{"id":206957,"date":"2020-05-09T07:04:12","date_gmt":"2020-05-09T07:04:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=206957"},"modified":"2020-05-11T06:20:15","modified_gmt":"2020-05-11T06:20:15","slug":"ve-day-lockdown-and-the-power-of-language","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=206957","title":{"rendered":"VE Day, Lockdown, and the Power of Language"},"content":{"rendered":"

Ian Fantom — May 8, 2020<\/strong><\/h1>\n
\"\"<\/a>

Winston Churchill at Harvard, 1943. Click to enlarge<\/p><\/div>\n

Today in the UK we are supposed to be celebrating VE Day \u2013 the 75th anniversary of \u2018Victory in Europe\u2019. It is indeed a special day, but for the wrong reason. We in the UK are locked down by government order, and people are being arrested for doing normal things, by a police force that was originally set up to be \u2018citizens in uniform\u2019 and is now looking more and more like a militia.<\/h5>\n
I am allowed to go out for \u2018one form of exercise\u2019 each day, whatever that concoction of word is supposed to mean. Most times when I go for a walk I get chatting with one or two of the locals. When I say, \u201cThere\u2019s something they\u2019re not telling us\u201d, they all say, \u201cI know\u201d. Then we get talking. There\u2019s a lot we don\u2019t know about Covid-19, but what we do know is that it\u2019s a toxic brew of truth and lies.<\/h5>\n
I often feel that I want to meet people from the past, whom I knew, or by now feel I knew, and tell them what I know now. If I were to tell the people celebrating on the streets in the UK 75 years ago that in 2020 we wouldn\u2019t be allowed to go onto the streets for such celebration, because of a toxic mix of truth and lies, their jaws would drop. They would be asking what it had all been for. George Orwell shortly afterwards tried to warn people of the dangers of a Big Brother state, and he made some impact, but for that message to have been really believed by the public, it would also have needed an authoritative figure in the British Establishment to tell them so.<\/h5>\n

Genocide Denial<\/h2>\n

Whatever the sins of the National Socialists, the German people were about to suffer terribly. This was covered up until author James Bacque discovered \u2018The Shocking Truth Behind The Mass Deaths Of Disarmed German Soldiers And Civilians Under General Eisenhower\u2019s Command\u2019. That was the subtitle of his book \u2018Other Losses<\/a><\/span>\u2019, first published in 1989. The dust cover on my copy states:<\/h5>\n
Other Losses charges that General Eisenhower, as commander-in-chief of the European theatre at the end of WWII, was part of a policy that caused the deliberate death from exposure, fecal contamination, and lack of food of a massive number of disarmed German soldiers. Hundreds of thousands of dead prisoners were written off in the army reports simply as \u2018other losses\u2019, without any other explanation. In order to write this book, James Bacque spent years tracking the fading trail of this atrocity.<\/h5>\n
The Foreword states:<\/h5>\n
More than five million German soldiers in the American and French zones were crowded into barbed wire cages, many of them literally shoulder to shoulder. The ground beneath them soon became a quagmire of filth and disease. Open to the weather, lacking even primitive sanitary facilities, underfed, the prisoners soon began dying of starvation and disease. Starting in April 1945, the United States Army and the French army casually annihilated about one million men, most of them in American camps.<\/h5>\n
US Secretary of State Cordwell Hull described the plan \u2013 the Morgenthau Plan \u2013 as follows:<\/h5>\n
\u2026 the Morgenthau Plan would wipe out everything in Germany except land, and the Germans would have to live on that land. This meant that only 60 percent of the German population could support themselves on German land, and the other 40 percent would die.<\/h5>\n
\u201cHull is speaking here of the deaths of about 20 million German civilians\u201d, the book adds. Churchill\u2019s advisor Lord Cherwell supported the plan. \u201cThe economic argument convinced Churchill, who now swung over to Morgenthau and Cherwell. Anthony Eden was shocked. \u2018You can\u2019t do this\u2019, he exclaimed, \u2018After all, you and I have publicly said quite the opposite\u2019\u201d. Fortunately, the plan was not implemented in full because of public pressure.<\/h5>\n
A publishers\u2019 note at the beginning of the book ends with: \u201cIn a free society, the truth must be exposed, regardless of the consequences \u2013 especially if we don\u2019t like to hear it\u201d.<\/h5>\n

