Brexit: The Greatest Swindle in Modern UK History

It seems that the media is constantly awash with stories of how the Brexit campaign misled voters through lies and deceit. However, this article will show that both sides lied, and that the outcome of the election was decided before anybody cast a vote. This leaves me with the thought that a new alliance is emerging between the UK, the US, and potentially Russia – and plans for civil wars are being worked on to cleanse the populations of the naysayers that may create gridlock in a future war scenario.

The biggest lie of all by the Remain campaign was that there would most certainly not be a European Army. This point was repeated multiple times, even after Brexit.

In the same week it was declared that Britain was to leave the EU, Germany and France outlined plans for an EU Army and there have been calls by leaders such as Angela Merkel to build one (also see here). This point only received minimal media attention. Much less attention than, say, the Brexiteer NHS lies.

This shows me that the media want Remainers to feel robbed. Why else would they decide not to cover this issue in a more balanced way? More and more, stories are emerging that are hoping to garner support for a new referendum.

Even the man behind the £350 Million NHS bus slogan lie, who evidently was influenced by Soviet propaganda techniques, believes now that leaving the EU could be an error… £350 million… Million. Why would someone who is a propaganda enthusiast say this after spending so much money on it and when he knows his comments could divide a nation?

Polarisation exists to some extent, however, disharmony about it is being intentionally stirred so that violence will emanate from and between these groups. Only then can a new moral order be implemented so that the threat to the old one from the internet (which is now being censored) can be cleansed.

When I visited Parliament the protests on opposite sides of the street for Remain and Brexit were only small – but now they grow every day. They create a visible representation of this manufactured division. This has been done to create a focal point for when violence erupts.

How do I know Brexit disorder has been planned? It’s simple, he who decides who will vote already knows the outcome of the election/referendum. Why could Commonwealth citizens vote, but EU citizens (some who had been in the UK for many years and grown up here) not vote? Anybody smell a rat? Commonwealth citizens are much more likely to vote Brexit – why? Because their families can get here more easily for one. Ask the Australians, who may more easily come to Britain soon.

The planned violence will also allow Britain to bring secessionist movements in Scotland and Ireland under control and to stall hopes of Welsh independence which could be fostered if Scotland or Northern Ireland were to leave the UK and join the EU. Counterinsurgency operations could also be hijacked by other influential elements in government. So beware!

The United Kingdom is set to ally with the United States, the Common Wealth, and, possibly, Russia, in order to bring about the downfall of the continental European elites who are seen as threats to the United States’ markets and resources in places like South America and Africa – where countries such as China and regions such as the EU are now entering.  Donald Trump has already put the possibility of a US-Russia alliance on the table, although it is doubtful the establishment would accept this.

There are no doubt patriots behind these plans who believe it will be in Britain’s best interests – patriots who know history and see the world in real politics terms.

Is realism really the way forward? Ignoring the fear mongering and poorly monitored immigration procedures, hasn’t multicultural Britain taught us that we can all get along if we try?

Furthermore, if the elites of other countries are such a huge threat why not use other less destructive methods? We don’t want to fight your wars any more.

It seems that ‘elites’ of all countries appear to be the largest impediments to peace. Yet, violence, implemented through the state, wittingly and unwittingly gives much prestige to citizens of each country. Violence upholds all hierarchical structures in society so that moral orders are built and maintained.

These moral orders are falling apart at the seems as Eastern Europe moves against these values through the rejection of homosexuality for example. This was again seen through the actions of some football fans in Bulgaria and other places. This problem will not be solved through censorship.

You Thought Only Planes Hit The World Trade Towers – Wrong!


There is a growing body of evidence that missiles were used in the demolition of the World Trade Towers. Now yet another video has emerged that provides evidence of 9-11 missiles. The clip first appeared on LiveLeak, but the missile strike was only recently discovered by FBISMOSTUNWANTED.

The video also shows the projectile impacting the side of the building as it collapses, with debris of the building spewing outwards from the missile strike. This helps explain why the buildings appeared to explode outwards and eject debris far from the buildings themselves, which pancake floor collapse theories have failed to explain sufficiently well enough.

Click Here for >>>>> Gif of Missile Strike

Still Frames:

Missile Frame Still 9-11Missile Frame Still 9-11 2

The projectile clearly moves from right to left in a downwards trajectory.

Original Footage –

The collapse occurs in the video at 13:29. The projectile can be seen moving very quickly across the building’s face through the smoke as the tower collapses. The building appears to explode outwards in the direction where the projectile was headed. The video below shows several examples of other evidence, as well as the edited and annotated clip (this version is quite poor quality – see original clip and gif). This video is useful as the missile moves very quickly and is hard to spot.

Frame by frame analysis:

The projectile is visible clearly in the first 3 frames. Later, the building can be seen to explode outwards in the direction of the missile.

Please keep this site running and donate to my patreon page!

