The past two years have seen organisations such as CNN, The BBC, Channel 4 Fake News, the Guardian and indeed most of the deadwood press insisting that Donald Trump would be impeached or forced to resign when the Mueller Report demonstrated that he had colluded with the Russians in the 2016 election against crooked Hillary Clinton. There was no real evidence for this other than a dodgy dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign. Yet journalists such as Jon Sopel, Kylie Morris, barmy Carol Cadwalladr and Matt Frei insisted Trump was toast. The Mueller report is now out. There was no conclusion. So where are the apologies for this disgraceful episode in the history of fake news? There are none. The poison of fake news driven Russiaphobia has spread to this side of the Atlantic too, thanks to this dreadful journalism. I discuss this all in today's podcast.
The UK? Germany? Trump’s America – after all the US did lead the fight against that bastard Assad? Think again. The answer is not something you will see reported widely in the Western Media for it is ….
Syria. Yup the refugees are heading home from Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and indeed from Europe in their thousands. But this was not meant to happen. For years we have been told by the political and media establishment that folks were fleeing that butcher Assad and that is why the West had to provide arms and monies to those fighting him, the folks David Cameron branded “the moderates.”
As this site has documented since 2012, the moderates are no such thing but are largely Al Qaeda affiliated Islamofascists who regularly leaked men and arms to ISIS, beheaded kids, chucked post office workers and gays off rooftops, imposed strict Sharia law on women, executed Christians, Alawites and Shia Muslims and were, in fact, all round bastards, only marginally less evil than ISIS.
Now President Assad has almost cleansed his country of terrorists both of the ISIS variety and also of Call Me Dave’s moderates. The war is almost over and with the West – thanks to Donald Trump - not keeping it going by pouring yet more arms and cash over to "the moderates", Syria can rebuild and is doing so with thousands of folks crossing the border each day.
At some point the only folks holed up in refugee camps in Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon will be those like Ms Begum of Bethnal Green who do not wish to live in a country where religious minorities are protected and where women have equal rights and where homos are not chucked off buildings to entertain baying crowds. And who cannot go to Syria because they will have to answer for their historic actions.
Now that the West is butting out, ordinary Syrians are voting with their feet. Will our leaders admit they screwed up and the mainstream media admit that their narrative about how folks fled the bastard Assad and desperately craved regime change was a wholly false one? It was all fake news. Don’t hold your breath.
There are just two countries in the Middle East where Christians can celebrate their faith openly, as part of a supportive community and with no fear of having their head chopped off. One is Israel, which is also the only country in the region where there are gay pride parades. But suggesting that Israel is a beacon of tolerance in a sea of bigotry is not part of the group think narrative for the liberal media elites here in the West. So what about the other place where Christianity is not a high risk activity?
It is of course Syria. Well parts of Syria. Those small pockets still controlled by either ISIS or by the Al Qaeda affiliated Islamofascists of the FSA, who we in the West and Turkey and the evil Saudis have backed with guns and money, saw no Christmas celebrations.
But most of the country is now controlled by President Assad and in that part of Syria and in the Kurdish regions (whose troops in Manbij and elsewhere are now fighting alongside Assad’s men, against “our guys”) you can, as a Christian, celebrate your faith openly.
One of the great joys not of the Christmas just gone but of 2016 was of seeing Christians in Aleppo celebrate the nativity inside their newly reopened cathedral, St Elijah’s. Just days before Christmas two years ago, Assad’s men had liberated Eastern Aleppo from the Islamofascists ("our guys"). The Western press described that liberation as a siege though, in fact most of the City, had always been in Assad’s hands. Certainly Christians felt liberated in that for the first time in several years they could celeberate the birth of Jesus without having their heads chopped off.
It is thus acutely embarrassing for we, supposedly Christian, countries in the West to see scenes of joy in Syria as our co-religionists celeberate our shared faith. For we in the West have done our darndest to topple the regime which protects this freedom and to replace it with one which wishes to commit genocide against our fellow Christians. The Western media has abetted our Governments in this appalling misjudgement with fake news or, as over Christmas, by just not bringing you real news.
Thus one must turn to non Western sources for the videos below. You may not like Russia Today. We are told, by our leaders and the Western press who have lied to us about Syria, that RT serves up fake news. The footage below is genuine.
Meanwhile the liberal Western press spins the line that the US troops being withdrawn by Donald Trump will help ISIS to recover. Au contraire. That is fake news. ISIS was able to flourish in Syria because the Assad regime was under a well funded attack from “our guys” and so had to fight on two fronts. The less support we in the West give to those Islamofascists who behead Christians, children, gays, Alawites and all sorts of others, the folks David Cameron termed “the moderates” the easier it will be for President Assad, assisted by President Putin, who was on the right side, to purge the country of ALL the terrorists.
Al Qaeda. ISIS. They are not that different. They hate the West. They hate Christians. They hate you. They want to kill you. As such if President Assad kills more terrorists of ekither strain of evil, that is fine by me. It is hard to see why the West got this so totally wrong.
Meanwhile back to Christmas in Syria and the scenes the BBC and Channel 4 "fake" News would not dare to show of folks able to celebrate with joy becuase "our guys" lost... Video one is from Damascus, video two is from Aleppo.