Professorial Deception<\/h2>\n

The problem today is that the Establishment is defining \u2018truth\u2019 as whatever the government says it is, and anything else is being defined as \u2018conspiracy theory\u2019. I\u2019ve just had a fifth article on the current pandemic scare published in The Truthseeker. It\u2019s called \u2018Fake Psychology\u2019: Health dangers of COVID-19 \u2018Conspiracy Theories\u2019 claim\u2019<\/span><\/a>, and it contains an analysis of a supposedly scientific paper by two professors of psychology, claiming that belief in \u2018conspiracy theories\u2019 leads to health dangers. This, to me, is a shocking indictment not only of the professors of psychology, but also of their university, which has been putting this story out to the press, when no research into the suggested health effects had taken place. A list of my previous four articles is given in this article, and they call into question the integrity not only of politicians, but of many research departments. I was brought up to believe in scientific method and the peer review process. I was in awe of universities and their professors. So when I started to realise the deception that can take place by university professors I found that quite shocking. It is a grave betrayal of public trust. That\u2019s a different category from lying in parliament, because to become a successful politician in the UK lying is mandatory. That is because government ministers are spokespeople for those who are really in charge, and sometimes they have to justify the unjustifiable. But when university professors get involved you know that there is a fundamental problem of trust in our society, and that we need to a simple lesson: Yes, it can happen here.<\/h5>\n
I\u2019ve just read a code review of Professor Neil Ferguson\u2019s computer model<\/a><\/span>, which led to the government\u2019s lockdown policy. Except that it\u2019s not. It\u2019s a review of the code after it had been tidied up by a team from Microsoft and others. That\u2019s cheating. The original code consisted of 15 000 lines of undocumented code, all in one file. Nevertheless, the code review sounds as if it\u2019s still pretty horrendous. I was once asked, over 30 years ago, how many lines of code I would write in a day. I replied that on a good day I would end up with fewer lines of code than when I started, because the code that I was required to work on would be so horrendous that it needed to be rewritten in a more comprehensible way. I think there were three reasons for that: 1. the programmers were untrained, 2: the programmers didn\u2019t care, 3: the programmers did that on purpose to make themselves indispensable. When scientific research depends critically on a computer model, which the scientists themselves do not understand, and even avoid publishing, that is fake science. I do not believe that the government would willingly base all their thinking on such \u2018research\u2019, whilst at the same time ignoring advice from genuine virologists and epidemiologists whose lifetime\u2019s experience was telling them that the lockdown policy was wrong. There must have been alarm bells ringing at the time.<\/h5>\n

It\u2019s all about language<\/h2>\n

I saw a television documentary a couple of days ago on Winston Churchill. As I watched I was asking myself what it was that Churchill brought to the war effort. Was it great insight into military matters? Well, no. His generals would at times become exasperated. Was he a great political maneuverer? Well, no. Without the war he would have been a third rate politician. Did he have great empathy with his people? Well, no. Many in the trade unions despised him, and he didn\u2019t seem interested in ordinary folk. The answer has to be, quite firmly: his use of language. He was a great parliamentary orator. He wouldn\u2019t have been much good at rousing people from a soap box at Speakers\u2019 Corner. But he was good amongst his political crowd in parliament and on the international stage. He was good at writing, too. His most brilliant speech that I\u2019ve come across was the one he gave in 1943 at Harvard, when he said that the empires of the future are empires of the mind. That was brilliant, because the whole speech, except for the gentilities at the beginning, was about promoting Basic English as the world\u2019s common language, and somehow being taken seriously. Basic English was a fraudulent concoction emanating from professors at Cambridge University, who claimed that it was a sort of Esperanto based on English, and that you could say anything with a just 850 words. It wasn\u2019t true. There was no simplification of syntax, and whole families of words (like: \u2018is\u2019, \u2018am\u2019, \u2018are\u2019, \u2018was\u2019, \u2018were\u2019, \u2018be\u2019), would be classed as a single word (\u2018be\u2019). Other words would be replaced by idiomatic phrases, which would be more difficult to learn than the single words themselves. Could you imagine Churchill giving a speech in Basic English? He\u2019d have been laughed at.<\/h5>\n
The brilliance of that speech lay in the way he could maintain an ambiguity in the concept of \u2018Basic English\u2019, so that it would mean one thing to the people in front of him (a second, easy-to-learn language for the world, like Esperanto), and another to the people behind him (a way of getting people to learn normal English). But there was a stronger message, too. Britain had a year earlier transferred the research on the atomic bomb to the US, and some of the people in charge on the US side were standing just behind him whilst he was making that speech. He was telling them: You may have the atomic bomb, but after the war is over, ha ha, you won\u2019t be able to use it. But we have the English language, and that is the power behind the British Empire of the future. Of course, the Americans spoke English, too, but the masters of English propaganda, who already ruled a quarter of the earth\u2019s population, were in London. Much of the empire had been won by linguistic propaganda; the armies were sent in only when that failed, and even then, that was usually enabled by linguistic propaganda. That will be the real power of the New World Order, which would be an extension of the British Empire. That is how things are now working out. The current lock-down has been carried out virtually entirely by use of language. A century ago they would have needed a world war to achieve similar results. In the meantime the corporations have become near-monopolies, including the financial sector, and they can centrally control much of what even governments do. Now smaller companies are going out of business, and the big corporations are set to take over in consort.<\/h5>\n
The only purpose of terrorism is to put people into fear. Otherwise there\u2019s no point in carrying it out. That can only be with the purpose of backing up a language-based propaganda effort. 9\/11 enabled NATO to begin a massive military campaign to take over much of the Middle East. \u201cThe PNAC’s seminal report, \u2018Rebuilding America\u2019s Defences: strategy, forces and resources for a new century\u2019, was a blueprint of American aims in all but name\u201d, wrote John Pilger a year after 9\/11. That appeared in a New Statesman article headed \u2018John Pilger reveals the American plan: a new Pearl Harbour\u2019<\/a><\/span>, and subheaded \u2018Two years ago a project set up by the men who now surround George W Bush said what America needed was a \u201ccatastrophic and catalysing event\u201d\u2019. What that report by the Project for a New American Century was effectively saying is that language propaganda alone will not suffice to bring the American public on board for the proposed military action. In the present COVID-19 crisis not a shot was fired; people succumbed to diktats from the very people they had previously been calling liars, and suddenly a world coup was in progress.<\/h5>\n

