The power of the Media Class to suppress real news, alter news reports to suit its agenda, invent news or point the public’s attention away from some news and focus it on other things, can be compared to the tricks of a clever magician. He will focus his audience’s attention on some distracting little irrelevance whilst he cheats with the mechanics of his magic trick. This process is often described as “the quickness of the hand deceives the eye”. Thus the media regularly distracts the public’s attention in order to suppress interest in what is really happening.
An example of this technique is used in a report in the Wall Street Journal of August 12, 2006. The report to which I refer was written jointly by two Journal reporters, Marc Champion and Jason Singer. Champion is a regular writer on mid-east affairs and is consistently negative about the Bush administration and its foreign policy. Of course, he is certainly not out of step with his Journal colleagues in this respect.
The report is headed “Hawks in Congress, not Tony Blair, May Benefit From Foiled Threat”. It is a report ostensibly about the political fall-out from the uncovering of the latest Islamic terrorist plot in London and it is aimed at misleading American readers about the British political scene. Tony Blair is high on the hit list of the Media Class these days because of his support for Bush in the war against terrorism so it is no surprise that this article celebrates his alleged unpopularity at home in nearly every paragraph. The two reporters leave no room for doubt about the cause of the alleged Blair unpopularity. In paragraph two they assert “These incidents (the terrorist plots) have fueled the widespread belief in Britain that Mr. Blair’s support for the war in Iraq and close association with President Bush – both deeply unpopular with British Muslims – are making the country more susceptible to terrorist attack”.
This is a cunning piece of opinion writing/propaganda dressed as reporting. It suggests that “British” Muslims and native British people share a view on Islamic terrorism. I would suggest that nothing could be further from the truth. It also lumps together two separate issues, i.e. the war being waged against Islamic terrorism in Iraq and elsewhere (note my rephrasing) and Blair’s association with Bush. It suggests that Bush is a pariah and any association with him over anything is “deeply unpopular” with people. This is, of course, the standard Media and Leftist line the world over. If the British people do hold such views, and one wonders how two Americans can be sure of this, then it is because the Media has peddled propaganda like this piece ever since Bush announced he was a “born again” Christian.
In the next paragraph the reporters’ evidence for the assertions is revealed. “On Friday, the opinion columns and letters pages of British newspapers were filled with accusations that Mr. Blair’s policies have helped to radicalize young British Muslims”. Well, they would be filled with such stuff, wouldn’t they! The Media Class, after all, controls what the opinion pages and the letters columns contain. In the next paragraph, Patrick Dunleavy, a professor of Government at the Leftist London School of Economics is quoted thus. “It beggars belief that the emergence of an apparently deep-rooted problem with the extremists in the UK is unrelated to the presence of British troops in Iraq”.
Later in the article, much is made of the views of Muslims in Britain on the growth of terrorism in their adopted country. All lay blame for it on police actions and a few alleged cases of British people shouting expletives at Muslims.
So here we see the technique used by magicians at work. Champion and Singer would have American readers believe that the terrorist plots in the UK are blamed on Blair’s association with Bush and by unfair treatment of Muslims in the UK and that these are the two key factors. Further more, they would have American readers believe that Blair’s unpopularity is explained more or less solely by these factors.
So what is it that they are distracting readers from?
Firstly, Blair has been in office for 9 years and can expect to suffer from voter fatigue. All long serving Prime Ministers have suffered declining popularity. Secondly, Blair has been getting a bad press from the Media Class (led by the BBC) ever since he began his support for Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thirdly, events in Iraq and Afghanistan have been reported relentlessly in only negative terms. Fourthly there is “an elephant in the room” and these two reporters wish to avoid mentioning its presence at all costs. Blair and his Party are quite properly being blamed by the native British people with being responsible for the uncontrolled influx of Third World immigrants that is swamping their country and providing a breeding ground for terrorists.
Many of my friends in the UK tell me that in every workplace and pub the ordinary people are asking why there are so many Muslims in the country, why they are allowed to stay to pose a threat to others, why they wish to stay if Britain is so unfair to them, why Muslim views and feelings are pandered to in the Media and by government and why tougher action is not taken against them. Mostly, the above views are expressed in less polite fashion and not within earshot of the police and other authorities, since the UK punishes free speech of this nature (though only when it is spoken by native white people).
The British people are blaming Blair, as Prime Minister, for the mass immigration from the Third World, and toleration of, and pandering to, Muslim disaffection. In fairness, all the mainstream politicians are to blame but Blair is the Media’s target.
The two Journal reporters are, of course, well aware of the real undercurrents in British sentiment, but like their colleagues in the BBC and elsewhere, they do not intend to mention them. Nor will they mention that the British National Party (that has been right all along about the intolerant and dangerous nature of Islam in the UK) is the only party giving voice to the feelings of the native British people.
The BNP is anti-Bush, anti-American and anti-British military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, but it would not suggest that Blair’s unpopularity is due solely or mainly to these issues. Immigration, and pandering to immigrants by the Media and Authorities—these are the issues that enrage British people at this time. Champion and Singer do not want Journal readers to know this. There is one question the Leftist media never asks when “explaining” Islamic terrorism or the support for it amongst so many Muslims. Why haven’t other minorities with similar “grievances” resorted to randomly blowing up innocent fellow citizens?
The Media Class is never interested in the questions that really matter. It is only a source of propaganda.