On 1 October 2021, the University of Bristol bowed to almost three years of pro-Israel lobbying and decided to sack Professor David Miller. I have worked with David for many years. Co-published works He has studied propaganda theory and written about the ongoing British Foreign Office propaganda operation to overthrow the Syrian government. Propaganda Research InstituteDavid was, is, and will continue to be a major intellectual force in our understanding of propaganda, and his candor, especially on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, has been engraved in history. He has spoken for the Palestinian people, highlighting the ways in which propaganda has worked to suppress public understanding of the Israeli government's malign actions against them, while at the same time erasing awareness of their plight. Inevitably, and predictably, he became a key target of the pro-Israel lobby, and an astonishingly sustained and aggressive campaign was mounted designed to have him falsely smeared and dismissed as an “anti-Semite.”
I also have links to the University of Bristol, where I studied for an MA in International Relations (funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)) in 1996-1997 and continued on to a PhD (also funded by ESRC) under the supervision of Professor Eric Herring in 1997. I left the university at the end of the second year of my PhD to take up my first full-time academic position in the School of Politics and Communication at the University of Liverpool. I obtained my PhD from the University of Bristol in 2000.
Smear campaigns and ad hominem attacks are central features of modern propaganda and our “democratic” landscape. There are even academic handbooks on this tactic. Routledge's Handbook of Adversarial and Reputation ManagementMeanwhile, US investigative journalist Sharyl Atkinson Powerful Account It details how legitimate political views are suppressed through malicious attempts to discredit them. I have witnessed these tactics firsthand. Experience studying propaganda and the Syrian warBritish government-related “influence operations” in that war, particularly the “thoughtcrime” of questioning and investigating the controversy over the OPCW (Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) and the alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma in 2018, have subjected me and other colleagues (including David) to aggressive and sustained smear campaigns, some of which have been documented. hereEven when OPCW whistleblower scientist Even after evidence emerged that confirmed our claims, our attackers continued to accuse us of being “conspiracy theorists,” “war crimes deniers,” and agents of “disinformation.” This smear campaign was joined by whistleblowers at the OPCW, to ruin a reputation.
What we see today is not entirely new, and David's experience is not unique. In earlier times, scientists such as Professor Stephen Jones were vilified and pushed out of their posts when they expressed entirely objective opinions.Evidence-based and Reasonable Questions On 9/11. Chemist and Lab Director Kevin Ryan He was fired for blowing the whistle on his company for covering up evidence about the 9/11 building collapse. To this day, and as Dr. David Hughes says, Recently in detail In academic journals, mainstream academia continues to self-censor and avoid substantive analysis of 9/11.
Today, COVID-19 seems to have seen an unprecedented level of attack on academics who have raised entirely objective, evidence-based and reasonable doubts about the effectiveness of lockdowns and the move towards compulsory/mandatory injections. Professor Robert MaloneThe inventor of the mRNA technology used in current Covid-19 shots A concerted effort to discredit For example, Gupta has been accused of being a “conspiracy theorist.” Professor Sucharit Bhakdi said: Early criticism of the lockdown, Suspicion of anti-Semitism This seems like a crude and unfounded attempt to discredit his expertise. Attacks on expert autonomy are Professor Robert Malone declared: In October 2021, he wrote, “Doctors who speak out are being actively hounded through medical boards and the press. They are trying to outlaw and eliminate us one by one… This is happening all over the world.” Indeed, “something is rotten in the Danish state.”
in David's Case We have seen how powerful actors, in this case the pro-Israel lobby and the Israeli government, have organised and used their influence to put enough pressure on the University of Bristol to take the extreme step of firing him. The campaign is large-scale And they have used both the mainstream media and the influence of celebrities, as well as student organizations, to relentlessly misrepresent his work as anti-Semitic, when in fact David's views and work are based on a clear commitment to opposing racism and discrimination. It is worth noting An independent QC report commissioned by the University of Bristol clearly determined that Professor Miller's comments did not amount to unlawful speech and that his comments were not anti-Semitic. And that in all of this controversy, the gradual destruction of the Palestinian people and the illegal actions of the Israeli government are Continue unabatedOf course, it is this wider issue that David's attackers would most like you to forget. By joining the vicious campaign to smear and destroy David, the University of Bristol has become a key component of what are widely recognised as crimes and atrocities. In doing so, the University has clearly placed itself on the wrong side of history.
Smear campaigns and character attacks are not new, but they have now intensified to the point where academics like David have been fired and even prominent scientists in the medical community are being targeted. Freedom of speech and expression cannot flourish in such an environment. Nor can scholarship, especially when rational debate is replaced by propaganda and politicized science. Our ability to evaluate, debate and speak truth to power is being fundamentally undermined, and with it, any pretense that we live in a functioning democracy. That the University of Bristol has become an active participant in these vicious processes is a disgrace to all who work there. Indeed, my memories of my time there are forever tainted, and I no longer look back fondly on my graduate years at Bristol, nor speak positively about the University.
David's experience is part of a broader process in democracies where power seeks to wrest control of both the professional class and the masses. The next few years will tell us who wins. Trust in institutions – government, mainstream media, academia – is likely to decline sharply. And we now live in a time when there is an unprecedented opportunity to develop new institutions where freedom of expression and speaking truth to power are cherished, promoted and protected. We need a vibrant independent media scene and an increasingly Discredited mainstream media These are good examples of these dynamics, but as Glenn Greenwald explains: hereThe political establishment and the corporate media are united in their efforts to take back control, but I doubt they will succeed.
The pro-Israel lobby and the University of Bristol may think they have scored a major victory in their campaign to silence critical debate about Israel, but they will not have the say, and they certainly will not be able to silence Professor Miller or stop his important research. Despite his personal loss, and unlike the University of Bristol, Professor Miller will emerge more powerful and influential than ever before.
***Petition in support of Professor Miller You can sign here.***
