Readers of this blog will no doubt have independently observed the current and ever-increasing instances of “Orwellian moments” in the speeches, utterings and “new-speak” declarations by regime pundits, or in sundry statements printed on the regime media.
“New-speak” is too familiar to require explanations. But as a reminder of other closely linked definitions, “double-think” is the power of holding simultaneously two contradictory beliefs and accepting both of them. In this context, the rulers’ orthodox agent knows how to play tricks with reality; but by practising double-think he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated.A derivative of “double-think” is “black-white”, where black is simultaneously white and vice versa. Orwell’s current scenario is, however, slightly modified from the original. In 1984 it was the responsibility of the rulers’ agent to alter the past to prevent the masses from drawing unorthodox conclusions – but he himself was exempted from believing in his alterations.
Today the position of the rulers’ agent is changed. His duty is not only to alter the past, but to believe in his own alterations. Orwell would probably call it “plastic-past”, of which hereinafter is an example – though ominous in its implications.
The preceding blog (http://yourdailyshakespeare.com/shakespeare-truth-malaysian-flight-mh17/equalities) dealt with the curious silence of the media after the flourish of tempestuous and loud declarations – immediately after the event – that flight MH17 had been shot down by the East-Ukraine separatists.
The image in this blog shows the Aug 8, 2014 (red arrow), front-page from the bulletin of “UNIAN”, the Ukrainian official news agency. The title (blue arrow), states, (I do not know the language but I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the translation – transcribed originals and translation at end of blog),
“The given investigations of the accident of ‘the Boeing’, will be announced at an agreement of sides”.
The title is sufficiently nebulous to require the reader’s interpretation of what it means. Does it refer to the conclusions of the investigations? If so, conclusions of this type are typically presented at a press-conference, whereas an ‘announcement at an agreement’ is meaningless.
The reader – albeit arbitrarily – interpolates and extrapolates. He understands (or assumes) that the investigations are nearing their end and their conclusions will be shortly made public.
But he is dramatically taken aback by the subtitle (green arrow), that reads as follows, “Within the limits of the quadrilateral agreement signed on August, 8th between Ukraine, the Netherlands, Belgium and Australia, the information on the investigation of accident “Boeing -777” will not be disclosed.”
“By the salt wave of the Mediterranean!” – Antony would say (1) – this is either “an infinite deal of nothing” (2), or, more likely, UNIAN wants readers to believe in this “plastic-past”, mixed with servings of “double-think” and “black-white.” And, if so and by so doing, branding readers as fools.
With the further inevitable conclusion that “… he that is so yoked by a fool, / Methinks, should not be chronicled for wise.” (3) For only a fool would consider these assertions tenable, let alone believable, if there was ever intent to explain who shot down the plane and killed 298 people.
As I write this, no reference to the Ukraine’s News Agency’ announcement has been made in the Western regime media. Showing the contempt that the same Western regime media has for its followers.
The MH17 affair has an eerie echo of what happened after 9/11.
For example, The NIST (National Institute of Science and Technology) conducted a related 8-million dollar investigation, including the collapse of building WC-7, which had not been hit by a plane. The results were announced in the summer of 2008.
At the first public presentation of NIST’s findings, its director stated categorically that building WC-7 did not collapse in free-fall, as that (free-fall), would imply a lack of any resistance of the base of the structure. Which – unsaid but implied – is what happens in controlled demolitions, when charges are made to explode simultaneously to destroy the supporting function of all the supporting columns.
However, a physics professor from Texas was allowed to present his study of the collapse. He had superimposed on the actual publicly available video, the times (in 100th of a second) of the falling sequence. Which showed incontrovertibly that the building crashed in free-fall.
Unable to deny the evidence of the acceleration of gravity – measured during the collapse – NIST’s director made a statement that has remained a classic among those who have followed the event, “Gravity is a force that affects everything on this planet and in the universe.”
However, this was too much even for an Orwellian script. Therefore, three months later, NIST came out with a modification of their findings. Yes, they said, WC-7 fell in free fall, as measured by the professor, but at the same time it didn’t. But how could this “black-white” be possible? Simple, they added 2.5 seconds to the actual measured duration of the fall. In other words, WC-7 started falling before the cameras actually showed it did. Demonstrating that, for determined people, plastic-past, double-think, and black-white, also work in simple physics.
The Ukrainian affair is an eerie echo of what happened after 9/11. In fact there is another ominous document on which the regime media has been silent. It is the 9/11 Commission Report, produced on behalf of the intelligence committees of both houses of Congress. The report is titled “Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.”
Until page 369 there are some redactions here and there (i.e. text blacked out), but not enough to obscure the meaning. However, after page 369, the text of the next 28 pages is completely blacked out.
What is the secret contained in the 28 pages? The humble citizen cannot know. But members of Congress can, if they get written permission from the heads of the Senate and House intelligence committees. They are escorted into a carefully guarded room, where, under inspectors’ supervision, they can read the material, but are not allowed to take notes.
Some hints, however, can be gleaned from the title of the censored section, “Finding, Discussion and Narrative Regarding Certain Sensitive National Security Matters,” and from the abstract, only partially censored, as follows,
“Through its investigation, the Joint Inquiry developed information suggesting specific sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers while they were in the United States. The Joint Inquiry’s review confirmed that the Intelligence Community also has information, much of which has yet to be independently verified, concerning these potential sources of support. In their testimony, neither CIA nor FBI officials were able to address definitively the extent of such support for the hijackers globally or within the United States or the extent to which such support, if it exists, is knowing or inadvertent in nature.”
The alleged Saudi connection to the 9/11 is well known. All but one or two of the hijackers were Saudi citizens. But there are other undisclosed governments involved – but who are they? “Be innocent of the knowledge, dearest chuck, till thou applaud the deed.” (4) In 2002, Senator Bob Graham of Florida, then on the Senate Intelligence Committee, went public with the news that foreign governments were in on the 9/11 attacks. He said, “…the degree to which agencies were not communicating was certainly a surprise but also I was surprised at the evidence that there were foreign governments involved in facilitating the activities of at least some of the terrorists in the United States.”
And here is a statement by one of the Representatives, Walter Jones (R-North Carolina), who read the mysterious 28 pages,
“I was absolutely shocked by what I read. What was so surprising was that those whom we thought we could trust really disappointed me…It does not deal with national security per se; it is more about relationships. The information is critical to our foreign policy moving forward and should thus be available to the American people. If the 9/11 hijackers had outside help – particularly from one or more foreign governments – the press and the public have a right to know what our government has or has not done to bring justice to the perpetrators.”
Perhaps Representative Walter Jones would be equally shocked if he could read the report produced via the “quadrilateral agreement between Ukraine, the Netherlands, Belgium and Australia”. According to which, “the information on investigation of accident Boeing-777 will not be disclosed.”
In the play. Hume reflects on his own plans
(1) Antony and Cleopatra
(2) Merchant of Venice
(3) Two Gentlemen from Verona
Original of statement 1. “Данные расследования катастрофы “Боинга” будут оглашены при согласии сторон”
Translation of statement 1. “The given investigations of accident ‘ the Boeing ‘ will be announced at an agreement of sides”
Original of statement 2. “В рамках четырехстороннего соглашения, подписанного 8 августа между Украиной, Нидерландами, Бельгией и Австралией, информация о расследовании катастрофы малайзийского “Боинга-777” разглашаться не будет”
Translation of statement 2. “Within the limits of the quadrilateral agreement signed on August, 8th between Ukraine, the Netherlands, Belgium and Australia, the information on investigation of accident “Boeing-777” will not be disclosed.”