and/or corrupt
  - both and worse

.. both lies ...

  .. and secrecy ...

    .. cripple democracy

Thesis/Subtitle: A national = publicly financed broadcaster's function is to inform the electorate. Any failure to do so makes a properly functioning democracy impossible.

Corollary: A pushed-propaganda paradigm dumbed-down (ppp-dd'd) populace cannot vote in a properly informed way, thus producing the very result assumed as the basis for misinforming the electorate in the first place.

Illustration: Oh, they won't vote the way we want them to, so we'll trick them into it ... by telling them a few well-chosen 'little whites' (= lies. Note that lies are deployed to deceive).

Q: How fair is that?


Forewarned is forearmed; the following is a bit circuitous = it is not simple.


Trigger article 1:

Syrian rebels accused of human rights abuses
Updated March 21, 2012 12:59:34
  «A rights group has accused elements of Syria's opposition of carrying out serious human rights abuses, including kidnapping, torture and execution.» 
[AusBC/'news' rebels' abuses]

Comment; note the source: "A rights group has accused ..."

Trigger article 2:

Families shot dead while fleeing Syria
By Middle East correspondent Anne Barker, staff
Posted March 23, 2012 08:24:22
  «Two families have been shot dead in Syria as they fled the north-western province of Idlib in a bus, trying to reach the border with Turkey.
Opposition supporters in Syria say the two families were near the town of Sermin, close to the Turkish border, when Syrian forces opened fire.»
[AusBC/'news' Families dead]

Comment; note the source: "Opposition supporters in Syria say ..."

More from article 1:

  «Reports from Syria cannot be independently verified because authorities have barred access to rights groups and journalists.» 
[AusBC/'news' rebels' abuses, ibid.]

Comment: In the absence of independent verification, the AusBC's implication is: "Trust us."

Q: Why should we? Does the AusBC have any 'form' as far as reporting truthfully?

Consider these four searches:

1) Google {Israel "right to exist" site:abc.net.au} (without the {}s):
About 1,090 results

2) Google {Israel "right to defend" site:abc.net.au} (without the {}s):
About 2,000 results

3) Google {Palestine OR Palestinian "right of return" site:abc.net.au} (without the {}s):
About 433 results

4) Google {Israel OR Palestine "peace process" "Anne Barker" site:abc.net.au} (without the {}s):
About 149 results

The searches themselves prove little, but do show the AusBC's awareness of the issues, illustrate what's wrong with the pushed-propaganda paradigm (i.e. how it differs from the just-world we *should* be living in, but obviously are not).

Q: Why? Does the AusBC have anything to do with tolerating injustice?

A: Yes, IF (= when) they misreport (= lie of commission), or fail to report (= lie of omission = promulgate some 'secret'), THEN the AusBC maintains the population in a state of false or incomplete information.

Argument: It is easy enough to prove some 'inconvenient truths' about the above four searches:

1) Israel has *no* "right to exist;"

1a) UNGA181 contains "The mandatory Power shall use its best endeavours to ensure that an area situated in the territory of the Jewish State, including a seaport and hinterland adequate to provide facilities for a substantial immigration, shall be evacuated at the earliest possible date ..."

Comment: This clearly specifies 'ethnic cleansing' = 'not on' and invalidates UNGA181 as a whole.

1b) Even if UNGA181 is regarded as 'inoperable,' the invading Zionists (most were newly immigrated) then performed just that 'ethnic cleansing' by genocidal attacks [Deir Yassin and all analogues then and since] on the mostly Palestinian ELO/Os (hapless erstwhile legal owner/occupiers) = even less 'on.'

Note: As recent immigrants, the war by Zionists against the ELO/Os was *not* of a civil war nature but *was* of the nature of an aggressive invasion (Nuremberg; hang perpetrators).

The 'upshot' of a & b is that Israel squats on improperly alienated land/property = no right to exist, QED.

Note 1: *All else* after this un-remedied 'establishment-crime' cannot change the fact that Israel is an illegitimate entity. Proof: Burglar/home-invaders are (under just law) prosecuted then imprisoned, *not* allowed to self-declare independence let alone occupy and live on in an enduring crime-scene.

Note 2: What *could* change (= improve) Israel's status would be remedial RoR+RaR = honour the ELO/Os' right of return plus all improperly alienated land/property to revest and with acceptable reparations where applicable. Obviously, no peace is ever possible without justice.

