a Hillary Clinton presidency, particularly because of her desire for a 'no-fly-zone' in Syria, thus making direct conflict with Russia almost inevitable.

Now that it’s more obvious to all that we’re on this course towards possible calamity, thanks to Trump seemingly renaging on his earlier anti-interventionist stance in Syria and becoming Hillary 2.0,  (or perhaps it's all 'liberal' Macron's doing and Trump is being truthful in his public calls for withdrawal?), ‘MSM’ has suddenly started reporting on the extreme seriousness of the situation in Syria, with direct conflict between two nuclear powers closer than it is has been since the height of the first Cold War.

It’s as though these ‘MSM’ journalists are unable to report anything other than the obvious. Why is this? Is it because of the constant McCarthyite climate that we have - meaning that doing so; to actually question the system whilst it heads in the direction of disaster, rather than waiting until we’re on the brink of catastrophe, sees them condemned as anti-western, conspiracy theorist, Kremlin bots? I know from first hand experience on Twitter that if you speak out against imperial war and against the ‘right’ of the west to ‘police’ the world, you‘ll be attacked as though you are a genocide-loving devil. Imagine what it is like for journalists/politicians to speak out against these things?

Unfortunately it’s the nature of  ‘MSM’ - they are a corporate media; a business, reliant on profit. They must be careful not to offend, and not to question the prevailing view too much and end up smeared as radical conspiracy theorists, or getting something wrong and having their reputations ruined. So self-censorship becomes necessary. Integrity is impossible. Corporate media journalists inevitably end up a herd of self-serving careerists. Generally only those with a certain ideology - those eager or willing to serve power and maintain the status quo - will reach the ‘top’ of the profession. This is Noam Chomsky’s theory of the ‘Manufacturing of Consent’. (See this interview in which Chomsky puts the BBC’s Andrew Marr on the spot).

And of course, the corporate media is owned and influenced by a handful of plutocrats, some of whom benefit from war and our hurtle to hell, via vested interests in oil rights in the Middle East, for example. (But surely even they don’t want nuclear war with Russia..?!).

It is abundantly clear that corporate media is not keeping the public informed, so it is essential that we citizens become wise to this media system and that we all grow a backbone and spread awareness ourselves. Thankfully this is happening, thanks to social media - hence all the establishment attacks on social media lately.

I just hope to God that Jeremy Corbyn, a man who clearly understands how the media operates as a propaganda machine to uphold the neoliberal and imperial status quo, holds out and doesn’t succumb to the current McCarthyite climate and to the bloodlust of the spineless sheep who make up both political parties and the ‘MSM’.

The debate as to whether or not we should intervene more in Syria is really a debate between those who continue to support, (or be apologists for), the unipolar world order dominated by the militarism and neoliberalism of the west... and those who want a different (multi-polar) world based on a genuine respect for international law and human rights.

Given that our latest intervention, in Syria, would literally involve becoming al Qaeda’s air force, and potentially lead to direct conflict with a nuclear armed country, I’m hoping that many are increasingly moving towards the latter option? Please god.

Syria Strikes - a tyrannical 'show' of force

Theresa May, Macron and Trump are monstrous tyrants prepared to act as al Qaeda’s air force with zero regard for international law in order to maintain their imperial agenda in Syria.

The OPCW hadn’t yet even investigated the Douma incident used as a pretext for this - that tells you everything you need to know. These people have no regard for law and order. And they are hypocrites, representing countries with a long history of chemical weapons usage.

Saying all of that, I am thankful that Hillary Clinton is not POTUS right now. As horrific as Trump is, if she’d won the election and gone ahead with her desired ‘no-fly-zone’, all hell could have broken loose by now.

Instead, what we got from Trump (and Macron/May) was an indefensible and illegal ‘show’ of force, to make the west look like the good guys and feed the military-industrial complex (Raytheon shares are up!).

And the whole charade, inc the massive propaganda drive, helps to justify the US’s indefinite occupation of northern Syria, (coincidently where the oil is).

A United States military general has stated that they ‘did not eradicate all of Assad’s chemical weapons’, leaving the door open for more strikes in ‘retaliation’ for future ‘chemical attacks’, (jihadists have been re-incentivised to stage attacks).

Who knows if the west will do more after the next ‘attack’, but it seems clear from these strikes that the west very much fears Russia. As they should.

If not for Russia, Syria would surely have been destroyed by the west’s proxy jihadists long ago!

