Media en politiek bepalen waar wel en niet over gesproken wordt >> over manipulatie en desinformatie gesproken

Caitlin Johnstone heeft een artikel gepubliceerd waarin ze stelt dat de Overton Window (Overton-venster of Raam van Overton) onderhevig is aan sterke inkrimping. Het Overton-venster is het spectrum aan gedachtegoed dat wordt geaccepteerd door het publiek. Ofwel waar spreken we wel en niet over. (degenen die uitmaken waarover gesproken wordt zijn politiek en media). Zoals je begrijpt is e.e.a. een heel smerige vorm van manipulatie, iets waarvan politiek en media nu juist de alternatieve media op het internet beschuldigen....

Johnstone stelt dus dat het Overton-venster aan krimp onderhevig is en dat toont ze aan door een groot aantal voorbeelden, waar ze aangeeft dat men spreekt over zaken, maar niet kijkt wat bijvoorbeeld de oorzaak is van waar men over spreekt. Neem de islamitische terreuraanslagen in het westen: het is prima om daar over te spreken zolang je de schuld maar bij de jihadisten legt en niet begint over de grootschalige westerse terreur in islamitische landen in het Midden-Oosten, terreur die terreur in Europa oproept en grote vluchtelingenstromen richting Europa opgang heeft gebracht..... Ofwel men wil wel over één van de gevolgen van een fout beleid spreken (fout >> immers het westen heeft niets te zoeken in het Midden-Oosten): terreur op de Europese straten, maar niet wat de oorzaak daarvan is.....

Johnstone noemt o.a. het discussiëren over censuur op het internet, zonder dat de de vraag wordt gesteld of die censuur nodig is..... Veel sites en blogs zijn platgelegd in de VS, in feite als gevolg van de 'Russiagate' leugen, terwijl het hele Russiagate verhaal intussen onderuit is gehaald...... 'Russiagate' was in feite een smerige truc van Hillary Clinton en haar campagneteam, om haar eigen misdaden tijdens de Democratische voorverkiezingen te verbergen......

Of wat dacht je van het debatteren over de steun die politici in de VS (en een aantal andere buitenlanden) krijgen van grote bedrijven, zonder de vraag te stellen of het wel gewenst is dat grote bedrijven in feite steekpenningen betalen voor een voor hen zo gunstig mogelijk beleid na de verkiezingen....... Kortom onvervalste corruptie!

Over samenzweringstheorieën: men bediscussieert of iets wel of geen samenzweringstheorie is, zonder over het feit te spreken dat de figuren met macht nu eenmaal altijd samenspannen, anders gezegd: samenzweren....

Johnstone haalt zoals gezegd een groot aantal zaken aan en ik moet zeggen dat werkt behoorlijk verhelderend, zelfs als je al op de hoogte was van de effecten die discussies over een bepaalde zaak teweegbrengen, zonder dat men over de oorzaak heeft gesproken...... Ook wordt nog eens duidelijk gemaakt hoe machtig de reguliere westerse (massa-) media zijn en hoe het komt dat men daar ongegeneerd liegt en manipuleert. Dit is uiteraard in het belang van de plutocratische eigenaren en in het belang van de overheid, zoals bij bepaalde berichtgeving door 'onze' NOS.... Neem de totaal gekleurde berichtgeving door de reguliere media, inclusief 'fake news' en andere desinformatie, voorafgaand aan en tijdens de illegale oorlogen van de VS, oorlogen die door het zittende Nederlandse kabinet maar al te graag worden gesteund, ook al worden deze oorlogen op basis van hele bergen leugens gevoerd..... Oorlogsvoering is veelal ook in het belang van de plutocratische media eigenaren, die enorme aandelenportefeuilles hebben in de moorddadige oorlogsindustrie en in de olie-industrie, waar deze oorlogsvoering zoals gezegd ook in het belang is van overheden, zoals die van de VS....... Neem bijvoorbeeld Turkije waar Erdogan steeds minder populair werd >> Erdogan valt Syrië illegaal binnen en is weer populair bij het volk, terwijl hij schaamteloos gebruik maakt van de media, die hij na een heftige persbreidel onder de duim heeft.....

