Gaming the Law / This is how we change the narrative.

RE: BBC Interview with Victoria Derbyshire, Tuesday 21st July

They have a script and that script is the narrative, the narrative is the official voice of the establishment. An interview is not an exchange, they never pick up on the reply of the interviewee but proceed with the script. This means that the narrative doesn’t change, the public don’t fill in the gaps or the objections. It’s simply the received opinion.

When Victoria Derbyshire interviewed me, I insisted on finishing my answer which meant she had to reply. It became a discussion by which means I managed to change the narrative. Victoria was puffed up with her status as a journalist of the BBC meaning that she has official authority / The BBC are recognised as an impartial authority, but they do not deserve this status. I don’t respect the BBC. I’m not one of the interviewees who just stands in line and doesn’t quibble when I don’t have the chance to finish my opinions. Without demur that my opinions are not listened to. I do question the authority of the BBC.

The Press are the pillar of the establishment, this is how they lie e.g. Julian Assange was accepted as a political prisoner by the Ecuadorian embassy. The British Crown Prosecution  then invented the idea that bail is more important than political asylum –of course it’s not. Gaming the system, Julian Assange: no country can arrest someone because of an allegation. They have to charge them: Habius Corpus. Julian Assange was arrested by Britain because of an allegation and given bail at £250,000 – an outrageous sum plus house arrest.

JACK OF CLUBS

At the time of his political asylum at the Ecuadorian embassy, political asylum takes precedence over bail, yet the Crown Prosecution resurrected the bail charge. 2 years house arrest counts as 1 year in jail.

They’re already gaming the law by introducing unprecedented fines, before a man has been charged for the crime for which he is really being pursued: it is a crime to publish the truth about American war crimes.KING OF DIAMONDS

This is how the press lies, Julian has been presented as someone who is escaping justice, squirreling himself away in the Ecuadorian embassy. The Embassy accepted Julian as a political prisoner because it was now public information that America wanted to arrest Julian.  He should have been allowed safe passage to Ecuador, but no, the English said! If you put your head outside this Embassy, we will arrest you on trumped up bail charges, when he has already paid bail many times over 4 a rape allegation invented by Swedish prosecutors, trapped in the embassy for 7 yrs.  He agreed 2 go if Sweden would say they would not extradite him. They refused, meanwhile UK told Sweden, “Don’t come to him here.” Bail gaming lasted 7 yrs. Sweden said they had run out of time.

It is illegal for anyone to invade an embassy and drag out a political prisoner who has been given asylum, and so, this is how the Press lies. This cartoon shows the strong arm of the law holding an abject little puppet in the air in triumph.

 

Assange arrested

Share this post

fb-logo-sm
Tweet
  1. Vivienne,

    You were very brave to go on the BBC for an interview knowing that they would spin the truth. I am proud of you for holding your own and voicing your opinion. I sent the video to all of my friends to educate them on the importance of this subject. My friend in New York responded by saying “What about the charges against Assange in Sweden?” I told her that these were trumped up charges and part of the plot against him. People really don’t know the truth, and they seem to blindly believe what they hear and read in the news! I always question what I hear because it’s usually false. The media is just as corrupt here in the US as it is in the UK!
    Thanks again for defending freedom and the truth!

    Comment by Jeffrey Jordan on 23/07/2020 at 2:17 am

  2. Dear Vivienne,

    Really incredible article. I’ve seen a lot of your interviews and always just thought it was just a quirk, the way that you’d disregard a lot of questions- but changing the narrative makes a lot of sense. Unrelated but I recently read Nelson Mandela’s Long Walk to Freedom and Che Guevara’s biography by John Lee Anderson. Wondered what you thought of Guevara? I know you’ve used his image in some of your work, he used to be on your manifesto badge but it’s a funny one for me. Guevara is undoubtedly an image of revolution but when I compare the two- Guevara and Mandela, can’t help but feel that Guevara was a bit of a monster. Not sure if this is accurate it’s just what I felt reading his biography, but I mean with Mandela, reading LWTF you really get the sense of the injustice he had to suffer through & of how noble his cause was, he was fighting for what was right… But with Guevara I’m not too sure. He saw injustice in South America and he wanted to change that sure, but wasn’t it all more of an intellectual thing for him? It wasn’t his war, he went out looking for a fight and however high his ideals in the end he was responsible for the slaughter of thousands of innocent people and I’m not sure how I feel about that. Or how noble his cause even was? I’ve read the communist manifesto and I think that there are a lot of ideas to respect there, but with the Cuban revolution I mean, they won, they ousted Batista but they just replaced one horrific dictatorship with another and Castro became x1000 times the monster that Batista ever was. Just be interesting to hear your thoughts.
    Take care
    Tony

    Comment by Tony on 19/08/2020 at 1:37 am