'MSM' love proven liars

BBC News now reporting that Russian special services had a secret operation training spies to put nerve agents on door handles.

Could this get any more farcical?

And who is this information coming from? Sir Mark Sedwill. Quick internet search reveals that he helped cover up Blair’s Iraq War lies.

A reliable source to the ‘MSM’ though.

The propaganda continues.

Morally Reprehensible Media

Having seen what happened to Libya (and numerous other countries), it is despicable that many/most 'MSM’ journalists are now either calling for the same to be done to Syria, or silent about it. They are morally reprehensible, & if you are STILL relying on these self-serving sickos to inform you about the world, please reconsider fast.

They’ve spent two years lampooning Trump as a racist tyrant and a danger to the world, but now suddenly consider the US under his leadership, (+ lackeys in France and the UK), worthy of showing moral superiority in Syria. It’s rancid.

The internet is mostly full of shit, but there’s plenty of people out their doing great independent journalism. It’s up to us all to seek it out, become more aware, and speak out to prevent more destruction and death!

If we don’t, we are accomplices.

Another alleged chemical attack in Syria brings us closer to WW3

Nuclear powers are on the brink of direct conflict in Syria. 

Somehow, few seem alarmed by this. Instead, as a (seemingly desired) result of the Russiagate psy-op, many so-called liberals are cheering it on: ‘Trump must prove that he is not Putin’s puppet’! 

And, as a result of seven years of war propaganda, they also exclaim: ‘the US must intervene and help the freedom-fighting Syrian rebels!’. Never mind that the ‘rebels’ are al Qaeda and other extremist groups. Never mind that we have already given them a huge amount of support ($12billion+ of support from the US, with more from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey etc). 

And never mind that these are the same terrorists whom the west ostensibly set out to defeat 17 years ago, following 9/11!

We’re headed directly for WW3 and a nuclear holocaust. If you don’t think the priority right now should be to step back and reverse the unbelievably dangerous and stupid trajectory that we’re on, you’re either not paying attention, or you’re being brainwashed by western government stenographers in the ‘mainstream’ media. 

Russia is NOT ‘the villain’, but westerners have been made to believe so, in order to justify NATOs existence, and to justify the US Empire’s proxy wars against Russia in Ukraine and Syria - ie in order to sustain and expand the military-industrial complex, continue to steal all the world’s resources, and demonise the one country that is currently doing most to hinder this.

The use of a ‘bogeyman’ also helps to divert attention from the mass atrocities committed by the US +allies. It is WE who have caused the deaths of millions of innocent people, particularly in recent years - not Russia.

It’s essential that people realise what is going on. WE are the villains. The neoliberal/corporatist system that western powers set up has rewarded and handed power over to the greedy few, and encouraged war profiteering and Empire expansion. Democracy is mostly an illusion, with governments bought off and in service of the elite, rather than the people. Many countries plundered, and many millions killed and maimed, as a result. 

Westerners are largely brainwashed following a lifetime of psychological abuse from this psychopathic system. (I know I was). Right now, with extreme inequality; with citizens increasingly disempowered and angry; and with the destructive system of eternal and unaccountable growth, catastrophe seems inevitable, whether or not the psychopathic plutocrats who hold most of the power in this system consciously want it. Small, defenceless countries are easily plundered. Russia, and China, are not.

We need a mass awakening and a peace offensive. We need a new system to bring about a redistribution of power, and more equal societies. ASAP.

We can argue as to how close we are to catastrophe, and perhaps you think I’m being alarmist (hope so). But with the current crisis in Syria bringing two nuclear powers close to direct conflict, I think it is safe to say that things are not looking very good. In any case, we’re on a highly dangerous trajectory, and should be doing all we can now to change course, before tensions get any worse than they already are.

As we know from history, great wars can kick-off without intention.

Gay Rights In Russia: The West Cannot Claim Moral Superiorty

Seeing that my Twitter name is ‘LGBTforpeace’, the first question people usually ask me when I refuse to go along with the anti-Putin hysteria is: ‘But why do you support him? He hates the gays!’.

Firstly, just because I don't go along with the hysteria, doesn't mean I support him. What I support is the fact that a resurgent Russia is standing up to the US war machine, in Syria for example, and putting an end to the impunity of Neocon domination. I value all human life, not just my own kind. Regarding Putin’s domestic agenda, I don’t really consider it my business to judge either way. (Though for sure, there is a hell of a lot of propaganda about it).

