Monthly Archives: June 2017

Amazing, I wonder what the difference is.

A Tory council is absolutely smashed for its apparently terrible and slow response to the Grenfell Tower fire, criticised for a chaotic reaction with no one being accommodated, people not able to find relatives, no instant database of everyone in the tower and where they were, no coordination of relief services and people apparently just couldn’t find those relief centres even when the council did eventually manage to open them.

Trouble is most of that it is nonsense…a huge ‘towering inferno; in the middle of the night in which hundreds of familes had to be evacuated…any wonder there was a level of ‘chaos’ to start with? Families bomb-burst away from the scene to sleep in cars and parks or wherever and some seem to have made no attempt to contact the council but moaned to the media about lack of contact and services…that’s despite the council setting up several relief centres that, as they were flooded with people and donations, seem to have been easy to find for most people….the council was on the usual internet locations, as well as on the ground, pumping out information.  Those volunter services were in fact organised by the council and they had to register with the council…so ‘disorganised’?  The council housed nearly everyone in a very short space of time in temporary accommodation…and yet was still being heavily criticised for not doing so.  The council was forced to close its main centre by the violent protests of Corbyn’s street thugs, the BBC reported this as a council that just didn’t care about people and which had just shut up shop and vanished…not mentioning that the centre had been forced to close [ and not mentioning the very obvious windows boarded up havng been smashed by the Corbynistas]…and never mind the work had had to be transferred to other centres.  The BBC had only one narrative..a council that didn’t care about the poor and were hopelessly disronganised and chaotic in their response.

We heard that Grenfell was a ‘story about poverty’..meaning the rich just didn’t care if the poor burned to death in their homes….despite the fact that many of the flats were privately owned and were renting out for over £2,0000 a month…or that so many other properties are clad in the same material….such as Premier Inns…..just how many private blocks of flats have the same cladding?  Loads I suspect.  You won’t hear the BBC working the rich and poor narrative then…it’ll be conveniently forgotten.

Compare all that to how Labour run Camden is treated as they make the astonishing decision to evacuate a block of flats in the dead of the night…amidst the same chaos and lack of information that RBKC were accused of having been guilty of.  Plucky Camden gets praise and cheerleading, no doubt we will be getting the line that ‘it’s all the fault of Tory cuts’ very shortly.  Listen to Sarah Montague ‘interview’ the leader of Camden council [08:36]….on Thursday Camden told its residents that their flats were safe, on Friday night they were being evacuated as the flats were deemed an immediate and extreme risk…fair enough Montague asked why such a rapid about turn happened…however no-where does Montague ask the most relevant and biggest question…how is it that these flats were not checked before, after all they get an annual fire safety check and building inspectors must have approved the cladding…how did they miss the fact that this building is apparently such a death trap that the residents have to immediately, in the middle of the night, be evacuated to safety?  If this had been a Tory council they would have been slaughtered, as we’ve seen, but a Labour one doesn’t even get asked the difficult question by the BBC’s premier news programme…surely they might have thought such a question was relevant…how is it that your building was a deathtrap that could potentially go up like a roman candle at any time killing hundreds and you didn’t know?  Do you not care about the poor and marginalised in society like your nasty Tory neighbors?

No such difficult, searching questions…in fact this morning on Broadcasting House the BBC was praising Camden for their rapid response, organised ‘chaos’ in difficult circumstances and the very fast and high quality work that they had done to remedy the situation.

Guess the BBC are still hopeful of a early second election.

Sarah Montague was gushing all over Billy Bragg as they talked excitedly about Corbyn appearing at Glastonbury in yet another of his down-with-the-kids PR stunts.  Tory MPs were apparently choking on their full english as they listened in disgust to the BBC pro-Corbyn hype which they declared would, with one more little push, see Corbyn in No10 .  Can’t say they are wrong as Corbyn gets a free ride on the BBC Corbyn-for-Prez bandwagon.

Montague was all fur coat and no knickers as she proved her willingness to let Corbyn go all the way declaring unashamedly that he was ‘recognised as a man who doesn’t change his mind’!!!!

And yet that’s the biggest lie of all.  Corbyn campaigned in the election on a raft of lies, his whole life, principles and ideology ruthlessly dumped in some dark room until he gets the reins of power…the BBC not bothering to turn some light upon these past glories.

Corbyn dumped his love of terrorists, his opposition to shoot-to-kill and his Euroscepticism, the man who declared he was the ‘ethical politician’ bringing a new, kinder, more gentle, more honest politics to Westminster lied through his teeth continuously throughout the campaign…even is famous beige clothing was dumped for a new, ‘respectable’ dark suit and a red tie.  He’s living a lie and the BBC don’t want to know.

