thesaker | Assuming mankind finds a way not to destroy itself in the near future
and assuming that there will still be historians in the 22nd or 23rd
centuries, I bet you that they will look at the AngloZionist Empire and
see the four following characteristics as some of its core features:
lies, willful ignorance, hypocrisy, and hysterics. To illustrate my
point I will use the recent “Skripal nerve-gas assassination” story as it really encompasses all of these characteristics.
I won’t even bother debunking the official nonsense here as others
have done a very good job of pointing out the idiocy of the official
narrative. If you are truly capable of believing that “Putin” (that is
the current collective designator for the Evil Empire of Mordor
currently threatening all of western civilization) would order the
murder of a man whom a Russian military court sentenced to only 13 years
in jail (as opposed to life or death) and who was subsequently released
as part of a swap with the USA, you can stop reading right now and go
back to watching TV. I personally have neither the energy nor the
inclination to even discuss such a self-evidently absurd theory. No,
what I do want to do is use this story as a perfect illustration of the
kind of society we now all live in looked at from a moral point of view.
I realize that we live in a largely value-free society where moral
norms have been replaced by ideological orthodoxy, but that is just one
more reason for me to write about what is taking place precisely
focusing on the moral dimensions of current events.
Lies and the unapologetic denial of reality:
In a 2015 article entitled “A society of sexually frustrated Pinocchios” I wrote the following:
I see a direct cause and effect relationship between the denial of moral reality and the denial of physical reality. I can’t prove that, of course, but here is my thesis: Almost from day one, the early western civilization began by, shall we say, taking liberties with the truth, which it could bend, adapt, massage and repackage to serve the ideological agenda of the day. It was not quite the full-blown and unapologetic relativism of the 19th century yet, but it was an important first step. With “principles” such as the end justifies the means and the wholesale violation of the Ten Commandants all “for the greater glory of God” the western civilization got cozy with the idea that there was no real, objective truth, only the subjective perception or even representation each person might have thereof. Fast forward another 10 centuries or so and we end up with the modern “Gayropa” (as Europe is now often referred to in Russia): not only has God been declared ‘dead’ and all notions of right and wrong dismissed as “cultural”, but even objective reality has now been rendered contingent upon political expediency and ideological imperatives.
I went on to quote George Orwell by reminding how he defined “doublethink” in his book 1984:
“To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which canceled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it (…) To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality“
and I concluded by saying that “The necessary corollary from this state of mind is that only appearances matter, not reality”.
This is exactly what we are observing; not only in the silly Skripal
nerve-gas assassination story but also in all the rest of the
Russophobic nonsense produced by the AngloZionist propaganda machine
including the “Litvinenko polonium murder” and the “Yushchenko dioxin poisoning“.
The fact that neither nerve-gas, nor polonium nor dioxin are in any way
effective murder weapons does not matter in the least: a simple
drive-by shooting, street-stabbing or, better, any “accident” is both
easier to arrange and impossible to trace. Fancy assassination methods
are used when access to the target is very hard or impossible (as was
the case with Ibn al-Khattab, whose assassination the Russians were more than happy to take credit for; this might also have been the case with the death of Yasser Arafat).
But the best way of murdering somebody is to simply make the body
disappear, making any subsequent investigation almost impossible.
Finally, you can always subcontract the assassination to somebody else
like, for example, when the CIA tried and failed, to murder Grand Ayatollah Mohammad Hussain Fadlallah
by subcontracting his bombing to its local “Christian” allies, killing
over 80 innocent people in the process. There is plenty of common crime
in the UK and to get somebody to rob and stab Skripal would have
probably been the easiest version. That’s assuming that the Russians had
any reason to want him dead, which they self-evidently didn’t.
But here is the important thing: every single criminal or
intelligence specialist in the West understands all of the above. But
that does not stop the Ziomedia from publishing articles like this one “A Brief History of Attempted Russian Assassinations by Poison” which also lists people poisoned by Russians
