Let's Talk About Palestine!

Today I was 'invited' to contribute a comment upon the broad theme, 'societal constraints with regards to mental health.' I paused before writing, "Open borders!" but I wish I'd written something along the lines of "Palestine exists." Why didn't I?

As have so many people, I've been watching the news more closely than usual. Even when I've removed myself from the coverage of Putin's invasion of the Ukraine, the idea of what might be happening is never far from my thoughts.

Excepting the recent 'glitch' when the BBC Breakfast programme (25th February) elected to show footage of a military flyby of Ukrainian jets above the streets of Kyiv in May 2020 and then to present it as if evidence of Russia's current attack on the capital, the BBC has more or less risen to the task. More or less. The Ukraine is a sovereign state and Russia has shown considerable aggression in invading it. This has to be an ongoing war crime! Another ongoing war crime!

But, to labour for a moment upon the 'wrong' footage, we should realise that such mistakes cannot actually happen. That is to say that the 'incidents' can happen, but not as actual 'mistakes.' In order to use archived material someone is required to first find the desired footage and is then additionally required to catalogue and to attribute the desired footage. It's the same for all 'clips' and for 'music used.' It's simply the system that's required by all national broadcasters. But, moving on...

I watched footage, I think iPhone, of the Russian Police Force dealing with protests by its own citizens, and listened to the Channel 4 news reporting of the 'roughness' with which officers dealt with protesters. It was impossible not to drift back to iPhone footage of how the Metropolitan Police Force dealt with women at the Sarah Everard Vigil- decidedly rougher, I mused.

Of course, we are reminded, news footage from Russia, even footage that leaks out via alternative sources, may be subject to censorship or 'selective coverage,' which amounts to pretty much the same thing. Censorship! The word is given more sinister connotations when it's applied to those 'unfriendly' states. Of course Russia censors news that does not conform to state expectations, that much we already take as a given. But the BBC is homegrown, respected around the globe. At least it was in those parts of the globe in which I once travelled in the 1990s and early 2000s; mention the BBC in conversation and it was often surprising to learn just how respected it was. Personally, I would grieve the loss of the service; angry 6th-former, Nadine Dorries, doesn't seem to have the first clue as to the range of the services it provides- radio drama, wide-ranging discussions upon a whole wealth of topics, music outside of the sphere of current neoliberal trends, art, classical and contemporary history, science in all its guises. In a way it's not that surprising that Dorries doesn't understand the full range, she doesn't appear to know very much at all. Several recent TV and radio broadcasts would suggest that she doesn't even know when she's being made fun of, or when she's 'drowning' in her own inability. Much like an angry Head Girl who's used to nothing so much as the sound of her own voice. Why bother to find out when you've already got your 'own home grown answers,' she likely thinks... or rather doesn't bother to think.

Travesty then that she's the current UK Minister for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. The 'Culture' consideration has likely been put in there just to further highlight the gulf!

Inside Russian borders, where we are advised (and know) that the state employs censorship- here 'censorship' bad- two stations have recently succumbed to that state censorship. They are Dozhd TV and Ekho Moskvy, accused by Russia of broadcasting deliberately false information about the military efforts in Ukraine. Quite naturally we would tend to look more to such outlets for better insights into what is actually going on. We would be naive indeed to rely upon the aggressor to properly inform us.

Some time prior to the troubling events escalating in the Ukraine, back in the UK, PM Boris Johnson appointed Baron Walney (John Woodcock) as an 'Independent' Adviser on Political Violence and Disruption (April 2020). At which point several alarm bells should have been ringing: 1) Woodcock's departure from the Commons was not without controversy; he was under investigation for sexual harassment and refused to cooperate with the internal investigation, 2) Woodcock's departure enabled him to somehow wriggle free from the Labour Party's internal investigation into the allegations, 3) he was appointed to the Lords by Boris Johnson who has shown himself to be more prepared than the very worst of his predecessors to rig political systems to an obsessive and blatant degree of dishonesty, 4) the title of Woodcock's given role appears as alarmingly specific!