May on the other hand was mocked remorselessly by the BBC for her ‘strong and stable’ sales pitch…..now however she is mocked for apparently not being ‘strong and stable’….thus proving she was in fact right to press those characteristics as necessary for government.  Note also that before the election the BBC were telling us that the EU were not concerned about the election and that the outcome would make absolutely no difference…now apparently it is crucial to our negotiations and a ‘humbled’ May cannot possibly hold her own in those negotiations…also the BBC told us during the election that whilst May wanted it to be about Brexit other issues had taken over…such as terrorism and the economy as Corbyn mostly ignored Brexit and campaigned on ‘austerity’ and the NHS…and then police and security [lol]….but now  the BBC is telling us it was all about Brexit and the election changed everything and we must now surrender to the Remainders and go for a soft Brexit..ie stay in the EU.

The BBC just makes it up to suit as they go along hoping nobody will notice the complete change of narrative….as did Corbyn….and he got away with it.

As for austerity, Labour gets away with murder as it claims that austerity has destroyed the economy…and yet we know that there has hardly been any austerity…proven by the fact that Osborne’s plans have continuously been put back and the goal posts moved for the deficit target.  Labour then criticises the government for not getting borrowing down quick enough…so Labour criticises for cutting spending too much and then criticises for overspending…and the BBC presenters make no comment.  And Labour’s big plan?  Massive borrowing and the highest taxes of any peacetime era ever.

Then we had the various police officers all suddenly appearing on the BBC complaining that the recent spike in terror attacks meant resources were being diverted from other areas of policing…and the BBC is shocked.  Not so shocked when hundreds of police were diverted into checking up on child sex abuse claims against Tory politicians or when they were sent off to stitch up Sun journalists in the wake of the Leveson show trial.

The BBC is very selective in what it decides to see and not see.

Here you go, detail this wretched bias here!

1984 documentary that predicted #GrenfellTower disasterpic.twitter.com/0fTpiMcoot

— The Agitator (@UKDemockery) June 20, 2017

Who knew?  Who’d-a-thunk eh?

Grenfell Tower.

You might have thought it was a no-brainer, a 23 storey tower block to be clad in insulation and rain-proof cladding…it’d have to be fire proof, surely?  You wouldn’t wrap a building in flammable material would you when non-combustible materials were available, materials that not only didn’t burn but didn’t give off cyanide gas when burnt?  And yet that is precisely what did happen.

What went wrong?  ‘Experts’, political hubris, time and money, good intentions and lack of supervision.

The BBC et al scoffed loudly at Gove when he suggested perhaps ‘experts’ weren’t all they were cracked up to be and perhaps we shouldn’t listen to them quite so much, maybe with a touch of scepticism.  Indeed the Brexit vote was a vote by the People flying  in the face of ‘expert’ advice telling them how great the EU was.  The problem was that the peoples’ own experience on the ground, living with the consequences of EU membership, was entirely different to what they were being told they should appreciate….they were told what they saw as EU failure was their own fault, they didn’t understand, they were ignorant or they were prejudiced and bigoted.

Trouble is they were not stupid or bigoted, they knew full well what was going on and that they were being lied to.  The same goes for tower blocks like Grenfell Tower…the residents, not experts in architecture, building design or in building materials, could tell from living the reality that the place was a death trap.  But the experts knew better.

The trouble is the politicians, local and national, all have to rely on the experts…for the design, for construction and for overseeing any project.  And of course they will rely on them and their advice.  What else can they do?  Then there is the politics.  Housing in desperately short supply and politicians make promises to build, build, build and then they get elected and have to make good on those promises…luckily new building techniques and materials are available that will speed up and lower the cost of mass producing news homes.  It then falls to the local councils to carry out those promises, find the money and to supervise the jobs.  It just doesn’t happen as good intentions fall by the wayside and the pressure is on to get the new homes built to a budget…and the new techniques aren’t properly researched and developed so that ultimately the buildings fail in some shape or form.  The buildings are either demolished or attempts made to repair them…repairs which suffer the same problems of insufficient development and supervision.  These also fail as at Grenfell.

None of this is new.  New techniques and building materials have been around for over a century as prefabs using concrete became the common solution to rapidly building mass housing.  The politicians naturally having to rely on experts to assure them this was the best solution, and safe.

