Conspiracy Theories Malign And Benign – Face Masks And Israeli Training Of US Police
JVL Introduction
Following on our recent posting of John Booth’s Q & A’s on Conspiracy Theories, here is recent article on the topic from Media Lens.
As it points out, the term is often “used as a Pavlovian bell to mean ‘Evil’, deranged and dangerous”. You can have a theory – even ones for which there is no credible evidence – without it being a conspiracy. And you can have theories about conspiracies which turn out to be true (e.g. the US-UK rush to war over Iraq).
In this article the author reflects on some recent examples of what are described as conspiracy theories and look at how they can be used to stifle debate.
This article was originally published by Media Lens on Fri 3 Jul 2020. Read the original here.
Conspiracy Theories Malign And Benign – Face Masks And Israeli Training Of US Police
Loading article text…
The difficulty society faces where antisemitism is concerned is clearly stated here. Newspapers like the Guardian could learn a lot from studying this article. Unfortunately the Guardian and other popular papers do not learn much from facts and rational arguments. The trouble is that in the long run Israel will suffer a loss of respect just as other racial states have done in the past.
A much needed analysis. Looking forward to more of the same from JVL.
There has been close collaboration between Israeli and the Apartheid government secret services in the past and I expect there is now collaboration going on between Israeli and other regimes.
I’m with Peter Hitchens on this one. He was also the only mainstream journalist to write against the lockdown, which I have written about, entirely based on official sources, as a travesty of the principle of risk assessment in this blog: https://medium.com/@notthenewnormal/covid-19-a-risk-assessment-b71f3315c947
What’s interesting re masks is that the accusation that the government didn’t impose the wearing of masks earlier because they ignored the evidence/didn’t care about the cost in human lives is very obviously a conspiracy theory which also requires thousands of medical and public health professionals within government to be silenced. Meanwhile, the corruption of sciencific process, often via flawed studies funded by Big Pharma or other corporate entities that benefit, is non-controversial. The fact that the evidence is said to be weak regarding face-masks is because no randomised controlled trials have ever proved the benefit, and making a judgement based on what has happened in countries imposing a huge array of risk management measures all at once, but also at different times in relation to each other and the progress of the virus, discounts most of the evidence of the efficacy of face masks as entirely non-scientific.
Given the experiences of Jewish Voice For Labour and others who have tried to question official mainstream narratives re antisemitism, it’s strange how willing the same people are to accept “the evidence” as provided by the same bodies. The general willingness to discount the significant social and environmental costs of mask-wearing for the general population and describe these as “low cost” is also strange to the point of appearing to me to be delusional.
Oh dear – what a confused article, mixing risk assessment of face masks with antisemitic conspiracy theories.
The two issues are not in the least bit similar, and whilst the latter political issue (anti-semitic conspiracy) is grasped with a degree of knowledge, the former issue (face masking) is dealt with a naively non-scientific glibness that shows little grasp of hypothesis testing, or rational risk assessment and benefit/harm balances in a medical context.
‘Stick to the knitting’ would be my advice.
The other very obvious point to make in relation to Covid-19 restrictions and risk management measures is that everything that is known about asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission confirms what you would expect: as well as accounting for less infection than transmission by those with symptoms, it mostly takes place in the same places: households, or enclosed settings where there is close contact, defined by the WHO as “direct physical or face-to-face contact with a probable or confirmed case within one meter and for prolonged periods of time.” Droplets are emitted by talking or singing (in the absence of coughing or sneezing). It’s quite clear that opening pubs therefore poses a far greater risk of asymptomatic transmission than not wearing masks in shops, regardless of whether this latter measure has any merit at all (and it’s worth pointing out that one thing we do know isn’t required to control the epidemic is mandatory wearing of masks in shops, since the UK government has helpfully waited until now to impose this…).
There are some useful insights in this article. We know the right regularly use the term “conspiracy theory” to close down critical debate and investigation of their actions. The same is true with the Zionist lobby when it comes to any discussion of the crimes committed by the Israeli state. Its as if the holocaust gives the Jewish state a free pass to do what it likes to the Palestinians. We are supposed to feel guilty about even raising the issue. To do so is antisemitic by definition.
The author points out the irony of a campaign supposedly against discrimination and oppression to protect Israel’s apartheid discrimination and oppression. Put simply, “two wrongs don’t make a right”, I can also think of many Pavlovian trigger words and phrases used by the MSM to present individuals and groups as “Evil, deranged and dangerous” with views unworthy of discussion. These include “fringe”, “controversial” and “antisemitic” in the case of JVL. An “angry mob”, “woke liberals”, “anti-British” to describe BLM protesters. Corbyn supporters are said to be “unpatriotic” “intolerant”, “schemers” “the loony left”, “power mad” and the list goes on and on.
I find this article to be broadly superb and very much woth publishing and republishing. Good find JVL.
Just out of interest, does any actually read an eleven page document like this on line? I certainly don’t. BUT I printed it out and it’s an excellent article. Thanks you.
I agree 100% with Charlie. There is some very dubious science being promoted in order to enforce the wearing of masks, with no consideration of the harm this might do.
There is an opposing view, supported by perfectly respectable doctors, which points out the health dangers of masks. but these views are stamped on by the powers that be because they contradict the government line. And heaven forbid that the government message should become any more garbled! (The Daily Mail writes about Johnson’s ‘nuclear option’….as my husband pointed out, it’s probably a typo, and should read ‘unclear’)
It would be good to know if the incidence of annual flu is any lower in those Asian countries where mask wearing is common, either for reasons of air pollution or possible infection.