I was eager to write this piece as it was something that truly annoyed me, and intellectually inspired me in the same vein. I was both disappointed and a bit confused and frustrated about its subject: Douglas Murray, Zelenskyy and that fucking missile that could have started the world on fire. I mean seriously. A possible Archduke Franz Ferdinand kind of moment. The confusion is what enabled the writing of the first words. I am still trying to sort it out?

The world has become a rough place, and the sentiment is to relapse into a state of comfortable numbness. So I have kick this piece around the house for a week and I think I might be able to clarify some things.

Murray who I might not have agreed with at times who above all, I felt spoke truth, or I presumed spoke in truth, wrote a piece for the New York Post, a flailing propaganda something or other, clumsy and from the informed and boots on the ground point of view of a Gonzalo Lira, much to do with ignorance at the least but looking more likely a shifty ( manipulate my readership) fucking pack of lies.

Murray has always been for me one of those writers who still, although I might not always agree, I felt told truth, I felt. If he was lying why was he doing this? Why would he lie? I had heard his opinion on so many other things and although a much gayer version of a Sam Harris — who it seems has lost it also. And is now not so intellectually centered.

I have been untrusting of that whole intellectual “Dark Web”. Jordan Peterson, Harris, Murray and Joe Rogan who it seems is only doing a favor for his homies and comedians. He got soft and lost the hunger. Moved to Texas and the whole show is about promotion of those he guest. 

So I needed to confirm if I was wrong, maybe after listening and watching Lira’s video expose on Rumble of Murrays New York Post debacle I might prove myself right or wrong. And I mean that in, after reading the whole presentation of the article and reading the article in the post I was wrong.

Douglas Murray is a mealymouthed liar and a not so obvious propagandist.

The photographs in the article for the NYP looked contrived. Murray seemed unaware at the time; at first glance it seemed. He held the Ukrainian flag at the opening photo of his scribbling for the Post backwards. There was graffiti; writing on it that was not legible. Maybe I needed to put the photo next a mirror and see if there was some kind of code to his kind?

Did he know this, that it was backwards? Was it on purpose for some or another reason? Was it his decision or the photographer’s? Why the fierce look on his face as if he was trying to convince that he was actually sincere and filled with truth. 

The Ukrainian soldier he took the picture with holds a magic marker — was he the author of the words on the Ukrainian flag? The forced smirk as if proving a point, rather than witnessing a truth and reporting on it. Why did it seem that he was furthering a cause rather than reporting for the post. Why did it seem he was in Kherson for something other that the New York Post? And the Post was a cover story. Was Murray running an errand for NATO?

In a kneeling portrait with a little girl in pretty bows in her hair the colors of Ukraine flag he seems two-fingered strained to hold the position so that the Nazi Banderite flag is just above his head, distasteful as it seemed but yet not one single piece of Ukraine memorabilia upon his own person. No Azov badge, dressed darkly and only what seemed, a black hat semblance that he is in for this whole arrangement in his strained pose.

 

The little girl was seen earlier with her mother speaking to Murray. Piece players in an scene…

Murray states in his opening for the Post article…“Russia is going to lose this war. And Ukraine is going to win it. How can I say that with confidence? Because yesterday I was in the city of Kherson and saw Russia’s defeat with my own eyes.”

And that, I knew was a pack of lies…

 

 

It seems Murray has no understanding of the crisis at all. There was no defeat in Kherson, the Russians simply left, even that was known by his own sides media. And so either he is stupid, or that is a blatant lie.

The whole piece seems contrived and orchestrated, made up for some reason beyond what Murray as a writer was usually about. 

Is Douglas Murray a propagandist or as he has stated so many times, never more than his puff piece on Christopher Hichens passing, which he claimed was said of him, ‘‘Christopher Hitchens is never nice about anybody. He has just been nice about you.’ 

It was his tribute to Hichens that made me look closer at his writing. I’m sure Hitchens the professional drunk whose choice of poison was scotch would have corrected Douglas when he used the term ‘scotches’. It’s scotch like Moose, representing many. 

Douglas Murray as a writer, the man looking for his importance, his own relevance in a fast changing world might pick up a gig like writing on a subject he knows anything about. With a little more looking I found that Murray has been, until 2018, a Associate Director of the Henry Jackson Society, it… ‘is a trans-Atlantic foreign policy and national security think tank, based in the United Kingdom.’

While it prefers to think of itself as non-partisan it is committed indeed to its beliefs, forward thinking in its strategy of spreading liberal democracy; values around the world. Named after Henry M. “Scoop” Jackson, Democratic senator  from the state of Washington. A Cold War democrat who spent his time supporting higher military spending and a hardline against Russia as it was at that time the Soviet Union.