Note 3: Wishing/hoping for some 'peace-settlement' with ELO/Os whereby those ELO/Os surrender their rights (to their land/property or right of return to same, say) is at least doubly fallacious: a) 'agreements' signed under duress are never valid & b) the ELO/Os would be truly mad if they did.

2) Following no "right to exist," Israel has *no* "right to defend" anything (but of course, individual Israelis have rights just like any other person on the planet, just not on stolen land/property.)

3) Palestinians *do* have the "right of return," as specified in UNGA194. In addition, UNGA181 specified that Palestine be partitioned into two states, one Palestinian. UNGA273 'recognised' Israel as a state, on condition (amongst others) of Israel accepting (= honouring) 181 & 194. Nearly 63 years 'down the track,' there is still no Palestinian state, and the 'ethnically cleansed' Palestinians are still dispossessed/locked out of their land/property. Another QED on Israel as an illegitimate entity.

4) Jabotinsky: “No native population would stomach the intrusion of another nation into their territory. So the gloves have to be off [= rogue; if nothing else, this implies no respecting of law]. Unremitting force is viewed as the only answer to Arab objections to Zionist control of the territory.” [= perpetual war]

Comment 1: Jabotinsky wrote the above circa 1923. Under that long-known circumstance (or deliberately suppressed/ignored?), *no* "peace process" can ever be expected to yield any positive result [proof is continued Israeli expansion into land-not-theirs]; to write about any such peace process is sheer humbug = more deliberate and grave misinformation. QED on Barker as propagandiste.

Comment 2: Points 1-4 above are more or less the results of my own research, IF the AusBC ever reported them THEN (a) never in my recollection and (b) they have long since forgotten them, as their current 'narratives' show. QED on AusBC as propagandist.


Fazit: As Fraser may or may not have said: "Life wasn't meant to be easy" (neither was my circuitous route) and someone else is reputed to have said "The truth will set you free." With the AusBC & Barker's form = proven loss of credibility, they can't be trusted to properly inform us. So, back to Syria. You, dear reader, will no doubt make your own assessment; I merely ask: Is it credible of a state-leader like Assad, under massive pressure ("We're going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, ..." with Libya'11 as 'entrée') - to set snipers onto innocent civilians, or shoot "two families ... dead in Syria as they fled the north-western province of Idlib in a bus, trying to reach the border with Turkey?"

My tip: When dealing with rogue-regime/entities (US/Zs, run-of-the-mill terrorists, alien invaders et al., say), listen not to what they say but watch closely as to what they do.

We are still waiting for the truth, that which is supposed to set us free; how much longer, Aunty?


PS (Added as a mini-update, 3:43am): Google has stuffed-up the indexing of this blog. Just like the AusBC, they appear to be either incompetent and/or corrupt = are not 'honest brokers' ... proof = WYSIWYG.


who can we trust - to tell us the truth?
  (AusBC vs. Syria/Assad)

[update, 13Mar'12 (sub-section added; minor changes (red font))]


Trigger article:

Snipers bring terror to Syrian streets
Updated March 01, 2012 11:27:59
  «Every sunrise over Idlib sets off a deadly soundtrack - the crack of snipers' bullets that hail down from roofs and hillsides and kill indiscriminately.
The locals of the northern Syrian city have become grimly familiar with their unseen enemies - called qanas, the Arabic name for snipers - whose bullets cut through the air long after nightfall, often until midnight.
Their victims seem chosen at random. During the two weeks I just spent there, I witnessed the funerals of three children who were shot on Idlib's streets in broad daylight.»

Comment: Of course, IF Assad was shooting his own innocent citizens dead by random sniper-fire, THEN he certainly would be a vile monster. BUT: That's a known and well-used propaganda technique called 'demonisation.' The US deployed similar 'stories' in 1991 against Saddam (babies dumped out of incubators), again in 2003 (people-shredders, mobile bio-labs, non-existent WMDs) and then US-proxies F+UK/NATO ditto in Libya recently. Recall that 'belief' is mainly done in the absence of evidence, and there is every reason to suspect the AusBC/AFP article contains whopping lies presented as 'evidence' by a possibly self-interested and self-involved journo - an example of the 4th-estate conduiting and actively assisting lying propaganda.

Q: With 'the West' breathing down Assad's neck, how realistic would it be for him to deliberately paint himself as a random-murdering tyrant? Especially since the same type of 'narrative' was deployed against Gaddafi? Recall the story of Viagra-assisted mass-rapes? Same m.o., same conduit = corrupt&venal MSM + AusBC, same type of lies. Lies with 'impact;' lies designed to shock people into revulsion. Recall "Why, of course, the people don't want war... [but] it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, ..."


