Extract from a Paper by Viscount Monckton

Extract from a Paper by Viscount Monckton.
The Unexpected.

Strategic threats to the United Kingdom,
to her allies and to the West.

He who is prudent, and lies in wait for an enemy who is not, will be victorious.

Sun Tzu, The Art of War, c. 350 BC

Walled towns, stored arsenals and armouries, goodly races of horses, chariots of war, elephants, ordnance, artillery, and the like, all this is but a sheep in a lion’s skin, except the breed and disposition of the people be stout and warlike. Nay, number itself in armies importeth not much, where the people are of weak courage:
for, as Virgil saith, “It never troubleth the wolf how many the sheep be.”

Francis Bacon, Essay XXIX, Of the True Greatness of Kingdoms and Estates, AD 1625

Organized Political Suppression of Freedom of Thought and Speech

When the Allies halted their advance on Berlin in 1945 to allow Marshal Zhukov the honour of taking the capital of the collapsed Reich, one of the few office buildings of the regime that the advancing Soviet forces found to have survived the Allied bombing was Goebbels’ Reichspropagandaamt in Mauerstrasse (Wall Street). Files captured there, in what was at that time the largest office building in Europe, were transferred to the KGB, whose analysts were anxious to study, inter alia, how it was that a brutal, dictatorial regime in most material respects indistinguishable from their own had come to be successfully and swiftly established, with remarkably little political opposition.
It was discovered that Goebbels had issued a standing instruction to every member of the Nazionalsozialistische Deutschlands Arbeitspartei that every effort was to be made, on every available occasion, to attack not the arguments of the opponents of Nazism but the personal reputations of all who had proven to be successful in publicly opposing the advance of Nazism.
Thousands who would otherwise have stood up and spoken out against Nazism swiftly learned that, if they did so, their reputations would be trashed. They and their families would be endlessly and personally vilified in the most offensive terms. Life would become impossible and even their friends, themselves fearing the campaign of disinformation, would fall away, silent. [Does this not ring a bell?]
The files from Mauerstrasse showed how remarkably successful the Nazi disinformation campaign had been. Goebbels himself had held it to be the main reason why Nazism had taken over in Germany with such startling suddenness.
The KGB were impressed. Immediately after the War, they established their own Desinformatsiya directorate, whose sole task was to attack the men and not their policies. To run it, they chose Ion Mihai Pacepa, at that time head of the Securitate, the hated and feared secret police in Ceausescu’s Romania. Pacepa set to work at once to recruit willing, unpaid Communist sympathizers in the West as the agents of the new directorate. Their task would be to worm their way into any and all positions from which they could influence public opinion, and then to use their positions to attack the reputations of the opponents of Communism worldwide.
The first major target of the Desinformatsiya directorate was Pope Pius XII. Like the Nazis before them, the Communists recognized the Catholic Church worldwide as a stout bulwark against any form of totalitarian misrule. It was decided that the growing army of invisible Soviet sympathizers and fellow-travellers in the West would be instructed to allege, and to go on and on alleging, that Pius XII was a Nazi-loving Jew-hater.
At first, the results were disappointing. Even though several major news media had rapidly become infested with Pacepa’s willing Western agents, several of whom had run stories, made plays and films and written books making out that Pius XII was a monster, the campaign failed because there were too many who knew the truth. The Pope, as Secretary of State to his predecessor, had drafted for him in 1937 the encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge (“With heartfelt concern”), the first encyclical not to have been written in Latin since the Middle Ages, in which Nazism was roundly condemned at a time when the British newspapers were carrying front-page leads under the by-line of Goebbels himself demanding appeasement as the way forward.
The Catholic Church in Germany was viciously persecuted by the Nazis, and was subjected to a constant stream of crude and childish invective in its house journals such as der Sturmer. So systematic was the persecution that the Ministry of Information in Britain, under Walter Monckton, published a book in 1941 documenting the persecution of the Catholic Church in the Third Reich.