Football Hooliganism Sign of Rising Right-Wing Nationalism – A United EU will Stem the Tide

Clashes between English and Russian football fans at the European football championships are symptomatic of a growing tide of European-wide nationalism thanks to the increasing inequality and alienation of these groups on both domestic and international levels. As an EU referendum approaches, British voters should consider the far-reaching ideological knock-on effects of a Brexit on Europe and its implications for European-wide security in an increasingly uncertain world. Only a united and more homogenous European Union can guide more harmonious paths towards greater equality and long-term stability – but comprising states will have to listen to their electorates first.

Nationalism is gradually rising across Europe thanks to an increase in alienated groups that stem from growing disparities in wealth. This has been seen recently in Austria, where the main far-right nationalist candidate lost by a mere 31,000 votes, receiving much of their support from a increasingly underepresented working class base. In France, Marine Le Pen’s National Front made big advances in regional elections and Britain’s UKIP won 3.8 million votes in the 2015 elections, both parties receiving votes from other alienated segments of society who also feel they have no voice – who see poor immigrants and crime as threats to their continued well-being. This state of affairs is widespread across Europe and the negative implications for European cohesion that may follow should not be underestimated.


The English are somewhat at odds with themselves as they struggle over defining their own national identity. Do they want a future in or out of the European Union? Issues of disenfranchisement at home are key to this debate and it is easy to see why nationalism is growing and expressing itself through mainly working class football fans. The working class are left out to dry as issues of inequality are not addressed seriously by politicians, whilst they and other alienated groups, also express concern about uncontrolled immigration and crime, looking towards Brexit to solve these problems.

The referendum result has the potential to go either way towards a Brexit or EU remain outcome. Yet, several polls have indicated that a late swing towards Brexit may be occurring, despite a campaign by the reigning Prime Minister to stay in. Various elites have shamelessly vouched their bets over whether their companies will be more profitable in or out of Europe, ensuring that the British media publish a variety of views from both perspectives. The failure of an elite consensus over the potential economic results of Brexit ensures that there is resultantly no consensus between the press or British citizens either.

This division between and across Britain’s ruling political and economic elites has led to a dangerous cross-roads between peace or strife in Europe. A Brexit is possible, and with this, too, is the potential for an eventual EU break up in to factional rivalries. The current nationalistic climate across Europe in conjunction with the knock-on effects of a strong Britain leaving the EU, could encourage other states such as Holland to also leave and join them in an alliance that would damage joint funding for extending European hegemony to former Soviet satellites. This would no doubt heighten the rise of inequality and nationalism across Eastern Europe as a weaker EU fails to appeal to those states who may begin to feel like second class citizens, as less European funds head their way, and who feel threatened or enamoured by Russian nationalism.


In order to keep Eastern states under the European flag, it would be necessary to ensure that citizens feel they’ve been given a fair deal. To encourage this feeling of fairness, in-flows of capital would have to be kept high, and fears of security would have to be mitigated by allowing an influx of funds that would provide military strength. This would add additional pressures to the remaining cluster of EU states after a Brexit. Other potential future pressures may also have to be taken into account. The negative perception of a US military presence in some European states, and the potential electoral victory of unpredictable wildcard Presidential candidate Donald Trump, may yet change EU military interactions as the Europe-NATO relationship may weaken across the continent, putting further pressures on European states to increase their own defence budgets.

All-in-all, these pressures could further affect nationalist sentiments at home in Western Europe, as states fail to cough up funds for their own social welfare programs because of having to divert extra funds to replace those lost from leaving members that previously went to less technologically advanced states. This would create further inequality and nationalistic tendencies at home. Yet, an intact EU could avoid these outcomes and also encourage the horizontal homogenisation of responses to inequality in order to ensure that these choices were not too disparate enough from one another along the Left-Right spectrum to foster unresolvable ideological clashes that could lead to more states seceding from the Union.

These factors are compounded by a range of foreign policy choices by the United States and European countries that have isolated Russia. As Western elites have expanded their imperial sphere of influence further to the East and cemented former Soviet satellites into the EU and NATO realm, the impact of this drive has damaged the systems of prestige of those Russian citizens who link their identity to nationalism and who have also seen inequality rise in their homeland. Recent military victories such as the annexation of Crimea and the continued stability of Assad’s regime have further heightened nationalist sentiments. Western expansion and inequality can therefore be personal to negatively afflicted citizens, and this is partly why we see a rise of football hooliganism in France this month. Events such as those in Marseilles bring these factors to a climax. Whilst tackling inequality and remaining united, Europe must therefore distance itself from the Cold War policies of the United States and allow for better cooperation with Russia, and the US must additionally make efforts to Europeanize along with them.

Whilst we should consider the potential that some segments of the Russian hooligans seen  at the England-Russia football match were lent tacit support by some State and Moscow football officials thanks to post Cold-War politicisation, we simply cannot ignore the independent rise of the far-right across all of Europe when putting our mark on that referendum ballot paper – now is not the time to leave Europe. If elites fail to tackle inequality, only a united EU will refresh the old systems of prestige that are now giving way to far-right nationalism.

Daniel Taylor is an international politics PhD researcher at City University London. He specialises in US foreign policy in South America and the roles of their respective militaries. Areas of academic interest include: elite theory, social control, state terrorism, covert activity and the causes of regime (in)stability. Email contact:,

Panama Papers Demonstrate Capitalist Coordination


What the Panama papers demonstrate, that much media commentary fails to highlight,  is that despite antagonisms between them, capitalists have been colluding together in order to maintain wealth gained from an inherently exploitative system.

None of us are surprised that elites are hiding their wealth. Society have been well aware of this for decades and a variety of well publicised news stories have continually shone a spotlight on the issue. Academics such as Charles Wright Mills have been drawing attention to these issues since the 1950s, and it was the journalist muckrakers of the 1920s that also pointed out how so-called elites have often exploited positions of power within our societies – at the majority’s expense.

The real story here is how these men and women who stand at the helm of our societies have been working together to hide wealth garnered from their own, and indeed, foreign populations – even some statesmen who appear to be adversaries are using the same companies in order to hide their millions/billions.

The Russian propaganda ministry went into overdrive after the revelations, stating that the releases were a CIA ploy to damage Putin’s reputation at home. Many people believed that this story had some credibility. However, if we are to consider this scenario then several questions must first be answered. If the intelligence services leaked the information to damage Putin, would they not also be more cautious about avoiding damage to UK Prime Minister David Cameron by having withheld information about his own father’s alleged off-shore dealings? Wouldn’t they have avoided defaming members of the Icelandic government if it was a CIA job?

It is the opinion at FBIsMostUnwanted that whoever leaked this information wanted to do more than show how elites hide their wealth. We are being shown a capitalist control grid in full operation – only no one will see it for what it has become.

We all know that new means of hiding money will be found if these current avenues are shut down, or that privacy laws to protect ‘elites’ will be passed so that their personal wealth will never have to be exposed again without some poor journalist going to jail. No doubt some unplanned event will allow these laws to be passed, perhaps an assassination, or another terrorism related incident. Any change should be viewed with suspicion.

In the meantime we must wait for more of this data to be released – Are more Americans also implicated in these papers?


Syria Response – Short Memories 2.0


‘Elites’ have been leading us into accepting a ground war in Syria by fuelling a toxic mixture of emotion and imposed ignorance among US and European citizenry. By disregarding the historical context of recent imperial ventures, chastising Islam, and by focussing daily on the tragic Paris victims, much of the corporate media alongside their political kin have been banging the drums of war and normalising a capitalist-led imperial control grid. But will these key power players from a range of states manage to agree on a share of the spoils without resorting to using coercion directly against one another?

Whilst noting the inherent complexities within international relations, we should acknowledge that small, well-coordinated networks of men and women can have a disproportionate amount of long-term influence in our ‘democratic’ societies which can be reflected in the way media coverage is constructed for particular events. When deciphering this news and including capitalist to capitalist coordination in our analyses, state policies begin to make much more sense than taking at face value the framing which we are every day lambasted with through the corporate-owned media.

The goals of the Trilateral Commission, the cabal of capitalist corporate leaders and their internationalist partners who hold views pertaining to creating deeper cooperation between capitalist states and thus between global corporations, the media, banks and finance,[1] gain little traction in the media’s state-leader orientated and ‘objective’ news approach, particularly when we think of their coverage of the current Syria bombing campaigns. Though this grouping of leaders does not extend beyond the US, Western Europe, Japan and their traditional allies,[2] it represents a focal point by which capitalist states can coordinate together and extend powers over the politically powerless, in what scholar Karl Kautsky deemed ultra-imperialism; the pinnacle of capitalist to capitalist relations.[3] This is not to deny the power of leaders, yet, by focussing purely on leaders and non-state terrorist groups only, the media’s emphasis on their decisions therefore makes little sense when attempting to properly understand what exactly is happening in Syria and the wider world. This in effect produces a fog so that we cannot truly see what is going on within a wider state of affairs.

Capitalist Cooperation in an Uncertain World

When considering further Syria action we must remember the propensity for war and the vested interests among and across the most powerful capitalist states. Need we forget the US war-lust, before ISIS were considered a serious threat, when supposed Syrian chemical weapons were unleashed.[4] Only UN Security Council vetoes from Russia and China prevented referring the matter to the International Criminal Court whose ‘legitimacy’ may have allowed an intense situation to escalate into all-out war against the Syrian government let’s not forget Obama’s ‘red-line’ over chemical weapons use or he’s proclamation that the world ‘had to act’ in Syria.[5] Or more recently, the revelation that Tony Blair decided in 2002 that he’d take Britain into war with Iraq, no matter the pretext.[6] More specifically, we could look to former French Foreign Minister, Roland Dumas, who noted that in 2009 whilst visiting Britain he was asked to participate in a British attempt to overthrow Assad using rebel proxies.[7] We could also highlight General Wesley Clark’s extremely underreported revelations that the US administration planned to invade 7 countries in 5 years – Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Lebanon, Libya, Iran and Syria.[8] These examples are just the tip of the iceberg and demonstrate an imperial Western inclination towards war in the region, which the mainstream media is prone to forgetting.