Update, 13Mar'12, 10:21:

Consider: "Public support is a critical aspect of military action ..."

Contrast that with "It is always a simple matter to drag the people along, ..."

IF we are lied to (vis-à-vis war, say), THEN we can never offer *properly informed* support. No properly won public support means any resulting actions by rulers (US-led attack on Iraq, say, or US/F+UK/NATO rape of Libya etc.) - are undemocratic, and therefore without the permission extended by the sovereign-voters (= we, the people) - which in turn are offences against us, truth & justice.

A prime-propaganda technique is "the big Lie," try this google-search (at time of writing about 221 results) - a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously." (Proof: From Obama 'down,' current official US view is that Iran is *not* building a bomb, let alone wants one.)

It's easy enough to prove that the US-led smashing of Iraq (100s of 1000s dead, if not 1.4mio+) was illegal; even Kofi Annan said so: then added unequivocally: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal." (About 72,100 results)

I could go on... but time is fleeting. Try this, vis-à-vis the current 'Western' (by proxy, mercenary invaders, whatever) attack on Syria:

Middle East
Mar 9, 2012
Syria: Straining credulity?
By Alastair Crooke
  « ... for "we are already masters of information warfare ... Hollywood is 'preparing the battlefield' ... Information destroys traditional jobs and traditional cultures; it seduces, betrays, yet remains invulnerable. How can you [possibly] counterattack the information [warfare] others have turned upon you?
"Our sophistication in handling it will enable us to outlast and outperform all hierarchical cultures ... Societies that fear or otherwise cannot manage the flow of information simply will not be competitive. They might master the technological wherewithal to watch the videos, but we will be writing the scripts, producing them, and collecting the royalties. Our creativity is devastating."»

Comment: as usual, you should read it all. Some links at end of article are not well done; I intend to 'correct' them in a new comment below.

Then: "No war crimes regarding Iraq have even been raised or addressed by the International Court of Justice."

Comment: No court case does *not* mean not guilty, only an obviously corrupt justice system.

My point here: The US (plus snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on = SQSH-O) regimes do their dastardly deeds = murdering for spoil, in the name of democracy and oil-security, amongst other 'spurious' (= lying) excuses, when 'in truth' it's for $s, US-hegemony & Zs = both massive theft and destroying competition (Arab/Muslim Israel-neighbours, China, Iran & Russia).

None of the above are good reasons to kill&steal (there are no good reasons) - where is the effective (with good morals) opposition?



Contrast article 1:

The Saga Of Bradley Manning, Julian Assange, And Wikileaks, To Be Put To Ballad And Film
By William Blum
06 March, 2012
  «Since at least 2006 the United States has been funding political opposition groups in Syria, including a satellite TV channel that beams anti-government programming into the country.» 


Contrast article 2:

Stratfor Emails: Covert Special Ops Inside Syria Since December
A private conversation with Pentagon officials suggested US and allied troops were on the ground in Syria
by John Glaser, March 07, 2012
  «An analyst from Stratfor claimed in December 2011 that officials at the Pentagon clued him in on covert military operations taking place in Syria. “After a couple hours of talking, they said without saying that SOF [Special Operations Forces] teams (presumably from US, UK, France, Jordan, Turkey) are already on the ground focused on recce [reconnaissance] missions and training opposition forces,” the email said.» 


Contrast article 3:

The Bloody Road to Damascus: The Triple Alliance’s War on a Sovereign State
by Prof. James Petras
March 10, 2012
  «There is clear and overwhelming evidence that the uprising to overthrow President Assad of Syria is a violent, power grab led by foreign-supported fighters who have killed and wounded thousands of Syrian soldiers, police and civilians, partisans of the government and its peaceful opposition.
The outrage expressed by politicians in the West, Gulf States and in the mass media, about the ‘killing of peaceful Syrian citizens protesting in justice’ is cynically designed to cover up the documented reports of violent seizure of neighborhoods, villages and towns by armed bands, brandishing machine guns and planting road-side bombs.
The assault on Syria is backed by foreign funds, arms and training. Due to a lack of domestic support, however, to be successful, direct foreign military intervention will be necessary. For this reason a huge propaganda and diplomatic campaign has been mounted to demonize the legitimate Syrian government. The goal is to impose a puppet regime and strengthen Western imperial control in the Middle East. In the short run, this will further isolate Iran in preparation for a military attack by Israel and the US and, in the long run, it eliminates another independent secular regime friendly to China and Russia.»


