Some conspiracy theories are accurate. Click on the balloon.
I was discussing next week’s extradition hearing with a friend. “Let’s hope the judges show some backbone and block it”, she said. In reply I cited serial violations of due process for Julian:
… lying of a key FBI witness … eavesdropping of client-counsel meetings at London’s Ecuador Embassy … FBI plots to have a man murdered on British soil. Any one of these factors should have seen the request thrown out, before we even get to the exemption, in ‘our’ lopsided extradition treaty with the US, of manifestly political cases.
I also invoked Tony Blair’s blocking of the Met’s Serious Fraud Office investigation of bribes to Riyadh to procure lucrative arms contracts. My point? Our justice system asserts an impartiality underwritten by a much vaunted separation of the legislative, executive and judiciary branches of government. It’s a vital principle; to be abandoned only in the face of major inconvenience to power.
If Julian’s extradition is denied, I opined, it won’t be because the judges have all grown a pair. It will be because their American overseers, feeling they’ve made their point – you fuck with the US empire at your peril! – have allowed it.
Conspiracy theory? Well yes, because it’s anti-American.
*
Shortly after uploading my previous post on the death of Navalny, an American friend emailed:
There is a good chance Navalny was killed by M16 or CIA, crazy as it sounds.
I replied immediately:
the timing lends credence to that reading
Conspiracy theory? Well yes, because it’s anti-American.
*
On January 11 the ICJ found it “plausible” that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. On January 12 Israel announced that it had evidence of UNRWA – the UN body supplying food and medical supplies into Gaza – colluding with Hamas on October 7. No evidence was offered, at the time or since, and given Israel’s form the only sensible position is to regard its every claim as a lie until proven otherwise. But Washington immediately cut all funding to UNRWA and most of the “collective West” dutifully followed suit.
(Even were such evidence forthcoming and irrefutable, and the timing less eyebrow-raising, the indiscriminate nature of that response would still be one of the gravest of all war crimes; that of collective punishment.)
Like Navalny’s death so soon after the Carlson-Putin interview – and Baltic explosions after Biden and Nuland had promised that “we will stop Nord Stream” – Israel’s ‘discovery’, not 24 hours after the ICJ ruling, of UNRWA -Hamas ties was, for Netanyahu, manna from Heaven.
Are you too a coincidence theorist? Plenty of those around.
* * *
“Conspiracy theory? Well yes, because it’s anti-American.”
Could we define ‘conspiracy theory’ as any theory which involves a conspiracy? Conspiracy theories which the MSM/Western governments would like us to consider as the product of mental dysfunction are a sub-set of the larger set of theories which involve a conspiracy. Both sets having the same name assists in confusing the two.
I agree with everything else,
I think we’re on the same page. I use ‘conspiracy theory’ neutrally unless I say otherwise – in which case my objection will be that it is wrong on evidential or logical grounds, not that it posits a conspiracy. To use the term as means of a-priori dismissal is lazy or stupid. If I say this a shade too often it’s because I’ve a shade too often seen the term’s boorish use, by folk who deem themselves critical thinkers, to defend an indefensible status quo.
Here’s me 5 years ago, when I still used FB:
I’m going slightly off topic now but since I raised “whataboutery” – the connection being that both put-downs coincide with rising awareness of both real conspiracy and routine hypocrisy on the part of our rulers – here’s an exchange also from my FB days:
Yes, I too subscribe to ‘coincidence theory’. For example, regarding the events around ‘Covid’. For example, it was only a ‘pandemic’ because the WHO changed its definition of pandemic; we were told about a ‘novel, dangerous virus’, but the IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) was proven to be no worse than the average seasonal flu; the PCR tests were shown to be fraudulent; SARS-CoV-2 has never actually been isolated; the pandemic was wargamed in 2019 at Event 201, and heavily promoted by vested interests (most funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation) in the media, academe, the bio-medical establishment and client governments; the ‘vaccine’ manufacters were given immunity against harms, and were given only ’emergency use authorisatiion’; the normal prescribing and use of antibiotics to treat bacterial pneumonia practically ceased (because there was ‘no cure’); all other potential, low-cost treatments such as HCQ and ivermectin were suppressed, outlawed and ridiculed in favour of the ‘vaccine’ roll-out; small and medium-sized businesses were wrecked, while the multinational giants grew exponentially richer; and that smirk on Bill Gates’ face when he said we would all have to be vaccinated to return to normal. Coincidences all, I’m sure!
Well this anticipates tomorrow’s post but my primary concern, voiced ten days ago in EU fury as Tucker goes to Moscow, is who gets to decide what’s disinformation. Four years ago I posted on microbiologist Professor Bhakdi’s open letter to Angela Merkel, with its five questions to the then German Chancellor re Covid and lockdown. His exceptional and highly relevant research profile notwithstanding, the letter was met by stony silence from mainstream media.
Around the same time Off-Guardian posted on 12 experts, Professor Bhakdi and 11 others, all with eminent and relevant qualifications entitling them to a hearing (and us to hear them). All have been censored.
A video of Professor Bhakdi speaking on the subject was taken down from YouTube. It can only be seen by forking out for it.
This goes wider than Covid and we should not assume censorship means totally hiding inconvenient information. In most cases it suffices, as the cancelling of Professor Bhakdi on YouTube but not on IMDB shows, to reduce ease of access. Hence the total absence, in corporate media trashing of the Carlson-Putin interview, of any link to the full video …
… here it is!
“…my primary concern, voiced ten days ago in EU fury as Tucker goes to Moscow, is who gets to decide what’s disinformation.”
Yes, or indeed ‘malinformation’, as ‘information which is true yet deemed to be harmful’ has now helpfully been termed!
The Carlson interview, which I very much enjoyed (full credit to both participants, I say) has now apparently been watched by 1 BILLION people! I’ve no idea how that has been worked out, but whether or not it’s a verifiable number, it certainly seems to show that, for now at least, efforts by GloboCap (or however we prefer to term those ultimately running – and trying to define the terms of – our lives) to control the flow of information are manifestly failing. They will have to try harder; and doubtless they will.
But MY primary concern (or at least one of them) remains why such a huge proportion of the population were so easily goaded into going along with the monumental Covid scam and bogus pseudo-pandemic narrative, particularly among the so-called ‘Left’, when things were so manifestly badly amiss right from the outset. The two sources you quote above – the quietly and humbly heroic Sucharit Bhakdi, and OffGuardian – were, after all, never in any doubt.
If only people had listened to them (and the miniscule proportion of those of us on the ‘Left’) who smelled a rat from the word go, we might have made ‘malinformation’ something to celebrate long ago!
Well I’m on the Left. Despite promoting the concerns of Professor Bhakdi and others, I was criticised – by people doing the square root of fuck all themselves, be it on Covid or the reckless criminality of a dying empire – for not doing enough on ‘malinformation’.
Lesser chaps would have sunk into the slough of despond but I bore it manfully and here I is, still trucking …