Here are some phrases that sum up the time from a 1984 investigation….  ‘Get it built’, ‘the mood of the times’, ‘time and money’, ‘euphoric times’, ‘people swept along’.

The politicians et al were swept along on a tide of hubris…an Obama-like ‘Yes we can’ mood that meant the details and the criticisms were swept aside and ignored in the ‘euphoria’ of getting the job done.

Watch the film, below.  It’s frightening how good intentions result in costly and dangerous end results, the politicians not deliberately setting out to build shoddy and lethal housing but a perfect storm of time and budget pressures, contractors failing to provide quality materials and good work standards and a failure of supervision by the councils all combined to produce homes that were deadly.

The while film illustrates the process by which failure was built into the system but the last 5 minutes brings it all into clear focus and relevance to today as it gets to the cladding repair systems and then the failure of politicians to listen to the people, preferring as they did, to listen to the experts.

This was in 1984….33 years ago…lessons learnt?  None.

What caused the Finsbury Park attack?  Was it somehow the Mail and The Sun?

No.

This is what caused Finsbury Park…..No Muslim terrorism…no ‘blowback’…..and who helped ‘radicalise’ Muslims and thus in turn ‘radicalised’ the Finsbury Park terrorist?  The BBC and Guardian.

Blood on their hands.

This is not ‘rhetoric’, this is not an inappropriate tone, this is not Islamophobia…this is death, this is terrorism, this is the bloody reality not some cheap point scoring game by some smart-arse prat at the Guardian……why is he angry at the Mail and The Sun and not this….?  The Guardian and BBC make excuses for the killers but condemn these newspapers?  There is something very, very wrong with the people at those two organisations.

*** EDITORS NOTE – GRAPHIC CONTENT*** Please hide the victims faces prior to the publication. NICE, FRANCE – JULY 15: Victims are seen on the Promenade des Anglais seafront in the French Riviera on July 15, 2016 in Nice, France. At least 84 people were killed when a truck drove into a crowd watching a fireworks display in the French resort of Nice, a lawmaker said on July 15. PHOTOGRAPH BY Abaca / Barcroft Images London-T:+44 207 033 1031 E:hello@barcroftmedia.com – New York-T:+1 212 796 2458 E:hello@barcroftusa.com – New Delhi-T:+91 11 4053 2429 E:hello@barcroftindia.com www.barcroftimages.com

The Guardian produced a cartoon image of the van used by the Finsbury Park attacker blaming the Sun and  the Mail for ‘radicalising’ the driver…

Just the usual anti-Mail and Sun slurs that we come to expect….not just from the Guardian but the BBC also which never lets a day go by without some snide passing comment about the Mail and of course blaming the tone of the Right-Wing Press for stirring up hate and division.

The BBC and the Guardian have over the years mounted a sustained and violent media campaign against British troops, the security services, anti-terror legislation, the police, the government and of course against all those who would speak up against the Jihadi Islamist threat…including many Muslims.  They have done more to help radicalise Muslims and justify terrorism in the name of Islam, done to ‘protect’ Muslims and an Islam under attack from the West, than any other MSM or unofficial media sources…..the stamp of approval from two such ‘respected’ and credible news organisations must have been invauable to the Jihadi cause as the Muslim community saw their prejudices and conspiracy theories confirmed by these two news sources.  Trouble is the BBC narrative is entirely false, its history a lie, a very dangerous lie.  Even now it is still pumping out the Jihadi narrative of the West using, exploiting and destroying the Muslim world…The BBC’s latest history of the Middle East was a complete travesty, lie upon lie upon lie. And these lies have consequences….in places like Manchester, London Bridge, Westminster, 7/7, 9/11…not to mention in the Muslim world itself…where as is often said Muslims are the main victims.  But the consequences are far broader and more abstract than terrorist bombs and murders as the Media, politicians, authorities, education centres, legal system, workplaces and society as a whole appeases the Muslim community and adopts its Islamic practices in order to make Muslims feel part of society…Islamic State and its terrorists blow up their bombs in order to force Islam upon us…our answer…more Islam….we do exactly what the terrorists want…when we don’t, we get threats from ‘community leaders’ that Muslims will be angered, some will be radicalised and there may be bombs…instead of arresting these community leaders we give them money, positions in our political parties and favoured status…any wonder why many have no interest in stopping the terrorism whilst at the same time ‘condemning’ it?

Remember this letter ‘blackmailing’ the government to change foreign policy…Sadiq Khan was one of those who signed it…you know, Khan who thought those who helped the government in its anti-terror programme were ‘Uncle Toms’…the man  who is now Mayor of London…..