The Henry Jackson Society (HJS), formed in 2005 at Cambridge pursuits “[…] robust foreign policy … based on clear universal principles such as the global promotion of the rule of law, liberal democracy, civil rights, environmental responsibility and the market economy”. Under the eight principals that the society adheres too: Liberal democracy, setting a example for the rest of the world. As I have said before forward looking in focus helping those nations that are not yet liberal and democratic to become that using political, cultural and diplomatic means.

Is this what Douglas Murray is doing in Ukraine, regardless of the truthiness or the justice of the subject. Is he a grand influencer bringing his followers to the narrative of Russia as the evil here…is he one of the firestarters of Cold War 2.0?

The HJS prefers a strong military in countries of the European Union and furthers the modernization and integration under British leadership and finally preferably within NATO.

It stresses importance in Unity using NATO amongst other institutions, a “Carrot and Stick” forward strategy, and the stick in a ‘strong military domain’.

In the final statement of its principals HJS will only legitimize ‘Liberal Democratic States as legal and unflawed government’. And there is no other.

Douglas for his part was founder of the Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC) which was subsumed in the HJS in 2011. Murray its said has is no longer been part of the Henry Jackson Society (HJS), as of 2018, or is he? Has he now become the unlikely agent of that politics.

Douglas Murray is now a senior Fellow at the National Review institute with its past endorsement as helping to establish cold war conservatism.

Murray’s position has changed since September 22nd when he was stated in the beginning sentence of another NY post “Letting both sides declare ‘victory’ in Ukraine may be the best solution”. He went on to say…“One thing has become clear about the war in Ukraine. Vladimir Putin cannot win. But he also cannot lose.”

Who has been talking to Murray?

Murray is reading a script and has stopped being his own man, he knows nothing about Ukraine but what he is told and he is lying and aiding his masters in creating a new cold war.

Let get it straight Zelensky is a criminal and his regime are criminals and hire Nazis and arm Nazis, extorting the west for their needs and Douglas Murray is negligent of history’s lesson and the phrase and the promise of “not one inch eastward‘. Murray has been dragged into something he has very little knowledge about.

This a is a war of narratives and the fabric of the west narrative is fraying an starting to tear. NATO is an illegal organization that has been corrupted to become an arms dealer, an institution that now wants to encompass the south pacific.

What since September the 22nd when he ended his post with “

“There are things we might like to happen, and then there is what ought to happen. At some point, peace is going to have to be restored. But strangely enough the best way for it to happen will be for both sides to be able to declare victory to their own side.”

In the end what can be said of Douglas Murray is that he has drank the Kool-Aid and no longer can be respected as an independent thinker and writer and journalist. What Murray fails to realize is that a coup supported and initiated by the US over-run a legitimately voted for government of Petro Poroshenko who fled after the coup and since 2014 there has been a slow genocide of Russian cultured people in Donetsk and Luhansk and Russian culture in general. Christian religion is banned and made illegal. There has been a rise of neo-Nazism that has torn the country apart. These people have been in the process of de-Russification now continuingly and is now inspiring the west to do the same..

Ukraine a country that has always been part of Russia and has deep, deep roots in Russian culture. Ukraine has always been of  Russia.

I am coming to realize that the Dark Web ideology is a slow burn and purposeful neutralizing of young males conservatives.

Jordan Peterson in a cozy chat with Bebe Netanyahoo? Sam Harris wigs out on Bill Maher. Douglas Murray?

They are the propagators of the state of the Comfortably Numb… the influencers of “Just shutup and clean your room!”

Something became completely clear when I read this,

“Starting around 2000, Peterson began collecting Soviet-era paintings.^[24] The paintings are displayed in his house as a reminder of the relationship between totalitarian propaganda and art, and as examples of how idealistic visions can become totalitarian oppression and horror.”

Has he seen any recent western art?

Jordan seems to be of late backtracking in regards to what he has said of free speech and supports a kind of Twitter apartheid.

 He states…

“Think for a second. Why would we mix the trolls in with the real people? Think about what that enables? I didn’t say they should be banned. I said they should be SEPARATED FROM VERIFiED PEOPLE.”

…is he meaning that trolls are not blue checked? What is a verified person?

But he has always spoke of freedom of speech as a combat with words. Isn’t that what trolls do. Combat with words? Lay out the truth all naked in spite of what you thing of it, they bring an honesty that is sometimes in your face and all up in your emotions — and Peterson  did state…

“I regard free speech as a prerequisite to a civilized society, because freedom of speech means that you can have combat with words. That’s what it means. It doesn’t mean that people can happily and gently exchange opinions. It means that we can engage in combat with words, in the battleground of ideas. And the reason that that’s acceptable, and why it’s acceptable that people’s feelings get hurt during that combat, is that the combat of ideas is far preferable to actual combat” – Jordan Peterson, Maps of Meaning, 2017

Jordan Peterson and the Dark Web are neutralizing agents any real combat of words…