The Latest Enemy of 'Great Convenience.'

Well, that would be Russia. Or Putin? Currently...

Watch the news and things look horribly bleak in Ukraine and for its people. Putin is thoroughly deserving of global contempt and should indeed be tried in the Hague for the 'War Crimes' he is currently perpetrating. With every passing day of the invasion evidence that Russia has committed crimes of a yet higher order, 'Crimes Against Humanity,' appears incontrovertible. Evidence is still being collected in order to fully corroborate any unlikely trial. We have heard several of the UK's hawks claiming that, "This is genocide!" Yet genocide seems less clear. The violence certainly seems to have been perpetrated with the intention of 'killing a large number of people from a particular region or nation,' but 'with the aim of destroying that nation or group' remains less clear.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are bravely doing what such groups are so respected for, risking their own lives collecting testimonies and photographic evidence, providing aid under fire. The International Criminal Court has launched its own investigation. In order to further contextualise the situation the ICC may seek to search back as far as 2013, when Ukraine rejected further integration with the EU and the consequent protests allegedly brought about the annexation of Crimea.

No stone to be left unturned in the quest for evidence that might stand up in an independent court, that might, reasonably unquestionably, portray, especially Putin, as guilty of perpetrating international 'War Crimes' or worse!

Within a political party, and within a 'sleeping' nation, Dorriesesque or Rees-Moggian bouts of flatulent disinformation, demanding the ultimate in golden-endorsement of their own lazy proclamations of Kafkaesque-truth, it is vital that the greater and untarnished truth be permitted to shine through the fug. If international laws are to retain respect we must not allow the current cabal of populists to tarnish their worth and standing. And, by 'worth' and 'standing' I am obviously referring solely to 'international laws'- Rees-Mogg and Nadine Dorries likely have never embraced such values. Or indeed, ever been deserving of such accolades.

Through its actions UNICEF has made it clear that the body recognises the plight of the Ukrainian people. Instead of posturing they have committed to doing what they can to alleviate the suffering of the children and the families affected and fleeing. Their verification of 142 child fatalities seems wishfully low- now far in excess of this- but they acknowledge it as a significant underestimate. Their's is not to seek to bathe in the warmth of broadcast anti-Putin rhetoric, more it is to save lives, recognising instead that, "War in Ukraine (is) a 'nightmare for Ukraine's children.'" The International Organisation for Migration estimates that 7.1 million people have now been displaced. Within that staggering figure the IOM understands that over 50% of displaced households include children. Only time will tell the shameful awfulness of the Russian war with Ukraine. Sensitivities and/or respect for those who have suffered the worst atrocities or succumbed is likely to determine that much of the on-looking world may never learn of the true depth of any yet-to-be-determined 'War Crimes.' Those who are currently working under fire to allay or mitigate such acts, Amnesty's and the ICC's foot-'soldiers, will not be so fortunate.

Of course, through their entirely honest interpretation and portrayal of the situation UNICEF, the IOM, Amnesty, Human Right Watch and a number of other human rights and human dignity organisations will have brought themselves also into sight of certain cross-hairs. Why, one can almost hear newly (Murdoch) platformed Piers Morgan lining up his first anti-Woke targets.

The Campaign Against Arms Trade has put out a statement condemning Russia's invasion of Ukraine as, "an act of imperialist aggression." The CAAT goes on to venture that the aggression "almost certainly involves 'War Crimes.'" It is most unlikely that the UK government will be devoting much time to consideration of the CAAT's reluctance to endorse further fuelling the conflict and thus boosting the nation's dishonourable arms trade. The organisation also condemns UK company BAe System's shareholder cash-in, whereby dividends have seen a steepling rise of 21% in under a week. One wonders quite who would wish to invest in such barbaric opportunism.

Watch the Houses (Commons and Lords) rising to theatrical applause and one can speculate that more than one or two of the participants will have had at least half an eye upon future investment opportunities.

Sign anything supportive of an organisation such as CAAT and it's likely to attract sanctions and condemnation if one happens to be a minion in (er) Keith Starmer's Labour Party. As does UNICEF, CAAT recognises the value to the refugee exoduses in de-escalation, the depletion of the weapons being used to undertake those crimes, the reduction in UK arms to NATO, actions cited by Demagogue Putin as party to the initial invasion.

"Don't they know there's a war on?" the Daily Mail reminds us. Hardly a paper with a faultless record with regards to the calling out of war and 'War Crimes.'

