Jon Snow introducing C4's report on the 'The Muslim Question' - no Final Solutions have been presented at this stageOK, I've seen the Channel 4 piece about British Muslims and their doubts about the Official Narrative of 7/7
And, fuck me, how surprised was I to discover that I hated it
You could have knocked me down with a feather
I won’t bother with what would be a very long list of the snide little presentational tricks used in the film but they are there and once a copy gets put up on Youtube (I have it on VHS if all else fails) any vaguely media literate person will be able to spot them.
However, it’s worth running through some of the more blatant devices used...
Attributing doubts about 7/7 to a sense of alienation on the part of Muslims
The message of the piece was that 7/7 scepticism is a Muslim specific issue and not grounded in the weaknesses in the Official Account of 7/7. The possibility that C4 was putting the cart in front of the horse and that some Muslims were feeling alienated because of the bullshit surrounding 7/7 was not touched
And the last time I looked at my baptism certificate I was a Roman Catholic
Misrepresenting Luton CCTV footage
C4 showed a few frames taken from another day whilst the presenter was talking about 7th July. The timestamp was there to see but the vast majority of viewers would have come away with the impression that the footage was from 7/7. In fact, the absence of images from 7/7 is a major cause for scepticism. An issue not mentioned in the piece
Presenting people’s concerns without context
The film showed lots of clips of Muslims saying they doubted the official account of 7/7 but did not show lots of clips of Muslims explaining why they had doubts. The impression given was that their concerns had no credible basis. The most blatant example was the part where a young Asian man explained why he thought the Luton CCTV image had been doctored. A shot of the photograph was included but not in a way that you could see what he was talking about.
Somebody I know personally was interviewed for the film. He is well spoken, intelligent and would have had no problem communicating why he has questions about 7/7, which is presumably why his contribution was edited down to something like one and half sentences (they were good sentences though)
Gatekeepers, straw men, loonies and shills
The piece managed to work in some clips from Alex Jones, a ‘witness’ called Daniel and a sliver of the film Ludicrous Division with an emphasis on its spooky X-Files style soundtrack. Presumably the producers didn't have enough time or couldn't get hold of 'ex' MI5 operative David Shayler or 'ex MI6 operative' and alien tunnel aficionado James C
I’ve written about Daniel here. I don’t recall writing much about Alex Jones’ coverage of 7/7 in his film Terrror Storm but suffice to say it’s the sloppiest account of 7/7 issues and riddled with perplexingly (if you trust Mr Jones that is) obvious factual errors
I could go on but what’s the point? Tonight’s effort by C4 asserted that there were no grounds for scepticism about 7/7 without actually covering the issues. The xenophobes in the audience will come away with their belief that Muslims are a bunch of disloyal bastards who hate our government and therefore our country reaffirmed. Non xenophobes will be satisfied with the psychological tosh about alienation and exclusion.
I’ve said it before but I’ll say it again. Any time someone from the mainstream media or an associated production company gets in touch with any of us 'who doubt', their only objective is to make us look like idiots or lunatics. They are not going to help
edit: someone has just dropped me a line pointing out that C4's web site does give a little more coverage on the inconsistencies in the Official Narrative of 7/7. That it does. It also includes web links to some right old shit
edit #2: someone else has pointed out to me that I should at least be pleased that C4 addressing the issue of 7/7 scepticism is a sign of progress. Well, yes. But I don''t think that's because the folk at C4 are nice guys. Their treatment of the material pretty much disproves that possibility
edit #3: it is heartening to see that C4 was clearly bombarded by emails from people who weren't biting the 'mistrust of the government is a Muslim specific problem' line taken by the piece. One thing that always makes me laugh about the 'public response' to this sort of thing is that it appears to be mandatory to include the thoughts of some random cunt who starts talking about Elvis Presley (in this case it's you 'Russ Singleton'). Play another tune for fuck's sake...
Chinese Elvis - so convincing an Elvis impersonator that you'll actually start believing that The King isn't really dead..."We're caught in a trap
I can't walk out
Because I love you too much baby
Why can't you see
What you're doing to me
When you don't believe a word I say?
We can't go on together
With suspicious minds
And we can't build our dreams
On suspicious minds..."
I can't walk out
Because I love you too much baby
Why can't you see
What you're doing to me
When you don't believe a word I say?
We can't go on together
With suspicious minds
And we can't build our dreams
On suspicious minds..."
.
16 comments:
i take it i didn't miss much
Couldnt aggree more - it used the exact same template as the recent BBC 9/11 debunking film. ALl very tiresome but ever so predictable. I think its time to give up on the mainstream press ever investigate the issue seriously. It's never going to happen.
Stef, you’re such a cynic, you never fail to amaze me! How about some congratulations for getting these issues raised in the mainstream media, no matter how it was presented? The media have ignored this stuff for two years, do you really think they’re suddenly going to hold their hands up and say, “Guess what, we’ve been wrong all this time. Here’s Jon Snow with the truth.”
If that’s the sort of thing anyone expected, I suggest you consider joining the UK 9/11 Truthling Movement as they always eagerly await the media unravelling the whole truth and nothing but the truth, in between ad-breaks. And, while they’re waiting that revelatory televisual event, they all waste their time, and everyone else’s, babbling on about 9/11 like there’s a single thing people in the UK can do about it. Meanwhile, they ignore entirely the events of 7/7 which happened right on their doorstep.
It's not so much that I approve wholeheartedly of the piece, it's more the fact that they even bothered to raise this as an issue and dedicate so much time to it.
What is important is the content of the piece, not the agenda setting tone in which it was presented. People aren't as stupid as everyone seems to think.
