Qui Breivik?

The evidence that last week's massacre in Norway involved something more than a lone nutcase is starting to stack up...

- The possible involvement of multiple gunmen
- Ridiculously slow police response time
- The police knowing the gunman's name when they arrived
- The 'media package which emerged immediately after the shootings - including a dubious 1,500 page manifesto, suitably incriminating Facebook account and high quality portraits and photos of the gunman dressed up in a variety of deranged costumes like some kind of White Nationalist Action Man

Anders Behring Breivik posing with some chums

and so on and so on

So, yes, there are plenty of reasons to suspect 'dark actors playing games' behind the scenes

And if the profile of the gunman, as being woven by the corporate media, were that of a Muslim fanatic or a lone Internet-obsessed conspiranoid I'd acknowledge that at least some of the analyses I'm seeing in the alternative media were internally consistent and credible

However, it's a little different this time

The ideology being implicated on this occasion is the kind of anti-Islamist, White Nationalist, pro-Zionist brew which up till now the 'dark actors playing games' have been working like bastards to cultivate around the world

When ghastly characters like 'Lionhart' and Melanie Phillips, people who've spent years bigging up the TERROR!! threat in support of their ideologies, feel obliged to distance themselves from an act of terrorism I personally conclude that something unusual is going on

You don't have to do much digging to establish that the EDL and other European White Nationalist groups are Zionist funded and often quite open about their solidarity with the state of Israel


My take is that if Melanie Phillips is wetting her knickers about something the chances are that it's not that good for Zionism

Melanie Phillips - The answer to the question 'Do you want to see something *really* scary?'

However, the fact that this mass murder places Zionist-associated ideologies firmly into the frame has done nothing to prevent many on-line conspiranauts posing the question 'Cui bono?' and responding 'The Zionists'

This is a belief system I've been criticising repeatedly in recent posts - the conviction that 'The Jews' are responsible for every event of malevolent significance in the world. A presumption nurtured by a willingness to cherry pick evidence and bend thought to gratify that belief system

It is on the increase in many of the sites that I visit, in readers' comments if not in the posts, and it's fucking up clear, critical thinking

It is no accident that the corporate media persistantly go out of their way to depict conspiracy theorists as people motivated by racial or religious agendas. Racial and religious based belief systems are easily ridiculed and, not to put too fine a point on it, they have a boundless capacity to piss people off. Well thought out, politically-based points of view are a much tougher proposition

.

Truth? Where's the market for that?

In the UK, back in the days before the Internet, it was possible to make a fairly reliable estimation of an individual's political viewpoint based on the title of newspaper they had under their arm; The Guardian, The Telegraph, The Daily Mirror, The Daily Express, The Daily Sport and all the rest, each had a particular target demographic. The biases were unashamed and undenied


The priority for the readers of those newspapers was not the quality of research, or the writing, or the photography or any of that nonsense. Their top concern, first and foremost, was to read material which presented events in a way that was most pleasing to their pre-existing world view

Curiously, apolitical readers of the back pages of newspapers often genuinely were interested in non-partisan, well-written, well researched articles, accompanied by decent photography. Which is why you could sometimes screw up guessing a person's politics by their choice of newspaper, if they'd only bought it for the sports coverage

The reason why I'm raising the subject of people prioritising their world-view ahead of their thirst for objectivity is that I've just finished reading Webster Tarpley's take on the recent massacre in Norway...

Norway Terror Attacks a False Flag: More Than One Shooter on Island; Oslo Police Drilled Bomb Blasts; Was It NATO’s Revenge for Norway’s Decision to Stop Bombing Libya?

Washington DC, July 24, 2011 – The tragic terror attacks in Norway display a number of the telltale signs of a false flag provocation...

As I was reading the piece I was overcome with the same sense of frustrated tedium that I've been feeling recently as I plough through most of the 'alternative' news and commentary on the web. In that respect, I'm not singling Tarpley out. His article on Behring Breivik simply typifies the laziness that I think is corrupting alternative analyses of current events

What's my problem with Tarpley's piece?

For starters this 'number of telltale signs of false flag terror' stuff is way too reminiscent of the cliched 'all the hallmarks of Al-Qaeda' nonsense that mainstream commentators trot out five seconds after anything bad happens in the world

And the parallels with mainstream presstitution don't end there. Tarpley and countless other 'Truthers' started banging out their analyses of the massacre whilst the bodies were still warm. The result was not informed commentary but mounds of speculative verbiage - where the absence of facts and carefully thought out conclusions was compensated for by a pile of 'what ifs' and 'maybes'

And whilst I'm on the subject of carefully thought out conclusions, the last time I looked the whole purpose of a 'false flag op' was to create the appearance that it was carried out by another entity. So how does framing up reactionary white supremacist lunatics 'punish' the Norwegian state for refusing to bomb Libya or, as others are writing, for its friendly relations with Palestine?

If this were a false-flag op to punish Norway wouldn't the idea be to implicate Libya, or Palestine, or Muslims in general? Why would Zionist or other establisment gangs stage an atrocity which discredits an ideology they've worked like bastards to cultivate and which they need to maintain now more than ever?

The Muzzers are soooooo going to catch it for this one

There's no serious critical or original thought going on in Tarpley's piece; no more than in most of the other alternative commentary I've read. The writers are just simply filtering through the material as it becomes available and cherry-picking that which fits their pre-established narratives. The end result is a certainty of conclusion that is a 'characteristic hallmark' of the most blinkered, the most confirmation-bias afflicted and the most thoughtless

.

Beware the Clockwork Elves!!

One of the staple cliches of on-line conspiranoids is to make constant allusion to the 'false left-right paradigm' and to refer to left and right wing politics as being 'two wings of the same bird'

Now, as it happens, I agree that mainstream politics are frequently manipulated into two horse races where both horses have the same owner

I also agree that the left-right paradigm is a restrictive, 'two dimensional' representation of the possible spectrum of political viewpoints. The political bird in question also has a head (libertarian) and an arse (authoritarian) - and several other appendages that could be pressed into methaphorical service, but not in this post

By bringing the additional libertarian-authoritarian axis into your simple left-right political paradigm it becomes possible to shed light on all sorts of otherwise difficult to explain behaviour...

• Why Hitler and Stalin got on so well, for a while anyway

• Why on certain issues such as personal freedoms or overseas wars, libertarian right wingers can sound a lot less bloodthirsty than left wingers with an authoritarian streak
  
  
• How it is possible for a certain type of young 'Marxist' (sic.) to effortlessly become a middle-aged Neocon, or Melanie Phillips

Ooh, nasty ...and not in a good way

If you are the kind of person who enjoys petty power and telling people what to do you would probably fit just as well into a 'hard' left as a 'hard' right regime. If you do not like giving or taking orders you are going to have real issues living under a paternalistic regime, however benign

Having said all that, simplistic as the left-right paradigm may be it is not a false paradigm

There are such things as left and right wing sensibilities and one of the falsest paradigms out there on the Interweb is the assertion that left wing ideologies are entirely a fabrication of the Illuminati Jew Bankers, created to destroy the transcendental beauty that is Christian Free Market Capitalism

Oh hum, where do you start?

• You could point out that the Christ depicted in the New Testament is not what you would call a raving free market capitalist

• You could explain that the vast majority of workers in free market nirvanas such as Victorian England didn't exactly have much scope to savour the joys of all those capitalistic opportunities and freedoms, on account of being too poor and dying prematurely from a variety of exciting lung diseases

• Or you could simply suggest that anyone who dismisses compassion for and empathy with fellow humans as being nothing more than the product of Zionist mind control is probably in dire need of a hug
  

Without going into the ins and outs of who allegedly funded and promoted which political group, which writer or which revolution, plain common sense and a little knowledge of history, should tell you that the quest for fairness, compassion and empathy goes back a long way and is not some 19th century cabalistic invention conjured up out of the ether by Marx

Zionist pawn Watt Tyler - getting it in the neck as punishment for falling for the 'false left-right paradigm' super early; almost 500 years before the publication of Das Kapital

The really bizarre thing is that of the plethora of conspiratorial websites and personalities out there the great majority are anti left-wing and pro capitalism*. Somehow socialism gets discounted as a capitalist plot but capitalism does not

Which, from an evil, plutocratic overlord's point of view is a bit of a result, and exactly the manner in which you would like to see your opposition behaving

* = That would be a special kind of never yet seen magic capitalism which does not rely on banks and does not result in dangerous concentrations of dynastic wealth and power

Anyway, all of the above was merely a preamble to this short clip of Alex Jones explaining what true political insight is really all about. It is not about false paradigms and birds' wings. It is about elves, clockwork elves...

PS And if anyone who has bothered to read my latest spate of posts detects a certain confrontational tone being directed towards conspiracy theorists as well as official narratives they might well be onto something. It could be that I am either a) a Zionist keyboard monkey basking in a shower of Jew Gold, or b) a contrarian scrotum who is bored of reading the same old lazy-arsed, confirmation bias-riddled BS on conspiratorial sites and which is rapidly achieving the status of unquestionable orthodoxy. Fuck that

I'm going to get Medieval on your ass pt1

Amongst any other points of disagreement, there is one issue above all others that distances me from many of the people who promote alternative narratives of 7/7 and other atrocities.

They know 'The Jews' did it

I don't

For the umpteenth time, I'm going to illustrate why those people are wilfully spouting out of their rear end when it comes to 7/7 and The Jews. After that I will move further afield and point to a couple of examples how this same kind of nonsense, and I will explain why it is nonsense, is fucking up other areas of sceptical inquiry

I have yet to meet a 7/7 researcher who is an apologist for Israel or Zionism, quite the opposite. I have, however, met a few who do not believe that plutocratic evil is restricted to The Jews and who will not point fingers without supporting evidence. As I have made clear throughout the life of this blog, these are the kind of people I feel most comfortable associating with

As far as I can tell, the Muad'dibs, the Kollerstroms, the Jim Fetzers, the Kevin Barretts, and all the other twunts who accuse people like me of being Zionist stooges for not blaming The Jews for 7/7, point to three pieces of evidence of undeniable Mossad involvement in 7/7...