In regards to non-Western powers, Kautsky’s ultra-imperialism appears alive and well – at least for the time being. Our minds must be drawn to the many oil contracts eventually signed by Chinese firms, such as Sinopec and PetroChina, in Iraq,[9] and Russian firms operating there as well[10] that are only mentioned matter-of-factly in the pages of business chronicles. Before the US invasion of Iraq, the Iraqi government had also cancelled some major Russian oil contracts.[11] Regaining those contracts may have given Russia more leniency towards the US occupation, even with the risk of losing everything to the Americans and their allies. Alternatively, we could link events today with those of Libya’s bombing aftermath, where Chinese and Russian firms have entered the oil market, despite not backing the country’s successful rebels.[12] What this all together implies is that Syria will only be ransacked once elites – including those in Russia and China – eventually decide or deem possible a fair share of the spoils.

The costs of all-out war are currently too high, and the results of modern warfare too unpredictable[13] for elites to not cooperate in today’s world of bunker busting missiles and satellites; where there are few places for them in the world to hide. For the time being, what we are more likely to see is a gradual escalation of the crisis using fringe allies in the region, such as Western allies Turkey (who have never been allowed to become a European Union member) or Saudi Arabia, and on the other side, quite possibly Iran, backed by Russia, until a stalemate is eventually reached. Only then will it be possible to compromise. Given the fall in the price of oil and gas due to fracking and weak demand,[14] in hand with Russia’s over reliance on these commodities’ exportation in order to contain their own social infrastructure,[15] arrangements may be come by relatively quickly.


The Media’s Role

The horrific Paris shootings have evoked many emotions in the days and weeks after they occurred. With a multitude of avenues to communicate now at our fingertips, these emotions were clear to see, having found their way on to social networking sites such as Facebook, blogs, and news page comment sections. The mass media drenched populations link the events to their own lives and the ones they love, thus producing empathetic[16] and defensive emotions. In this sense, the victims and survivors can sometimes become members of the populaces’ own families. This tendency culminated in individuals placing photos of their own pets online with the caption ‘Je suis Diesel’, in support of the police dog that was killed in a raid.[17] These heightened emotions may also latch onto a whole host of other underlying tensions which partly relate to peoples’ ordinary frustrations, isolation and powerlessness in capitalist society and everyday life.[18] The feelings are more likely to be vented in situations like these because the mood of the time, which has been fermented by real life events and daily media saturation, allows for people to self-righteously express their positive or often negative opinions knowing that in such a fog shrouded environment, others will strongly resonate with and accept their views – even if others strongly protest. Amongst the confusion, the propensity to tolerate ignorance increases through pressures to conform and because for a given situation people do not know how to act; this phenomena is called informational social influence.[19] Individuals naturally seek information in order to increase certainty about events,[20] but they are often met with an ignorant certainty which they themselves may sometimes adopt.

These frustrations must then express themselves through the media too. But, importantly, we should consider the way in which the mass media frames and sustains news stories depending on their origin.[21][22] Despite their regularity, most of us do not see terrorist events regularly unfolding on the news in such a saturated manner, because the mass media usually reports daily foreign terrorist events in a matter of fact way, noting the ‘objective’ facts and figures – often failing to underscore the human side of events in any truly sustained manner.[23] Terrorist attacks rarely gain such day-to-day coverage unless they directly affect the West and are politically expedient.[24]

Linked to this, news outlets actively and sometimes unwittingly create a common enemy to focus our aforementioned frustrations on. The media have done so more recently by equating Islam with terrorism[25] and demonising this multifarious and diverse group by linking them to criminality, speaking of ‘Muslim ghettos’ and ‘no go-zones’ in Paris.[26][27][28] The classification of poor areas as ‘Muslim’ ghettos is a futile attempt to equate the crimes that emanate from these geographic areas, that are clearly linked to poverty, with Islam instead – just as the case with those labelled ‘black’ by society in US ghettos.[29] What’s more, there are parallels with the ‘Muslim ghetto’ classification and the ‘Jewish ghetto’ labelling that was used to isolate the Jewish segments of society in Nazi Germany. Few of these news outlets actually venture out and do real reporting by visiting these areas. What they would have found if they did is simple; deserted streets. Many Muslims are terrified of the terrorists themselves and fear the possible hostile reactions of their fellow citizens towards them.[30][31] Muslims are afraid to venture out of their houses, just like everybody else in Paris. Despite many media efforts to disassociate conventional Islam with extremists,[32] Muslims are being used as scapegoats to suppress us all in our search through the fog, and to distract us from the self-serving interests of the few.

We could also look to the recent erosion of state boundaries and the media coverage regarding the refugee crisis to see these continued dynamics. This was originally an example of people from ‘outside’ who were given the emotive day-to-day media coverage that we see for Paris that was non-existent during the Iraq war. Who could forget the tragic photograph of the Syrian boy who washed up on Greece’s shores,[33] and why shouldn’t we? I don’t quite remember the Iraqi refugee equivalent though in both Gulf wars or during the crushing UN sanctions in the 1990s which led to the death of well half a million children alone.[34] Although the current refugee crisis affected Europe, which is considered fair game for the media daily news, the coverage was unprecedented in comparison to slightly smaller, but similar events in the past – why did the media choose not to care before? This coverage has now somewhat shifted clumsily to focus on the ‘terrible nature’ of these refugee groups, further strengthening this ‘us’ and ‘them’ paradigm.[35]