Operating from within the remit of the massive Daily Mail Trust wedge of the UK's Media companies, as opposed to the monstrous wedge owned by Murdoch via News International, Richard Littlejohn wasted no time in painting Starmer and Rachael Reeves as representatives of the 'Bogie Left,' when Pseudo-Labour called for our Lion of Kyiv to resign over the PM's (Insert suitable number, I really have lost count) bout of lying. Lion or lying? is not a worthy topic during a war, don't they know? Readers might not even have noticed, or cared to notice, that painting Rachael Reeves as anything to do with the 'left' rather beggars belief, unless there are yet bigger pieces at play here. Which, of course, there invariably are.

'Now is not the time!' Haven't we heard the clarion call before, isn't it rather beginning to echo?

Richard Littlejohn is, of course, just one of the many conveyors of this type of doctored 'truth,' this new Brexit-worthy 'truth!' Littlejohn self identifies as a 'journalist.' He slots in seamlessly to his self-identified role, comfortably on the 'right' side of the unspoken national 'divide'- really it is now a veritable gulf!. Richard will not be undertaking any perilous journeys, with all he owns wrapped in a small carrier-bag, merely pontificating upon those who are forced to do so, in part as a consequence of the overseas military operations or international arms sales of the UK Government.

Richard Littlejohn or Richard Madeley, it matters not! Philip Schoefield, Piers Morgan, Andrew Neil, Andrew Marr, Laura Kuenssberg... they are something but they are not 'quite' journalists. Or they are no longer journalists! Journalism: 'that (which) informs society to at least some degree.' Does it? Do they? 'Writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation.' Search the various definitions and nowhere is there emphasis upon 'subjugation of information' or 'misrepresentation through evasion of information,' or 'misrepresentation through highly selective reporting.' 'Investigative reports'? 'Investigative,' Laura, not simply re-tweeting, and selectively so at that! We should speculate more upon quite how such a lack of journalistic credentials might lead to greater journalistic access and (pseudo) freedoms for the woman. Sadly the UK's MSM regulates itself via IPSO. But, even IPSO have found the Jewish Chronicle to have multiple times published false allegations of anti-Semitism against selective Labour activists.

Imagine the shock horror that might result at the head of said Labour Party, more so if that Head happens to be the former Human Rights Lawyer, former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service, Sir (er) Keith Starmer. Sadly there is much apparent and evident weight in the prefix, 'former,' all of it on the heavy side. So instead, Keith has opted to 1. ignore those breaches by the Jewish Chronicle, and 2. to use the fabricated 'evidence' in order to further an ongoing attack upon...

... former 'Enemy of Convenience,' Jeremy Corbyn, or anyone in the Party who has ever so much as shared a platform with the man... selectively so of course, as defined care of those such as Richard Littlejohn. There are just so many dots to connect and so few remaining independent (thinking) journalists to do so.

There is an independent press regulator (IMPRESS) and yet the MSM, the same MSM that clearly has multiple times been identified as seriously requiring regulation, that MSM, has been afforded ample leeway to circumvent this. The supermarkets have been permitted similar means to evade regulation (another meaningless 'pledge') as has the gambling industry (Gambling Commission, sponsored via Nadine Dorries's department). And all the while such slight of hand is being reported upon by a self-regulating MSM. Or rather, it isn't! Fishy? Only 'fishy' if it's known about!

Littlejohn, Morgan, Marr, Neil, Kuenssberg, Schofield, they all undoubtedly recognise that which is and that which is essentially not journalism. But they are not it! They are merely opinion writers, not, as they would have the nation believe, journalists. It matters not if they occasionally throw us a bone, if we are not also thrown the means with which to identify that 'bone.' Instead they are the self-censoring opinion writers who are permitted to echo the right sort of opinions. As Chomsky once said of, and to, Andrew Marr, "I'm not saying that you're self-censoring; I'm saying that if you 'believed' something else then you wouldn't be sitting there, conducting this interview." Chomsky did not put in the inverted commas, they're mine.

Richard Madeley served to good effect the other day when he gathered fellow voices from the 'right' media groups to attempt to shut down one of the UK's concerned Climate Activists. I doubt he fully appreciated the telling juxtapositioning of his claim that, "It’s a very complicated discussion to be had, it’s a very complicated thing." with his follow up of "And this ‘Just Stop Oil’ slogan is very playground-ish isn’t it, it’s very Vicky Pollard, quite childish." Centre stage, Richard postulated that his was perhaps the only mind present that might reasonably wrap itself fully around the 'complicated issue.' Certainly he seemed oblivious to the dawning realisation that it was only Miranda Whelehan from Just Stop Oil who had even bothered to arm herself with any of the terrifying facts. Richard didn't actually use the words...