The Incredible Shrinking Overton Window

by Caitlin Johnstone

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.”
~ Noam Chomsky

The plutocrat-owned narrative managers of the political/media class work constantly to shrink the Overton window, the spectrum of debate that is considered socially acceptable. They do this by framing more and more debates in terms of how the oligarchic empire should be sustained and supported, steering them away from debates about whether that empire should be permitted to exist at all.

They get people debating whether there should be some moderate changes made or no meaningful changes at all, rather than the massive, sweeping changes we all know need to be made to the entire system.

They get people debating whether they should elect a crook in a red hat or a crook in a blue hat, rather than whether or not they should be forced to elect crooks.

They get people debating violations of government secrecy laws, not whether the government has any business keeping those secrets from its citizenry in the first place.

They get people debating how internet censorship should take place and whom should be censored, rather than whether any internet censorship should occur.

They get people debating how and to what extent government surveillance should occur, not whether the government has any business spying on its citizens.

They get people debating how subservient and compliant someone needs to be in order to not get shot by a police officer, rather than whether a police officer should be shooting people for those reasons at all.

They get people debating whether or not a group of protesters are sufficiently polite, rather than debating the thing those protesters are demonstrating against.

They get people debating about whether this thing or that thing is a "conspiracy theory", rather than discussing the known fact that powerful people conspire.

They get people debating whether Tulsi Gabbard is a dangerous lunatic, a Russian asset, a Republican asset gearing up for a third party run, or just a harmless Democratic Party crackpot, rather than discussing the fact that her foreign policy would have been considered perfectly normal prior to 9/11.

They get people debating whether Bernie Sanders is electable or too radical, rather than discussing what it says about the status quo that his extremely modest proposals which every other major country already implements are treated as something outlandish in the United States.

They get people debating whether Jeremy Corbyn has done enough to address the Labour antisemitism crisis, rather than whether that "crisis" ever existed at all outside of the imaginations of establishment smear merchants.

They get people debating whether Joe Biden or Elizabeth Warren would win against Trump, rather than whether either of those establishment lackeys is a worthy nominee.

They get people debating whether politicians should have corporate sponsors, rather than whether corporations should be allowed to interfere in the electoral process at all.

They get people debating if the US should be pursuing regime change in Iran or Syria, rather than whether the US has any business overthrowing the governments of sovereign nations to begin with.

They get people debating how many US troops should be in Syria, rather than whether that illegal invasion and occupation was ever legitimate in the first place.

They get people debating whether to kill people slowly by sanctions or kill them quickly with bombs, rather than whether they should be killed at all.

They get people debating whether or not some other country’s leader is an evil dictator, rather than whether it’s any of your business.

They get people debating the extent to which Russia and Trump were involved in the Democratic Party's 2016 email leaks, rather than the contents of those leaks.

They get people debating what the response should be to Russian interference in the election, rather than whether that interference took place at all, and whether it would really matter if it did.

They get people debating how much government support the poor should be allowed to have, rather than whether the rich should be allowed to keep what they've stolen from the poor.

They get people debating what kind of taxes billionaires should have to pay, rather than whether it makes sense for billionaires to exist at all.

They get people impotently debating the bad things other countries do, rather than the bad things their own country does which they can actually do something about.

They get people debating what should be done to prevent the rise of China, rather than whether a multipolar world might be beneficial.

They get people debating whether western cold war escalations against the Russian Federation are sufficient, rather than whether they want to horrors of the cold war to be resurrected in the first place.

They get people debating what extent cannabis should be decriminalized, rather than whether the government should be allowed to lock anyone up for deciding to put any substance whatsoever in their own body.

They get people debating whether or not US troops should be withdrawn from Afghanistan, rather than whether or not there should be any US troops outside of the US.

They get people debating whether or not Julian Assange is "a real journalist", rather than whether or not they should set legal precedents that necessarily criminalize acts of journalism.

They get people debating the subtle details of bail protocol, political asylum, embassy cat hygiene and leaking rather than whether it should ever be legal to imprison a publisher for exposing government war crimes.

They get people debating what the punishment should be for whistleblowers, not what the punishment should be for those they blow the whistle on.

They get people debating whether Fox or MSNBC is the real "fake news", rather than whether the entirety of mainstream media is oligarchic propaganda.

They get people debating about how the things everyone is freaking out over Trump doing were previously done by Obama, rather than discussing why all US presidents do the same evil things regardless of their parties or campaign platforms.

They get people debating what should be done with money, not whether the concept of money itself is in need of a complete overhaul.

