Nadiya Hussain, vilified for criticising Theresa May over air strikes on Syria
The truth is sometimes revealed through words, but more often through deeds.
The Times and several other papers recently carried alarming stories about "Apologists for Assad" to be found in social media, in independent journalism, and even in universities. Passive consumers of corporate media communications may have taken the papers' word for it and been perturbed. The more alert, however, will have taken this conspicuous flagging of certain journalists, tweeters and academics to be a
strategic communication:
"these are people you must not listen to and definitely not think of emulating!"
The response from the critically aware has been spectacularly resistant -
not least on Twitter, which, ironically, was the main source of the "evidence" used in the coordinated smear campaign. The fact of a campaign, and a coordinated one, appeared obvious.
Perhaps a rush to launch the attacks all at once was due to an unexpectedly quick unravelling of the authorized narrative in Syria. As the Syrian Arab Army brought Douma back under government control, the liberated citizens were bringing
horrendous stories about conditions of life under the UK-sponsored "moderate rebels", speaking of terror, humiliation, deprivation, rape, murder and forced labour.
These stories, if verified, would severely undermine the mainstream narrative. As would the discovery of exceedingly inconvenient facts relating to the alleged chemical attack that recently served as justification for the F-UK-US bombing raid.
So it is that those of us who strive to get a fair hearing for the inconvenient testimonies are branded "Apologists for Assad".
Comment: Google has a lot to be embarrassed about and sealing the documents will do little to scrub their image: