Jeremy Corbyn asked a number of searching questions of Theresa May in the Commons on Monday – including asking her why international journalists and local people were able to clamber among the rubble of supposed chemical weapons facilities with no protective clothing.
But one question in particular caused howls of outrage from the Tories – and presumably from the small number of bomb-happy ‘moderates‘ misplaced on the Labour benches:
Clearly the idea of waiting for evidence from experts capable of definitive assessment is distasteful to those who prefer to bomb first and ask the questions – or hold the parliamentary debate – later.
The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.
If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
This seems to confirm what a lot of us suspected.
Columbia University professor Jeffrey Sachs went on to summarise:
This happened because of us… We started a war to overthrow a regime. It was covert… a major war effort, shrouded in secrecy, never debated by Congress, never explained to the American people… And this created chaos, and so just throwing more missiles in right now is not a response.
https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2018/04/16/a-renowned-professor-brings-the-wests-syria-propaganda-crashing-down-live-on-air/
I guess this perspective broadcast on MSNBC didn’t fit the ‘narrative’ so the MSN chose to just ignore it.
https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/should-the-us-be-part-of-solution-in-syria-or-leave-1209166915804?playlist=associated
Robert Fisk of the Independent, a veteran of Middle East reporting has just visited Douma. A Dr Assim Rahaibanirom from the the hospital shown on TV says the ‘gas’ attack video is genuine, BUT the patients ‘were overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm.’ This needs to be more widely known.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-chemical-attack-gas-douma-robert-fisk-ghouta-damascus-a8307726.html
If this is true and there was no gas only dust, it should lead to the fall of the Governments in the UK, US and France and their leaders arraigned before the International Criminal Court in the Hague charged with war crimes.
should do, But won’t do. They think they are above the Law
The problem here is that as far as the establishment and their supporters amongst the public who are pro these policies are concerned any narrative which contradicts that of those pursuing them is invalid.
Discussion of the facts, even of science, is dismissed on the grounds that it is not from the Government and is therefore tainted and the product of stooges of the official enemy.
As a result there is no rational means of discourse to be had. You are dealing with a group incapable of critical thinking which contradicts their narrow world view.
Why did Labour abstain in the recent vote in Parliament about Syria and so let May off the hook – and also let her away with breaking the rule that there should be no act of war without Parliamentary approval?
A simple question? No. Several related questions in a row welded together by Comrade Seamus (“director of communications” -joke!) and regurgitated with some difficulty by Corbyn. The best one could say about the presentation is that he was not heckled. The second best thing one could say is that it will be recorded in Hansard. Dave Hansell’s comment is spot on. No-one of any influence will take the blindest bit of notice, so heavy is the rubble of lies and deceits, not just about chemical warfare but also about the Middle East conflicts generally, with which successive post-colonial and imperialist administrations have sought to bury the facts.
I salute Corbyn for his courage in resisting these lies and deceits, not just in the current “debate” (-joke!) but throughout his political career. Pity he has had to wait 35 years to attain a position from which his voice can be heard. And an even greater pity that he runs even today the same risk of being ignored to death that he suffered while on the back benches, so great is the might of the neo-liberal propaganda machine.
Corbyn didn’t “regurgitate” anything, he has a unique and experienced and practical grasp of politics himself. And the crowds he can gather anywhere and speak easily to one person or thousands testifiy to a fluency. He was astute enough to choose Seamus (we don’t need the “comrade” handle) Milne whom the MSM loathe not only because his work in print before he left the Guardian provided the most incisive analysis to be found in Britain of current global politics (more incisive than anything provided by the various “comrades” publications); but also Milne’s parthian demolition before leaving the Guardian of the intrigues and networks that saw the removal of his father Alasdair Milne from the BBC reveals his intimate knowledge of the very networks now so powerfully active. These are the same networks that will try when it suits them to portray Corbyn not as an antiSemitic misogynistic demon but as a decent misguided allotment potterer peacenik who is used by the “real” baddies like Milne, Formby and so on who ought to be removed from their places of power. It’s all the same stuff. Just listen to the man. The bravest you’ll find in any place of discourse just now—and that, despite what you are saying, is getting across. That is what is worrying the establishment. That Corbyn’s message is getting across.
It could be a case of “Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we set out to decieve.”
The truth will win out, they may have the slightly now leas important MSM but hopefully we can get our messages out via social media like on here.
Solidarity!
We shouldn’t ignore what led up to the current situation in Syria and how foreign powers contributed to todays situation.
WikiLeaks Reveals How the US Aggressively Pursued Regime Change in Syria, Igniting a Bloodbath
http://www.truth-out.org/progressivepicks/item/33180-wikileaks-reveals-how-the-us-aggressively-pursued-regime-change-in-syria-igniting-a-bloodbath
Fair comment. Corbyn’s message is getting across and that’s why the MSM and the Tories (and sadly many of the Labour PLP) are constantly fabricating and dissembling in frantic attempts to bring him down. The way he just carries on is testament to his courage. You’ve got to admire that, and I certainly do.
I also admire his fluency as a public speaker and his empathic response as a listener to ordinary people. When he speaks from his own heart, he is great. I just wish he would do it more often, and especially in the HoP.
Sorry I don’t share your (or Corbyn’s) faith in Seamus Milne. Yes, brilliant political analyst and writer. Yes, knows the media networks and their chicanery (as does Corbyn himself of course). But, they seem as a team to be too often on the backfoot, pulling their punches for fear something won’t play well with the media (or the PLP?), leading sometimes (eg on Skripal) to mixed messages, uncertainty, fudge, and in the case of the ‘regurgitation’ I criticised, overdetailing and pomposity, making Corbyn come across as pedantic and pedestrian. One, just one, of the questions he put would have been quite enough.
Corbyn is, absolutely, as you say ‘the bravest you’ll find in any place of discourse just now’. But I submit he is not as effective as he could be, and that’s because it is no longer enough to merely push back or defend against the mainstream discourse. It’s time to openly subvert it. This is done by setting a different agenda from that of your opponent, consistently and fearlessly leading on it and thereby creating a mainstream discourse of your own and defending that – and doing it absolutely everywhere and at all times, and preferably having a dedicated team of big-hitting frontbench colleagues doing the same everywhere and at all times.
A little less Seamus Milne, and more John Prescott would be my humble advice.
We’ll just have to disagree on this. I think your latter points assume the MSM would work hand in hand with this “different agenda”. Indeed it would, if it was different from the present one which centrally subverts their own part in pushing neoliberalism at home and unquestioning Nato/US interests abroad. Corbyn has been the length and breadth of the country pushing an anti-neoliberal agenda which is not “his” but which he believes in and has stood his life by. And the MSM have not once followed him to report this, other than occasionally to find some snide distortion. If you don’t follow him on Facebook or Twitter you wouldn’t know what has been going on. That is neither his nor Milne’s fault; it is corporate news deliberate policy. As for the shadow front bench, it hardly needs bighitters when it is immeasurably in every way superior to the one facing it in government. Again, what is said by shadow ministers just aint reported. The last socalled bighitter event I can recall was Hilary Benn’s passionate speech for bombing Syria. Yes, the MSM loved it, the Conservatives loved it, the Labour Right loved it, the greatest speech since Churchill apparently. And now forgotten. The MSM has moved on to the next way of destabilising Corbyn’s team. I too very much welcome Lord Prescott back to the ranks of that. He is now with someone who, unlike Blair, will have every respect for his days in the National Union of Seamen.
Well said, Tom.
Calling him a “Warmonger ” when he is the one asking why the PM had dropped bombs on a sovereign country!
That alone shows you how deluded some of those MP’s have become.
I tend to agree that Labour’s message is not getting across as well as it should and it appears it is because it’s not enough just to put it out there in a take it or leave it fashion, the opposition’s case also has to be demolished and every accusation robustly challenged. This is not being done as vigorously as it should be. The recent illegal attack on Syria is a good example.
In the ‘old days’ we had the conventional media and Parliament as battle grounds but now we have social media which is much more difficult to gauge and as far as we can tell, this may compensate for other discrepancies.
In any case, it is personalities such as Jeremy Corbyn with his integrity and humanity who can make a big difference. He has inspired more people than ever to become actively involved in politics. However it takes people with a range of qualities to form a successful team and there is no one at present in the Labour Party with the tenacity, intellect and gravitas who can put an argument across and frighten the opposition to their core as meticulously and comprehensively as George Galloway.
So from a range of sources from all sides perhaps there are 4 contending theories (a) Wasn’t a gas attack? (b) Saudi backed Islamists? (c) Assad? (d) Foreign Secret Services? (a) could be dynamite and looking now potentially the most plausible – the first independent and what seems like genuine report giving a voice to the people there. The question is if this is the truth will it be allowed to emerge or will it be a case of “the first causality of war is the truth”?
Wow I posted 15 minutes ago then looked on BBC News website and shows video CBS reporter in Douma and talking to residents who talked of “gas” but remember Robert Fisk said a White Helmet shouted “gas!” and created panic and some may think it was but perhaps the propaganda war over the truth continues and this seems in my opinion to give more credibility to (a) it wasn’t gas – but who do we trust more US CBS or the UK Independent’s experienced journalist Robert Fisk?
John Lennon, “Just Give Me Some Truth”
Now expect the Right Wing media to pile in referring to the CBS piece!
“Oh what a tangled we weave, when first we pratice to decieve.”
We weep for the suffering Syrian people and a political solution now!
Could you imagine any of the runners for the leadership asking that question,such as Cooper or Kendall?