The Vatican, throughout the period of German occupation of Rome, had in fact been the centre of the underground pipeline by which Jews were spirited out of the clutches of Nazism and were spared the death-camps to the north-east. So grateful were the Jews for the Pope’s intervention that, as soon as it was safe to do so after the War, the Chief Rabbi of Rome and his deputy were both received into the Catholic faith. On the Wall of Honour at the Yad Vashem Memorial to the Holocaust in Jerusalem, one of the largest plaques of remembrance was erected in honour of Pope Pius XII.
Notwithstanding these mere facts, within a few years Pacepa’s campaign [against the Catholics] began to succeed. A new generation, knowing little or nothing of the true history, was easily suborned and confused. By the 1960s the entirely false opinion that the Pope had been a collaborator with Nazism had gained near-universal acceptance. Anthony Rhodes, an Anglican scholar, was so angry at what the Pope was said to have done that he decided to write a book exposing in detail the Pope’s collaboration with the Nazis.
However, the more Mr Rhodes examined the evidence, the more he came to realize that the stories appearing throughout the news media and in many other outlets were entirely without foundation. He never discovered how it was that the Pope’s reputation – and through it that of the Catholic Church as a whole – had come to be so grievously damaged. But he wrote his book, The Vatican in the Age of the Dictators. No longer, however, did he believe for a single instant that the Pope had been any kind of collaborator with Nazism. The book remains, to this day, one of the chief sources of factual information to scotch that rumour.
The reason why this history is relevant to the defence of the United Kingdom [and Western Allies] is that, long after the Berlin Wall had been torn down and the Desinformatsiya directorate dismantled, Pacepa’s Communist agents in the West were continuing to recruit their successors and to campaign against the opponents of totalitarianism worldwide.
How was this possible? Because the Desinformatsiya directorate had succeeded beyond even the ambitions of its founders. Pacepa eventually defected to the West, one of the most senior KGB officials to do so. He revealed, in his characteristically unpretentious, down-to-earth style, that in the 40 years of the directorate’s existence he had recruited no less than 1 million willing Western Communist sympathizers to oppose capitalism by the single, simple method invented by Goebbels: relentlessly assaulting the reputations of all those who were seen to be effective against Communism.
As the number of willing Westerners in the Desinformatsiya directorate’s ambit grew, it became quite impossible to control them all directly. Accordingly, all new recruits were trained to identify, recruit and train their own successors without referring back to the Directorate at all. Pacepa’s propaganda monster became self-sustaining; it continued to function even when the KGB was no more; and, to a large extent it continues to function to this day. It is probably the chief reason why the news media in the West – such as the BBC in Britain, the ABC in Australia or CNN in the United States – to say nothing of most other electronic media and a good proportion of the print media – have lurched so far to the Left in recent generations.
The intelligence-gatherers in the Western nations’ security forces are at present not tasked to identify, investigate or prevent subversive threats as penetrative and all-pervading as this. Freedom of academic thought, and of the Press, is now honoured more in the breach than in the observance.
Imagine:
1. Trying to suggest in almost any university that the benefits of returning to the atmosphere some of the CO2 that once resided there outweigh the costs of the mildly warmer weather that results.
2. Trying to write in The Guardian that many children who are aborted can feel the agony of their dismemberment, which, therefore, constitutes torture at international law, so that each child who is to be killed should be given its own anaesthetic first.
3. Trying to suggest in almost any news medium that the rate of immigration should be more efficiently controlled so as to permit our institutions, such as the National Health Service, to continue to provide treatment for all British subjects.
4. Trying to say in almost any university or news medium that defence spending should be doubled or we run the risk of inviting the many enemies of Western civilization to exploit the growing weakness we have deliberately inflicted upon ourselves.
The ruthlessly enforced ideological monoculture that allows only one narrow-minded viewpoint to prevail on a rapidly growing range of controversial subjects such as the four described above is a growing threat from within that our defence forces and security services are not invited to act upon, for they are tasked to look outward only, like the guns of Singapore before its fall to Japanese forces attacking from the mainland.