Russia would stand nothing to gain by bombing its own pipeline whose gas flow it could control on its own end, while US officials are openly acknowledging that the US benefits from it directly. It's just so silly how imperial spinmeisters are falling all over themselves to dismiss a claim they all privately know is true because it's so glaringly obvious.
The Nord Stream sabotage is like what 9/11 would look like if before 9/11 you had top US officials saying "Yeah we're definitely going to bring an end to the World Trade Center" and then after 9/11 they were saying "It's good that the World Trade Center was destroyed because it advances our interests." The compilations of evidence we've been seeing that the US was behind this attack look a lot like the evidence compiled by 9/11 conspiracy analysts, except the evidence is way stronger and US officials are pretty much saying they did it in plain English.
It's just a basic fact that conspiracies happen. Powerful people do conspire with each other, and they are often able to keep their conspiring secret for a very long time. It really is a cruel joke how our rulers hide their actions behind thick veils of government secrecy, punish anyone who tries to look behind those veils with harsh prison sentences, and then have the gall to smear those who try to form theories about what they're doing behind those veils as "conspiracy theorists".
Just something to keep in mind as the mad narrative management scramble to brand Sy Hersh a "conspiracy theorist" continues.
❖
The empire has been frantically ramping up propaganda and censorship because its "great power competition" against Russia and China is going to require economic warfare, massive military spending, and nuclear brinkmanship that no one would consent to without lots of manipulation.
Economic warfare, exploded military spending and nuclear brinkmanship all harm/threaten the interests of the rank-and-file public. Nobody's going to consent to being made poorer and less safe over some global power struggle that doesn't benefit them without being manipulated to.
That's why the media have been acting so weird lately, that's why dissident voices are getting harder and harder to find online, and that's the purpose of the new "fact-checking" industry and other forms of narrative control. Controlling the narrative is growing more crucial.
It would never occur to a normal person that China needs to be made to submit to US interests and that economic sacrifices must be made to attain this goal which make their wallet lighter, for example. That's the kind of change you can only get consent for if you manufacture that consent. The fact that the empire's "great power competition" happens to be occurring at the same time as widespread access to the internet means that drastic measures must be made to ensure the empire's information dominance so it can march the public into playing along with this agenda.
❖
So many Americans in my social media notifications bought fully into the shrieking hysteria about a fucking balloon the other day. Doesn't bode well for how critically they'll be thinking once the anti-China propaganda campaign really gets going.
❖
Still blows my mind how the empire can rob Americans blind, keep them poor, deprive them of all normal social safety nets, oppress them, exploit them, throw them into the largest prison system on earth, work them into the ground, and then convince them to be angry at China.
❖
All major US foreign policy maneuvers in today's world are ultimately about preventing China from becoming an obstacle to US planetary rule. That's all its shenanigans with Russia, Iran etc are ultimately about, and it's what Ukraine is about too. If you don't see this, you're not seeing anything.
If you say you oppose US foreign policy toward Russia but not toward China, then you don't really oppose US foreign policy toward Russia, because it's the same foreign policy. They're just two aspects of the same one agenda.
❖
Rank-and-file Australians are so pathetically aligned with US interests in their opinions because we have the most concentrated media ownership in the western world — a huge amount of it by Murdoch, who has been intimately intertwined with US government agencies for many decades.
❖
A sizeable percentage of the people who shriek at me for criticizing US foreign policy are Bernie Sanders progressives and self-described "anarchists". Very few of the people who think of themselves as fighting the power and opposing tyranny actually do.
❖
The best measure of character for a journalist, analyst or commentator is whether they spend their time punching up or punching down. Are they always throwing shots at the world's top power structure, or are they punching at weaker governments, other commentators, "tankies", marginalized groups, etc?
This is the best measure of character because consistently throwing punches at the very top is the least effective way to rise in influence and build a brand, because those who facilitate the interests of the powerful will be uplifted and amplified by the establishment power structure while those who work against those interests will not be. Someone who's only ever punching up as high as possible — never down or laterally — is more likely to be in it for nobler reasons than fame and fortune.
This is also a good way to evaluate your own character. Are you always punching up as high as your arms can reach? Or are you getting lost in sectarianism, social media drama, or power-serving attacks on parts of the rank-and-file public? How high are your fists going? It's a good habit to check in on this from time to time.
https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/my-sources-corroborate-sy-hershs?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=101973939&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten