Monthly Archives: July 2017

Corbyn and Co are out for the oppressed workers who have zero hours contracts…will  that include actors?  Should the BBC et al pay them all retainers and pensions and holiday pay or will actors continue to ‘rest’ between jobs?…perhaps they could work for Uber as they ‘rest’.

 

“We have to remember that our defense is not just a commitment of money, it is a commitment of will.”

 

Quite extraordinary how the BBC treats Trump and anything he says or does.  No  matter what he says, however sensible, measured or insightful his statements, Trump never gets the benefit of the doubt, he is immediately mocked, demonised or dismissed as ‘deranged’ as Justin Webb has, once again, been calling him.

We’ve seen the sensationalist headline the BBC produced for what seems an almost completely fabricated story about one of Trump’s sons and of course followed the BBC’s less than convincing reporting of Trump’s alleged Russian connections but the BBC loses no chance to slip the knife in…never mind that once again the BBC interpretation is at odds with the facts.

When Trump met Putin at G20 the Today show told us that Putin dominated Trump and that the handshake was a win for Putin…but that is complete tosh.  Putin supposedly held back from shaking hands and looked on disdainfully as Trump offered his…just not true…Putin looked down because he had to see where Trump’s hand was…and the handshake was immediate…no hesitation…the Guardian time-line photos of the shake were very, deliberately, misleading…

Not as of Putin was keen to shake Obama’s hand…did the BBC sneer at Obama or were they outraged on his behalf?

Even the BBC itself said Trump won the encounter…in fact he one both handshakes with Putin…so the Today show is peddling the usual crap…so much for the BBC’s flagship news programme providing us with the ‘gold standard’ in journalism….

Interesting how the BBC reports so seriously on the importance of a handshake when they excoriated the Mail for its jokey report on ‘Legs-it’.  BBC sexism…taking men more seriously than women?

Then we had Trump’s speech in Poland in which he said we must defend Western borders and Western values and asks if we have the will to do so…not something the BBC will get too excited about…and true to form their first response was, on the Today show, to scorn and mock Trump bringing on two people who were clearly not Trump fans and who had absolutely no idea what he was talking about…..one even denying there was such a thing as ‘The West’ and ‘Western values’…any wonder Trump asks if we have the ‘will’ to defend ourselves…clearly not in many quarters….. Melanie Phillips goes into the interview in depth...

In his magnificent speech in Poland, President Trump asked whether the west “still has the will to survive”.

If he’d listened to BBC Radio’s Today programme this morning (approx 0840), he might have lost his own.

The issue that seemed to have startled the BBC was the suggestion that there were now threats to western bonds of culture, faith and tradition. (The fact that some of us have been writing about this for years has of course totally passed the BBC by). Two guests were invited to discuss this question: Margaret MacMillan, professor of international history at Oxford university where she is also Warden of St Anthony’s college, and Lord Dannatt, former Chief of the General Staff.

The interviewer’s loaded question about Trump’s speech, “Is he in any sense right?” invited them to agree that no, there could be no sense in which he was. Both duly agreed. Three against Trump, then. But if anything illustrated precisely what he was talking about, this conversation could scarcely have been bettered.

Opined Professor MacMillan: “There are bonds that hold us together and there are often bonds of history, but the idea there is something called ‘the west’ seems to me very dubious indeed. There are many wests, there are many different ways of looking at who we are, and I’m worried by the whole tenor of his speech. The talk of the ‘will’, the family, traditional values, what does that all mean?….. if you talk about defending the power of the west and the dominance of the west that’s very different and I’m not sure that does make the world more stable… What worries me is that part of the enemy is seen as those who live among us… Islam, or Islamic fundamentalism, is [as presented by Trump] in some way a threat, and that means not just from outside but inside and that to me is really troubling.”

Lord Dannatt was equally perplexed. “What threat does he have in mind? From Russia? Islamic State? From climate change? Well he ruled that one out by pulling out of the Paris agreement. Or is it the nuclear threat from North Korea?” [if Dannatt had read the speech he’d have known exactly what Trump was warning against]

The millions who voted for Trump did so because of the promise he made them that he would defend America and the western values of life and liberty that it embodies. They understand very well that America and the west are not just being threatened from outside but are being undermined from within by the kind of people who are engaged in a fight to the death to destroy him – and by the kind of people who took part in that discussion on Today.

The BBC is up to its old tricks of splashing a big accusatory headline that states ‘as fact’ that something has happened when there is absolutely no proof that it did…but the target of the piece is ‘deplorable’ so facts just get in the way of justice don’t they?….