Secondly...

Nobody is saying that Russia is a particularly LGBT-friendly country, but westerners seem to be a bit misinformed, with many under the impression that gay people are regularly being imprisoned, killed and just generally persecuted there. 

This isn’t really true. What is true is that there have been allegations of some gay men being detained, tortured and killed in Cheychna, a somewhat autonomous region of Russia, and home to many Islamists. What is also true is that the Russian parliament passed a ‘gay propaganda’ law in 2013, making it illegal for anyone to promote the idea that same-sex relationships are on a par with heterosexual relationships, not dissimilar to the Section 28 law that we had in the U.K. just 15 years ago.

I’m obviously not here to justify any of this, but it's interesting that what has not been widely reported is that in 2016, a proposed law to ban same-sex public displays of affection, was rejected (unanimously) by a government committee. This seems like quite an odd move for a supposedly rabidly homophobic Kremlin that is supposedly hellbent on persecuting gay people! It at least suggests that Russia is not on a downward spiral of increasing LGBT oppression.

It took about 40 years in the U.K. from decriminalisation, to equality. (Arguably only achieved in this timeframe because neoliberal politicians have used identity politics for votes, at the expense of economic equality). 

It’s only been 24 years since decriminalisation in Russia, following vehement homophobia in the Soviet Union. And what’s more, they’ve had quite a lot to deal with in that time, what with the US meddling and devastating the country economically in the 1990s, and now with NATO provocations on their borders and US saber-rattling following completely unproven allegations of Kremlin meddling in the US election. 

Also, it is obviously a FAR greater and more culturally diverse country, thus it will inevitably take longer for societal attitudes to change across the board. 

So I find it a bit absurd to hold the general state of gay rights in Russia up to our current standards. We really need to stop thinking of ourselves as morally superior, especially given that our governments, who we choose to vote for, continue to support numerous LGBT oppressive governments around the world, many of which are far more oppressive than Putin's Russia.

The reality is that western powers are not concerned for LGBT people in Russia. History since WW2 shows very clearly that their foreign policy is not based on improving human rights, but instead is about advancing their geopolitical influence, securing access to resources, and feeding the out-of-control military-industrial complex. The issue of LGBT rights in Russia is simply a useful propaganda tool in their agenda to demonize the Putin government as much as possible, and manufacture consent for future regime change operations, so that they can return Russia to the chaos of the 1990s; allowing western corporations to plunder the country, and making it subservient, once again, to American interests.

Hope that clears it up.

New McCarthyism reaches UK Labour Party

What is Labour's John McDonnell on about?

He has called for a Labour boycott of RT, the Kremlin-funded TV network that has, over the years, given a platform to the anti-establishment, socialist Left, when others have shut them out. It is incredibly disappointing that John has caved to the new McCarthyism and chosen to join the neoliberal herd, who are seeking to censor RT and blame 'Russian meddling', to distract from the failures of neoliberal globalism that have led to anti-establishment movements throughout the west.

Why hasn’t he called for a boycott of all the corporate media outlets that have just been shilling for 'reformer' Bin Salman, destroyer of Yemen? (Oh, Bin Salman is allowing Saudi women to drive, and opening some casinos, so who cares!).

Why hasn’t John called for a boycott of the BBC, with their long history of propagating for western interests? For example: still, they are referring to child-beheading jihadists in Syria, as ‘rebels’. Why? Because western governments want Assad gone, and in order for the public to support this, we must not become too aware of the reality of the opposition. We must remain convinced that they are moderates - not inhuman barbarians. So they are ‘rebels’ and ‘freedom fighters’, and the BBC et al. have pushed this narrative for seven years. The victims of these so-called ‘rebels’ are thus mostly ignored in their reporting - they are ‘unpeople’. Also ignored is any context - like the fact that this war was created by imperial powers, particularly America, who knowingly gave billions of dollars of support to a jihadi revolution, to fuel the creation of a ‘Salafist principality’ (aka Daesh).

Another example is their coverage of all things Russia. Here’s an interview I caught the other day, on BBC’s Hardtalk, with Russian presidential candidate Boris Titov. The interviewer, Stephen Sackur, is flabbergasted that someone can oppose Putin yet still support much of his foreign policy, and not consider him uniquely corrupt. In the interview, Sackur is literally just parroting western government’s line on Russia - ie that Putin is a tyrant set on destabilising the western world and that his foreign policy is imperial and aggressive, rather than defensive; anyone who doesn’t agree with this must either be insane or in-league with him, and their opinion on anything is to be derided. (And they say RT presenters are propagandists!).

