Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/829524
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 28 MAY 2017 30 Letters Some conspiracy theories are more equal than others S omething decidedly uncanny is taking place deep within the Maltese psyche at the moment. For a long time now, we have been active participants in the global phenomenon of 'conspiracy theory culture'. Just six months ago, for instance, the Al Afriqiya hijack at Luqa airport was passed off as a 'hoax'... engineered by the Maltese government to give itself something to coo about for a change. Interestingly, however, the people who were pushing that utterly idiotic idea around last Christmas, included many of the ones who today vociferously denounce the so-called 'Russian spy connection' in the Egrant case. Having themselves bought into such a laughably farcical conspiracy theory only six months ago, they now keel over backwards in uncontrollable laughter at what they have decided – for no apparent reason, and clearly without even looking at the facts of the case – is just another ludicrous flight of fancy. I guess some conspiracy theories are more equal than others. Or, to be more specific: a 'conspiracy theory' only qualifies as a 'conspiracy theory' if it can be used to discredit one's political opponents. At all other times, it is a classic case of Gospel Truth. Nor is this the only reversal. The same people who now pooh- pooh the Russian interference hypothesis, were themselves giving blanket credence to an almost identical claim that the Russians had intervened in the American election last November. Strange, that these people attributed Donald Trump's shock victory to 'Russian espionage' and 'fake news' at the time... but now dismiss the idea that Russian espionage and fake news might have an equal bearing on local politics. Someone else beat me to the question online: but is intellectual consistency really too much to expect these days? How is it even possible to simultaneously occupy two diametrically opposed world views at the same time... without even appearing to notice? In any case: we may be an endangered minority in this country, but some of us – and I am happy to include one or two other journalists in this category – have this stubborn tendency to approach all unproven allegations using the same yardstick. I will not dismiss or accept theories that the Russian whistle-blower may be a secret agent working to destabilise the Maltese government for some arcane reason. As with the Egrant allegation itself, I will reserve judgment until there is something to actually base a judgment upon. Until then, however, there is plenty to dig into in this particular case. For instance, the way it has been twisted and manipulated since first coming into the public domain. And again, the same people who have perverted this story to match their own political prejudices, include several of the ones who complain the loudest about 'dishonesty' on the part of the present government. Let's start with the obvious: who made the claim? If I were to go on my (overwhelmingly Nationalist) Facebook feed, the answer would be straightforward enough. 'It wos Joseph Muscat wot dunnit', they all argue... in a desperate attempt to divert attention from his present, unenviable situation by concocting some cock and bull story about treachery and treason. Erm... sorry, but that's not how it happened at all. The claim was actually made on an international website called 'Intelligence Online', which appears to be a genuine publication (if not exactly very influential). Muscat was asked to comment about that story at a press conference, and about the only thing his answer added to the picture was that he had been alerted by the local Secret Services to the possibility of Russian reprisals as long ago as last December. This can be borne out by evidence. There were indeed reports to that effect last December. Naturally, none of this does anything to support or undermine the theory itself: but it remains a fact that what most people think they know about it is actually just a hopeless mishmash of lies, half-truths and misconceptions. As for the conspiracy theory itself – well, again, it all points towards an inbuilt political contradiction. People have time and again proved ready and eager to lap up any fanciful notion in the absence of evidence. They are perfectly happy to accept that a Russian employee at a private bank would steal copies of documents incriminating Michelle Muscat over Egrant... even though these documents remain unseen to this day. So why the hell shouldn't they extend the same levels of gullibility to this particular unsubstantiated claim, too? The question becomes more pertinent when you consider the weakness of the arguments brought out to 'disprove' the Russian hypothesis. NET NEWS numbered 'six reasons' why the story is a lie. Tell you what, let's take a look at all six in order. 1) The whistle-blower arrived in December 2015 Erm... yeah, so what? If we assume (for the sake of argument) that she is a spy, the precise date of her arrival is hardly important. Spies are always not sent out to countries on specific missions, you know. They are normally long-term residents in the country of operation, and may be working on multiple missions at the same time. It is perfectly normal in the espionage world to have an agent permanently based in a country, awaiting instructions on whatever case may arise. Graham Greene wrote a novel about it called 'Our Man in Havana'... the 'man' in question wasn't sent Raphael Vassallo