And it's not just Muslims that don't trust the State, hence why Dr John Reid wants to declare a State of Emergency.
Fair enough, the fact that anything was shown at all can be considered progress
My worry is that this piece might be part of a wider, erm, puts Conspiraloon hat on, campaign to demonize those Muslims who don't support terrorism (ie virtually all of them).
As time goes on it's going to become increasingly clear, is increasingly clear, that the image painted by our government and security forces of hundreds of UK based terror cells with thousands of members is nonsense.
So, they're going to have to find new ways to keep the point boiling - depicting Muslims as a group that is set against the government (and therefore the country) and staging and publicising the odd provocative demo would fit the bill
The wider campaign to demonise just about anyone, although particularly Muslims at this present time, is a sure sign that the official conspiracy theorists are becoming increasingly desperate about the fact that their hitherto tried and tested methods of supressing and subjugating ordinary decent people, methods that they have been using since the old wooden horse of Troy, is failing.
The beast's time is up and it is up because of their own actions. They have nobody to blame but themselves.
Trying to blindly pin the tail on whatever donkey they can find isn't going to work either.
In media terms it was a classic hit-piece designed to appeal to the viewer emotionally rather than engage them intellectually. I was interested by the similar tone and structure to earlier BBC offerings.
I notice that the C4 website highlights one of the most easily debunked issues surrounding 7/7, that of the video latency in the surveillance footage, which I have discussed before. This is a rudimentary diversion worthy of a seaside conjurer.
Channel 4 is a commercial station and it is quite easy, given the right connections and money to get any viewpoint you want aired and the intense focus on British Muslim dissent was quite a giveaway.
I don't believe there is a government connection to this sort of propaganda, excepting those they have influence over on the inside. This looks "privately funded" to me, if you get my drift. There's a lot of it about right now.
@wolfie
I think we're reading from the same book...
and yes, yes there is an awful lot of it about at the moment
I wonder why...
A follow up on C4's piece in the DT today...
http://tinyurl.com/2nej8g
The writer includes the line
Some even dismissed as fakes the "martyrdom" videos left by Mohammed Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer admitting responsibility for the bombings"
So, presumably he's seen copies of the videos where the two guys actually talk about the London bombings. Maybe he could share them with the rest of us
I wonder if this is the start of a new strategy to do to the 7/7 truth movement what has been done to the 9/11 one?
9/11 truth has effectively been destroyed by the incredible amount of crap and disinformation that is now cicrualting about it - so much so that a lot of believers are now so revulsed they don't want anything more to do with it, me included. Is this a new divide and conquer strategy in it's infancy?
As long as people stick to asking questions about the weaknesses in the Official Narrative all will be well
The number one thing which divided the 9/11 movement was people adopting pet theories and feuding with people who adopted other theories. How much of that was staged, if any of it, can't be gauged. But it doesn't matter anyway. It's a daft way to go about things
I suspect that cultural differences between the US and UK mean that we're less susceptible to that
Stef, I think that's the point. J7 has never postulated an alternative theory, but instead many, many questions, all of which are legitimate, all of which call into question the official Home Office account of events, and all of which remain unanswered or otherwise almost entirely unaddressed.
In addition, many of those directly affected have similar legitimate questions about the official story that has been spun, although you wouldn't know it because they've all been corralled into 'survivor groups' fronted almost entirely by one or two prominent people.
The burden of proof is on the State to prove the guilt of the accused. Innocent until proven guilty, and all that old fashioned stuff.
The full findings of the Channel 4 survey -- you know, the content of the piece -- can be found here.
Those of the opinion that it was a typical media hit-piece to further demonise Muslims or anyone asking questions and seeking the truth should write to news@channel4.com and let them know that it's not just Muslims that don't trust the government, much less a government with the dubious privilege of having the first ever serving Prime Minister to be interviewed under caution by the Police.
A selection of emails received by Channel 4 after the programme is heartening:
A large number of your emails drew attention to the fact that it was not just Muslims who did not believe the official version of what happened on 7 July 2005.
These are big boy's games.
You will notice that there has been a shift in the recent propaganda war against Iran to include Russia, rather obviously yet another petrochemical resource-rich country. At the centre of it all is Globalization and all its hideous by-products.
It never ceases to amaze me how many useful idiots can be found to help the greedy and powerful in their objectives though.
The 7/7 truth campaign has always been restrained, sensible and rational. As you say nobody is constructing elaborate theories as to what actually happened. 911 truth started like this, with sensible people asking questions and look what its become. I think we have to be scrupulous about avoiding that or we'll see more reports like this that paint us as conspiracy theorists out of touch with reality. That's what this report did, rather than address any of the important questions we have.
Anonymous: I'm glad you appreciate the efforts of J7, thanks for your kind words about the campaign. You are also right that the focus should be the questions, anomalies and outright nonsense that comprises the official Home Office report that is an insult to the dead, the injured and the intelligence of anyone who takes the time to read it.
With regard to the other points you raise, is it really possible for people to watch and read the news and see countless people charged, particularly Muslims, with 'conspiracy' or 'conspiring' to do something or other and not notice that the State's prime business these days is that of bringing prosecutions based on 'conspiracy theories'?
Further, is it then possible to not realise that the State can't be charging everyone with 'conspiracy theories' or 'conspiring' to do something while simultaneously maintaining the position of portraying 'conspiracy theories' as outlandish nonsense with no basis in fact?
It's cognitive dissonance of the highest-degree and, as mentioned earlier, people aren't as stupid as many would like to believe.
Post a Comment