I picked up on this one this morning. It’s an admission on NBC that much of the news stemming from “intelligence sources” on the Ukraine war has been based on shaky intelligence, or simply made up – by the intelligence services, that is, not by the journalists, whose task is merely to be totally compliant to the State and hype up the news so that we all hate the Russians enough to wage economic war.
The now admittedly fake stories include the misleading of an isolated and mentally unstable Vladimir Putin by his staff, the intended arming of Russia by China, and most worthy of attention, the widely-publicised claim that Russia was preparing to use chemical weapons as a false flag in order to… ah, there’s the rub. Motive is entirely lacking, now that the “Putin is mad” narrative has also been admitted to be invented.
According to NBC, Western Intelligence is entirely aware that Russia has no chemical weapons in Ukraine, although America’s Victoria Nuland (who helped engineer the violent 2014 coup in Ukraine) had to admit to Congress that the US has biological labs there that could immediately be weaponised, contradicting earlier denials. It is claimed that the false flag lie was intended to put the Russians off doing that weaponisation, seeing that they are all such evil bastards and that every Russian military unit has embedded bioweapons experts.
You’ll remember, though, since it was only a couple of weeks ago, that the (entirely true) Russian denials were castigated by Boris Johnson and all our news outlets as “typical Russian disinformation.” If so, then we should perhaps henceforth regard “Russian disinformation” as a reliable source of truth. We already know about Johnson’s truthfulness.
Rational analysts immediately pointed out, when the “false flag” warning was first given, that Russia had (and has) absolutely nothing to gain from such an atrocity, since it would turn the world’s media, which already controls the public narrative in a totally partisan way, firmly against them; it would encourage Western powers to send even more weapons and clandestine forces; and it would probably start a World War which would likely destroy Russia as well as everyone else.
On the other hand, for just these reasons there would be strong motives for right-wing nationalists in Ukraine to commit such an act to increase support (they would happily target Russian-speakers), or for Neo-cons in the West clearly determined to abolish Russia (they don’t care much who they target, so long as they themselves stay safe). Incidentally, the same considerations apply to any alleged atrocities in Ukraine: the Russians have every motivation to avoid them both for the undeniable reason that they would strengthen their enemies’ hand, and for the at least plausible reason that, from the start, Russia’s stated intention has been to fight a limited war to achieve a diplomatic settlement. The latter may, of course, be Russian disinformation, but see the previous paragraph.
Now, the NBC piece says that the reason Western Intelligence has unleashed all this disinformation on the public is – wait for it – to prevent Russian disinformation to which the Western public has already been denied access through censorship. We are being actually deceived by our own leaders to prevent us being potentially deceived by someone else far away. That’s all right then.
In this case, this means that the Russians would deny, truthfully, having chemical weapons in Ukraine, and suggest that if a false flag were planted, it would be on the part of those who are already planting lies in preparation. And that seems a reasonable position, given that the West also lied about having biosecurity labs in Ukraine, and that it was already clear (and was also reported by NBC) that 80% of the news footage and many of the stories from the very beginning of the war were faked to favour the Ukrainian cause.
There is a more sinister motive for this particular disinformation, though, other than preventing true disinformation (think about that for a moment…). And that is that false flags against disliked regimes have become a regular part of Western public manipulation, a claim that becomes more credible now we know that disinformation is also a frequently-used tool in our box.
Here’s a classic example. Wikileaks revealed that the claimed chemical attack by President Assad in Syria on April 4 2017 was in fact staged by U.S. funded jihadists, technically assisted by the White Helmets, a clandestine outfit set up for just such purposes (and now reputedly active in Ukraine), with the connivance of a BBC film team. That revelation seems reason enough in itself for the persecution of the journalist Julian Assange: misinformation is not a sufficient reason for illegal detention in Britain with the likelihood of life imprisonment after extradition, but the outing of official dirty tricks might well be.
You may remember that the White Helmets founder, a British ex-soldier names James Le Mesurier, died mysteriously in 2019. At the time many blamed the Russians, as ever, but a BBC documentary later confirmed that he had committed suicide. Clearly the third possibility, that he had become a risk to our security services, did not need investigation: it might have embarrassed the BBC too, after all.
Now, just as in the case of Russia in the Ukraine, there was very little strategic or tactical incentive for President Assad to use chemical weapons in such a chemical strike. Quite the opposite – conventional bombs would have worked just fine, and quite predictably, the Western “allies” (in this case Israel) bombed Damascus before any investigation or UN authorisation (nor any declaration of war, if you still believe in such niceties). The West’s motive was regime change at any cost – the main cost being to Syrians, and only financially to deceived taxpayers here.
Research also, if you like, the suspicion that the attack on the US Embassy in Benghazi in 2012 was a similar false flag serving the globalist agenda. Even if these two instances are in fact “conspiracy theories,” bear in mind that neither would even have been possible without Western interference in the politics of those two nations, the very thing that precipitated the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Did you know, for example, that Britain has been training the Ukraine army for years? Although Britain denies training the Nazi Azov Battalion, there are reports that, after the 2014 coup, many thousands of true fascists were distributed across the whole armed forces, and perhaps now comprise one in ten of most units. But in any case, our military presence there is as shadowy a game of geopolitics as the bio-labs are, and as the 2014 coup was.
As I have said before, part of the problem of living in a propaganda state is that, although you know a good part of what you’re told is lies, you don’t know which part. Maybe that’s as true in Russia as it is here, but since total cynicism is unhealthy, one has to judge information-peddlers on their track record. If somebody lies to you 50% of the time, it’s probably a good move to doubt everything they say. That’s true especially when they have a track record of spending much money and effort on faking evidence, and even more when they take care to silence any alternative narratives – because in general, lies fall apart when confronted by truth. It helps also to assess the value system of those informing you – though it’s quite hard to find one amongst our institutions since COVID.
What I have no doubt about is that living by lies is evil.