1. An Israeli company was responsible for CCTV on the London Underground on 7/7
   
   
2. Benjamin Netanyahu was in London on the morning of 7/7 and, as reported in an Israeli newspaper, was warned not to leave his hotel by a mysterious phone call shortly before the bombs exploded
   
   
3. Everyone knows that staged atrocities like 7/7 are the kind of things The Jews get up to

Starting from the top...

CCTV on the London Underground, or anywhere else, can potentially record (or not record) a multitude of crimes every day. How exactly does that make the people operating the cameras responsible for the planning and execution of those crimes? Could anyone honestly believe that the British state could not interfere with footage from CCTV cameras operated by a non-Israeli company?

Control of the CCTV proves absolutely nothing when it comes to responsibility for 7/7

Now hands up anyone who thinks that Benjamin Netanyahu travels on public transport in London. Hands up anyone who thinks that Mossad would only tell Netanyahu that it is bombing London a few minutes before the bombs go off. And hands up anyone who thinks that the all-powerful Mossad and Israeli state would broadcast proof of their foreknowledge and culpability in an Israeli newspaper

I have posed these questions directly to people promoting the Netanyahu Warning story on the net and have yet to receive a straight reply. They insist on uncritically perpetuating this crap regardless, demonstrate every time they do so that their brains are in their backside and show that when their reason and prejudice are in conflict their prejudice wins every time

Which leads us on to the 'everyone knows The Jews do this sort of thing' proof of guilt.

Presumably anyone who supports this line of thinking is in favour of randomly stopping and searching Black people on the High Street. They would also presumably have some sympathy with the rising tide of Islamophobia which is being stoked up in the West off the back of exactly the same kind of logic. Innocent till proven guilty? Nah, sod that

You choppers

As well as having your brains in your backside, you'd have to cultivate and maintain a seriously skewed understanding of history to believe that only The Jews play dress-up and engage in false flag operations

The British, for example, have been dressing up in sheets and flouncing around Arabia, executing and buggering the locals for years, long before the Zionist state was even a twinkle in Herzl's eye

• There was Richard Burton, the spiritual godfather of the contemporary sex tourism industry...
  
  

• Then that bloke in The Four Feathers...

• Then that bloke in that other film...
  
  

• There was the Long Range Desert Group in North Africa during the Second World War...
  
  
  
• And SAS assassination teams in Aden...

• And not forgetting that pair of jokers who had to be sprung out of jail in Basra a few years back

Ah, but the argument goes, The Jews trained the British Army to behave like this

Nope, wrong way round. The British were practicing infiltration, playing one side off against the other and ripping off the world by tricking and paying puppets to do their killing long before the State of Israel existed. It was the British who trained the Israelis, not the other way round. Which is why this frankly bonkers individual is revered in the Jewish State...

General Order Wingate - clandestine warfare and counter-insurgency specialist, and all round beardie mentalist

Blaming 'The Jews' for everything is a cop out. The people who fall into that trap are swallowing the same myth that was doing the rounds in the 1920s and 1930s. That myth is that there was a Jew-free Golden Age at some point in the unspecified distant past, that only The Jews are capable of being responsible for great acts of plutocratic wickedness and that if The Jews were out of the picture everything would be just fucking peachy

The problem is that history is littered with people who, by any measure, cannot be considered to be The Jews or Zionists but who were still right bastards. One example that comes straight to mind is President Andrew Jackson. The man who laboured for years to kill an earlier incarnation of the 'Zionist' Federal Reserve but who laboured just as hard killing indigenous North American people and endorsing slavery

A once popular painting celebrating the spirit of American Progress driving indigenous people into the shadows of history. Nice
(I don't think she was supposed to be Jewish)

People like Jackson, or the slavers who fought for their freedom (to keep slaves and to steal a chunk of Mexico) against the slave-free Mexicans at the Alamo, just don't fit into 'The Jews are responsible for everything awful' mythos. Consequently, people who embrace that mythos are also obliged to develop a very selective view of history and current events

As belief systems go, blaming The Jews for everything is not rational, it is unsupported by historical experience and it is also cowardly. It is a device for ducking out of any obligation to reflect critically on the shortcomings of your own 'race' (whatever the fuck that is), your heritage and the beliefs you hold dear. It is, for example, absolutely no coincidence that the majority of people who blame The Jews for everything just happen to revere capitalism. And now that capitalism has fucked up, yet again, they feel obliged to get busy finding some racial group to blame rather than the system itself

The final straw, as far as this nonsense goes for me personally, hit the camel's back a couple of months ago immediately after the huge(?) earthquake hit Japan. I'll leave that story till the next time...