https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpXsY00_5do
‘Steerpike’ at the Spectator says Louise Mensch has a car crash interview with Andrew Neil. I would suggest it is Neil who has the car crash as he keeps getting his facts wrong and continually misunderstands what Mensch says about Putin and Breitbart…she says she believes Putin had Breitbart murdered but she does not have any evidence…she is not saying that she has evidence of that, she is not saying it is true, she is merely saying it is purely her own personal unconfirmed belief…which it is perfectly reasonable to have.
Neil attacks her for linking Trump to Russia…and yet the BBC has consistently done so, suggesting openly that Trump won because of Russian hacking…despite no concrete evidence on the table so far…and even if the Russians did hack the Demcrats emails…so what?….if they showed that the Democrats were ‘dirty’ is that not legitimate whatever the source? After all the BBC were more than happy to take evidence from the dodgy dossier about Trump whose source was claimed to be…Russian intelligence…so why is that acceptable evidence, meant to alter the course of the election, when the emails are not?….And why would Russia both try to get Trump elected and then try to stop him being elected? The BBC was also eager to use Snowden’s revelations to attack the US….and yet Snowden was in all likelihood a Russian spy…what better cover than to claim it was whistle-blowing, thus giving useful idiots like the BBC and the Guardian the excuse to give the stolen information massive publicity and coverage…hugely damaging to US and European interests. [The BBC is the enemy within all too often]
Note the BBC is reporting hard on the recent Wikileaks revelations about the CIA…but not about earlier revelations released a couple of weeks before, that the US hacked the German elections in 2012…
CIA espionage orders for the 2012 French presidential election
All major French political parties were targeted for infiltration by the CIA’s human (“HUMINT”) and electronic (“SIGINT”) spies in the seven months leading up to France’s 2012 presidential election. The revelations are contained within three CIA tasking orders published today by WikiLeaks as context for its forth coming CIA Vault 7 series. Named specifically as targets are the French Socialist Party (PS), the National Front (FN) and Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) together with current President Francois Hollande, then President Nicolas Sarkozy, current round one presidential front runner Marine Le Pen, and former presidential candidates Martine Aubry and Dominique Strauss-Khan.
How is it that the BBC is so keen to delegitimise Trump’s election but fails to tell us what the American intelligence agencies got up to in foreign, friendly, countries…and of course we know that they also hacked Merkel’s own phone in Germany [and many have the belief that Merkel is one of the Soviets greatest successes as an agent….she was brought up in East Germany [35 years] and was a committed Young Socialist party member, a mid-level propaganda commissar for the Free German Youth, that is, the young Communists, and all at a time when Putin was also in East Germany working for the KGB]….the BBC, eager to rewrite history to suit its anti-Trump, anti-Brexit agenda also forgets, as it tells us that we are now living in a new era of ‘post truth’ where Russia is trying to influence elections, that Russia, in the shape of the Soviet Union, always tried to influence elections and national politics….with many fellow travellers in those countries happy to help…many of them working for the BBC.
We came close to losing our democracy in 1979
Douglas Eden reveals the extraordinary penetration of the 1970s Labour movement by pro-Soviet trade unionists and the extent of Callaghan’s toleration of the hard Left.
How the Kremlin hijacked Labour: Diary of a Kremlin insider reveals the hold Soviets had over Labour politicians
Just how deep the tentacles of communism reached into the heart of British government has now been revealed with the emergence of an extraordinary diary by Anatoly Chernyaev, the Soviet Union’s contact man with the West at the icy height of the Cold War.
Meticulously detailed and written by hand on lined notepaper, the diary has come to light in the U.S. National Security Archive.
They were soon exercising considerable influence in universities, the state education system, publishing houses, the legal hierarchy and the civil service.
But it was in politics that these high-flying members of the Left established their greatest power-base, both in the Labour Party and the trades’ union movement.
As far as I can see, Obama is still resident in Washington, vainly trying to hold back the pile of shit. While Trump is patiently collecting evidence for a coming investigation. Obama has obviously used Russia mania as an excuse to look at Trump’s emails and phone calls and financial transactions, and use both the FBI and the CIA to spy on Trump.
Obama used Russiaphobia to get his Justice department to use the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to spy on Trump, while the CIA has and can use MI6 to spy on American citizens, while the FBI has paid a British spy working for the Clinton campaign, for information on Trump. He was the person responsible for that daft fake news story about Trump in Russia. In Britain there was a D notice on the name of the British spy who had been named a few weeks earlier in my emails. So the D notice seems to have been lifted six days ago and was revealed as MI6 operative Christopher Steele. Presumably the D Notice was lifted because MI6 could not keep a lid on the shit, so ordered him to leave MI6. That would be the reason that he is now described as a former MI6 agent.