Overall then, these views are interspersed with what Charles W. Mills labelled the ‘conservative mood’, whereby the lion’s share of the population will often defend their government, even if it does not always stand for their best interests.[36] Together, the mood of sadness, anger, confusion and conservatism evokes memories of the build up to the 2003 Iraq invasion and this is why we should slow down and consider the bigger picture before we allow these emotions to get the best of us in this fog shrouded environment. After all, as Benjamin Ginsberg noted:

“a successful regime caters more to the interests of its elites and more to the emotions of its masses.”[37]

So, in this context, how the Paris attacks and as well, the Russian airliner that was brought down over Egypt,[38] are used to fulfil political objectives must be at the very least, weighed up when analysing political decisions that appear to stem from real events.

Civil Rights Threat

As we all fight one another, we may now sit at a precipice between a fully-fledged Syria invasion and the continuation of an ongoing bombing campaign which Britain and France have now joined against ISIS.[39] Only a new attack on a country such as Britain or the US would ensure that there is absolutely no turning back. Worryingly, and like in America with their Patriot Act and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security,[40] a whole host of archaic laws and measures are being passed across Europe in the name of security which strengthen the capitalist control grid.[41][42] Despite the very real threats of terrorism, these laws and measures go too far and strongly threaten the freedoms we have left in our injured ‘democratic’ societies. Take London’s response to the Paris attacks when they decided to hire, not 50, nor 100, but 600 new armed police.[43] Are we forgetting the lessons of Menenzez, who was brutally shot and killed by armed police who allegedly mistook him for another suspect in London?[44] We also have to look at the secrecy surrounding initiatives such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and some of its aims to see the urgency of what we all face. The goals of the Trilateral Commission are ominously evident in the vast power the TPP gives to corporations. For example, according to leaked segments, it allows corporations to sue governments if their profits are affected negatively due to state activity.[45] This could lead to the most powerful corporations having free reign across weak states’ boundaries, giving another tip of the cap to Kautsky.

Overall, what is needed is not new laws but better intelligence practises and a sensible increase in the number of analysts working for the intelligence services. It is clear that many terror suspects are/were already on the radar of multiple intelligence agencies before various major terrorist attacks took place.[46][47][48][49] We should be wary of any measures going beyond reasonableness that reinforce this capitalist control grid. Otherwise, with all of the data intelligence agencies have already been collecting on our political allegiances and other highly personal information, we could be facing fascism on steroids. In this vein, we could look to the burning down of the Reichstag building and the subsequent 1933 Enabling Act, that in effect gave Hitler the power to pass laws without seeking approval from the Reichstag (Parliament/Congress)[50] as an historic example of what the future could hold. Indeed, American elites have long had a historic disdain for Congress and the Federal government’s power has risen dramatically since even World War II.[51]

ISIS – A Bolt from the Blue?

When attempting to understand ISIS in Syria and the role of the West, then, we must also look to the Saudis and Qataris amongst whose populations spurred wealthy donors that most likely supported them or other extremist groups looking to overthrow Assad.[52] These governments are also no strangers to suppressing their own populations.[53] The West have done much to ensure both their regimes’ continuation through the supplying of arms and the training of officers to name but a few of their actions.[54] This internal authoritarianism, it is argued, has led directly to frustrations that were externalised through ISIS and allowed by both states to spread outwards so that these emotions were not turned inwards against the state.[55] However, all in all, this theory does not fully add up.

The spread of ISIS has moved too far for it to simply be a venting of these frustrations. Have the United States government and Europe not more control over the Saudi and Qatari linked ISIS situation, or has everything simply got out of control? Whilst full control over any proxies may be impossible, the idea that the situation has simply gotten out of hand is erroneous when considering the benefits gained for the West in pursuit of some of their strategic objectives in the region and their own support for rebels. Have not US problems – complicated by the Arab Spring – of being unable to control more representative new governments, and in effect, their resources, been somewhat rectified by the allowance for ISIS to demolish state boundaries by an ISIS that British and American intelligence services reportedly armed using Libyan stockpiles.[56] The horrific actions of ISIS across the Middle East, which the media have been all too happy to publicise through constant internet and television streams, provide an easy pretext for military and governmental involvement in these states once any Islamic fighter group the West chooses to label ISIS enters. They may also prove to be effective pawns at potentially drawing Iran and Syria into war with Turkey and the Saudis or any other state proxies.

I remember a time when blood, guts and gore were never shown over the mass media during wars, even when the internet had found its feet. ISIS and Syria and all their related bloodshed changed this so that even the conservative BBC decided to go all out with their video coverage by opening the floodgates with footage of those men, women and children affected by the chemical weapons attacks which were blamed on the Syrian government.[57][58] In the fog of ‘the war on terrorism’, few men and women in the street are looking to the right places for information, or asking the right pertinent questions.


Daniel Taylor is an international politics PhD researcher at City University London. He specialises in US foreign policy in South America and the roles of their respective militaries. Areas of academic interest include: elite theory, social control, 9/11 and ‘coercive diplomacy’. Email contact:



[1] Shoup, Laurence, Minter, William, Imperial Brain Trust (Monthly Review Press: London and New York, 1977)

[2] Ibid.