British Muslim groups have written to the prime minister calling for “urgent” changes to UK foreign policy.

In an open letter they say British policy is putting civilians at increased risk in the UK and abroad.

‘It is our view that current British government policy risks putting civilians at increased risk both in the UK and abroad.

To combat terror the government has focused extensively on domestic legislation. While some of this will have an impact, the government must not ignore the role of its foreign policy.
We urge the Prime Minister to redouble his efforts to tackle terror and extremism and change our foreign policy to show the world that we value the lives of civilians wherever they live and whatever their religion.  

Such a move would make us all safer.’

The Mail hit back with a full page editorial today slamming the Guardian as the real Fascists and manufacturers of hate and fake news…all accusations that could so readily be made about the BBC…

‘Fake news’, ‘fascist left’, ‘purveyors of hate’ – Daily Mail declares all-out war on The Guardian

The Daily Mail has launched its most savage ever editorial attack on long-time critic The Guardian accusing it of “fake news” and being a “purveyor of hatred”.

The excoriating attack appears to be a declaration of all-out war against its left-wing rival. It follows various pieces of Guardian coverage including one which compared the Daily Mail to an “open sewer” and a letter which said it was an “organ of hate speech”.

Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre appears to have been spurred into action by a Guardian cartoon which depicted the van which attacked mosque worshippers at Finsbury Park with the words: “Read Sun and the Daily Mail” on the side of it

In a comment piece headed: “Fake news, the fascist Left and the REAL purveyors of hatred” it said today: “..this week the Guardian published a cartoon so sick and disgusting – so deranged and offensive to the four million decent, humane and responsible people who read us – that we owe it to every one of them to lay to rest this malicious smear.”

It added: “The Guardian was telling its followers that the Daily Mail and its readers are vicious bigots with the blood of innocent, peace-loving Muslims on their hands.

“If this had been an isolated example of the Left’s bilious malice, we might have let it pass with nothing more than a shudder of revulsion…

“But this is far from a one-off insult to our readers, who – as should go without saying – were as horrified and appalled as the rest of the country by the Finsbury Park attack.”

It noted that earlier this month Guardian online columnist Sophie Heawood tweeted: “Genuinely excited for a future in which the Daily Mail readers are all dead.”

It also singled out Guardian writer Owen Jones who described the Daily Mail as an “open sewer” in March and complained about a Guardian readers’ letter which yesterday described the Mail as “the main organ of hate speech in Britain”.

It said: “For the Guardian’s editor to publish such deluded, defamatory nonsense – which in itself is a naked incitement to violence – speaks volumes about the hatred that drives this ‘voice of liberalism’.”

The Mail said it wouldn’t matter if The Guardian’s “infantile lies” were confined to the pages of a “little-read dying paper”.

“But in this age of social media, they are spread and amplified through the great distorting echo-chamber of the internet, where the mob really does rule…”

It said: “For the record – not that this matters to the fake news the Guardian creates about the Mail – this paper has always been against UKIP, so much so that Nigel Farage blamed as for his lack of electoral success.”

It also noted that Mail was against the wars in Iraq and Libya, was the first paper to condemn Guantanamo Bay and has consistently opposed UK involvement in torture.

It also noted that its campaign to bring the Stephen Lawrence murderers to justice “did more to improve race relations in this country than anything the Guardian has ever achieved”.

The leader accuses The Guardian of “criminally stupid business decisions” which have lost it hundreds of millions and says “in the name of sanctimony, what, when you handle your own affairs so badly, gives you the right to sit in judgment on other papers?”

And it says: “Your jaded product is addicted to subsidy and steeped in public sector mentality.”

It concludes: “The truth is that the Guardian and the fascist Left are the real purveyors of hate in this country.”

It also notes that Mail Online is a “totally separate entity” from the daily paper with “very different world view”.

Hitting back at a Guardian story that claimed controversial columnist Katie Hopkins wrote for the daily paper, the Daily Mail said: “That was a lie.

“The Guardian and its writer know that Ms Hopkins has nothing to do with the Daily Mail, but works for Mail Online – a totally separate entity that has its own publisher, its own readership, different content and a very different world view.

“The Guardian knows this because the Mail has told it countless times, but, hey, why let a little lie get in the way of a good smear?”

A Guardian spokesperson said: “Guardian journalism is based on principles of quality, trust, integrity and facts.”