Email ‘linked Kremlin to Trump son meeting’ – New York Times

Trouble with that headline?  It’s just not true…there’s absolutely no evidence of a link between ‘Trump son’ and the Kremlin.  No evidence that the email makes any mention of any Kremlin connection, the man who contacted ‘Trump son’ didn’t know the source of his information and it is likely to have come through various ‘others’ before getting to him…all of which the New York Times [rabidly anti-Trump along with the Washington Post] eventually admits as does the BBC.

And where is the email?  The NYT tells us that it is reporting what three people who say they have seen the email have said…but no  email, not even a direct quote from the email.  Remember how Comey’s infamous memo about Trump suddenly disappeared…Comey himself having destroyed his own copies…why would he do that when it was clearly such an important, crucial, document for his claims?  Is this yet another NYT/WaPo fabrication built on whispers and lies from the dread ‘Deep State’?

Here’s the Times’ nonsense…

Donald Trump Jr. was informed in an email that the material was part of a Russian government effort to aid his father’s candidacy, according to three people with knowledge of the email.

So  it was all part of a Russian government conspiracy…or was it?  The NYT muddies the water…and why ‘three sources’?  Trying to make out it is credible?….and was it part of a Russian campaign or not part of a Russian campaign?….

Mr. Goldstone’s message, as described to The New York Times by the three people, indicates that the Russian government was the source of the potentially damaging information. It does not elaborate on the wider effort by Moscow to help the Trump campaign.

So…the Russian government was the source but no indication part of a Russian government campaign?  How can the email indicate the Russian government was the source when the NYT then admits….

It is unclear whether Mr. Goldstone had direct knowledge of the origin of the damaging material. One person who was briefed on the emails said it appeared that he was passing along information that had been passed through several others.

So the NYT doesn’t know if the email sender, Goldstone, knew Russia may have been the source…and yet they say earlier it definitely was indicated to be the source.

As with all other ‘sourced’ material the NYT and WaPo never provide links to the original material…they haven’t even quoted the email here.

Much like all these leaks the sources are dodgy with vested interests in spreading anti-Trump misinformation…good of the BBC to help out….as usual.

And just who are the NYT’s sources?  Looks like it was leaked by Comey’s pals in the intelligence services…

Two weeks after Donald J. Trump clinched the Republican presidential nomination last year, his eldest son arranged a meeting at Trump Tower in Manhattan with a Russian lawyer who has connections to the Kremlin, according to confidential government records described to The New York Times.

So not only are the intelligence services acting against the President but this shows that when Trump said they had been spying on him he was correct despite all the mockery and dismissive claims that he was paranoid and deluded….of course we know that Obama loosened the rules on who could see intelligence and what they could report….part of his campaign to undermine the Trump campaign by allowing intelligence information gathered for one purpose to be used by politicians for another, ie to attack Trump.

Curious how ‘Trump son’ is accused of collaborating with the Russians for having met a ‘Russian national’ who said they had information on Clinton…why would he not meet with them?  The BBC had no qualms about our dodgy MI6 officer meeting supposedly ex Russian intelligence officers to get information on Trump for the Clinton campaign.

Claims about a Russian blackmail tape were made in one of a series of reports written by a former British intelligence agent. As a member of MI6, he had been posted to the UK’s embassy in Moscow and now runs a consultancy giving advice on doing business in Russia. He spoke to a number of his old contacts in the FSB, the successor to the KGB, paying some of them for information.

How on earth can anyone take seriously information fed to them by Russian intelligence…lol.

Interesting….the Russian who met ‘Trump son’ employs the private investigation firm that cobbled together that dodgy dossier...hmmm…any chance that the meeting with ‘Trump son’ was set up precisely to try and associate ‘Trump son’ with the Russians and hence provide headlines that Trump was helped by the Russians? [Corallo is a spokeman for the President’s lawyer and Ms. Veselnitskaya is the Russian contact]

In an interview, Mr. Corallo explained that Ms. Veselnitskaya, in her anti-Magnitsky campaign, employs a private investigator whose firm, Fusion GPS, produced an intelligence dossier that contained unproven allegations against the president. In a statement, the firm said, “Fusion GPS learned about this meeting from news reports and had no prior knowledge of it. Any claim that Fusion GPS arranged or facilitated this meeting in any way is false.”

The BBC has been seen to frequently encourage the ‘Young’ to get out on the streets and riot, sorry, protest, the BBC seems to want to incite inter-generational war setting the Young against the Old….the ‘Baby Boomers’ having had it so good but now the next generations will be worse off than their parents…and this is so so, so wrong.  Not only that but the ‘Old’ have stolen the Young’s future having voted for Brexit…a narrative constantly championed by the BBC.  The BBC encourages the rage, the greed, the sense of entitlement that says because someone else had something ‘we’ deserve it as well…’we’ must have it….perhaps they should have the wartime conscription or the post-war rationing or the 1970’s.  The Baby Boomers may have had it good, or maybe not, but that period was a blip in history built on hype and hope and the labour of ‘Coolies’ as Orwell noted so long ago…the ‘normal’ is much more austere with the bulk of the population ‘just about managing’.