You may decide, but a word of caution: Bad things can happen, when good people say/do nothing.


PS Some 'more of the same':

  «The Western governments' and mainstream media’s narrative of a one-sided humanitarian crisis in Syria is rapidly unwinding to reveal a self-serving deception to justify a re-run of Libya-style NATO conquest. In reality, it is the Western powers and their Israeli and Arab henchmen who are fuelling a humanitarian crisis and creating the conditions for all-out war. All of which, it should be said, constitutes criminality comparable to Nazi Germany’s wars of aggression.
Despite the mainstream media’s self-serving smokescreen, the fact is that the Western governments have been calculating for years on the subversion of Syria from within. For the past 12 months, their plans for regime change in Damascus have gone into overdrive with clandestine, criminal military action on the ground and using Arab and Israeli proxies as conduits for weapons. The latest leak from the Pentagon’s favourite private-sector think-tank, Stratfor, is just one more proof of an already established fact on the ground. But don’t expect the Western mainstream propaganda machine, or even some of the so-called progressive media, to alter the mood music of “humanitarian crisis” in its efforts to groom the Western public to accept yet another criminal war, even when it becomes patently clear that the narrative is nonsense.
There is too much at stake for truth to be allowed to interfere. Syria is a preordained piece on the chessboard that the Western powers want to take out in their grand scheme for bolstering dominance over the oil-rich Middle East – with Iran as the next piece. The Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria... Iran sequence stretches Western government and media credibility to well beyond breaking point. Believe the “responsibility to protect” or “weapons of mass destruction” fairytale if you want. Meanwhile, in the real world Prince Charming is shafting international law and human lives by the millions.»

Some proof: "We're going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran" (Wesley Clark, reporting a US post-9/11 boast.)

More proof: Anything Netanyahu says vis-à-vis Iran, anything the IDF does to hapless Palestinians, starting latest with Plan Dalet/Deir Yassin - and right down to 'the current moment:' "Israeli air strikes on Gaza killed 15 Palestinians, including a top militant, medics said on Saturday, ..." - recall that Israel does *not* have clear legal title to *any* of Palestine.

Even more proof: The US, F+UK/NATO have 'form' = criminal history, also right down to 'the current moment.'


how to prevent WW3


Preamble: The self-styled 'world-leader' = US accuses Arab/Muslims, if not the people themselves, but those people - of being led by vicious tyrants and/or 'mad-Mullahs.' (To the US it's all the one generic really; people not-like-them are little better than ignorant savages, to be disposed of arbitrarily.)

And so the wars since 9/11 - conquering Afghanistan (well, attempted over last 10+ years but failing, Pakistan suffering grave collateral damage), Iraq, Libya, Syria in-progress and Iran in-the-queue - are all 'sold' on a) freeing the people and so b) making the world safe for democracy and c) - most important! - Ensuring 'oil = SUV-fuel security.'

That's one view of the actions of the US, another is that all these illegal, aggressive, Nuremberg-style invasive attacks are for resources = for spoil = plundering = rapine; Afghanistan for pipeline-routes, Iraq for oil, Libya ditto + water, Syria for oil + Russia's port + one road to Tehran, continued "All options!" threatened Iran for oil + revenge, THEN add a US-hegemony overlay, also to punish recalcitrant = US-predatory-capitalism resisting regimes and finally, to 'protect' its criminal, ethnic-cleansing, genocidal, land-thieving, illegitimate side-kick = dog-wagging tail or actual master (the last two depending on how far the Z-rot has set in.)

Got all that? You decide; you probably already have - your decision may rest on how much of the pushed-propaganda paradigm you believe - or not, recalling 'belief' is mostly done in the absence of evidence. End preamble.


The in-progress attacks on Syria are more or less openly supported by the US; foreign elements (terrorists) crossing in to foment trouble and attack the Assad govt.. (Usual disclaimer: However much I deplore aggressive external subversion etc., it doesn't mean that I personally support (alleged!) vicious tyrants. Recall here 'choice between evils;' IMO, US+Zs are definitely the most evil, proof = see rapine etc. above, more below.)

I thought that since Russia already has a port in Syria = 'a foot in the door,' then they could be invited 'all the way in' to help defend Syria.

But then I went MAD; Russia + China could both 'donate' a few (ready-to-go, mobile-launched = shell-game) H-nukes to both Syria and Iran.

