Categories
NFU

About that Douma “gas attack,” here’s what Wikileaks released about OPCW’s cover-up—and what “our free press” WILL NOT report

Yesterday I sent out Caitlin Johnstone’s piece on the tomb-silence of “our free press” on Wikileaks’s release of documents concerning the OPCW cover-up of the truth about the Douma “gas attack.” 

Here are the links to Wikileaks’ documents themselves.

MCM

All Releases

OPCW-DOUMA – Release Part 4

27 December, 2019

Today WikiLeaks releases more internal documents from the OPCW regarding the investigation into the alleged chemical attack in Douma in April 2018.

One of the documents is an e-mail exchange dated 27 and 28 February between members of the fact finding mission (FFM) deployed to Douma and the senior officials of the OPCW. It includes an e-mail from Sebastien Braha, Chief of Cabinet at the OPCW, where he instructs that an engineering report from Ian Henderson should be removed from the secure registry of the organisation:

“Please get this document out of DRA [Documents Registry Archive]… And please remove all traces, if any, of its delivery/storage/whatever in DRA”.

The main finding of Henderson, who inspected the sites in Douma and two cylinders that were found on the site of the alleged attack, was that they were more likely manually placed there than dropped from a plane or helicopter from considerable heights. His findings were omitted from the official final OPCW report on the Douma incident.

Another document released today is minutes from a meeting on 6 June 2018 where four staff members of the OPCW had discussions with “three Toxicologists/Clinical pharmacologists, one bioanalytical and toxicological chemist” (all specialists in chemical weapons, according to the minutes).

The purpose of this meeting was two-fold. The first objective was

“To solicit expert advice on the value of exhuming suspected victims of the alleged chemical attack in Douma on 7 April 2018”. According to the minutes, the OPCW team was advised by the experts that there would be little use in conducting exhumations. The second point was “To elicit expert opinions from the forensic toxicologists regarding the observed and reported symptoms of the alleged victims.”

More specifically,

“…whether the symptoms observed in victims were consistent with exposure to chlorine or other reactive chlorine gas.”

According to the minutes leaked today: “With respect to the consistency of the observed and reported symptoms of the alleged victims with possible exposure to chlorine gas or similar, the experts were conclusive in their statements that there was no correlation between symptoms and chlorine exposure”.

The OPCW team members wrote that the key “take-away message” from the meeting was

“that the symptoms observed were inconsistent with exposure to chlorine and no other obvious candidate chemical causing the symptoms could be identified”.

The third document is a copy of OPCW e-mail exchanges from 20 to 28 August 2018 discussing the meeting with the toxicologists.

Click on the link for the rest.

Categories
NFU

Going after critics of 5G, NYTimes and Scientific American tell many toxic lies

Categories
NFU

These eight activists were murdered for their work to save the planet, where they lived.

The only problem with this piece is its misleading headline—as those eight activists were not “fighting climate change,” but battling forces ravaging their natural homes, their sacred lands, fouling the air and water, and otherwise destroying Mother Earth before the very eyes of those brave people: destruction actual not theoretical, and not eventual, but here and now.

Do these names figure in the propaganda for the UN’s “climate movement”? 

MCM 

Categories
NFU

Spanish diplomats now under siege at the Mexican embassy in Bolivia

Categories
NFU

You need a flu shot like a hole in the head—despite the myths pumped out by NPR

Propaganda kills.

MCM

Categories
NFU

In one more propaganda master-stroke, the Times blacks out resistance to 5G in Europe

From this NYTimes story datelined Brussels, we learn of Huawei’s (i.e., China’s)”charm offensive” as it seeks to take the lead in building 5G networks throughout Europe—an “offensive” that “seems to be working,” despite the likelihood that China’s tight grip on those networks will threaten “national security.” The piece quotes experts fretting over Trump’s inattention to that danger, over-focused, as he is, on his trade war with China. 

Although the piece reads as a propaganda sally against China (and Trump), it actually suits China’s mission of constructing Europe’s 5G infrastructure, since it blacks out the gravest threat posed by 5G: not its facilitation of a super-state’s surveillance capabilities (although that danger is quite real, whichever super-state is finally in control), but its catastrophic impact on the health of every single European living in the continent’s “smart cities”—a danger very clear to countless Europeans, as the New York Times would have us all not know.

Is it possible that Matina Stevis-Gridneff, the Times’s Brussels correspondent, somehow hasn’t heard that Brussels banned 5G last spring, due to health concerns—the first major city to do so, with Geneva then doing the same? 
https://www.brusselstimes.com/brussels/55052/radiation-concerns-halt-brussels-5g-for-now/

The faithful readers of the Times, and “our free press” in general, have no way of knowing that opposition to 5G is spreading throughout Europe—and the US, too, for that matter—since such grass-roots activism threatens to impede the 5G “rollout,” for which “our free press,” and especially the New York Times, is serving as one mammoth propaganda mill (and Google, naturally, is part of it as well).

Why has the Times blacked out that inconvenient datum about Brussels? As I pointed out last May, the Times’ effusive 5G coverage has, in large part, been driven by the Times’ business partnership with Verizon, and the related financial interest of Carlos Slim, who made his billions in the cell phone racket throughout South America, and who owns more of the New York Times than any other single shareholder. While there surely is, as well, a (what we might call) US “deep state” interest in the use of 5G to variously manage all the rest of us, the Times’ commercial motivation is overt, and a huge blot (one of many) on its fabled journalistic record. https://markcrispinmiller.com/2019/05/what-drove-the-times-to-tell-those-whopping-lies-about-5g-and-russia-this-story-isnt-pretty/

Some day—perhaps before, or soon after, its long-overdue collapse—that “great” newspaper will be universally perceived as having been the worst newspaper in the world, for all the heinous damage that it’s done not merely through the Big Lies that it’s propagated stoutly through the years, but through their deafening echoes all throughout the rest of “our free press.”

MCM

Categories
NFU

WikiLeaks’ astounding drop re: OPCW has been totally BLACKED OUT by “our free press”

Is it a scandal if NOBODY hears of it?

MCM

Media’s Deafening Silence On Latest WikiLeaks Drops Is Its Own Scandal

Categories
NFU

We can save the planet through “regenerative farming”

This means getting past the (highly profitable) fantasy of “zero carbon.”

MCM

Categories
NFU

Wait a minute, Mr. Postman! USPS could be PRIVATIZED in 2020

Last year, Trump accused Amazon of “scamming the Post Office.” Will that be okay with him if Jeff Bezos buys it?

MCM

USPS Could Privatize As Early As Next Year

Categories
NFU

Two armored cars crushed Chilean protester (an image NOT dispersed by “our free press”)

How come this image of that crushed Chilean isn’t everywhere we look, like that “iconic” photo of “tank man” after the (imaginary) “massacre in Tiananmen Square”?

That’s a rhetorical question. I know the answer: Some protesters are worthier than others, even—or especially—if their protests have the backing of the US government. Thus any protesters beat up or hauled away (or who appear to be)in China, or in Russia, Venezuela or Iran, are worthy of “our” sympathetic outrage, while those in, say, Chile, Honduras, Haiti, Argentina, France, Ecuador, Brazil, Indonesia, Cameroon and Lebanon are not, as their demonstrations are at odds with US foreign policy and/or the interests of Western capital. 

As for apparent brutal crackdowns by the state—the sort obsessively “reported”by the Western media—”the massacre in Tienanmen Square” is certainly the best example, as millions of smart, “educated” people still believe it really happened (as I did, before looking into it), the various disproofs all having been ignored, and buried very deep, so that, if you don’t know enough to seek them out, they might as well have been erased.

Here are links to some invaluable correctives:

First—and most astounding—is Nicholas Kristof’s belated follow-up (in January, 1990) for the New York Times, reporting the experience of Chinese pop star Hou Dejian, who was in the Square that night, and negotiated with the troops to allow the students to leave peacefully: https://www.nytimes.com/1990/01/16/world/beijing-journal-stilled-by-the-unthinkable-a-singer-tries-his-voice.html?searchResultPosition=1

What makes this a jaw-dropping piece (for anybody who was paying attention) is its tacit contradiction of Kristof’s own screaming, pseudo-firsthand “coverage” of the heinous slaughter carried out by China’s soldiers in the Square that night—a bogus story that, in spite of Kristof’s own report on Hou’s experience, he told yet again last June to mark the 30th anniversary of the “massacre”: 
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/01/opinion/sunday/tiananmen-square-protest.html

The mundane truth made news (in the UK) in 2011, when the Telegraph reported Wikileaks’ release of secret cables from the US embassy, quoting a Chilean diplomat who was in the Square that night, and noted that there was “no mass firing” on the students:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8555142/Wikileaks-no-bloodshed-inside-Tiananmen-Square-cables-claim.html

He watched the military enter the square and did not observe any mass firing of weapons into the crowds, although sporadic gunfire was heard. He said that most of the troops which entered the square were actually armed only with anti-riot gear – truncheons and wooden clubs; they were backed up by armed soldiers,” a cable from July 1989 said.

The diplomat, who was positioned next to a Red Cross station inside Tiananmen Square, said a line of troops surrounded him and “panicked” medical staff into fleeing. However, he said that there was “no mass firing into the crowd of students at the monument”.

Jay Mathews, who was in Beijing reporting for the Washington Post, wrote this indictment of the Western press for its unfounded stories of a “massacre”—apiece that ran in the Columbia Journalism Review: “[A]s far as can be determined, no one died that night in Tienanmen Square.
https://archives.cjr.org/behind_the_news/the_myth_of_tiananmen.php

For a thorough overview of more Western reportage that (quietly) debunked the Standard Narrative, see World Affairs, Chris Kanthan’s blog, which offers visual evidence (some of it harrowing) that the Chinese police were mostly unarmed that night, as the Chilean diplomat reported, and that many of them, too, perished in the violence:
https://worldaffairs.blog/2019/06/02/tiananmen-square-massacre-facts-fiction-and-propaganda/

Finally, Gregory Clark’s thorough retrospective, in Japan Times, notes a number of eyewitnesses who reconfirm the fact that there was no “massacre in Tienanmen Square.” Clark’s piece notes the experiences of a TV crew from Spain’s TVE channel, and Reuters correspondent Graham Earnshaw, all of whom were in the Square that night, and none of whom saw any violence as the students all departed peacefully. Clark also mentions a piece in Asia Timesby Chinese dissident Xiaopijng Li, who quotes Hou Dejian:

“Some people said 200 died in the square and others claimed that as many as 2,000 died. There were also stories of tanks running over students who were trying to leave. I have to say I did not see any of that. I was in the square until 6:30 in the morning.” 
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2008/07/21/commentary/birth-of-a-massacre-myth/#.XazLGudKiu4

But were there massacres outside the Square that night? The evidence—including the reports of many soldiers killed, as well as protesters—suggests that what occurred were not one-sided slaughters by the government, but pitched battles in the streets, as certain Chinese people fought the troops, and slaughtered some of them. That possibility is by no means far-fetched, considering how long and ardently “our” covert warriors have labored to bring down the Chinese government(as they’ve been doing for decades with the Uighurs, and, lately, in Hong Kong).

And as those covert warriors have interfered in the affairs of (many) other states, they’ve also vigorously interfered in our affairs of state—and turned “our free press” into one gigantic propaganda mill. And so the lesson here, as ever, is that we should not believe a word of what “our” press reports to us, without checking it, and thinking very carefully about it.

MCM

Chile: TV Broadcast Live When Two Armored Cars Crushed Citizen