They get people debating what should be done with government, not whether the concept of government itself is in need of a complete overhaul.

They get people debating whether the status quo should be reinforced or revised, rather than whether it should be flushed down the toilet where it belongs.

They get people angrily debating things they can't change, rather than constructively working on the things that they can.

They get people shoving against each other in opposite directions, while they swiftly build a cage around us all.

___________________________________

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, checking out my podcast on either Youtube, soundcloud, Apple podcasts or Spotify, following me on Steemit, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I'm trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Caitlin Johnstone | November 4, 2019 at 2:54 am | Tags: debate, Overton window, partisanship, Politics | Categories: Article | URL: https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1Uj

========================================
Zie ook:
'Facebook keurde advertenties goed die waren gericht op neonazi's'

'VS presidentschap wordt gekocht met 100 dollar per uitgebrachte stem'

'Michael Bloombergs deelname aan de verkiezingen laten nog eens zien hoe ondemocratisch de VS presidentsverkiezingen zijn'

'Niet Rusland maar Trump beïnvloedt nu al de verkiezingen in Groot-Brittannië'

'Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez grilt Zuckerberg over misleidende advertenties op Facebook: liegen in verkiezingstijd is toegestaan'

'Tulsi Gabbard (Democratische presidentskandidaat) en de gestoken verkiezingen'

'Hillary Clinton manipuleert democratische voorverkiezingen'

'Ollongren (D66 minister) manipuleerde bevolking met beschuldiging Russische manipulatie door desinformatie en nepnieuws' (zie ook de links in dat bericht naar meer berichten over Ollongren en haar leugens)

'WaPo waarschuwt voor Russische digitale controle over de hersenen van VS burgers'

'Trump tracht met fake news het volk te manipuleren en daarmee de EU te schande te maken'

'ALEC is een extreem rechtse lobbyclub: corruptie tot op het hoogste niveau en (echte) beïnvloeding van verkiezingen'

''Geheime diensten in westen geven toe dat spioneren via het G5 netwerk praktisch onmogelijk is........'

'Federale rechter stelt ten overvloede dat DNC geen grond heeft voor zaak te tegen Trumps verkiezingsteam'

'Britse regering weigert RT en Sputnik voor conferentie over persvrijheid..... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'1984 het boek van George Orwell: niet langer fictie.......'

'Het westen vervolgt journalist Assange, Rusland laat journalist vrij na onrust over diens gevangenschap' (zie daarin ook de links naar andere berichten over Assange)

'De sterkste beïnvloeding van de VS presidentsverkiezingen wordt als volkomen 'legaal' en normaal gezien'

'Avaaz valt met fake news en desinformatie 'fake news en desinformatie' aan......' (zie in dat bericht ook de link naar een ander artikel met een smerige rol van Avaaz)

'Rob Jetten (D66 fractievoorzitter) liegt een fikse slag in de rondte in EU verkiezingspraatje'

'EU verkiezingen: manipulatie ook door lobbyisme is misdadig, zelfs Bas Eickhout (GroenLinks) doet hieraan mee'

'Intel processors al 10 jaar zo lek als een mandje, Intel niet een bedrijf uit Rusland of China, maar uit..... de VS!'

'Gelekte documenten tonen aan dat Google en Pinterest censuur uitoefenen'

'Facebook stelt klimaatsceptisch Daily Caller aan als 'factchecker...' ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Russiagate: nog overtuigd van bestaan daarvan? Lees dit!' 

'Robert Mueller lijdt aan dementie en maakt van Russiagate een nog belachelijker verhaal'

'Putin vraagt en Trump levert: een lijst met 'alle goede zaken die Trump voor Rusland regelde''

Jeremy Corbyn weggezet als nazi in fake news 'antisemitisme schandaal' >> haatzaaien met een 'groter doel'

De voortdurende demonisering van Corbyn in de Britse reguliere media kent werkelijk geen grenzen meer, dagelijks wordt Corbyn door de stront gesleurd en afgezeken als antisemiet....... Niet dat daar ook maar één direct bewijs voor geleverd kan worden, sterker nog: Corbyn onderhoudt aantoonbaar goede relaties met joodse mensen en niet de minste, neem de intussen overleden van joodse komaf Nederlandse Hajo Meijer, een overlever van de nazi-dodenkampen, met wie hij een goede relatie had......

In het hieronder opgenomen artikel nog veel meer joodse mensen die het opnemen voor Corbyn, de Labour leider die in zijn team zelfs drie mensen van joodse komaf heeft, allen joden die allesbehalve vinden dat Corbyn een antisemiet is.....

Men is dan ook totaal niet bang dat met Corbyn de nazi's over de Britse straten zullen marcheren, maar dat Corbyn na zoveel decennia neoliberaal wanbeleid gevoerd door opvolgende regeringen, ja zelfs door zijn eigen Labour Partij, een sociaal regeringsbeleid zal voeren....... Corbyn is te populair en dat dit zeker ook veel jongeren aanspreekt, is velen in het verkeerde keelgat geschoten..... 

De schrijver van het artikel stelt terecht dat een deel van de Labour politici het beleid van Blair willen doorzetten, van Labour een tweede Tory partij maken* dit t.b.v. het inhumane, ijskoude neoliberalisme en de voortdurende Britse steun voor en deelname aan illegale oorlogen van de VS, waarmee deze Labour politici ook fungeren als lobbyisten van het militair-industrieel complex, een complex waar men vindt dat er niet lang en vaak genoeg oorlog gevoerd kan worden....... 

Het sterkste pleidooi in het volgende artikel is wel de vaststelling dat het misbruik van het woord 'antisemitisme' in feite een trap na is voor de slachtoffers van de holocaust (een te korte samenvatting, lees het artikel)

De schrijver van het hieronder opgenomen artikel, dat eerder op MediaLens werd gepubliceerd (nam het over van Information Clearing House), neemt ook de opgestapte Labour leden onder de loep en geeft daarbij aan dat deze figuren een allesbehalve fris verleden hebben.......

Lees het volgende uiterst verontrustende, maar prima artikel en geeft het door, ook de Nederlandse media nemen de lulkoek van de Britse media over en stellen dat Labour een probleem heeft met antisemitisme, terwijl een groot aantal Britse joden lid is van Corbyns Labour Partij....... Intussen heeft de eerste aanval op Corbyn, n.a.v. het haatzaaien in de Britse media al plaatsgevonden......

The Fake News Nazi - Corbyn, Williamson And The Anti-Semitism Scandal

By Editor Media Lens

March 08, 2019 "Information Clearing House" -  One of us had a discussion with an elderly relative:

'He can't be allowed to become Prime Minister.'

'Why not?'

'It's so awful...'

'What is?'

'The way he hates the Jews.'

The last comment was spoken with real anguish, the result of continuous exposure to just two main news sources: the Daily Mail and the BBC.

What is astonishing is that, just four years ago, essentially no-one held this view of Jeremy Corbyn.

Corbyn first became an MP in 1983. He stood for the Labour leadership 32 years later, in May 2015. We searched the ProQuest database for UK newspaper articles containing:

'Jeremy Corbyn' and 'anti-semitism' before 1 May 2015 = 18 hits

'Jeremy Corbyn' and 'anti-semitism' after 1 May 2015 = 11,251 hits

None of the 18 hits accused Corbyn of anti-semitism. For his first 32 years as an MP, it just wasn't a theme associated with him.

We also searched the ProQuest database for UK newspaper articles containing:

'Labour Party' and 'anti-semitism' before 1 May 2015 = 5,347 hits

'Labour Party' and 'anti-semitism' after 1 May 2015 = 13,921 hits

The archive begins in 1980, which means that more than twice as many articles have included these terms in the last four years than in the 35 years from 1980 until May 2015 when Corbyn stood for the Labour leadership. A standard response to these findings runs along these lines:

'Irrelevant backbencher gets less Press attention than Leader of The Opposition SHOCKER. What's your next scoop, Water Wet, Sky Blue?'

But in fact, Corbyn was not an irrelevant backbencher. We found 3,662 hits for articles mentioning Corbyn before May 2015. Many of these are mentions in passing, but he had also long been a high-profile anti-war MP at a time of numerous wars. And he was frequently smeared, only not about his supposed anti-semitism. Consider, for example, an article that appeared in The Sun in 1999, under a typically cruel title:

'Why did it take you so long to dump him, Mrs Corbyn?' (Ally Ross, The Sun, 13 May 1999)

The story:

'EXTREME Left MP Jeremy Corbyn has been dumped by his missus after an amazing bust-up over their son's education.'