Another disclaimer: I'm not actually advocating *anyone* attacking *anyone else* - just saying. At the moment, there appears to be no effective countervailing force restraining the US/Zs and their vicious rapine; I'm proposing the immediate nuclear-arming of - in the US' own words - a few mad-Mullahs, who would not hesitate, not for the smallest part of a pico-sec, *in circumstances of being under actual attack*, to take action to *defend* themselves - thus *forestalling* any such attack... and so avoid WW3. Prevention most obviously here being better than cure.
Update 16:51 (from here to end) - Note also, that MAD would still be operative, since the US/Zs maintain the ability to obliterate any country on the planet, but they themselves would then be prevented from aggressive attacks on Syria and Iran = a VERY GOOD thing. Confirmation: At least one credible Israeli official has said: a nuclear-armed Iran does not necessarily pose an existential threat to the Jewish state.

See? - Easy.

PS Make no mistake; no-one should be naïve about this, nor persist in any level of ignorance - let alone believe the US/Z lies, brought to us via *and actively assisted by* the corrupt&venal MSM (sadly incl. 'our' AusBC). The US/Zs have form = murdering for spoil, one 'let itself loose' on the world latest 6Aug'45 and the other latest 29Nov'47. The Zs continue to threaten their neighbours (and the world, see "Samson option" below [*]), and US' presumed end-game is to subjugate both Russia & China - neither of which(whom?) may go down without a fight = another way to WW3.

Tip for any remaining doubters: Look carefully at what the US/Zs do, listen not to what they say. Zs, for example, claim to be as innocent as the sky is blue, yet they are squatting on land/property improperly alienated = stolen by murdering violence from the hapless erstwhile legal owner/occupiers = ELO/Os of Palestine.


Proof of infamy (Zs):

motive = Herzl, 1897.

opportunity 1, Balfour, 1917.

m.o. 1 = Jabotinsky, 1923. ('We will kill anyone who gets in our way')

opportunity 2, WW2 + Holocaust.

m.o. 2 = much illegal immigration by Jews into Palestine 1934-'48.

means = Meir raised $50 million in the US for arms, '48, used in:

m.o. 3 = Plan dalet/Deir Yassin and similar, sporadically but continuously down to 'current moment.'

So means, motive, opportunity + m.o. & cui bono = crime in progress = 'the alien burglar/home-invasion analogy.' Since the 'crimes of IL's creation' have not been remedied (by 'right of return' + revest & reparations; none of which anywhere in sight, ditto for peace) AND anything built on an illegitimate basis remains illegitimate until remedied, *no* legitimacy ever was IL's to lose.

[*] Not so BTW: The Zs are the world's worse terrorists, and by a looong chalk. The "Samson option" has been mentioned, and elsewhere a 'cobalt bomb.' Cobalt itself is not a nuclear-explosive (absolutely the reverse), but it can be made intensively radioactive - and sufficient thereof could quite possibly poison the entire world, if coated around a nuclear warhead - of which the Zs are reputed to have 200+. In case you *still* have doubts, two items:

1) Proof - of Samson, or some analogue; google (without the {}): {Israel "would be prepared to take the region and even the whole world down with it" golda meir}

Her response About 335 results (time of writing): "Golda replied, “Yes, that’s exactly what I am saying.“"

2) Extending the threat (About 28,700 results): "We possess several hundred atomic warheads ... Most European capitals are targets for our air force."

Those two are both proof of Z's ultimate terrorism, and of our peril.


Proof of infamy (US): Too onerous to enumerate; from Afghanistan to Libya + beyond mentioned above, then see here for a pre-'02 list. Note the source (haw), then recall it's not who says it, but what's said that counts (Which, about the US/Zs, is 'pretty ordinary.')

Another not so BTW: The fact that the UN does not stop the US/Zs' rapine = proof that the UN itself is hopelessly corrupt ( = criminal by accessory mechanism), in fact UNGA181 specifies ethnic cleansing, which Plan Dalet etc. duly carried out via genocidal methods:

"The mandatory Power shall use its best endeavours to ensure that an area situated in the territory of the Jewish State, including a seaport and hinterland adequate to provide facilities for a substantial immigration, shall be evacuated at the earliest possible date ..."

Final Q: We the people, especially the truth & justice = equity seekers, vastly outnumber both the obscenely rich <1% and our (sold-out = anti-democratic = tyrannical) so-called 'leaders;' we could peacefully take both our country (from rip-off FDI) and democracy back *anytime*. (But IF resistance THEN tumbrels - again, just saying.) All it needs is a bit of organisation (imagine "Joe Hill" playing quietly in the background, but with words clearly audible).

Well I'm ready; who will begin, and when?