When Woodcock was set loose to undertake his task there were all manner of right wing groups upon whom he could have exercised his authority. However, Baron Walney, introducing himself as being, "with open mind," opted to swing the cross-hairs leftwards towards groups like Black Lives Matter and, more so, Extinction Rebellion. Sites like Novara Media- already once taken off air for reasons that were never quite clear- I would suggest, are likely to be taking up a rather disproportionate amount of Lord Walney's time. I might suggest that Lord Walney, instead, devotes a bit more time to investigating some of 'our' MSM headlines that seek to maliciously target individuals and groups that do not always conform to Murdoch's national and world views.

In the city of Norwich there's been the occasional police presence of late. Heads up! Why? Are we expecting any peaceful demonstrations, 'Stop the War!'? Here imagine Baron Walney's little nose twitching! The uncharacteristic presence naturally drew comment. When a small child, replete with police cap, wandered past, we were given to wondering if this wasn't, in so many ways, rather better? In the light of that old cliché, 'police deterrence,' we thought that, likely, the prop-up cardboard cut-outs offered considerably better value for money: 1) they might actually instigate a mindset more inclined towards respect for one's fellow citizens and 2) they offer considerably greater presence. Oh, and 3) they're most unlikely to club your candle-holding daughter or granddaughter to the ground.

Of course again, it's only what we get to see...

... and read!

And what do we get to read? Well, that's obviously the preserve of a handful of mega-wealthy media barons, with tendencies towards staggering inequality and right-wing populism. The journalists that fare best here, the ones holding down the more secure posts, tend to be the ones who best practice the MSM dark-art of 'self-censorship.'

One of the many interesting discussions on BBC Radio 4, in the week beginning 25th February, was one regarding the Matchgirl Strike of 1888. I think the programme I'm referencing was 'Woman's Hour.' During the short history lesson striking women were looked back upon with reverence. Annie Besant, a socialist writer and reformer was posthumously praised for her support of the striking Bryant and May workers

Project forwards some one hundred and thirty-four years and any mention of 'socialism' or 'strikers' is far more likely to draw unfriendly fire from the BBC's current batch of 'political journalists.' Radio 4 may currently enjoy the freedoms to converse in mournful tones about the evils of modern day slavery but give it an up-to-date spin and Baron Walney or Home Secretary Patel's ears are likely to be sent twitching! Annie Besant or the Matchgirl Strikers would be most unlikely to elicit such respectful tones. And it's all so seamless, isn't it. Back in 1888 'socialism' or the mere concept of 'striking workers,' we are given to deduce, meant something entirely different to those same words and concepts in 2022. Progress?

Any, 'Let's Talk about Palestine' suggestion is most likely to draw one of two responses, I would think. Either the (quite frankly insultingly farcical) 'anti-Semitic response' proffered by anyone who does not want to confront the documented facts or else prefers to sport the cloak of ignorance. Or the suggestion might, more understandably, draw forth the comment that, in the light of the current Ukrainian crisis, now is not the time!

Watch the newsreels, listen to the dark commentary, but, just for reference, the Palestinian crisis has been going on for over seventy years! So, if not now, when! When might we talk about Palestine? The news broadcasters may not 'think' we should do so now; it's most unlikely they'll want to in the future, even though the bombed out tower blocks, care of the Israeli Defence Force- 'Defence,' seriously?- have been regarded, by some, as better illustrating the Ukrainian situation. And so, blatant in the extreme, 'they'll' sneak the footage in, and label it as Ukrainian wreckage, instead.

If we've been paying attention we already know that the BBC, Channel 4, ITV, will not even be bothering to report upon such barefaced misappropriation! Really it is as simple as merely calling out the lies! We do not doubt that the Ukrainian conflict is a human crisis, so why elect to cloud the issue? The whispering vacuum that comprises the UK's MSM won't be expecting their self-censoring journos to seek out such counter-productive bouts of propaganda. The Jewish Chronicle would be far more likely to tar any mention as an anti-Semitic act. Whereupon Baron Walney, Keith "I-am-not-Jeremy-Corbyn!" Starmer, Lord "film-me-shouting!" Mann, nor the entirety of the BBC would so much as raise an eye-brow. And again, when 'USA Today,' uses Palestinian footage to deceive its viewers, not yet any of the aforementioned, for a nation that is otherwise happy to report upon each and every Presidential bout of flatulence, one could be forgiven for choosing to interpret the absence of comment as a further enablement of disinformation. So, is it still the case that there remain many more accessible images of bombed out communities inside Palestine than there are inside the Ukraine? Just a thought. And a thought brought about through Western misinformation.