Like MI5 spying on UKIP being stopped by leaks to Norman Tebbit. The liberal establishment, Obama, FBI, CIA and MI6 must have been overwhelmingly confident that Trump could not possibly win if they used Russiaphobia to look at his emails, telephone calls and financial transactions. But demoralisation within these institutions will cause the downfall of these Liberal fascists by leaks within these institutions to Assange rather than the Russians, because the Russians may or may not keep secrets. Coincidently, Farage has just gone to talk to Assange.
‘Belief’, along with allusion, is now the bedrock of BBC news.
But fear not; others are on the case, complementing ‘It’s worse than that’ Jim Harding’s so far rather selective unit:
https://www.journalism.co.uk/news/3-steps-news-organisations-can-take-to-fight-misinformation/s2/a700940/
Seems the core remains to tell it often enough how impartial you are. BBC has that covered.
As a radical suggestion I offer an alternative:
1) Stick to the facts
2) Report them rather than opine on them
3) Remember the truth is out there, online, and your audience knows it
Only those with unique funding can ignore this a survive, and then not for long.
Yes…It’s really all about the likes of the BBC trying to maintain their grip on power…knowledge, information,the ability to decide what people read and hear, is power.
Liked this bit…
“We especially need to listen to readers’ concerns very carefully – ensuring we’re listening to their complaints about any bias or inaccuracy,” LOL
The irony of this title using US papers such as the NYT as wise counsel on ethical journalism is rather funny, if tragic.
At least they are to an extent under notice by a need to serve and be trusted by readers prepared to either pay or at least provide ad eyeballs.
Not funded by trusts like the Graun or as uniquely as the BBC.
As some may have experience of, if the BBC listens to concerns enough to realise it cannot bluff out on a ‘got it about right’ basis, it is not unknown for them to ‘solve’ this by banning those putting them on the spot.
That’s why they are so trusted.
It was a car-crash interview. I can’t believe there was a time when I respected her.
There would have been no reason for Putin to have Breitbart murdered. Her assumption that it was done to enable Bannon to get into Trump’s team is so ridiculous considering his death happened a long time before Trump had any hope of getting to be POTUS. I do believe he probably was murdered (I have no evidence except that he was constantly nailing the left-wingers and “Democrats” and the co-incidence is huge). His murderers would have been supporting Obama and Clinton (if he was actually murdered of course).
Mensch was such a great Hilllary fan that she lets herself believe the completely unproven lies about links between Trump and Putin. She even quotes Trump calling for Putin to investigate Clinton’s emails – that was a clear joke and she must be irredeemably stupid if she can’t see that.
There’s as much evidence (arguably more) that Trump Towers were hacked by Obama than there is for the Putin-Trump link. Her bit at the end was completely bonkers.
Neil often gets by with his sneering comments, which did not help him on this occasion. Neither did his technique of repeating an assertion which the interviewee has clearly refuted. Note here his snide comments about Mensch being new to journalism – Ha ha. There are few in any at the BBC, including Neil. Also, I wonder who writes the material on the sheets of paper he reads from?
Neil would not accept a distinction between belief and evidence.
Note this well. Neil will always conduct a hostile interview with those who criticise the BBC’s official faith – Islam. It is full of beliefs – the earth is flat, Mo rode to heaven on a winged horse, Satan farts to drown out the prayers of the faithful and so on. Beliefs – no evidence Neil, but you and yous BBC colleagues will scream at the likes of Tommy Robinson who disparages these beliefs.
This thread is confusing Andrew Neil with the wider BBC. Neil is a beacon for sensible, hard-hitting interrogative journalism on a BBC which has otherwise totally forgotten the art in its obsession with left wing views as opposed to news.
I saw nothing wrong with Neil’s approach to Mensch. In fact I’d say Mensch came across as little short of a lunatic, who in pre-internet, pre-social media days would not have got air time and would have had to confine her ramblings to privately printed pamphlets that might have secured 100 readers if she were lucky.
She’s a member of the new media celebrity set who are given publicity for having ‘beliefs’ not backed up by facts. If you want to believe something that is not verified, start a religion not be a pretend news commentator.
On the question of do countries spy on each other, do they attempt to influence events in other countries and, now, do they now add to that by manipulating via the internet? Why yes of course. Russia, the USA, the UK etc etc all do it. Big deal! Spying is an old tradition, its just the techniques that change.
England,
Sadly I thought she was well on the way to becoming a female David Icke.
Well said EE. Mensch was out of her depth, and repeatedly quoted the Twitterati gospel, but could offer no evidence for what she was saying. I’m surprised she was given the time of day; and having never heard of Mensch as a bone fida ‘journalist’ before, I was hardly surprised that Neil called her a ‘new’ journalist. I didn’t consider his remark to be’snide’, – but as Neil said at the end, “we’ll let the viewers decide”. Too right !
The scary thing is that there are many more Mensch’s still walking the corridors of power, unworthy of their seat and only there because of their sex, ethnicity or the colour of rosette that they wear – see Labours front bench.
Louise who ?