Home truths from ex-British ambassador to Syria

During yesterday morning's broadcast of the Today program on Radio4, the BBC dropped its guard and a few home truths emerged.

BBC Radio4 Today Program on Saturday 10th October 2015 (2 hour podcast - Syria 10 minute segment from 1 hour 31 minutes)

In the "warm up" for the interview with Peter Ford, former ambassador to Bahrain and Syria (2003-2006), Justin Webb (BBC presenter) and John Simpson (BBC World Affairs Editor) mixed some truth with anti-Russian rhetoric and disinformation:

Truth: Prior to Russia's recent direct involvement in the war on Islamic State, Assad's forces had been significantly weakened.

Lies, unsubstantiated assertions and speculation:

Justin Webb: "ISIS has benefited from the [Russian] intervention" - Independent reports of Russian air-strikes severely impacting ISIS command, control and supply infrastructure contradict this lie.

John Simpson: "[Russia]...is mocking the Americans"; in respect of Russian cruise missile strikes: "whether some of them went astray, is another question";  "they're saying to each country in the Middle East - look we're the real power there now; we're the ones in charge; Americans are feeble, they're weak, they're useless; who knows who's going to be the next president? Look to us - we're the ones that are achieving something." - Listen to Putin and study Russia's actions; Simpson's characterisation is contradicted by all the evidence. In contrast to the US/UK and NATO allies, whose belligerence since 9/11 has been unstoppable, Russia has sought to mediate in the Middle East and Ukraine.

Justin Webb: "Russia is going to dig a grave for itself [which may be part of the NATO plan to do a repeat of the CIA operation in Afghanistan: luring the Soviet Union into a war that led to its collapse]....let 'em." - while the "Afghanistan" scenario is a risk of this intervention, in neglecting to explain that luring the USSR into Afghanistan was a US plot to weaken it, Webb's speculation reinforces the notion that the Russians are the "bad guys" and they deserve everything they get.

John Simpson: "[Of Russia} they're getting in these volunteers ....came across them in Crimea and Ukraine and they're not a very nice lot." - There was no evidence presented to back up this assertion and yet copious evidence shows Israel, US, UK, Turkey, NATO and Arabian Gulf countries recruiting, training, equipping and supporting ISIS forces.

Simpson's closing summary was speculative waffle about "boots on the ground" but the tone of the piece was blatantly anti-Russian, based on lies and assertions without substance.

A glimpse of truth:

Justin Webb was possibly taken by surprise when he asked former ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, whether "the Russian action ...might in the longer term be a good thing?"

Peter Ford: "Yes, I think the Russian action is extremely positive....a few months ago [the Syrian army] had been haemorrhaging men, young men who incidentally have been flocking to Europe, being unwilling to be conscripted.... the Russians have come in to redress the balance and NATO, instead of sounding petulant and churlish, should actually be grateful to the Russians who are exercising some adult supervision, and in fact what is happening is grist to the mill of Jeremy Corbyn who argues that NATO has lost the plot and is in fact often a risk to British security."

Justin Webb: " [Of the Russian intervention]...all this does potentially is put off the day when he [Assad] has to go and Syria has to be sorted out."

Peter Ford: "I totally disagree... Assad does not have to go....the choice cannot be shirked, it's Assad or the deluge. NATO leaders need to address this question and answer it to the people..."

Justin Webb: "...because [Assad] he's murdered so many of his own people and they know, or they suspect he is such a divisive force..." - the "Assad has to go" narrative has been crafted from the outset with support from the BBC which has been caught out, more than once, fabricating TV clips of the Aleppo chemical attacks.

Peter Ford: "That's simply untrue...The truth of the matter is that Assad is supported by a good 40% of the Syrian people; that is more actually than voted for David Cameron [24%]....What is realistic is to expect is that the West should pipe down, take a deep breath, let the Russians get on with it. NATO should continue to do what it can to fight ISIS but it should not undermine the one force with boots on the ground which, as John Simpson said earlier, is the only one likely to prevail against ISIS. It is totally shambolic to have a policy which is mutually contradictory.... Western powers have impaled themselves on this policy of calling for the downfall of Assad... but they can help by, for example, lifting sanctions on the Syrian economy which penalise only the poor Syrian people; this is one reason why so many are fleeing Syria - the western sanctions, about which we never hear a word!" - leaving aside the naive reference to NATO fighting ISIS (why would NATO destroy its own creation and major military asset?), Peter Ford demolishes nonsense served up as the rationale to attack yet another stable sovereign nation; it's a pity we didn't get more of such sanity from the BBC before destroying Libya, the other former secular, stable state in the region.

The agenda is perpetual war to benefit the Structural Elite. Mass migration plays into destabilisation of Europe, the next phase in the progression to one world government.

In short:

Such glimpses of truth are rare from the BBC, which has been the Ministry of War Propaganda from its inception and is controlled by the Structural Elite. In the final analysis, all wars are banksters wars and to stop war, we must remove the levers of power from the Structural Elite.


0 #2 Clive Menzies 2015-10-11 20:13
Quoting eddie farrell:
More of the same BBC if you are going to go out do it with a bang not a whimper.

Thanks Eddie.

It'll be interesting to see whether there is any "destabilisatio n in the force" as a result. Saturday's Today program doesn't get the same penetration as on weekdays (I suspect) and the Ministry of War Propaganda (MOWP, aka. BBC) may carry on regardless.

However, in PM (Radio4) on Friday, there was a very strange item ridiculing Robert Peston who's departing the BBC for ITV. (Peston item at 56mins 35secs):

It could be:
1. a private spat between Mair and Peston;
2. a hatchet job to devalue Peston going to a competitor; or
3. supposed to be amusing radio.

If it was 1 or 2; the BBC must be in breach of the law, regulations or its charter. If 3, it failed dismally - slapstick doesn't work on radio.

Your suggestion, that Justin Webb may have been enjoying Peter Ford's rant and was playing a "double game", gives rise to thought of "rats deserting a sinking ship" or "thieves falling out".

In much the same way as the Structural Elite destabilise countries to achieve their aims, perhaps we should encourage and support journalists who rise up against their masters and even show support to those in "minor" revolt. The way to do this is to engage them in a dialogue with Critical Thinking.

So any journalists out there (BBC or not) and you're fed up with lying to survive, come talk to us.
0 #1 eddie farrell 2015-10-11 19:32
wow that doesn't happen much these days. Radio 4's flagship news programme going off message. Perhaps its a minor rebellion against Tory terrorising of BBC. Hard to make out if Justin Webb was gob smacked or enjoying it. After the on-message build up he and John Simpson gave The effect of letting former ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford just rip was an incredible breath of fresh air. It made me think about Paul Mason's extremely odd and revealing interview with Julian Assange a few weeks back on channel 4.

http://freecriticalthinking.org/daily-pickings/1511-is-paul-mason-an-idiot-or-really-quite-clever -sorry not sure how link works

More of the same BBC if you are going to go out do it with a bang not a whimper.

Please register to post comments