Taxpayer funded, BBC Radio 4 has just run a long report on the problems Nigeria faces. It started with David Cameron slamming the country as being corrupt back in 2016. This, the BBC argued, was unhelpful. It was a bad thing to say. I am not normally one to defend Call Me Dave, but on this occasion.
Transparency International which monitors corruption ranks countries on scores ranging from 0 (utterly corrupt) through to 100 ( as honest as Mother Theresa). Guess what? In 2017 Nigeria scored just 28 coming in as the 148th most honest nation on earth out of 180. In short Call Me Dave was, for once, bang on the money.
The BBC then turned to Nigeria’s problems, not bothering to mention that it is the world’s 13th largest oil producer and 20th largest economy. Anyhow, the BBC insists that it has problems and interviewed a local big wig who insisted that all the problems were the fault of …the British. Yes of course, agreed the BBC.
As it happened the evil Britishers, having set up legal and democratic structures which have survived perfectly well elsewhere in other former colonies, departed in 1960. Within seven years the Nigerians were fighting a civil war and have since flitted between democracy and dictatorship. I guess that is all the fault of the Britishers too. The British Empire was, in the fake news, world of the BBC an unmitigated force for bad and its legacy is poisonous.
We evil Britishers left Nigeria 58 years ago. For how long can we be blamed for the country’s ills (despite its oil windfall) while other former colinies manage (without oil) to do so well?
But there is hope. Alleluia!
The EU. Yes the BBC and interviewer agreed that the EU was starting to intervene and offered the chance of real change. Given its expertise in tackling endemic corruption and driving economic prosperity it is hard to think of a more appropriate saviour for Nigeria. The whole report was beyond parody.
On the flimsiest of evidence, wretched Theresa May, Donald Trump and President dans Le Closet of France would use wall to wall media coverage to bomb President Assad of Syria whenever the Islamofascist terrorists he is fighting claimed that he had engaged in chemical warfare. Yesterday Aleppo suffered a chemical weapons attack leaving 55, including eight kids, hospitalised. So why aren’t the BBC and Channel 4 Fake News all over this? Why aren't Macron and Trump lining up another air strike? Oh yes…
The small portion of Aleppo under the control of the Al Qaeda supporting terrorists we in the West backed in an act of insanity, was liberated more than a year ago. Not that the western media report this but Christians in Aleppo will soon celebrate Christmas in their rebuit Cathedral without the threat of beheading for a second year. The population of Aleppo is growing rapidly as folks who fled the terrorists flock back to the safety and, relative, tolerance of Assad rule.
So it would not be Assad launching shells filled with poisonous Chlorine gas on the City. It is “our guys” – you know those Al Qaeda loving fanatics who execute 12 year old boys, gays,. Post Office Workers, Christians and others by beheading or chucking them off tall buildings. It is the terrorists who we in the West have backed with arms and money since 2012 so creating the Civil war that has made Syria what it is today. It is “our guys” in the Nusra Front who are gassing civilians.
Yet the Western media seems slow to report this and our leaders say nothing. I can’t think why…
Have you ever been burgled? I have. You feel violated. As if your home is dirty. For a long while you feel unsafe in your own abode. What if they come again? And it is a crime that affects folks of both genders, oops sorry I meant all genders. This Guardian headline below is not meant to be ironic and is the sort of nonsense which helps to explain why sales of this sordid rag are crashing, however many fake news articles by Carole Cadwalladr it publishes.
Suzanne Moore argues, with no evidence at all, that crimes of misogyny, a hate crimes so defined as onme where the victim feels hurt, lead to violent crime. I rather suspect that almost none of those who might wolf whistle a bird in a skirt or term Suzanne Moore or Carole Cadwalladr daft bints(and thus could be accused of misogny) will go on and commit violent crime against individuals. But Ms Moore would rather that the fuzz investigate such folk than tackle burglaries.
This is how the liberal Metropolitan elite really do think. Even Marie Antoinette was more in touch with the sans culottes than are folks like Moore today.
Like 17.4 million other folk I put my feet up yesterday content to know that we won the #PeoplesVote on June 23 2016. But large numbers of snowflakes, Guardian readers, state sector employees, gobshite celebrities and other folks who looked like they were out on day release marched through London to tell us that we plebs had voted the wrong way on Brexit and must vote again. So how many marched?
The organisers said they were hoping for 100,000 which in a game of expectations management means they knew at least 150,000 would attend. Peter Tatchell, a frothing remoaniac but a decent and honest man tweeted that 150,000 were marching. The fuzz said it was 150,000 – 250,000 and they, being the experts on crowd control, should know. Then we started to see rampant marcher inflation.
Thirsty, EU loving, Tory MP Anna Soubry tweeted that there were 500,000 on the march. But that was after lunch so she was, possibly, seeing double. Then the spin doctor for war criminal Tony Blair, Bad Al Campbell, pitched in with a claim of 750,000. The BBC dutifully reported that fake news as fact. Do I believe a proven liar like Campbell or the fuzz? That was a rhetorical question.
So lets call it 250,000. That is big but, as I noted yesterday, given that the march was in the heart of remoaniac country it is not that big and is certainly much smaller than the march to save fox hunting and a fraction of the march against the Iraq war.
The stench of hypocrisy was everywhere yesterday. On social media left wing gobshites demanded that after such a big March the Government must yield to the demands met. How many of them were demanding a repeal of the fox hunting ban after a bigger march? I suggest almost none. Hypocrisy strike 1.