It's been said that 'the first casualty of war is the truth.'

There's a very specific reason that the UK's MSM is still permitted to reign on as judge and jury as to its own conduct and honesty. It must be stressed and re-stressed as often as there are ears to hear, that IPSO is a body established by the large paper groups to 'regulate' itself. Effectively it offers cover for the misinformation it purports to 'investigate. If the UK was genuinely interested in honesty it would disband IPSO, with immediate effect, and employ instead IMPRESS. One can almost imagine Jake Wallis Simons, journalist (sic), with his finger posed over the 'anti-Semitic' red button. Not many journos would be quite so quick to do so when Amnesty International recently declared Israel to be operating as an apartheid state. Or when Israel's own B"Tselem- largest Human Rights organisation inside of 'Israel- did likewise.

Sir Keith Starmer was, not so curiously, silent upon the judgement, but professed Zionist, 'Labour First's' Luke Akehurst, was quick to share his thirty second 'deliberation' upon the Four year investigation by the globe's most highly respected human rights group. Careful there, Luke, try not to underthink things so much!

The first casualty of war is the truth! We know Russia has already sacrificed this major facet of its broadcasting, more so because the UK's MSM regularly reminds us of this. But, it is surely of further detriment to the truth to remove Russia Today (RT) from EU and UK platforms. RT is repeatedly labelled as a source of Russian propaganda, but then so is US Fox News known to be a major source of, at best, frequent bouts of serious misinformation. What RT does sometimes offer is a route through the misinformation supplied in the UK, about the machinations inside the UK and through the smokescreens that are provided care of our IPSO 'overseen' MSM. Further Russia's retaliatory actions have brought about the cessation of BBC broadcasts inside Russia. Now we can roll our 'superior' eyes at Russia's state propaganda whilst pretending not to notice the irritation at the back of our own throats.

We, that is most of 'we,' strongly object to the Russian invasion of the Ukraine! And we abhor the attacks upon its civilian populations! We are disgusted at the use of such weapons of destruction upon its cities and its people! Such, 'Shock and Awe!' military interventions deserve nothing less than wholehearted international condemnation. We look down upon the Russian State Machine threatening to lock up citizens for involvement in certain demonstrations against their government. We thus welcome the most stringent sanctions! Is this not the message and the reaction that all such crimes against humanity should draw? International prosecutions in the Hague, by the ICC? Right!

One wonders if demonstrators outside of, say, the Russian Embassy in London, might be risking imprisonment under Home Secretary Patel's new democratic mandate. Or whether, perhaps, a Daily Mail journo might be risking up to 14 years behind bars for exposing Russian State propaganda? Or does democracy only work when it serves the 'right' people? Is the right to protest only held up if the protests are against those other people?

The narrative slips seamlessly into the apparent furtherance of Operation Legacy. Operation Legacy being the cosy-cuddly, fireside story-book version of, especially, the UK's global historical record- something for the children. Orwell would have better understood the manner in which history may best be moulded to conform to the desired narrative. Double-speak! 'Operation Legacy' may be further bowed and moulded to the narrative, the ongoing and unspoken narrative of (effectively) one and the same Operation Legacy- incorporating also Windrush, Orgreave, and more recently Grenfell, Iraq and even the ongoing War in Ukraine. Everybody rise on cue and applaud to camera!

Those who have read 1984 may appreciate the abstract, many have observed or experienced the application. The narrative leads us along 'other' corridors, corridors of more imperial grandeur. Not that refuse-laden back alley, instead this shiny one! Look at those statues, revere those historical giants! Listen to the words of the wise! Hurry past the in situ Iraq gallery, the Greater Israel gallery, don't worry about the Palestine wing, we'll sort that out later.