"Don't they know there's a war on?"

... but he might just as well have done so. I'm not saying you're self censoring, Richard, I'm saying that if you 'thought' differently somebody else would be sitting in your chair, conducting the attacks upon those who dare to question the current narrative, in your place.

Don't they know there's a war on? Truth is, though, that there are several wars going on but all those other veritable blood-baths don't, quite as conveniently, support the popular MSM headline that seeks to focus almost solely upon Putin. Truth also is, that when so few million-and-billionaires own the UK's Media, even those outlets often present increasingly like opinion pieces. Even so, isn't it far beyond worrying that so many of the electorate are quite so eager to fall into line, like so many newly-hatched ducklings? Watch them weave the trickier pathway from Putin's imperialist war, smoothly and without hesitation, on to the position that opts to turn a blind eye to the ongoing global refugee crisis.

The UK might (or might not) be preparing to house only triplicate-rubber-stamped Ukrainians in the homes of its citizens, more likely Home Secretary Patel is eyeing up the chances of offloading most upon a Rwandan Government whose own human rights record does not bode well for desperate refugees. The UK's record on accepting refugees increasingly doesn't bear closer scrutiny, either in comparison to other European countries or, more so, the wider world. For the few 'lucky' Ukrainians who manage to battle through the officialdom smokescreen their's will be yet another small example of, 'Nationalising the profits and socialising the losses.'

If Elon Musk is true to his claim, that he's the great 'free-speech absoluteist,' then we might not be able to read or to listen to the words on our MSM but we'll soon be able to construct our own multiplicity of echo chambers to fill that aching void where honest journalism used to reside, within his 'Twitter'verse. Elon Musk hasn't been overly impressed with the access to 'free speech' that those other billionaires have afforded him so he's bought his own space. We can all choose (or not) to do likewise- newspaper or social media platform, you choose- it's termed 'free speech,' by those who own it.

So, what passes for truth and what, or who, passes for despotism, formerly anti-Semitism, is now down to which billionaire owns which section of which media corporation? But currently, even amongst the 'selected' journalists of the BBC and the Guardian, Elon Musk isn't always yet afforded the free pass after which he so keenly lusts.

With (er) Keith Starmer at Labour's helm the righteous MSM no longer needs to concern its corporate journos with the scourge of anti-Semitism- job done! But, we'd be most naive to dare to presume that their 'job done' is precisely the 'job done' that's being pretended and presented. Turns out that since the weaponising of anti-Semitism, in order to (not) stamp out anti-Semitism that cases of the same have actually risen! Who'd have thought it, provide a free pass for further Israeli oppression and attacks upon Palestinians and anti-Semitism rises, curious! Although it's not really very curious. Far more curious is the fact that the UK's MSM reporting of anti-Semitism has now almost ceased. A suspicious bystander might wonder if anti-Semitism had been weaponised all along and to entirely different ends...

Adjacently, the aforementioned British Broadcasting Corporation presented itself to fine effect the other day when it broadcast a pertinent insight into the Russian Opposition leader, Alexei Navalny. I particularly enjoyed- is 'enjoyed' the right term?- Navalny's exposé of the Russian assassins who were tasked with 'eliminating' him, via Novichok within his underpants, specifically 'the crotch area.' We were treated to the moment that Navalny outwitted a named Russian scientist into giving further detail to the plot. One almost felt concern for the man, now also likely to have found himself upon another of Putin's hit-lists! Later in the program we were given much cause to worry for Alexei Navalny as he was bundled away by the Russian State. Will he simply now 'disappear?' Much as with the current coverage of the Ukrainian conflict the Alexei Navalny exposé offers up the stage for a far better brand of investigative journalism. The BBC is currently busily clawing its way back from a hellava low point but it does sorta showcase what the BBC was once world renowned for. Will those remaining journalists though ever again, regularly and effectively, be able to fight their way through the covertly-imposed Tory 'safety' net?

If it's that straight forward to edit and to broadcast such an exposé why isn't it done more often? What about the plight of other victims of other questionable global powers? What about Julian Assange? What about the Guardian's former and genuine journalist hero, who exposed the US's abuse of power, the US's stars-'n'-stripes version? When Julian Assange posted a wealth of criminal activity on the part of the US government and military the wealth of War Crimes was laid knee-deep, far and wide. In such light I doubt the International Criminal Courts required much deliberation before declaring that Assange should be immediately released from his internationally-regarded criminal incarceration. Not to comply, as the current UK and US Governments are conspiring to do, instead to extradite him to the US, `Julian Assange may effectively 'simply disappear?' This is beyond alarming, and for all manner of reasons, with such a hate-motivated figure as Patel with her talons at the UK pulse! What does the BBC think? Anyone..? Elon?

