Monday, March 31, 2008

And Tibet

Where does the Jewish media tell me I should be directing my attention? Tibet, says they. Well, they would wouldn't they? Anywhere but Israel, AIPAC and central banking.

And in Tibet, the Chinese are villains. They invaded a country, occupied it for fifty years odd, encouraged the mass immigration of ethnic outsiders, and beat or shot any indigenes who complained. I'm not even going to bother commenting on the parallels. Regardless, the media has done a terrific job of making clear who's done what to whom in Tibet. They can do this if they choose to. But it's what they don't choose that counts.

And who knew what was not being chosen until the internet arrived? We can now compare what's chosen with what's not. The results are perfectly tangible. Is anyone confused about where the blame lies in Tibet? Are there any people out there thinking the Tibetans are terrorists? Are the Chinese given all the airtime they need to explain Tibetan villainy and Chinese victimhood? The media could do this if they wanted to do. They've done precisely that in Palestine for decades.

-For the record, the Chinese I talked to have variations of justifications. Before the Chinese arrived, Tibet was a very wicked place much given to serfdom. The Chinese dismiss ethnic questions - We're all ethnic minorities, they say. Beijing is full of people (like my friends) from Shandong, Xian, Hunan, etc, and they all speak a language that is not Mandarin and they all have their own distinctive cuisine and culture - just like the Tibetans. 'We're under this government, why shouldn't they be?'. This is self-serving, sure. The central government is Han and all of my friends are also Han. Tibet is not Han.

However, the media, if they chose to, could easily portray the Chinese as hard-done-by victims with the Tibetans as primitive, feudalistic, trouble-making untermenschen. It's easy enough. They need merely emulate their portrayal of the Palestinians under their spectacularly vicious ethnically alien occupier. The parallels with the Chinese in Tibet are spooky. But these comparisons will never be made. Not least because the Israelis blow the Chinese out of the water for racist brutality.

I'm way past pretending the media is the Pulitzer-hunting keep-the-bastards-honest truth machine they say they are. I also couldn't be shagged differentiating between print, television, and Hollywood. They all sing from the same song-sheet, they all follow the same narrative. The ability to imagine a narrative in a Hollywood flick is the same ability required to imagine the narrative we receive in the news. Cinema is to News what oils are to acrylics - a minor variation that the painter takes in his stride.

It's really simple. The central banks are the biggest game going. Bigger than the MIC, big oil, big pharma, agribusiness and every other industry - put together. The biggest most powerful single entity in the world receives zero coverage in the media. Think about that. And it was always this way. Wonder at Karl Marx completely breaking down capitalism and creating its opposition and never mentioning central banking - an impossibility. It's precisely as impossible as the utter absence of central banking in the media. The media (along with Marx) would have it that we view monetarism and central banking as an immutable law of nature, an Act Of God.

Best we look away. The media will direct us. Okay, so who would they have us believe the villains are? A five year old could spot it - movie after movie, drama after drama, news after news - those we must hate are: Arabs/Muslims, Russia, and China, in that order. Would I be right in thinking that the aforementioned three peoples are not subject to a central bank owned by the Rothschilds and their very good friends? It's a fair question.

Anyone who knows - feel free to fill me in. God knows we'll never find out in the media. Otherwise, as this same media screams that I direct my attention towards the Chinese, I grit my teeth and turn in the direction they bid me. And sure, I condemn those black-hearted Chinese villains. But then I turn back again. I'd rather keep my eye on the beast that bids me.


nobody said...


Sure enough, I wondered if there might not be some aspect of this being stirred up by the usual troublemakers. And lo and behold, the folks who crashed the Olympic torch ceremony in Greece were the infamous Reporters Without Borders. Are we all familiar with them? You're meant to be confused, but don't be. Medecins Sans Frontieres, which is to say Doctors Without Borders are (as far as I know) a fine and uncorrupted organisation. RWB stole their name and have been trashing it ever since.

I notice the news felt no inclination to wonder at how crashing an opening ceremony is connected to borderless reporting (whatever that is). Nor did they wonder at how precisely they got through security. I'm prepared to bet that they used press passes. But since nobody's wondering, we'll never get to the question of supposed advocates of a free press trashing the credibility of press passes by using them for partisan political purposes. Who would do this apart from cynical sons-of-bitches who don't give a flying proverbial about the sanctity of the press? Any dimwit could predict that the Chinese authorities running the Olympics will now view all press passes as suspect and give the entire Olympic press corps a hard time.

But we'd expect nothing less from the self-impressed arseholes who run the media and its supposed alternative RWB. What we see here is a classic twofer. The Chinese are publicly embarrassed at their big torch-lighting ceremony and then, in their subsequent stringent (but requisite) checks on journos in Beijing, will be portrayed as heavy-handed fascists. None of it is rocket-science. All you need to do is to view the rest of humanity as beasts and eh, voila!

Anonymous said...

Yes nobody; as I always say 1.3 billion people can't all be wrong!

nobody said...

Hey Tony,

Thanks for the coo-ee mate. I'm finally back on board now after a protracted wander.

And it only took a single day of watching Fox before my blood started boiling and my fingers got all itchy. Grrrr...

Anonymous said...

Thanks Nobody, you make some good points here and it is all stuff worth considering.Being poor but educated I slagged off the newspapers for years but of course without knowing what wasn't being reported, the internet has been another huge education for me and probably for a lot of people.Cheers for now,john

nobody said...

Always welcome John.

Anonymous said...

I attended a history course years ago where the lecturer stated matter of factly that Bolshevism was overwhelmingly Jewish, that all the leading revolutionaries were Jewish, that the money for the Russian revolution came from New York Jewish bankers mostly. We sat open mouthed, never having heard this before.

It wasn't long before an enigmatic student late enrolled and began arguing with the lecturer, dominating the debate. He didn't fit the profile of the rest of us students, and he didn't stay around to take the exam. He socialized with no one, always turned up late and left early. We barely knew his name, but he suggested at one point that he wanted to work for the International Institute for Strategic Studies. I think he already worked for them, and was there to check up on this truth telling lecturer, who shortly after lost his post at the college. This is how it's done. This is how they control the debate, with their many little workers ever vigilant for truth tellers.

I threw out everything I learned about history at school and basically started again. It's been an interesting ride since then, particularly in relation to Israel, about which I knew hardly anything along with everyone I knew.

nobody said...

Hey Suraci,

What are you doing all the way down here mate? No problems, feel free to potter about and read whatever.

Wild story about university mate. That was your brush with spooks. That's the problem with spooks. You're never sure what they're on about or who they represent. The comedy of it is that they're not even sure what they're on about either. They're sent to do things and half of them don't even know why. Or they think they do but they don't, ha! Hey spooks! You have any idea who you're serving? Really? Like you think you have any bloody idea.

Sorry Suraci, I'll get out of public declamatory mode now. Apropos your comments re movies earlier, you might groove on the cinema blog which has a link on the front page. I attempt to split my time 50/50 between movies worth watching and shit hollywood propaganda and what it all means. I don't have much time for cryptic symbology or such arcana. I just view them through a lens of who we're meant to hate and who we're meant to cheer for.