The key issue, according to The Sun:

'Now the question on everyone's lips is: Why did it take her so long to leave the loathsome Lefty, and more importantly, why is she only moaning about his choice of schools?'

Because there was, apparently, plenty to moan about. The Sun described Corbyn as 'class crusader Jeremy - a rabid IRA sympathiser' who 'not only looks and dresses like a third-rate Open University lecturer, he thinks like one too. In 1984 the Provo stooge invited twice-convicted terrorist and bomber Linda Quigley to the House of Commons just 13 days after the IRA's murderous attack on Tories staying at the Grand Hotel in Brighton'.

This was pretty brutal stuff. The Sun added of Corbyn's ex-wife:

'Claudia's saviour of the masses also suffers incredible delusions of grandeur. Communist states may be falling like dominoes, but raving Red Jeremy still believes his outdated views are relevant to modern-day Britain.'

And:

'Not only is Jeremy a political coward who backs terrorists, he is also a self-confessed big girl's blouse.'

And:

'Jeremy's mis-shapen suits, lumpy jumpers and nylon shirts are not exactly what the well-dressed radical is wearing in 1999... Claudia should be aware her ex is irredeemably, unforgivably, annoyingly stupid.'

Given the no-holds-barred nature of the smear, it is amazing that The Sun made no mention at all of Corbyn's vile anti-semitism, viewed as his most obvious and dangerous defect now.
The reason is that, as this shows, not even his worst enemies viewed him as an anti-semite. The extreme Tory press aside, the accepted view of Corbyn pre-2015 is indicated by a long, admiring piece in which Jewish journalist Deborah Ross, whose family members were murdered in Polish pogroms even before the Nazi Holocaust was unleashed, interviewed him for the Independent in 2005. Ross commented:

'He is also, it is generally agreed, an exemplary constituency MP. Even my friend Rebecca, who recently sought his help on a local issue, and never usually has a nice word to say about anybody, which is why I like her, describes him as a "totally genuine mensch".'

Ross added:

'As The Sun would have it, Mr Corbyn is a "beardy Bolshevik" and "loathsome lefty" but he does not come across as either. He has strong opinions but does not demand you listen to them, if you don't want to.

'He is scandal free, unless you count the hoo-ha a few years back when it was revealed that Jeremy's oldest son would be attending a grammar school outside the borough.'

Joseph Finlay is a former Deputy Editor of the Jewish Quarterly, who co-founded a range of grassroots Jewish organisations such as Moishe House London, Wandering Jews, Jewdas and The Open Talmud Project. On 2 March 2018, Finlay wrote in his blog under the title, 'Jeremy Corbyn is an anti-racist, not an anti-Semite':

'Firstly we need to restore some perspective. The Labour party has thousands of Jewish members, many Jewish councillors, a number of prominent Jewish MPs and several Jewish members of its ruling council. Many people at the heart of the Corbyn team, such as Jon Lansman, James Schneider and Rhea Wolfson are also Jewish. Ed Miliband, the previous party leader, was Jewish (and suffered antisemitism at the hands of the press and the Conservatives). I have been a member for five years and, as a Jew, have had only positive experiences.'

Finlay added:

'Jeremy Corbyn has been MP for Islington North since 1983 – a constituency with a significant Jewish population. Given that he has regularly polled over 60% of the vote (73% in 2017) it seems likely that a sizeable number of Jewish constituents voted for him. As a constituency MP he regularly visited synagogues and has appeared at many Jewish religious and cultural events. He is close friends with the leaders of the Jewish Socialist Group, from whom he has gained a rich knowledge of the history of the Jewish Labour Bund, and he has named the defeat of Mosley's Fascists at the Battle of Cable as a key historical moment for him. His 2017 Holocaust Memorial Day statement talked about Shmuel Zygielboym, the Polish Bund leader exiled to London who committed suicide in an attempt to awaken the world to the Nazi genocide. How many British politicians have that level of knowledge of modern Jewish history?'

Israel-based journalist Jonathan Cook notes that a recent Labour Party report 'decisively undercut' the claims of Corbyn's critics 'not only of endemic anti-semitism in Labour, but of any significant problem at all'. Cook summarised:

'Over the previous 10 months, 673 complaints had been filed against Labour members over alleged anti-semitic behaviour, many based on online comments. In a third of those cases, insufficient evidence had been produced.

'The 453 other allegations represented 0.08 percent of the 540,000-strong Labour membership. Hardly "endemic" or "institutional", it seems.'

He added:

'That echoed an earlier report by the Commons home affairs committee, which found there was "no reliable, empirical evidence" that Labour had more of an anti-semitism problem than any other British political party.'

In 'Antisemitism in contemporary Great Britain: A study of attitudes towards Jews and Israel' by the Jewish Institute for Policy Research, L. Daniel Staetsky found:

'Levels of antisemitism among those on the left-wing of the political spectrum, including the far-left, are indistinguishable from those found in the general population. Yet, all parts of those on the left of the political spectrum – including the "slightly left-of-centre," the "fairly left-wing" and the "very left-wing" – exhibit higher levels of anti-Israelism than average. The most antisemitic group on the political spectrum consists of those who identify as very right-wing: the presence of antisemitic attitudes in this group is 2 to 4 times higher compared to the general population.'

The report notes that 'the prevalence of antisemitism on the far right is considerably higher than on the left and in the political centre'.

Noam Chomsky has commented:

'The charges of anti-Semitism against Corbyn are without merit, an underhanded contribution to the disgraceful efforts to fend off the threat that a political party might emerge that is led by an admirable and decent human being, a party that is actually committed to the interests and just demands of its popular constituency and the great majority of the population generally, while also authentically concerned with the rights of suffering and oppressed people throughout the world. Plainly an intolerable threat to order.' (Noam Chomsky, email to Media Lens, 9 September 2018)

Suspending Chris Williamson

On February 27, a propaganda blitz was launched against anti-war Labour MP Chris Williamson who had been filmed saying that Labour Party responses to claims of anti-semitism had exacerbated the crisis:

'I've got to say, I think our party's response has been partly responsible... Because, in my opinion, we've backed off far too much, we've given too much ground, we've been too apologetic.'

Williamson added:

'We've done more to address the scourge of anti-semitism than any political party.'

It is clear that Williamson was strongly endorsing the fight against anti-semitism and was proud of the Labour Party's record. Actual anti-semites talk of 'the scourge of Judaism', Williamson talked of 'the scourge of anti-semitism'. He was suggesting that the party had been too apologetic in responding to a cynical smear campaign attempting to destroy Corbyn by exploiting the issue of anti-semitism.

Others chose to see it differently. Guardian columnist Owen Jones responded to Williamson's comments:

'This is utterly out of order. When does the left ever say we've been "too apologetic" about fighting racism or bigotry? Why is he, a non-Jew, right and Jon Lansman - a Jewish socialist who founded Momentum and ran Corbyn's second leadership campaign - wrong about anti-Semitism?'

We replied:

'"When does the left ever say we've been "too apologetic" about fighting racism or bigotry?'"

'He's *endorsing* the fight against racism and bigotry. He's saying Labour has been too apologetic in responding to a cynical smear campaign to destroy Corbyn in the name of anti-racism.'

Ash Sharkar of Novara Media tweeted:

'Chris Williamson has been had the Labour whip suspended pending investigation, which I think is the right decision. But much more work must be done to proactively confront and dismantle conspiratorial and antisemitic thinking on the left, and it goes much further than expulsions.'

Aaron Bastani, also of Novara Media, wrote:

'I think media coverage of the "Labour anti-semitism crisis" is completely disproportionate - primarily because it underplays problem more broadly across society.

'Equally, hearing & reading the things I have in recent days I wouldn't feel welcome in the party as a Jewish person.'

In our latest book, 'Propaganda Blitz', we noted a key factor driving home these smear blitzes:

'while a demonising propaganda blitz may arise from rightist politics and media, the propaganda coup de grace ending public doubt often comes from the "left-liberal" journalists at the Guardian, the Independent, the BBC and Channel 4; and also from non-corporate journalists who crave acceptance by these media. Again, the logic is clear: if even celebrity progressive journalists – people famous for their principled stands, and colourful socks and ties – join the denunciations, then there must be something to the claims. At this point, it actually becomes difficult to doubt it'. (David Edwards and David Cromwell, 'Propaganda Blitz', Pluto Press, 2018, pp.8-9)

Foreign Wars – Racism Versus Speciesism

The truth of the corporate media's 'ethical concern' becomes clearer when we consider Corbyn's record on foreign wars. While the UK affects to care deeply about racism, Chomsky has noted that the West's endless 'interventions' - all reflexively supported by the same media damning Corbyn now - are manifestations of a prejudice, beyond even racism, that is a kind of speciesism:

'Namely, knowing that you are massacring them but not doing so intentionally because you don't regard them as worthy of concern. That is, you don't even care enough about them to intend to kill them. Thus when I walk down the street, if I stop to think about it I know I'll probably kill lots of ants, but I don't intend to kill them, because in my mind they do not even rise to the level where it matters. There are many such examples. To take one of the very minor ones, when Clinton bombed the al-Shifa pharmaceutical facility in Sudan, he and the other perpetrators surely knew that the bombing would kill civilians (tens of thousands, apparently). But Clinton and associates did not intend to kill them, because by the standards of Western liberal humanitarian racism, they are no more significant than ants. Same in the case of tens of millions of others.' (Chomsky ZNet blog, 'Samantha Power, Bush & Terrorism,' 31 July 2007)

Even if Corbyn was an anti-semite, a racist, he would still be a far safer ethical choice than Tory and Blairite speciesists who value human beings on the level of ants. After all, we find that Jeremy Corbyn:

'Consistently voted against use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas.'

'Consistently voted against the Iraq war.'

'... voted to say that the case for war against Iraq has not yet been established'.

'... voted against a motion stating the Government should use all means necessary to ensure the disarmament of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Support for the motion by the majority of MPs led to the UK joining the US invasion of Iraq two days later'.

'Generally voted for investigations into the Iraq war.'

'... acted as teller for a vote on UK Air Strikes Against ISIL in Iraq'.

'... voted against the establishment of a no-fly zone in Libya'.

'... voted against the continued deployment of UK armed forces in Afghanistan'.

'... voted to decline to authorise UK military action in Syria'.

'... voted against UK airstrikes against ISIL in Syria'.

'Generally voted against replacing Trident with a new nuclear weapons system.'

Consider, by contrast, the record of the Labour MPs who have left the Labour Party, supposedly in protest at the rise of anti-semitism, to form The Independent Group:

Chuka Umunna 'Almost always voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas.'

Angela Smith 'Almost always voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas.'

Mike Gapes 'Generally voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas.'

Chris Leslie 'Almost always voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas.'

Luciana Berger 'Generally voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas.'

Joan Ryan: 'Consistently voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas', 'Consistently voted for the Iraq war', 'Consistently voted against investigations into the Iraq war.'

Ann Coffey 'Almost always voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas.'

Gavin Shuker 'Voted a mixture of for and against use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas.'

Not even his most extreme critics are suggesting that Corbyn is offering the kind of threat to Jewish people consistently offered by Tory and Blairite MPs to millions of people in countries like Iraq, Libya, Syria, Venezuela, Iran and Yemen. Even if Corbyn had erred in failing to perceive the ugliness of a mural declared antisemitic by the press; even if had been lax in taking action against party racists, and so on, how do these failings compare to the destruction of whole countries in lie-based wars of aggression?

Why do corporate media never make this moral comparison? Because they are incapable of perceiving US-UK crimes against humanity as crimes; a wilful moral blindness that renders them completely unfit to pass judgement on Corbyn. Especially as they are themselves, of course, complicit in these same war crimes. 

Conclusion

The claim that Corbyn is an anti-semite presiding over a surge in Labour Party anti-semitism is fake news; it is a scam of the utmost cynicism and brutality. It should be viewed as the latest in a long line of attempts to destroy Corbyn by all necessary means. He has been smeared for not bowing low enough, for not singing loudly enough, for hating women, for disrespecting gay people, for consorting with terrorists, for refusing to unleash a nuclear holocaust, for being a shambolic leader, for being a shambolic dresser, for leading Labour towards certain electoral disaster, for being a Putinite stooge, for aping Trump, and so on. Now, finally, someone widely admired for thirty years as a decent, socialist MP, has been transformed into an anti-semite; or as game show assistant and political commentator Rachel Riley implies, a 'Nazi'.

Anti-semitism does exist in the Labour Party, as it exists throughout UK society, and of course these delusions should be resisted and exposed. But the smear campaign against Corbyn is not rooted in concern for the welfare of Jewish people; it is not even about blocking a political leader who cares about Palestinian rights. It is about preventing Corbyn from undoing Tony Blair's great achievement of transforming the Labour Party into a second Tory Party, thus ensuring voters have no option challenging corporate domination, including the 'humanitarian interventions' for oil and other resources. The goal is to stop Corbyn letting democracy out of its box.