The Centrality of English<\/h2>\n

I came into the 9\/11 Truth movement in December 2006 following research into the decline of Esperanto Association of Britain, but I would talk about that only because it had opened my eyes as to how infiltration and propaganda were in operation in the UK. I had been hounded out of a role in the movement by a professor of Phonetics and Linguistics, whom I had known all my adult life, and had thought of as a friend and colleague. That to me was quite a shocking experience, but I was even more shocked when I started looking at other issues, and read a paper on the Twin Towers by Professor Steven Jones. I thought the Esperanto association was of relevance to the truth movement only as regards the experience I had gained in a small intimate environment of \u2013 by that stage \u2013 under a thousand members. I had discovered historical incongruities between the accounts and the minutes of the association, which needed explaining. I made no allegations, but simply sent a draft confidential report to the professor, rather than going public. It was only after the treasurer had admitted that my figures were correct a few years later, that I could state definitively that she had been misleading the members by saying that the association\u2019s capital reserves were declining, when in fact they were rising dramatically. It was clearly controlled demolition.<\/h5>\n
I carried on investigating. My assailant, Professor John C. Wells<\/span><\/a>, was on the Advisory Board of Encarta, the \u2018World English Dictionary\u2019, produced by Microsoft under Bill Gates. The Esperanto association\u2019s legal advisor had earlier given me a friendly hint that something was wrong, when I brought up the idea of inviting John Wells to be a candidate for the presidency of the association. He told me that the linguistic description in the definition of \u2018Esperanto\u2019 in Encarta was wrong. Only later did I realise that he was talking about an Advisory Board of twelve, not an editorial board of perhaps a hundred or so. As a leading expert in the Esperanto language his voice would have carried some weight in Encarta.<\/h5>\n
John Wells also had close ties to the British Council in the promotion of English. From 1989 to 1995 he was President of the Universal Esperanto Association, saying that the role of the association should not be to promote Esperanto, but only to keep it in good order until the world was ready for it. At the same time the British Council was pushing English in Central European former Communist countries, and their Esperanto associations were sharply declining. Strangely, the same thing was happening in the UK, too. A friend of his, Professor Humphrey Tonkin<\/span><\/a>, blew up in my face in 2007 when I asked him his assessment of my research reports. He had led a coup in the association in 1974 and remained the \u2018\u00e9minence grise\u2019 of the association ever since. He turned out to be quite a close friend of George Soros<\/span><\/a>, and they were active together in England in the Esperanto youth movement in the 1950s. Also in 2007 another \u2018friendly\u2019 professor became the international President. Probal Dasgupta<\/span><\/a> seemed expert in ensuring, in a charming manner, that nothing significant would actually happen. I latched on when he tried to tell us that Chomsky\u2019s studies in \u2018Syntactic Structures\u2019 wasn\u2019t based on a statistical method, when it was based on Markov chains. It turned out he was a colleague of Chomsky. Chomsky had been telling people that Esperanto was not a language, so I asked him if he still held to that when two of his books had been translated into the language. He gave me a paragraph of evasive linguistic contortion. Chomsky had been working with the Pentagon in his \u2018Syntactic Structures\u2019, which was used to bring about a coup in the field of linguistics, based on mathematical obfuscation, which linguists seem to be accepting without really understanding it.<\/h5>\n
So something was going on at a high level, which meshed with the high-level stuff linked to all sorts of other New World Order activities. I think it\u2019s safe to say that if the New World Order were to progress unhindered, then in a hundred years time virtually no-one under thirty would know any language other than English, except for those who would be bilingual in English and Hebrew. I think it\u2019s also fair to say that had it not been for such interventions in every generation since 1887, then Esperanto would long ago have become mainstream in the world\u2019s language teaching programmes. Yet few of the Esperantists seem to understand that finding the cause of a problem is the first step to solving it.<\/h5>\n
From these experiences I inferred that you should judge the importance of a cause not only by those who are promoting it, but even more by those who are against it. It wasn\u2019t just Esperanto, but all foreign language learning in the UK; Tony Blair\u2019s government pushed through reforms, supposedly to expand language learning in England\u2019s schools, against warnings from the teaching profession, who were saying that it would have the opposite effect. That turned out to be the case.<\/h5>\n
Propaganda is easier when you have only one language and culture to contend with. Even the term \u2018conspiracy theory\u2019, which can be translated into most languages, is known in some languages as \u2018plot theory\u2019. That wouldn\u2019t work in English because of the ambiguity of \u2018plot\u2019. Every propaganda term needs to be evaluated carefully in order to find equivalents in other languages and cultures.<\/h5>\n
I\u2019ve been told from time to time to keep quiet about my findings, on the grounds that \u2018the others\u2019 won\u2019t believe me. It\u2019s always \u2018the others\u2019. To see the absurdity of this, consider two propositions: 1. The Esperanto movement has been taken over and used as a front for the Neoconservatives, who want to push English as the language of the New World Order, and 2. Esperanto is progressing and on course to become the world\u2019s second language. Which is more credible? Most people in the UK think Esperanto is dead. So why are people who are putting proposition 2 about telling me to shut up about proposition 2, on the basis that I won\u2019t be believed?<\/h5>\n

