When it is not distorted, information is hermetically sealed and deliberately kept inaccessible in order to mislead the public or simply keep it in the dark.
Veteran observers of the way Western democracies function are familiar with the routine. When it is not distorted, information is hermetically sealed and deliberately kept inaccessible in order to mislead the public or simply keep it in the dark. This process may take one of two forms. Facts vital to arriving at an informed opinion may literally be locked away in a safe for several decades or longer, with harsh punishments provided should it occur to anyone to violate the secrecy regime.
The second method only appears to be more liberal, but in practice it tends to the same effect. The media monopoly ignores evidence that contradicts the official narrative and denigrates anyone who questions it. Technically, in most democracies there is no “secrecy act” (which actually does exist in Great Britain and is used as a legal tool to punish violators) but to suggest publicly anything that diverges from the official version is viewed as a grave breach of political correctness, with attendant harsh consequences. The result in both scenarios is therefore nearly the same. Evidence to the contrary is suppressed and discordant voices are effectively silenced. The public are deprived of information lacking which reasonable assessments are impossible and rational political decisions cannot be made. In an environment shaped by a deliberately orchestrated disinformation endeavour, it is safe to let “democracy” flourish. Allowing a deceived and benighted populace to form an “opinion,” and even to vote, obviously presents little danger to the system which is manipulating and keeping it in the dark.
On rare occasions when in spite of the suppression regime accurate information about an event does eventually surface, that usually occurs with such delay that the newly disclosed facts no longer matter. They are nonchalantly dismissed as “water under the bridge,” which is not an entirely inaccurate description of what they are. Facts which had they been honestly disclosed at the appropriate time might have made a political difference no longer have any impact whatsoever.
Copious examples can be cited of this sleight of hand played by the cynical rulers on their unsophisticated and trusting subjects. The Kennedy assassination comes readily to mind. A huge amount of evidence that if properly examined might have answered key questions, challenged the immediately established narrative, or could have generated uncomfortable implications, was immediately secreted away and has been kept under lock and key for over 50 years. Long ago, the Presidential assassination was supplanted by numerous other concerns. The opening of the remaining files, if and when it should occur, will cause few waves, except in the ranks of a handful of academics.
Evidence pertaining to what happened in Srebrenica in July of 1995 similarly has been locked away for decades. The official pretext in this as in other cases – “national security” – is of course shamelessly bogus. With very few exceptions, in a democracy national security is best served by keeping the public thoroughly informed and by vigorously debating all important issues. Armed with facts, instead of disoriented by the elite’s self-serving fabrications, the people would be empowered to make intelligent political decisions, as we are told in theory that it is their sovereign right to do. Perish the thought that such a thing should ever come to pass.
Were their minds not poisoned by ignoble sentiments against their Russian neighbours, Poles should be up in arms right now at how their leaders and their foreign masters ruthlessly deceived and manipulated them following the 2010 plane crash near Smolensk that killed President Lech Kaczynski and 95 other prominent Polish government officials aboard as their aeroplane was attempting to land in dense fog. Polish public opinion was encouraged from the start to believe that the crash was not an accident but an act of sabotage for which the Russian side was to be blamed. The already existing rift between two neighbouring Slavic nations was aggravated by this perception.
It appears nevertheless that facts about the crash that occurred in 2010 may have been misrepresented or swept under the rug but are finally beginning to emerge. As reported by the Indian news platform Republicworld.com an expose by the Polish television broadcaster Fakty TVN24 on September 12, 2022, has called into question the conclusions of the Polish government commission which studied the crash and which dutifully confirmed the official narrative of a Russian assassination plot.
Republicworld.com reports that, contrary to the official Polish version, “a professional commission for investigating aviation accidents found the April 10, 2010 crash of the Tu-154 aircraft near the rudimentary airport was an accident caused by human errors in adverse weather and technical conditions.”
The Indian source alleges that “in its report aired late Monday, private broadcaster TVN24 said the Polish government team intentionally ignored or manipulated facts presented by outside experts that negated its findings that intentional explosions aboard the plane caused the crash.”
The principal motive behind evidence manipulation may well have been political because “the head of the [government investigative] team, former Defense Minister Antoni Macierewicz, is an associate of ruling party leader Jaroslaw Kaczynski. The assassination theory helps to consolidate the right-wing Law and Justice’s nationalist base and is supported by Kaczynski.”
The Polish government and political establishment have turned out to be quick learners and eager acolytes of their Western democratic paragons. After transitioning to the simulacrum of democracy, they did not miss a beat when an opportunity presented itself to mislead their own citizens by deliberately massaging facts about the tragic plane crash. The aim of these fledgling democrats apparently was to exacerbate enmity toward Russia and consolidate support for their nationalist agenda, by whipping up xenophobic fervour with deliberately falsified evidence.
With a twelve-year delay, the proverbial organic matter has finally hit the fan, as they say in America. It is doubtful that these disclosures will significantly alter the perceptions of the passionately anti-Russian Polish audience. But in view of the position that Poland has taken vis-à-vis the turbulence which currently surrounds it, these disclosures are illuminating and deliciously timely.