Rationality is not permitted. Exceptionalism is rife. How dare Putin react when the US instigate a coup in a country on Russian borders? The bastard should have left the ethnically Russian Crimeans to oppression under the US-backed, anti-Russian coup regime (inc neo-Nazis) in Ukraine; he should have allowed Syria to be taken over by US-backed al Qaeda barbarians. And he should bloody well accept NATO's gradual encirclement of Russia as an act of peace, and stop being so unreasonable! (NB I am not saying that I support Putin, nor that his foreign policy has been perfect, but I think he and his policies need to be judged in context of western aggression).

Is anyone in western ‘mainstream media’ NOT entirely ignorant of Russian politics and Russian interests? Oh, they’re not allowed any interests, are they. Only America and her vassals are allowed those, even in countries on the other side of the planet. And what are Russian interests? I see little evidence to suggest that they desire any more than a respect for their sovereignty, and for America to not intervene in countries on their borders.

The fact that Putin is immensely popular with the Russian people is of no interest to western pundits. They aren’t important. They must be brainwashed by propaganda, which we’re to be believe only exists in Russia. They need some American 'freedom'. Also of no interest is that Putin has consistently sought partnership with the west, including suggesting that Russia join NATO. But instead, NATO continues to provoke.

For a more balanced view of Russia’s viewpoint and actions, watch this talk by American Russia scholar, Professor Stephen F. Cohen. American meddling in Russia in the 1990s devastated the country. Russian oligarchs, many of whom Putin subsequently cracked down on, took control of the country, and poverty soared. Under Putin, the economy has revived, and Russia’s integrity, rejuvenated. With the west now sabre ratting, and the threat of their meddling very present once again, is it any wonder Putin is more popular than ever? Only a unified country can resist such an imperial threat, and Russians know all too well what can happen when US-backed neoliberals get their oar in.

As for the attempted assassination of the former Russian spy in Salisbury last week - again, you are either considered insane or a ‘Putinist’, if you think it plausible but unlikely that he would poison a traitor six years after the treachery, just before the election and World Cup, at a time when relations with the west are at an all time low, and when he consistently says he wants us to be partners. And would he really use a poison that would be so easily attributed to Russia? It seems that, on one hand, western powers want us to believe that Putin is a cunning mastermind responsible for destabilising the ‘free world’, whilst on the other, he’s a complete idiot.

Those who are pushing this Russophobia have FAR more motive, so as to frame him. To get an idea of how former Russian oligarchs have been influencing this extreme anti-Putin narrative, watch ‘The Magnitsky Act: Behind The Scenes’. It is chilling. Or perhaps it has nothing to do with an attempt to frame Putin and is just a result of Russian mafia running amok in London.


Back to RT, here’s a tweet by Jeremy Corbyn, from 2011, in which he recommends RT as a media platform, for being more impartial than most regarding the Libyan intervention. He’s being shamed for this tweet. When did facts become shameful? Thankfully he has at least disagreed with McDonnell regarding his call to boycott RT. Let’s hope his principles shine through and he doesn’t give in to the Russophobia. However, I fear the inevitability of this new McCarthyism being increasingly used against him, particularly during any upcoming general election. We can only hope that most of the public now see through 'mainstream media' deception, and can decipher that Putin is possibly not the all-powerful, suicidal maniac we're led to believe. (The real maniacs are in the west).


The military industrial complex needs an enemy to justify spending; the established powers are desperate to keep the neoliberal status quo; and the openly imperialist Neocons want regime-change in Russia and beyond. Could this combination of desperation, war profiteering, and just sheer lunacy, which has led to this new Cold War, lead us into WW3?

What seems essential to me is that the true Left doesn’t play into the hands of those who have orchestrated this tension; with those who cannot accept the fall of the US unipolar world order. They must not cave to the new McCarthyism, but instead stand up to the neoliberals, neocons, and the war profiteers who have created it. They must show their support for a new multi-polar world order based on a genuine respect for human rights and international law.

That John McDonnell has now caved, is why I am so disappointed in him. Let’s hope that Corbyn continues to stand firm and resist!


My views on RT

Glenn Greenwald's views on RT