The Resistance<\/h2>\n

The government\u2019s story on lockdown is becoming less and less credible \u2013 if indeed it is the government\u2019s story. The evidence so far suggests that it the military-industrial-complex, with the bankers added in, who control governments. The world coup attempt has demonstrated dramatically the power of language. Investigating the facts and analysing them is clearly essential to digging ourselves out of the hole, but I can\u2019t think of a single professional journalist under the age of 60 who is doing that. On the other hand, to stop us getting into these holes in the first place we need to be more observant on the abuse of language in order to mislead the public, as is constantly being done in the art of \u2018conflict initiation\u2019 and political control. The constant creation and exploitation of linguistic ambiguity is key to understanding British propaganda, especially when coupled with charm and disarming smiles.<\/h5>\n
There is a website called \u2018Lockdown Sceptics\u2019, which is worth following, as well as, of course, The Truthseeker and Off-Guardian, and various other sites. The latest Lockdown Sceptics article contains an anonymous quote from \u201ca distinguished journalist and author who cannot say what he really thinks about the lockdown without jeopardising his career\u201d<\/span><\/a>:<\/h5>\n
There\u2019s a horrible irony that the 75th-anniversary of VE Day should fall during the lockdown. The British nation fought the Nazis to preserve our ancient freedoms, so that future generations would be able to live without fear. At this moment, Parliament is no longer properly functioning, jury trials have been suspended (perhaps permanently), technology giants appear to be censoring free speech, protest is deemed a dangerous activity and the citizens of this country remain under indefinite house arrest. A Government adviser, Professor Dingwall, of Nottingham University, today admits (in the Telegraph) that the Government has created a \u201cclimate of fear\u201d that has \u201cterrorised\u201d Britons. Fear has replaced hope and an untrammelled statel has replaced limited government. A year before VE-Day, Friedrich Hayek published The Road to Serfdom. Never before has our nation progressed so far down that route. What in the hell is there to celebrate?<\/h5>\n
The author also states: \u201cI\u2019ve caught the most law-abiding of my friends arranging get-togethers in their gardens or streets, or meeting friends for walks when it\u2019s not strictly allowed \u2013 simply because they realise there\u2019s no logic to doing otherwise\u201d.<\/h5>\n
I wish I was there.<\/h5>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A world-wide coup without a shot being fired: Ian Fantom explains why English is being imposed as the language of the New World Order.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":39262,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[61,29],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-206957","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-Commentary","category-The_New_World_Order"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/206957","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/39262"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=206957"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/206957\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":206978,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/206957\/revisions\/206978"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=206957"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=206957"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=206957"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}