The march was well organised and among those printing placards and providing financial support were two groups which between them had received £650,000 in the past year from the EU to help spread a pro EU message. Surely this is foreign interference in British democracy? Where is Carole Cadwalladr railing against this in the Guardian? Why aren’t Lord Adonis or David Lammy MP telling their comrades at the BBC how outrageous this is? Hypocrisy strike 2.
But taking the biscuit was Al Campbell who insisted that the march was so large the Government must change policy and have a second vote. This is the man who compiled the utterly bogus “dodgy dossier” used by his boss Blair to launch the illegal war in Iraq. Al is complicit in what was a war crime. The march against that War was far larger than yesterday’s and did the Government change course. No. Hypocrisy strike 3 for Bad Al.
Outside the metropolitan liberal elites we plebs are tired of being lectured by celebs and “experts” about how we don’t really understand what we vote for and so should vote again. It was revulsion at such folks that helped the leave campaign garner 17.4 million votes last time. And we plebs can see through the march inflation and the hypocrisy now. Whatever Cadwalladr, Adonis, Campbell and Bob Geldof think, we little people are really not that stupid.
As I sit with an ouzo in Greece, a country with 49% youth unemployment and where pensioners mist live on 9 Euro a day thanks to the EU, back in London, about 100,000 generally very affluent middle class folks are marching to overturn the wishes of 17.4 million of their fellow citizens and for Britain to stay in the EU. The organisers and the BBC and the rest of the liberal media claim this is a big demonstration but that is just fake news.
In 2003 a march against war criminal Tony Blair's illegal invasion of Iraq attracted 750,000 (Police estimate) to 1 million folks (BBC estimate). A few months earlier the Countryside march attracted 500,000 + including myself carrying my then baby daughter Olaf. On that march, where organisers claimed more than a million attendees, most folks had to travel in from the boonies. Some had never been to London before. But London is the most heavily remoaning part of the UK. If only 100,000 turn out today in the heart of remoaning territory, that is really, in relative terms, pretty small is it not?
I have noted in an earlier piece why I am delighted, if a bit surprised, that Ashers bakery in Belfast has won its court case, allowing it not to be forced to bake cakes carrying political messages with which it disagrees, in the case in support of gay marriage. As the great Peter Tatchell showed, backing the Christian bakers does not make you a bigot just someone who believes in key civil liberties.
In my lifetime the dominant mores of our society have been transformed and, I should say, largely in a positive way. But who is to say what the next great changes will be. Would gay bakers really want to be forced to print cakes, I’d admit they would have to be very large cakes, citing how extreme interpretations of Sharia law should be applied to the LGBTI community? How would your local gay bakers feel about being asked to ice on the words of Leviticus Chapter 20 verse 13:
“If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”
I guess even my local, straight, bakers, being good lefties, might baulk at that one and quite right too. Why should a customer be able to ram their political views down the throat of any business? The Ashers case is about civil liberties as one of the greatest heroes of the gay rights movement Mr Peter Tatchell explains here.
But the BBC did not see it this way - the ruling went against the set group think agenda which is that "rights" of set groups get to trump civil liberties for all. As such its coverage was shocking. For starters it stated repeatedly that the decision was greeted with anger by the LGBT community. In fact many LGBT folks agreed with Tatchell while, I accept, many others disagreed with the ruling. But the BBC presented it as if the gay community was, at one, opposed to the judgement. That was simply fake news.
Then it turn across radio and TV to three vox pops from Ulster. The first was an obviously devout old buffoon who said that Jesus would have welcomed the decision. The other two were “supportive straights” who said it would hurt the feelings of the poor gays and that it was thus a bad thing. The clear message: only bigoted members of the one faith that the metropolitan liberal elitists of the BBC love to mock as old world, Irrelevant and ridiculous supported the bakers while the rest of Ulster were not bigots so opposed the ruling. According to the BBC there is no-one in Ulster who takes the very sensible Tatchell line on this matter.
Such coverage is as ludicrous as it is unbalanced. Yet we taxpayers face the threat of jail if we do not pay a license fee to support the very high salaries of those who churn such nonsense out on a daily basis. And the BBC wonders why it is not universally loved?
But instead it focussed its report on the several thousand assorted snowflakes, man hating feminazis and other sufferers from full blown #TrumpDerangementSyndrome who protested in DC, doing their best to delay or block democracy in action. Okay 324,996,000 Americans were not protesting but the 4,000 extremists, screaming as loud as they could in DC, spoke for America, according to Britain’s Pravda.
As to the actual proceedings, there was final day admission from the BBC that Kavanaugh would be appointed but with every report this was followed by the words “despite the series of allegations of sexual assault made against him.”
Yes allegations were made. One of the three coming forward to join this circus, claiming Kavanaugh organised gang rapes, had already ‘fessed that she made it up. Accuser two was barely more credible and that left Christine Blasey Ford whose story had changed many times and had more holes in it that a mountain of Swiss Cheese. The FBI had investigated Ford’s fiction and concluded it did not stack up. Yet was the BBC offering any balance in this respect? Of course not. It just showed another placard held up by some work-averse liberal accusing the good Judge of serial sex crimes.