In the last post we had a reminder of the BBC’s extremely partisan reporting on Blacks killed by US police officers…the BBC wrongly claiming that Blacks are more likely than whites to be shot…not true…whites are in fact more likely to be shot…and note that a good proportion of the cops when they do shoot Blacks are in fact Black or other non-white ethnicity.

When a black person is shot by the US police it is big news for the BBC, they devote a lot of time and resources to reporting the shooting and in following up the story later on as well as tying it in to other shootings so as to make that narrative that they seem so eager to create of racist white cops…..despite knowing many of the cops are not white.

How different when it is a cop who gets shot or stabbed…of course the BBC’s ‘racist cop’ narrative has no doubt contributed to the heightened racial tension and subsequent shootings of police officers in the US by Blacks out for ‘revenge’.

A recent stabbing of a police officer in the US by someone shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’ is not clearly one of those ‘revenge’ attacks but it is interesting to see the way the BBC report, or hardly report it at all in comparison to their reporting when a Black gets shot  by a cop.  A police officer is attacked by someone who is likely an Islamic terrorist and the BBC doesn’t manage to get it onto the frontpage, or even on the world page….it is however top story on the US page….but how does a ‘top story’ from the US page about such a sensitive issue in light of present day circumstances and threats not merit a mention on the frontpage?  A bit of news management in light of those circumstances…once again the BBC playing down the violence coming from Muslims…and of course cops are legitimate targets…especially the white racist type…and if they’re white they must be racist..it’s a known BBC fact.

The BBC continues to try and suggest the shooting of Philando Castile by a US police officer was a cop shooting a man because he was black…never mind that the cop must have plenty of ‘black’ or other non-white heritage himself [photo above]…as with so many other shootings the police officer is not white and the BBC had to rapidly change its own racist narrative about ‘racist’ white police officers shooting blacks…Clive Myrie suggesting white cop racism is just the American way…

Well, slavery may have long gone, but apprehending someone because they could be up to no good, simply because they’re black is still police policy in much of the land.

The cop who shot Castile, Jeronimo Yanez, was found not guilty of manslaughter and the dashcam video of the shooting has been released [above].

The BBC tells us that..

The footage appeared to corroborate Ms Reynolds’ account of the incident. which she filmed immediately following the shooting.

The footage does not corroborate her account because we don’t see what is going on in the car…but obviously Castile is reaching for something and continues to do so when told not to…then he is shot.  When you’ve just told a cop you’re armed and he says don’t reach for anything, then don’t reach….even across the Pond we know not to wind up US cops and not to give them any suggestion that they are in any danger from us.

The BBC says..

The officer called for emergency responders and later is heard saying: “I don’t know where the gun was.”

The intention of including that is to cast doubt on his account, never mind he has just been found not guilty…he actually said the ‘Zip’ [Zipped pouch] the man was reaching for was a lot wider than a wallet, thus indicating he believed the gun may be in the ‘Zip’…presumably something along these lines…

Look at the BBC’s romanticised version of events at the time of the shooting which is wrong and clearly very pro-Castile…the timing is wrong, the shots were fired earlier than in the transcript and most of what Castile says is inaudible…I cannot hear him say he was reaching for anything…or that he said ‘I’m not pulling it out…’

The transcript

Philando Castile: Sir, I have to tell you that I do have a firearm on me.

Officer Jeronimo Yanez: (interrupting) Okay. Okay, don’t reach for it then.

Castile: I’m … I’m … [inaudible] reaching …

Yanez: (interrupting) Don’t pull it out. [Shots actually fired here]

Castile: I’m not pulling it out.

Reynolds: He’s not pulling it out.

Yanez: Don’t pull it out! (Yanez opens fire)

Castile: I wasn’t reaching for it. [The guy’s just been shot 4 times and he’s still chatting away?]

The BBC’s massive covergage of the shootings of Blacks, and nearly always only Blacks, not bothering with Whites being shot, will almost certainly have contributed to the atmosphere in the US that was whipped up into an orgy of violence and cop killing by blacks….justified by the coverage and fake news by the likes of the BBC….and they’re still at it..slyly insinuating the cop is guilty whatever the court says.

The BBC is desperate….frontpage news….

Queen’s Speech: Is the Queen wearing an EU hat?

The Queen has opened parliament to lay out the government’s plans for the next two years.

At the top of the agenda was Brexit, and as the monarch proposed new laws to prepare the UK for its departure from the European Union (EU), some social users couldn’t help noticing the Queen’s choice of headwear.

Here we go, on this #DayofRage time to rage at the BBC! The floor is yours…