[3] Brewer, Anthony, Marxist Theories of Imperialism – A Critical Survey. (Routledge and Kagan Paul: London and New York, 1980). 1987 print.

[4]McGregor, Richard, ‘Obama Says World ‘has to Act’ Against Syria’, from Financial Times (September 5th 2013). [Accessed: 10th November 2015]

[5] Ibid.

[6] Whitehead, Tom, ‘Memo Suggesting Tony Blair Signed up for Iraq War Year in Advance May Delay Chilcott Even Further’, from The Telegraph (18th October 2015). [Accessed: 15th November 2015]

[7] Ahmed, Nafeez, ‘Syria Intervention Plan Fuelled by Oil Interests, not Chemical Weapon Concern’, from The Guardian (30th August 2013). [Accessed: 20th February 2016]

[8] Clark, Wesley, ‘General Wesley Clark Reveals US Plan to Invade 7 Countries in 5 Years’, from YouTube (23rd November 2012). [Accessed: 08th November 2015]

[9] Cendrowski, Scott, ‘China’s Iraq Oil Problem’, from Fortune (30th June 2014). [Accessed 08th January 2016]

[10] Owen, Charlotte, ‘Third Russian Company Awarded Iraqi Oil Contract’, from Oil and Gas (2nd July 2012). [Accessed: 8th January 2016]

[11]Myers, Steven, ‘Iraq Cancels Oil Contract with 3 Russian Companies’, from The New York Times (13th December 2002). [Accessed: 12th November 2015]

[12]Fortin, Jacey, ‘Whatever Happened to Libyan Oil? For Western Oil Giants the Crude is Sweet, but China and Russia may get the Biggest Taste’, from International Business Times (24th May 2013). [Accessed: 12th December 2015]

[13] Lindley-French, Julian, Boyer, Yves, The Oxford Handbook of War. (Oxford University Press: Oxford, New York. 2012)

[14] Bowler, T, ‘Falling Oil Prices: Who are the Winners and Losers?’, from BBC News (19th January 2015). [Accessed: 05th January 2016]

[15]‘Special Report: After Mideast, Should Russia and China Worry?’, from Reuters (11th February 2011) [Accessed: 12th December 2015]

[16] Miller, Toby, Television: Critical Concepts in Media and Cultural Studies. (Routledge: London and New York, 2003)

[17] Dearden, Lizzie, ‘Diesel Police Dog Death Sparks #JeSuisChien Twitter Trend’, from The Independent (18th November 2015). [Accessed: 15th December 2015]

[18] Fromm, Erich, The Fear of Freedom. (Routledge: London and New York: Routledge. 1942. 2009 Print)

[19] Aronson, Elliot, Wilson, Timothy, Akert, Robert, Social Psychology, 5th ed. (Prentice Hall: New Jersey, 2005)

[20] Kellermann, Kathy, Reynolds, ‘When Ignorance is Bliss: The Role of Motivation to Reduce Uncertainty in Uncertainty Reduction Theory’, Human Communication Theory, 11, pp.593-604.

[21] Norris, Pippa, Kern, Montague, Just, Marion, ‘Framing Terrorism’, from Norris, P., Kern, M., Just, M. [Eds] Framing Terrorism: The News Media, the Government and the Public. (Routledge: New York and London, 2003) pp.3-26.

[22] Eland, Ivan, ‘Saturation Media Coverage of the Paris Terrorist Attacks is Unhelpful’, from Independent Institute (January 12th 2015). Retrieved from [Accessed: 12th November 2015]

[23] Ibid.

[24] Norris, Pippa, Kern, Montague, Just, Marion, ‘Framing Terrorism’, from Norris, P., Kern, M., Just, M. [Eds] Framing Terrorism: The News Media, the Government and the Public. (Routledge: New York and London, 2003) pp.3-26.

[25] Nossek, Hillel, Sreberny, Annabelle, Sonwalkar, Prasun, ‘Introduction’, Nossek, Hillel, Sreberny, Annabelle, Sonwalkar, Prasun, [Eds], Media and Political Violence. (Hampton Press: New Jersey, 2007) pp.1-22.

[26] Swinford, Steven, ‘Nigel Farage: Ghettos in French Cities have become No-Go Zones for Non-Muslims’, from The Daily Telegraph (13th January 2015) [Accessed 08 January 2016]

[27] ‘Ethnic Ghettos Prove a Perfect Breeding Ground for Terrorists’, from The Times (18th November 2015) [Accessed 20th January 2016]

[28] ‘France ‘No-Go-Zones’ Off-Limits to Non-Muslims’, from Fox News (11th January 2015) [Accessed 20th January 2016]

[29] Worrall, Patrick, ‘FactCheck: Do Black Americans Commit More Crime?’, from Channel 4 News (27th November 2014) [Accessed 21st December 2015]

[30] Nougayrède, Natalie, ‘Paris Attacks Leave France in Trauma, Fearing for the Future’, from The Guardian (14th November 2015) [Accessed 16th December 2015]