Such has been the unadulterated bias shown by almost the entire British media on this issue that, as I have dared to suggest to folks over the past week, old fashioned idea such as “innocent until proven guilty” or natural justice.” I have been met with almost universal disapproval. It is as if I were suggesting that Hitler had his good points as well as bad, which, for the avoidance of doubt, is not a view that I hold.
It makes me feel that Joshua and I should move to a solid red state well away from the coasts where we might find ourselves among folks who have similar beliefs. I have suggested this to the Mrs but am met with a Paddington stare. She is not convinced of the merits of my idea.
Is this as offensive as paying the bloated salary of jug eared virtue signalling prick Gary Lineker or the constant diet of fake news and #TrumpDerangementSyndrome? I don't know. But watch what is below and can anyone explain just why I should have cash extorted from me under threat of jail for this muck and piffle? Is this what Lord Reith had in mind when BBC TV was created? (Video at the bottom)
I had thought that Rachel Mitchell, the lawyer brought in by Senate Republicans to quiz Brett Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford was a total waste of space. I take it all back. She has just posted to the Senate her view, as a prosecutor specialising in sex attacks, of the "evidence" offered by by Dr Ford. I had suggested that Ford's statements had more holes than Swiss Cheese. I was being generous. Mitchell tears her evidence to shreds as you can see below,
Those who, whipped up by a toxic combination of #Metoo and TrumpDerangementSyndrome, to proclaim that the woman must always be believed (unless she is Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick, Monica Lewinsky, etc, etc) to asset that Brett Kavanaugh was presumed guilty unless proved innocent should read this and apologise. There may be new evidence which changes that but as things stand the good judge should be appointed to the Supreme Court at once. And those who started this witch hunt, notably Democrat senator Dianne Frankenstein, need to grovel.
The American people will give their own verdict on this obscene witch hunt instigated by the morally bankrupt Democrats in the mid terms. Bring it on.
Now will the liberal media, the BBC, Channel 4 "fake" news and the rest bother to report this? Don't hold your breath...
Of course Britain’s head teachers (700 of whom earn more than £100,000 a year) could have taken the day off to go on a march against education “cuts” in London during their 13 weeks annual leave. They did not but are marching today as the state funded propagator of fake news, the BBC reported with pleasure. At least that will mean fewer head teachers getting six year olds to write same sex love letters to each other.
The BBC admitted that, as the Government stated, actual spending on schools had increased last year to its highest ever but insisted that it real terms it had been cut by 8%. Really, is inflation running at 10%? Why did no-one tell us this. For that is what a real term adjustment actually means.
But not if you are a head teacher or the BBC. Its real term adjustments are for increased number of pupils and higher costs. Yes pupil numbers are marginally up but that does not feed through directly into costs. A 1% or 2% increase in pupils does not mean you need 1$ or 2% more teachers or classrooms or school playing fields. There is an inbuilt economy of scale.
And of course costs may have gone up. Head Teacher pay, for instance, went up. But you do not “real term adjust” how much the Government gives just because some Guardian reading fat cats award themselves even bigger cream allowances.
There may or may not be an issue with education funding but serving up bogus data and having Pravda report it as fact is not going to help anyone have an informed debate about it.
Naturally the BBC, Channel 4 “fake” News and the rest of the liberal media presented a hopelessly one sided account of the Senate testimony of Christine Blasey Ford and the man she accuses of groping her 36 years ago, would be Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. But normal folks can see through all this.
Poor Dr Ford had a shaky voice, she sounded for a moment like a little girl. You wanted to believe her. But hang on a second there are other women victims here, including the wife and ten year old daughter of Judge Kavanaugh. And what about the man himself or has #MeToo hysteria reached such a point where a woman is automatically believed.
This is the woman who had to delay her testimony to allow her to drive to Washington because she had a fear of flying. That is what she told the Senate. Except that she flies extensively for surfing vacations and, as it happens few to DC for this circus. So she is a liar. As for her allegation…
Ford cannot remember when the incident occurred. Or where. Or who drover her home. She has changed her story about who was present at the house. Those she now says were present all say that her story is not true. Two other men say they assaulted Dr Ford in the way she describes in 1982. Though she handed her counsellor’s notes which detail her 2012 recollection of the incident to the Washington Post she refused to let the Senate see them, perhaps because they do not name Kavanaugh and her story then contradicts the one, this Trump hating activist spins now.
Oddly the liberal press, especially in Britain, do not report on this.
If she took such a tale which has more holes in it than a mountain made of Swiss Cheese to the cops they would not prosecute. On the presumption of innocence it would not even make it to Court.
However Democrat lawmakers sat on this story, for that is what it is, for months only releasing it at the last minute to try to stop a Trump nominee making it to the Supreme Court before mid-terms in which they hope they will make enough gains to block any other nominees until the next General Election. Keep hoping libtards but don't hold your breath.
I feel sorry for Dr Ford. She is a troubled woman who has been played by Democrat senators. She may well have been assaulted at some stage but by whom is very unclear and a caring law-maker would not have allowed her to come forward with such a flimsy uncorroborated tale. Like Judge Kavanaugh and his family I pray for Dr Ford, that she finds happiness.
But the spectacle of a highly partisan minority attempting to destroy a man’s career on the basis of such a flimsy take has been unedifying and the role of the Democratic establishment in it has left a bad taste in the mouth. Their behaviour will not go down well in mainstream America though the liberal media establishment can’t see that, just like they thought Take a Knee and other issues would play badly for the GOP. And so they push out the fake news.
When we look back on this we will also see a good man in Brett Kavanaugh almost knocked out by #MeToo hysteria, destroyed by “evidence” so scant it would not even make it to Court. Perhaps that will be the legacy of this circus, an ending of that hysteria. That, and the dashing of the high hopes Dems come November by a red wave fuelled by disgust at events in the Washington swamp over the past few days would be truly fitting.
"Next warns on Brexit" risks screamed the headline on the BBC website as you can see below. On radio and TV broadcasters shouted the same message. But if you read what Next, a company run by highly pro Europe management, actually said rather than what the state funded broadcaster said it said you might be surprised.
The BBC article states
Next said the UK retail market remained "volatile" and it remained "cautious" in its outlook.The Brexit-related risks include higher tariffs on goods imported into the UK. However, queues and delays at UK and EU ports as a result of increased customs declarations for other companies posed the biggest risk. The retailer said it was preparing for the possibility that the UK leaves the EU without a transition period or a free trade agreement in place.However, it downplayed the impact a no-deal outcome would have on its business.
Of course the UK outside the EU would not have to impose tariffs on imports. Indeed it could scrap the tariffs the EU forces us to have on good imported from outside of the Eurozone. Outside of the evil empire imports could actually be cheaper, it would be our call.
However here is what Next actually said. It note that the risks of a no-deal Brexit do not “pose a material threat to the ongoing operations and profitability of NEXT’s business here in the UK or to our £190m turnover business in the EU.”
It concluded that “there would be some additional administrative costs but, in the scheme of the Group, these will be de minimis.”
In short the BBC coverage was just more fake news from the remoaning metropolitan liberal elite.
The conventional wisdom of the liberal media is that the Democrats will regain control of the House and possibly also of the Senate in the mid-terms coming up in a few weeks and that this will be a body blow to Donald Trump. Here’s something the BBC and Channel 4 “fake” news is not reporting – the latest poll numbers are just amazing.
A Gallup poll out this week puts the Republicans favourability rating on 45% compared to the Dems on 44%. To put that in context, the GOP is up 9 percentage points on a year ago and is the highest since January 2011, just after the 2010 mid-terms which saw it claim control of both houses.
Does the poll understate Republican support. The cleansing of Country Club Republicans from a party that is very much Trump’s party now is interesting. In the 2016 General Election I identified the phenomenon of the “shy Trumpster”. With the Dems and their bedwetting liberal bedfellows in the MSM now screaming that, with the passing of saint John McCain, ALL Republicans are sexist, racist, beasts I wonder if there is a “shy-Gop” element. We shall see.
Bear in mind that in US politics, thanks to the pork-barrel nature of Congress, the incumbent always has an advantage and most of the incumbents in the House are Republicans though most Senators up for re-election (the Senate retires in thirds) are, this year, Dems.
In the House there are a good number of those Country Club GOP Congressmen standing down. That may reduce the incumbency advantage but many of those are in “safe seats” so should not be too much of a factor.
In a sense of course these House seats are local contests but polling in some of the 24 seats the Dems need to win if they are to seize control such as The Florida 26th and the California 39th shows the GOP with a comfortable lead. There will be shocks in both directions but as things stand the GOP may well retain control of the House.
As for the Senate where the GOP currently has a 51-49 advantage there are four GOP seats where the battle looks tight but there are seven currently Democrat held States where Trump won the vote in 2016 where the GOP may well make gains. It is not at all inconceivable that the GOP will actually make gains. And those gains will see retiring Republican senators who might have blocked Trump’s ideas replaced by the faithful. In both the House and the Senate the Republicans elected will be far more supportive of POTUS than some of those Country Clubbers standing down.
The economy is, of course, key to the GOP surge. Whether Trump’s tax cuts and other policies are the key to economic growth or whether it is just a continuing growth of the asset bubble is a matter of debate. But the facts are that Americans are richer than they were two years ago, they are earning more and more have jobs. I noted how particular beneficiaries of this are black voters and that is why Trump has the highest approval rating of any Republican leader amongst blacks and Hispanics since the 1960s. A stockmarket correction in October might dent this and be a warning that the real economy may stumble at some stage but right now things look good on this front.
And, as I have noted many times before, on issues such as take a knee, trade deals, transgenders in the military, Trump and the GOP may horrify the liberal elites of the coastal cities and the, increasingly less read and watched, MSM but they are “in tune” with ordinary America. The more the Dems object by trying to bully Ted Cruz and his wife from a restaurant (something that will only enhance Cruz's, already very strong, chance of holding his Texas Senate seat, one of the four marginals the Dems are targetting) or launching obvious smears against proposed Supreme Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh, the more mainstream America recoils.
The Democrat candidates for Congress have never before contained so many extreme left wingers who may appeal to the party faithful but who alienate what is essentially a small c conservative country. The more such folks shout, rant and try to obstruct the President every which way he turns by means fair and foul, the more independent voters shift to the GOP and the more united and determined to vote become registered Republicans.