Isn't such an attack upon journalism, effectively an attack upon also our freedoms? Our freedom to be properly informed?

It fell to Yahoo! News (26th September 2021) to remind its readers of instances like the public gunning down of several civilians in a Baghdadi square, in 2007, and to report upon the lengths to which US and UK Governments might go in order to effect the extraordinary rendition of Assange. It appears that the States no longer pretends, so the flight- thumbed through by Judge Paul Goldspring- seems likely to be transportation into Hell! It won't be a case of 'torture by proxy,' instead straight forward 'torture.' Thankfully Judge Paul Goldspring- close friend of Alan Duncan- has allowed those UK ministers responsible- Alan Duncan again- to wash their hands of accusations of any such sordid affairs!

When the dark plane lifts free from UK soil we may be treated to the curious spectacle of the BBC- I suggest Kuenssberg- interviewing any available UK minister- perhaps Duncan?- pretending to believe the confected lies that will spill forth like so much tax-payer Champaign. In the quieter corners the UK's MSM now embraces the world's worst kept secret, that the US routinely employs waterboarding, something that all culpable UK judges have been happy to deny.

We, some of us, must almost be grateful that the world also houses one Mr Putin. A monster, the current big one of choice, but just one, one amongst others. A monster and a monstrous distraction. The latest enemy of 'convenience.'

The International Criminal Court has condemned Russia's invasion and the atrocities it has committed in Ukraine. The BBC will run with this and fly it from its tallest figurative flagpole. The International Criminal Court also believes that 'War Crimes' have and are being committed inside Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, where the atrocities have been going on for decades. Imagine the fine work that the BBC could do for the international standing of the oppressed Palestinians! Imagine the tweaks to the arms sales to Israel that the election of a 'few more' honourable MPs might undertake! Imagine righting these wrongs! Take a closer look at the Occupied Territories of the Palestinian people, study the boundary changes over the decades, and the argument that Israel genuinely may be guilty of 'Genocide,' undoubtedly 'War Crimes,' further 'Crimes against Humanity,' seems highly feasible. There's some serious hand-washing in the pipeline there, for any Government Minister who has continued to ensure the provision of £millions in arms sales throughout...

Inside Jerusalem, B'Tsalem, the Israeli Information Centre for Human Rights, has declared that, inside the Occupied Territories of Palestine, the Israeli Government is operating an Apartheid regime. Amnesty International also recently disclosed similar findings, making similar judgements. Isn't Apartheid actually a 'Crime Against Humanity'? The report was four years in compilation! Imagine the legwork and the journalistic credentials involved there!

Recently the ICC filed a legal case against Israel, accusing the IDF of systematically targeting any journalists brave enough to be operating inside Palestine and failing to investigate the killings of media workers- more 'War Crimes!' CAAT has declared that 'Israel maintains a regime of institutionalised apartheid against Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories of the West Bank and Gaza, as well as a deepening system of institutionalised discrimination within Israel itself, which reduces Palestinian Israelis to the status of 2nd-class citizens.' Again, Apartheid!

The International Criminal Court is also 'keen' to investigate war crimes being committed inside surely the globe's current most desperate human crisis, inside the nation of Yemen. Another fat recipient of the UK arms trade, via £millions in arms sales to the cited perpetrators, the Saudis. How will the BBC run with this one? Both Yemen and Palestine are long overdue some mighty-heavy international sanctions hype. Let's see how Liz Truss handles Kuenssberg's forensic cross-examination, shall we?

So, is it actually about the 'war crimes,' or is it more about the 'players?'

And the Houses rose as one to applaud the man! It didn't quite seem right. Not because the Houses (either one) was chock full of unprincipled and self-serving mis-informants and 'actors' of the most ingenuous kind, not even because they happened to have stumbled, chanced, bumbled onto the right side of a history that may eventually judge their deeds. No, it was more because it was an illusion! It wasn't about morality- Lord alone knows that the Houses were rammed chock-full of moral bankrupts- it was all about theatre!

Putin is the current enemy of choice! "Don't they know there's a war on?"

Which one?

* Since posting this Israel (IDF) has murdered Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh. Then, during her funeral Israeli forces charged at the mourners and coffin bearers, at one point causing Shireen's coffin to be dropped. The UK's MSM has already 'moved on,' with more vacuous celebrity tittle tattle. (updated 20th May 2022)