[31] Sakuma, Amanda, ‘Anti-Muslim Panic Threatens to Cause Lasting Damage’, MSNBC (2015) [Accessed 15th December 2015]

[32] Alnatour, Omar, ‘Muslims are not Terrorists: A Factual Look at Terrorism and Islam’, from The World Post (12th September 2015) [Accessed 10th January 2016]

[33] Smith, Helena, ‘Shocking Images of Drowned Syrian Boy Show Tragic Plight of Refugees’, from The Guardian (2nd September 2015) [Accessed 22nd January 2016]

[34] Scherrer, Christian, Iraq: Genocide by Sanctions. (Universati Sains Malaysia: Palau Pinang, Malaysia, 2011)

[35] ‘Refugees in Germany – Cologne’s Aftershocks’, from The Economist (16th January 2016) [Accessed 20th January 2016]

[36] Mills, Charles, The Power Elite, (Oxford University Press: London, Oxford, New York, 1956. 1971-2 Print) pp.326-327.

[37] Ginsberg, Benjamin, The Captive Public, (Basic Books Inc: New York, 1986). p.47.

[38] McTighe, Kristen, ‘Russian Airliner Crashes in Egypt’, from Financial Times (31st October 2015) [Accessed 14th January 2016]

[39] Perraudin, Frances, Siddique, Haroon, and Safi, Michael, ‘Syria Airstrikes: Britain Launches ‘Offensive Operation ‘ After Vote to Bomb Isis Targets – As it Happened’, from The Guardian (3rd December 2015) [Accessed 16th January 2016]

[40] Boukalas, Christos, Homeland Security, its Law and its State, (Routledge: London and New York. 2014).

[41] Chrisafia, Angelique, ‘France Passes New Surveillance Law in Wake of Charlie Hebdo Attack’, from The Guardian (5th May 2015) [Accessed 20th December 2015]

[42] Carvajal, Doreen and Cowell, Alan, ‘Free Rein in Speech Backing Acts of Terror’, from International New York Times (January 15th 2015) [Accessed 14th January 2016]

[43] Nicholls, Peter, ‘London to Boost Number of Armed Police Following Paris Attacks’, from Reuters (14th January 2016) [Accessed 23rd January 2016]

[44] Hughes, Mark, ‘Seven Mistakes that Cost Menezes his Life’, from The Independent (13th January 2008) [Accessed 10th February 2016]

[45] Warren, Elizabeth, ‘The Trans-Pacific Partnership Clause Everyone Should Oppose’, from Washington Post (25th February 2015) [Accessed 12th January 2016]

[46] ‘Paris Attacks Suspect was on U.S. Radar’, from CNN (November 17th 2015) [Accessed 12th February 2016]

[47] ‘Bomb Suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab on UK Watch-List’, from BBC News (29th December 2009) [Accessed 10th January 2016]

[48] ‘’Able Danger’ could Rewrite History’, from Fox News (12th August 2005) [Accessed 5th February 2016]

[49] ‘Security Bodies ‘Knew of Bomber’’, from BBC News (3rd February 2006) [Accessed 20th January 2016]

[50] Schmitt, Carl, Legality and Legitimacy, (Durham USA: Duke University Press, 2004. 1932 Print)

[51] Anderson, Perry, ‘Consilium’, New Left Review, 83, September. pp.113-167

[52] ‘Islamic State: Where Does Jihadist Group get its Support?’, from BBC News (1st September 2014) [Accessed 07th January 2016]

[53] Watt, Naomi, ‘’Sandhurst Sheikhs’: Calls to Stop Training Cadets from Gulf States with Bad Rights Records’, from The Guardian (22nd January 2016) [Accessed 2nd February 2016]

[54] Ibid.

[55] Wehrey, Frederic, ‘The Saudi Thermidor’, from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (1st December 2014) [Accessed 23rd November 2015]

[56] Milne, Seumas, ‘Now the Truth Emerges: How the US Fuelled the Rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq’, from The Guardian (3rd June 2015) [Accessed 09th February 2016]

[57] Pannell, Ian, ‘Syria Civilians Still Under Chemical Attack’, from BBC News (10th September 2015) [Accessed 14th January 2016]

[58] ‘Syria Chemical Weapons Allegations’, from BBC News (31st October 2013) [Accessed 16th January 2016]

Military Entertainment Complex – ‘America the Beautiful’

The US entertainment industry and the military often go hand in hand and help to sustain the worst parts of an unfair and exploitative capitalist system through their mutually beneficial cooperation. Like many sporting occasions, the 50th Super Bowl event, which brought together music and Hollywood icons, provided a very public stage to encourage military recruitment and support for some misguided political decisions to go to war.

In film, directors may use military equipment or premises often with the understanding that the military brass give scripts their approval – if they don’t give it they may ask for changes to the script or stop cooperating altogether. This relationship has been documented on multiple occasions, but does not always work in the military’s or the government’s favour. Take for example Kevin Costner’s brave rejection of changes suggested by the Pentagon to their portrayal of US generals during the Cuban missile crisis in the film Thirteen Days.

“That ‘elites’ try to make the worst off in society think that ‘elite’ goals are their own, when they are clearly against their best interests, is a well established theory with much truth to it.”

The modern gladiatorial games of the majority, the sports; the National Basketball Association, the National Football League and Major League Baseball, all help promote recruitment for dirty wars. The massive Super Bowl ceremony was certainly no exception, providing an amazing spectacle and exciting event that appealed to everybody’s emotions. Bringing together top stars from the music industry, it was a real family occasion. But the tentacles of the US war machine have been ruining the party by attempting to mix in a toxic fuel of patriotism and military fervour with these emotions.

Troops are often included in pre-game ceremonies and it emerged that the US military pays sports teams for them to include military officials in the starting proceedings and to honour the war dead before games begin. The NFL included 16 teams that received funds from the Department of Defense. These funds equated to nearly $6 million over 4 years. In 2014 $7 million was spent. Although Senators voted to stop tax payer money going to teams the government and some segments of society still expect them to show support or risk being labelled unpatriotic – and they do. War planes also frequent games and flyby as the national anthem rings out creating almost free advertising for recruitment purposes. Officials seem to think it is a sports team’s duty to support the military and that they should act as recruitment tools. I am sure Thomas Jefferson would have approved: “The spirit of this country is totally adverse to a large military force.”

As noted in a fantastic article by Rory Fanning, these shows of patriotism also create an honour system that puts soldiers on a pedestal, labelling them heroes and in turn decreasing the likelihood of internal dissent, and keeping them fighting for prestige.

“The event was a huge display of patriotism which, whilst many players and crowd put hand on heart and sang aloud, some Americans did not seem altogether comfortable with it.”

Patriotism, militarism and capitalism are uncomfortably mixed together in US sports, as advertisements and sponsors fill every interval. Free packages of branded goods are parachuted or shot into the crowds by their mascots at NBA games and the national anthem plays all too frequently at others. The 50th Super Bowl played host to a rendition of the song America the Beautiful. Whilst military men and women wearing their medals bellowed out the song, we were shown images of the Statue of Liberty, Mount Rushmore, and other US sites. The event was a huge display of patriotism which, whilst many players and crowd put hand on heart and sang aloud, it is unfortunate that some Americans did not seem altogether comfortable with it.





Coordination Of The Coordinaters In The Mass Media

Tony Blair has sent hundreds of British service men and women to their deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan, in a coalition that has killed thousands of these countries’ inhabitants on an admittedly false pretext. After official and public investigations into the build up to the Iraq invasion which focussed on a ‘dodgy dossier’, costing yet more tax payer money and ultimately leading to the death (murder) of Dr David Kelly – why on earth are newspapers not calling for Tony Blair’s arrest on their front pages every day?

Instead, the media have acted as Blair’s mouth piece through their quest for ‘objective’ and ‘impartial’ news reporting. They not only allowed him to defend his decision to invade Iraq and to make it almost sound patriotic, the media also allowed him to bash Corbyn, who by chance had himself suggested Blair should be tried as a war criminal.

After all of this, why are the mass media continuing to chastise Jeremy Corbyn, focussing on how risky his supposed reshuffle could be for New Labour. The New Labour that decided to take us to war in secret, and left the next incumbent government penniless. Why is a reshuffle of a discredited party, whose new leader fills up every public hall he speaks at, whose views energise the young to engage in politics, and who offers genuine alternatives to capitalist challenges, the main focus of attack for news sites. The mainstream media have a lot to answer for.

What is even worse is that these opaque attacks on Corbyn are taken seriously by so many people in the United Kingdom. He’s a terrorist sympathiser and doesn’t care for our war dead! Ultimately, not all of Corbyn’s policies may be ideal, but nor are any partys. We must ask ourselves: when has the opposition ever come under so much scrutiny at their very outset? Doesn’t this sustained criticism often wait until election time? Not only do these media attacks eschew the outlook of the population at large, they also empower the opposition within the Labour Party, as well as the leadership in corporations, finance, banking and the military to wittingly or unwittingly replicate anti-Corbyn dialogue. Additionally, the frying pan that Jeremy Corbyn has been thrown into will also pressure the man himself to change his policies which may or may not be a good thing altogether.

Nonetheless, how can the suggestion of a military coup if Corbyn were to scrap Trident by a general be taken less seriously than questions surrounding how low Corbyn did or did not bow at a war memorial service, or whether he wears a piece of fabric around his neck? Much of the media have now normalised Corbyn bashing.

It is indeed likely that Mr Corbyn did not fit the plans of the corporate-financial ‘elites’ who met at the most recent Bilderberg meeting in June 2015. Media representatives included the BBC Trust, the Financial Times, the Economist and others, as well as the usual Council on Foreign Relations and Foundation members. We know this because the group finally decided to release a list of participants and supposed talking points; after years of secrecy. One of these admittedly broad talking points was the United Kingdom which would certainly not have foreseen Corbyn’s rise to prominence and election to Labour Party leader.

There is little doubt that Corbyn’s plans for nationalising certain services used by the public and his focus on trade unions and worker rights will not have gone down well with these members who will get to discuss the topic in this year’s upcoming Bilderberg conference in 2016. But I would be surprised if some of these participants had not discussed it already.