Of course the BBC and Channel 4 News will not report this poll or any others that do not fit its narrative. No doubt they are preparing to blame the Russians or someone else when all their hopes and predictions are dashed in November. I am not saying that the Red Wave is a slam dunk certainty but those hoping that the Dems will make such big gains that they can impeach Donald Trump on spurious grounds come the new year may be in for a disappointment.
And if the GOP wins the mid-terms and the economy holds then #Trump2020 looks a slam dunk. It may well be time to start dusting off those “Four More Years” signs already.
For some reason we found ourselves watching both the 10 O’Clock News and Newsnight last night. In the end I had to switch off and vowed not to allow myself to suffer in this way again. It started with the warnings from the convicted fraudster Christine Lagarde and the IMF on Brexit.
We were told on both programmes that the IMF is highly respected and Ms Lagarde warned that any Brexit would damage the UK and a No deal Brexit would be a disaster, causing a recession, etc. No -one on either programme mentioned the fact that during the referendum, the fraudster and the IMF warned that simply voting to leave would cause a recession in 2017! It would also trigger a stockmarket and house price crash at once.
Of course there has been no recession, the economy has grown, the stockmarket has headed higher and house prices now are ahead of where they were in 2016 though are now falling. The IMF has, to its credit, ‘fessed that its 2016 forecasts were all wrong. I should cocoa. Yet there was no mention of this as the BBC treated Lagarde’s words as gospel. Natch Channel 4 Fake News also lead with these siren warnings without any comment on the “form” of the IMF when it comes to predictions in this area.
On Newsnight we were treated to a panel debate on Brexit with Kirsty Wark not hiding her remoaning views in the chair. Warning that Britain was in a bind and Brexit would end badly was an Irish politician and, for balance, er.. a former Civil servant who adamantly opposed Brexit. Impartial, fair and balanced? There was no-one present to argue in favour of Brexit.
Newsnight also covered the hearings for the Supreme Court vacancy where Trump nominee Brett Kavanaugh has been accused of sexual harassment 35 years ago when at High School. There was no mention of the witnesses who flatly contradict the allegation, only a grudging admission that the accuser is a rabid Trump hating democrat, that she has been accused by her own students of being flaky or that Kavanaugh’s mum (also a Judge) found the accuser’s parents guilty in a Court case many moons ago. Instead Wark sneered that Kavanaugh is a “known conservative”.
WTF. A conservative President nominates a conservative judge – well what a surprise that is. Knock me down with a feather. Whatever next? The Pope nominating a catholic to be a bishop?
The Wark sneer was in the same way you might talk of a “known felon” or a “known pervert”. The use of words was a shocking admission of partiality.
Back to the BBC News at ten where Middle East correspondent Jeremy Bowen reported on the evil Israelis trying to tear down a village, constructed illegally, in the West Bank. The details are for another day but what struck me was Bowen’s use of words. He talked of how Israel had “seized” the West Bank. Hmmm. I guess viewers might have thought Israel “seized it” from the Poor Palestinians.
The truth is that in 1967 Israel was attacked on all sides by the Arab nations. The West Bank was part of Jordan and the Palestinians were given no autonomy whatsoever by the Hashemite Kingdom. Jordanian troops went into Jerusalem’s Jewish areas to kill Jews. Israel fought back and eventually pushed the Jew murdering Jordanian army back past the Dead Sea and back into Jordan proper. That is how Israel gained control of the West Bank. That is not quite the story Bowen’s use of the word “seize” might suggest. It is part of the drip drip drip feed of fake news designed to blacken the name of Israel which the BBC serves up almost daily.
Why, I ask, should I be forced under threat of jail to pay a license fee for this tosh?
The Sunday Telegraph featured Mostafa prominently in a story “nowhere left for the refugees of Idlib.” Authors Said Ghazali and Middle East Correspondent Raf Sanchez gave an account of his travels as follows.
Mostafa and his family used to live in Aleppo but left after ISIS started to “murder opposition activists” then went to Raqqa but left after ISIS seized control. Next stop was land on the border with Turkey but they fled from here in 2015 after President Assad’s forces took control when they wen t to Idlib.
The trouble with this narrative is that it just cannot be true. ISIS never had a presence in Aleppo so did not kill opposition activists there. Aleppo was controlled by Assad until 2012 when what Call Me Dave Cameron termed “the Moderates”, i.e. a bunch of largely Al-Qaeada backed fighters seized one quarter of the City (East Aleppo). There they killed Christians, gays, Alawites, folks who had worked as Postmen for Assad, etc.
In 2014/14 ISIS occupied four villages near Aleppo (and co-operated with Cameron’s pals “the moderates” as Assad’s forces sought to reclaim all of the City, something they achieved in 2016.
So part one of Mostapha’s story is a lie. Maybe he did leave in 2012 heading to Raqqa but it fell to ISIS in march 2013 so his stay there was short. Where exactly did he go next? For in spring 2013 all of the border with Turkey was controlled by either ISIS, Al-Qaeda/The moderates backed by the West or by the Kurds. By 2015 ISIS was in retreat but still it was the Kurds or the Moderates who controlled the border, Assad seized no land. What did happen in 2015 was that the Al-Qaeda/Moderates seized Idlib from Assad’s forces.
So I put it to you that it was a desire to head to Al-Qaeda central rather than fleeing Assad which saw Mostapha and his family move to Idlib. His story is a tissue of lies but is presented as gospel by the Telegraph so that his testimony can be used to denounce Assad.