According to the UK's MSM we 'all' want to stop war from happening, we all want to see the perpetrators persecuted, we all abhor the use of those attack weapons of mass destruction. We all recognise the oppressor's propaganda for what it is. But we first need to weave the 'correct' pathway through the debris. Mustn't throw the baby out, so to speak, prosecute the wrong people, Jack (Straw)? Eh, Tony? George Junior? Apply the wrong sanctions to the wrong countries.
The Age of Politic has ended.
We are now living in the Age of Information.

Should the Hague and the ICC ever get to try the likes of George Bush there's a precedent. It's called the Hague Intervention Act. Because, much like the UK wishes to sanitise certain less-savoury aspects of its imperial past, the US of A, through the muddled 'thinking' of American Exceptionalism, now embodies an 'act' whereby its military can (un)lawfully intervene to extract an American citizen from ICC trial in the Hague. Just to keep the legacy on an even keel!

Volodymyr Zelenskyy is being branded as the pin-up boy of the 22nd Century- he's certainly showing great presence and admirable authority in the face of the Russian onslaught. Cometh the hour and all that sort of stuff? Vladimir Putin's talk of Ukrainian Nazis is being angrily dismissed and rightly so if it seeks to undermine the alliance of opposition to the aggression. But, must we all now pretend- Legacy compliant- that the Washington Post, the BBC and the Guardian, amongst others, were not recently also warning of the rising neo-Nazi threat inside of the Ukraine? Likely there are neo-Nazis organising for greater influence inside many nations... including inside Ukraine. Azov, Right Sector and Svoboda could reasonably be cited as reasons to question the Ukraine's calls for admittance to Nato and all of this significantly prior to Putin's heavy hand!

For those who have chosen to peer behind the screens, peer past the misused footage and images, the Ukraine currently bears considerable similarity to aspects of life for the Palestinians. The BBC no longer appears to sanction reporting whereby, for example, in the recent past, Israeli soldiers might be filmed attempting to break the limbs of unarmed Palestinian protesters. Neither do they appear worthy enough to correct Sir Keith that Israel is not currently "making the desert bloom," unless it is doing so specifically via the dried blood of the dead and wounded Palestinians. We in the UK may currently be electing to side with Ukraine, the underdog, but let's not pretend that Zelenskyy's some sort of God on Earth. He may recognise man's inhumanity to man when the dust kicks up in Kyiv but he was incapable of doing so when Israel used its UK supplied arms to demolish Jenin (2000), Al-Dahaya in Beirut (2006) or Gaza (ongoing). Nor is there any wider call for sanctions here. Utter the plea and Sir Keith or his unelected sidekick, David Evans, will shoot without questions! Take no prisoners!

Bizarrely it's another questionable manifestation of the ultra-Right that's preventing the UK doing anywhere near as much as its disowned neighbours in the EU to support resultant Ukrainian refugees, ultra-Right-wingers such as the multiple breaker of the Ministerial Code, Home Secretary, Priti Patel- surely now destined to join Gavin Williams in the Lords- those such as nodding donkey Dominic Raab, those such as PM Johnson, who're hastening to erect further barriers to the fleeing Ukrainians. It's those such as (Dim Lizzy) Truss or angry Head Girl, Nadine Dorries, who're operating the unspoken code of the elite money-takers by ensuring that sanctions shall not be permitted to curtail business as usual.

If they ever get here- one Ukrainian family redirected to the British Embassy, over a hundred miles back in Kyiv- what will their welcome be? Will they be impressed at the UK's curious policy of filling its shop doorways with the homeless tents of its own citizens? Will they join the throngs at the soup kitchens or queuing at the food-banks?

So, let's talk about Palestine!
Welcome to the Age of Information!

* After I'd already 'published' this post yet another example of the misappropriation of Palestinian images and information of came to light, curiously from the Guardian (obviously not via journalist (sic), Jonathan Freedland). The article, quite short, is rich with links, so I have linked the article here.

* Although, I thought the most moving detail was the widely misused video (here) of one heroic Palestinian girl, Ahed Tamimi, then 12 years old, confronting the unwanted Israeli occupiers.

* The occupiers are no less unwanted. The occupation is no less a breach of international law. Ahed Tamimi in no less heroic. Perhaps she is even more heroic because she is also up against the overwhelming weight of the Western propaganda machine.

* Let's talk about Palestine! Before it's too late!