Stephen Law of Heythrop College, University of London, warns that cavalier accusations made 'on the basis of obviously flimsy or nonexistent evidence' are 'disrespecting the memory of the millions who were slaughtered by real antisemitism during the Holocaust'. But in fact, it is worse than that. State propagandists and their corporate media allies are exploiting the suffering of these millions as part of an attack on British democracy. This is obscene. But it is not particularly shocking after the campaigns of deceit which, as discussed, knowingly risked and then shattered the lives of millions of innocent human beings in US-UK wars of aggression.

One thing is certain, if Corbyn and his style of socialism can be made to disappear, we'll hear no more about anti-semitism in the Labour Party, just as we heard no more about Iraqi democracy after Saddam Hussein, or human rights in Libya after Gaddafi; just as we will hear no more about press freedom in Venezuela, if Maduro is overthrown.

As this alert was being written, news emerged that Corbyn had been subjected to a physical assault in London, to muted concern from almost all corporate media and journalists (compare 'mainstream' reaction to news that Conservative MP Anna Soubry had been called a 'Nazi'). Journalists claimed Corbyn had merely had an egg thrown at him. Labour MP Diane Abbott tweeted:

'I was there. He punched Jeremy very hard. He happened to have an egg in his palm. But it could have been a knife. Horrible'

Perhaps journalists couldn't bear to express concern for a person they have so completely reviled for almost four years. Or perhaps they knew their smears of a thoroughly decent, well-intentioned man would be thrown back at them. More likely, they just didn't care. And that, finally, is the truth of their 'ethical concern' – they don't care.


This article was originally published by "Media Lens" -  
================================================
* Ook onder de Labour regeringen in het begin van deze eeuw, de regeringen van opperploert Blair en oplichter Brown, gingen miljoenen kinderen met honger naar school........

Zie ook:
'Corbyn als schietschijf voor het Britse leger, reactie Tories: Corbyn is een groot gevaar voor Brittannië......'

'Antisemitische heksenjacht in GB bedoeld om pro-Palestijnse Labour politici de mond te snoeren'

'Esther Voet (Nieuw Israëlitisch Weekblad) 'maakt grap': ze vertrekt naar Israël vanwege groeiend antisemitisme......'

'The Guardian weigert brief van meer dan 200 Joodse vrouwen, waar dit medium loog en blijft liegen over 'antisemitisme' Corbyn'

'Anti-Corbyn boek valt door de mand als valse aanklacht >> schrijver duikt onder......'

'Esther Voet (hoofdredacteur Nieuw Israëlietisch Weekblad) over 'antisemitisme''

'Jeremy Corbyn (Labour en oppositie leider GB) veegt de vloer aan met vertrekkende 'centrum' Labour fractieleden'

'BBC presentator maakt per ongeluk promotie voor het socialisme'

'The Mail on Sunday en Sky News schieten levensgrote antisemitische bok bij het belasteren van Corbyn'

'BBC wijst meer en meer naar Corbyn als medeschuldige voor de Brexit'

'Simon Wiesenthal Center: antisemitische top tien 2018 >> o.a. moorden toegestaan voor Joden'

'BBC Media Action: een smerige propaganda organisatie, mede door Nederland betaald'

'Britse justitie gaat 'hate crimes' van Labour onderzoeken'

'Jeremy Corbyn wordt gedemoniseerd als antisemiet.......'

'Jeremy Corbyn krijgt echt belangrijke vredesprijs >> aandacht van de reguliere media: nul komma nada...'

Daar Corbyn vooral voor antisemiet wordt uitgemaakt, nog wat links naar dat onderwerp:

'Kritiek op Israël wordt door een leger van Israëlische trollen bevochten'

'Israël misbruikt de aanslag op de synagoge in Pittsburgh voor demonisering van steun aan de Palestijnen.......'

'Google Maps veegt Palestijns gebied van de kaart'

'De film over de pro-Israëlische lobby in de VS, die Israël verboden wil zien.........'

'Israël zet snelle reactiemacht op poten tegen anti-Israëlische kritiek'

'Israël en VS werken samen in tegenwerken van critici op beleid t.a.v. Palestijnen'