Dominic Lawson notes in the Mail that anguished cry that Corbyn heard and exploited by promising everything to everybody…but as Labour now admits,, they have no idea how to pay for it all….what do these needy-greedy youths think of Labour’s admission that the tuition fee refund wasn’t a manifesto pledge but mere pie-in-the-sky vote winning trickery?

Labour — ostensibly the workers’ party — polls significantly better among higher socio-economic groups than it does among those on lower incomes. 

To put this at its clearest: Jeremy Corbyn is a magnet for the young — but most especially those from well-to-do backgrounds. 

It’s not hard to see why Corbyn was able to win their hearts and their votes. It wasn’t because of his decades-long commitment to socialism. 

No, it was his pledge to abolish student fees — and, in particular, his suggestion that Labour would also find a way of writing off the accumulated debts of all those who had gone through tertiary education since fees were introduced.

It will be the best-off among former students who will be the principal beneficiaries of Corbyn’s most successful vote-winning offer.

‘People of my generation are tired of hearing that we cannot have the same benefits that baby boomers such as Bartholomew enjoyed. 

‘To name a few: an economy generating meaningful and secure work, the ability to purchase a house, the guarantee of a state pension, free university tuition, and so on. That’s the crux of why we voted for Corbyn: we want what you had.’

Far from the austere socialist that the young Corbyn had been, this is the anguished cry of the frustrated bourgeoisie.

As Lawson says these youthful Remain voters who despair at never being able to set foot in Europe again as the borders slam shut [©BBC] might also been surprised that their new found working class hero, who is of course actually a very middle class marxist terrorist sympathiser [as are so many in the BBC], to learn that he has never been a great fan of the EU as the video above shows.

You have to ask just what was Corbyn’s appeal to them once you start to seriously look at what he offers…nothing that would actually seem to be genuinely in what they think is their interests.  Have they thought things through?

Does the BBC et al give the ‘young’ too high expectations of life?  Are they led to believe everythng will be handed to them on a plate without working for it?  Some may well have that attitude if a recent CBI survey is anything to go by…

Bosses say graduates can’t cope with office life: Third of companies are concerned about young people’s attitude to work

With many graduates and school leavers lacking the mindset and skills required to thrive in the workplace, the CBI said teachers needed to better reflect the importance of ‘attitude and aptitude for work’.

There are also worries about the literacy and numeracy skills of young employees, with firms admitting they have had to run classes for recruits.

‘Personal attitudes, aptitude, readiness to learn, effective communication skills and a sufficient capacity to cope with numerical data are the key enablers. It is critically important that all young people are helped to develop as fully as possible in these areas.’

Naturally the teachers blame ‘cuts’ [despite the education budget being protected] not themselves for low standards…

Dr Mary Bousted, head of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said: ‘With savage cuts to further education funding since 2009… it is unsurprising that businesses are struggling to find enough skilled staff.’

The BBC would no doubt go along with that as they seem to be on a mission recently to blame ‘cuts’ for everything that goes wrong [naturally no context as to why ‘cuts’ may be necessary] as they blame the deaths at Grenfell on Tory cuts [echoing McDonnell] as well as for drugs and phones getting into prisons.

Here we go, another week of BBC bias ahead and HERE is where you detail the bias!

So Trump had a very successful G20. BBC not happy hence this headline…

G20: Trump hails talks as ‘success’ despite divisions

“Despite’, eh? Reminds me of this cartoon…

Lord Grade slams the BBC for anti-Semitism [h/t Craig at Is the BBC biased?], though of course he protests that is not what he is doing…although he is, as he accuses it of singling out Israel for negative reporting that is unqualified and without context….thus helping to create the anti-Semitic narrative that is looming so large over so much of Europe and the world…..including the Labour Party…

The BBC is still pumping exactly that out even now as Jeremy Bowen blames the West and Zionism for all the Middle East’s problems…and a few days ago the BBC organised Lord Chilcott to come out of obscurity to damn Blair…the BBC helping him along by misleading the audience as to what he was saying…maybe we’ll look at that in more detail later.  Any coincidence that Bowen and Chilcott come together?  What else does the BBC have in the pipeline along the same lines?

Guess it is time for one of these…..another open thread to slamdunk the BBC’s Bias…..

