My game of cat and mouse with the political censor at the Guardian continues with my one remaining account.
There was a long piece in the Guardian yesterday by a Ukrainian, about the possible ceasefire in Ukraine, at arms industry funded think-tank Chatham house.
The piece looks like it is trying to be serious and balanced but, predictably enough, the main idea is more weapons. They are nothing if not focused, these Ukrainians.
I made a few comments on the article in the comments section. Some made it past the censor and some didn’t. For example; you are not allowed to say this on the Guardian:
If “nobody wants peace more than Ukraine” then why didn’t they implement Minsk, which, after all is nothing other than regional autonomy for a region with a distinct regional profile (like Wales), and agree not to be in NATO – even in 2015 only something like 34% of the population wanted to join NATO. (IRI poll).
But you are allowed to say:
The usual mix of distortions and misty eyed references to Churchill. As per the MOD Russia is recriiting 30,000 volunteers a month. Ukraine is dragging people off the street. Even msm, perhaps even this newspaper), carries reports of Ukranian commanders at the front complaining about the drunks and other incapable recruits they get sent. The author is latched into the endless weapons delusion. But without the men to fire them that won’t help. And anyway no one is going to give Ukraine any, or many, strategic weapons, (e.g Taurus), because they don’t want to escalate with Russia. No one who supports this endless drip-feed of weapons can explain how this will do anything other than prolong the war.
It is difficult to know why the one was allowed and not the other for sure, but I have noticed a bit of a pattern. It seems to be short, pithy, comments which, (I would like to think), undercut the narrative, which are blocked, especially if, as here, they reference facts. More discursive comments which are more amenable to disputation seem to make it past the censor. But this is just an impression.
On the same article I also added a comment reminding readers that Merkel had claimed she had signed Minsk in bad faith to “buy time” for Ukraine. This comment got 9 up votes, quite a lot for an anti-war comment on the Guardian, where the prevailing mood seems to very pro war and anti Russia. I couldn’t help wondering if the tide is turning. Despite the efforts of the censor.
,