Ian Katz, Newsnight editor, has penned an appeal for mercy, the BBC he insists is doing its very bestest in trying circumstances and yet it is under sustained attack as trust in the media is at an all time low and may go lower.

The irony is that it is those whom the BBC spends its time defending and shilling for that are the most aggressive critics of the BBC and the ones of course that Katz is responding to.  The cross-party group of MPs who complained politely of the BBC’s pronounced pro-EU bias got extremely short shrift from the BBC and were told the BBC is not at all biased.

How different Katz’s response to those who have the BBC news shaped and customised to suit them and yet batter at the BBC gates claiming bias….’those’ being the SNP, Muslims and the Corbynistas.

Katz says…

In each case there is a specific, albeit related, animus. During the election, it was Corbyn supporters convinced the mainstream media was bent on doing down their man. At Grenfell, it was an alarmingly widespread suspicion that the media — and especially the BBC — were part of an establishment conspiracy to play down the scale of the disaster. For the Finsbury Park attack, the charge was that the sensationalist coverage of previous attacks had whipped up Islamophobia.

First the Corbynistas, the Muslims and the SNP street thugs are not actually complaining about BBC bias, there is none, none that is negative for their ‘people’.  Corbyn was given an extraordinarily easy run-up to the election…a man who supports terrorists and terrorism, who has boasted of blocking anti-terror legislation all his career, who doesn’t want shoot-to-kill…and yet he was held up as the champion of the anti-terror position.  He lied continually throughout the campaign and flip-flopped on very serious issues and long held beliefs..and yet the BBC didn’t pick up on that unlike when they thought May had done so.  The SNP have in no way suffered the same degree of vilification and abuse that UKIP have and yet what’s the difference?  The SNP are are if anything more nationalist and more racist.  Muslims of course get an extraordinary amount of pro-Muslim programming on the BBC and the news shaped to hide the reality of Islam in the UK today.

What is such groups’ real point in complaining?  To shut down debate and to stop all media criticism of their group.  They intend to scare and bully journalists into toeing the line and are prepared to use any and all tactics to do so….and it works…Nick Robinson and Dimbleby came out demanding Corbyn got special treatment…and he duly got that.

Katz goes on…

When whole portions of a society don’t believe what they read or hear, the prospects of building any kind of cross-party consensus about what’s true and what isn’t become vanishingly thin. What’s left is a vacuum in which made-up stories are as plausible as any other kind. Fake news is not a tech problem; it’s a symptom of broken trust in the media.

Whose fault is that?  The BBC is one of the most prolific peddlers of fake news, news produced to send a message whether about Islam, the EU or climate change or any of the myriad of causes that the BBC thinks should be given prominence.  Katz of course does not accept that as his statement above shows….he says there is a lack of trust in the media that has left a vacuum for fake news to fill.  Hmmm….what he misses out is why the Public have a lack of trust in the MSM that leads to that vacuum.  It is of course because the MSM is itself mostly fake news and manufactured content selling a message….it is propaganda.

Ironically he finishes with this…

Possibly the most important thing we can do, however, is to acknowledge we have a problem. Right now the media’s attitude to trust brings to mind the proverbial frog in the pan of boiling water. Each increase in the temperature seems just about tolerable, but before we know it we are cooked. And it is starting to feel quite hot in here.

Trouble is he obviously isn’t prepared to actually do that and in fact used the article to do the opposite as it is clearly intended to pander to the corbynistas and the associated mob baying for blood over Grenfell.

Seems polite complaints about BBC bias just don’t work.  The BBC only responds to threats and violence…as from the adherents to the ‘religion of peace’…as Mark Thompson said…a man with an AK47 kind of demands your attention and a willingness to put aside your principles.

The BBC, as always, feeding the crocodile.

As Swedish girls are forced to conduct themselves as if in a Muslim country by segregating themselves away from men,‘certain men’ as the sexual attackers are coyly called, such matters rarely, if ever, concern the BBC and many others in the media who wish to sweep such things under the carpet…as Mark Steyn points out…

Timely then that Trump is reminding us that we must defend our civilisation and our borders…

“The West will never, ever be broken. Our values will prevail, our people will thrive, and our civilization will triumph.”

We have to remember that our defense is not just a commitment of money, it is a commitment of will. Because as the Polish experience reminds us, the defense of the West ultimately rests not only on means, but also on the will of its people to prevail and be successful and get what you have to have.

The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive. Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost? Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders? Do we have the desire and the courage to preserve our civilization in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it?

We can have the largest economies and the most lethal weapons anywhere on Earth, but if we do not have strong families and strong values, then we will be weak and we will not survive.