The same article also cites Ahmad who fled Aleppo in 2016? Was he always there? I doubt it. The only reason to flee Aleppo in 2016 was that the final small rebel enclave had fallen to Assad. Overall the population of Aleppo has gone up since Assad pushed out the islamofascists. Nearly all those who opted to leave Aleppo back in 2016 were fighters and their families and so Ahmad asks in the article “ what will you do if the regime comes? many will fight to the death.”
Ahmad is almost certainly a combatant yet this article is meant to be about refugees.
We are told by the Telegraph that there are 2.5 million folks in the province and half are refugees. The UN says the number is 2 million. Oddly back in 2011 pre-war it was 1.5 million suggesting that while quite a few folks have moved in, an awful lot have also left. Clearly, when Assad triumphs there will be many fighters and their families who wish to leave and continue their poisonous existence elsewhere. One wonders who in their right mind would want them? No doubt Mrs may will argue that Britain should "take its fair share."
But as has already happened in the rest of Syria in places like Aleppo and Ghouta – cited by the Telepgraph as places were folks fled when Assad regained control - refugees will also returning in huge numbers. The population of places now under Assad control having formerly been run by the "moderates" is going up. On a net net basis Syrians like Assad more than the West’s “moderates” with their penchant for decapitation and chucking folks off tall buildings.
The Telegraph will not report on that. Instead it serves up what is demonstrably fake news in support of the sad and misguided Western agenda.
PS. Tomorrow is the anniverasry of 9/11. That act was carried out by Al Qaeda. In Syria we in the UK, France and the US have been backing forces loyal to Al Qaeda with arms, money and by bombing their enemies. And our leaders regard that as a smaert move because? As, tomorrow, you take a moment to remember the thousands who dies at Ground Zero consider how we now support their killers. What folly. What evil.
America was a very different place then. In the “Solid South” the white majority opposed civil rights and voted for the party that had opposed the abolition of slavery – the Democrats. Blacks in the South voted for the party that freed them, the Republicans. Civil Rights changed the Dems and changed the south. And no Republican has come close to reversing that shake-up until now.
Quite simply by overseeing massive job creation, aided by his tax cuts, Trump has helped the poorest in America and yes, that means a lot of blacks. He has delivered life changing experiences. Years of listening to Democrats popping down to the ghetto at election time to sing Kumbya brought no jobs, no chance of a better life and black voters are starting to twig, in ever greater numbers, that they were just vote fodder for rich, largely white, liberals.
And how do Dem’s respond, with their white AntiFA activists chasing black conservatives out of restaurants? By trying to prove that Donald trump once used the N word? It may not be singing Kumbya with the folks in the ghetto but it is the same hopeless gesture politics which will make no difference to the lives of ordinary Americans be they white or black.
If Rasmussen is anywhere close to correct then #Trump2020 is a racing cert. The only question is whether Trump’s surging popularity among black and Hispanic voters – as well as his ongoing popularity among whites – will be translated into GOP votes in the mid-terms. If it is, then with many country club Congressmen standing down to be replaced by Trump loyalists the next two years you see a raft of radical reforms as well as a good bit of swamp draining with the folks in Congress singing from the same hymn sheet as POTUS. Bring it on.
Meanwhile have you seen the BBC or Channel 4 Fake News reporting about this earthquake? Is the Guardian telling its dwindling readership that the man they have branded as a racist on an almost daily basis is so popular with black and Hispanic voters? Er…don’t hold your breath. The liberal establishment is, for once, just speechless.
As I am sure you can remember, the liberal media, spearheaded in the UK by the BBC’s repellent Jon Sopel and Beltway Kylie Morris and Matt Frei of Channel 4 Fake News, demonstrated, to their satisfaction, if not that of anyone else, that Donald Trump was a racist back during the Presidential campaign of 2016. The Democrats and Hillary paid a few visits to the ghettos and sung Kumbaya and all was well.
Trump secured just 8% of the black vote which Kylie et al saw as some sort of vindication of the claim that Trump was a racist. Of course, as I pointed out at the time, it was not. That low score was not because Trump is or is not a racist but because, since the 1960s and civil rights blacks have just always voted Democrat however useless was the candidate, crooked Hillary Clinton being a case in point.
Nixon got 35% of the non-white vote in 1960. That was at a point when in the South it was the "Dixiecrats" - Southern Dems - that were resisting Civil Rights and thus blacks there voted for the party that had brought them their freedom from slavery, the party of Lincoln, the GOP. But since then the Republican candidate has - according to Gallup - polled among non white voters:
6% Goldwater 1964
12% Nixon 1968
13% Nixon 1972
15% Ford 1976
10% Reagan 1980
13% Reagan 1984
18% Bush 1988
11% Bush 1992
12% Dole 1996
At this point Gallup seperates hispanics and blacks and other non whites and it is clear that the GOP does a lot worse among black voters than among other non whites (for instance in 2004 polling 7% among blacks and 22% among other non whites to give an overall non-white 17% ) and that implies that the actual black vote since 1960 - other than in 1988 - has been consistently at 10% or below even when the GOP has won the battle for the White House. And so we go on..
3% Bush JNR 2000
7% Bush JNR 2004
1% McCain 2008
5% Romney 2012
In other words, in 2016 Trump did better (despite being a racist bigot according to the MSM) than any GOP candidate this century and almost certainly better than any GOP candidate, other than Bush senior in 1988 and possibly Ford in ’76, since Nixon 58 years ago.
However since the old racist, that is to say Trump, got into the White House the economy has boomed and that has seen more blacks lifted out pf poverty than at any time in memory. Dems may spend billions on Government programmes which employ lots of middle class folks to help the folks in the ghetto but they just don’t work, blacks stay poor. Freeing up the economy does work. Black wages are surging and thus in a poll a few days ago by Rasmussen Trump’s approval rating among black voters was an absolutely astonishing 29%. Now maybe approval ratings do not translate exactly into pulling levers in polling booths but if that poll is anywhere close to accurate this is an earthquake which makes #Trump2020 a slam dunk certainty.
Assuming The Donald has coat-tails it should also make the mid-terms in November very interesting indeed. If the personal popularity of POTUS among blacks translates into an unprecedented enthusiasm for the GOP then the Democrats are in massive trouble.
So how do the Dem’s respond? By threatening a black women having breakfast in a restaurant. I kid you not. This is not 1950s Alabama this is Philadelphia 2018. The black woman Candace Owens is a conservative commentator but video of ANTIFA, nearly all white folks who all support the Dems, driving this photogenic and charming young lady from a diner has shocked America.
As black America considers the idea that, whatever they were told about the bogeyman, racist Trump, they really have never had it so good, now they see the same white folks who called Trump a racist chasing a black woman out of a restaurant and haranguing her, which way do you expect Trump’s ratings to go?
Natch the liberal media and the Democratic party will respond by upping the volume on the chants of racism. But, it seems that black America is just not listening any more.
The BBC and its sister publication the Guardian had a weekend wankfest as large crowds gathered to protest against policies Donald Trump had already rescinded to deal with illegal migration across the Mexican border. But their coverage failed to show what is really happening. They are in denial as they serve up non-stop fake news.
The liberal media loves those protesters. But those large crowds are the same folks who protest against everything Trump does. If he says 2+2 equals 4 they scream “racist” and demand that Bob Mueller investigate POTUS for getting Russia to help him with his maths. As Trump brings peace to the Koreas they shout “fascist” and say that he has made the world more dangerous. As news comes through of surging jobs numbers especially among black workers they shout “well done Obama, for it is your policies that have delivered this despite Trump.”
And all the time this affluent middle class mob enjoy spending those tax cuts the President has implemented and which they said were just a sop to the rich.
So Trump is hated by well heeled liberals in the coastal states. Tell us something we did not know Jon Sopel et al.
What the liberal media is not discussing is how the polls show that most Americans actually approve of Trump’s tough line on immigration. And the sight of Beltway Dems and Hollywood celebs screaming about how they, effectively, want no controls at the Border only makes Trump more popular. Among GOP voters his approval rating is now 90% - as we approach the mid terms that is Reagan plus territory.
But more alarming still for the fake news media is that his overall approval rating among all voters is now 47% and climbing and if one factors in “shy Trumpsters” he is doing extraordinarily well for this point of the cycle, far better than Obama was. All talk of the Dems seizing control of Congress in November is now off the table. Not only will the GOP do well but those congressmen elected will be Trump Republicans not the Country Club set like McCain and Romney who cannot be relied upon to support Trump’s policies.
I still worry that, before we start celebrating a win for #Trump2020, the global economy may slow and the asset bubbles created over many years in the USA (and the UK) may start to pop. That would not help the Donald to defeat whichever candidate the Dems select. But, on the other hand, as the liberal media continues to give wall to wall coverage of the Trump hating mob and as the Democratic party aligns itself ever more closely to that mob whose views may be mainstream in the hipster infested parts of Brooklyn but are anathema to most Americans, the popularity of Trump and of the GOP will continue to climb.
And given how Trump's approval ratings in the biggest, solidly blue, states New York and California, are so incredibly low, basic maths suggests that in the rest of America and, critically, in the swing states of the Mid West he is well ahead. In 2016 Trump won partly because some folks thought he was awful but his opponent, crooked Hillary, was far worse. What the Dems just cannot understand, which makes them scream in an even more demented fashion, is that two years later more and more folks actually like Trump and what he is doing. Most of the folks who ldent their votes to Trump as the anti Clinton candidate are now firm pro Trumpsters. They are "deplorables too" and are most welcome to join the party.
One thing that you will not find reported on the BBC, CNN or read about in the Guardian is one group where there has been a big swing to Trump in recent weeks, helping fuel his ratings climb. That group is the Hispanic block. That should not be odd at all although one imagines that the liberal media elitists just will not understand.
More illegal migrants from the South will mean more folk ready to clean the lavatory of Nancy Pelosi et al or to serve them in swanky restaurants. But whose jobs will they be taking? Whose wages will they be threatening to undercut? In many cases it will be Hispanics living in the US legally and starting to pursue the America dream. They may wait in a restaurant but maybe their kids will go to college and get a better life. For such voters Donald Trump protects the American dream, the Dems threaten it.
If there was an election tomorrow the Dems would head to the ghettos and scream "Trump is a racist" not hoping but expecting to get what they regard as "their people" out in drov es. And the Dems would win the hispanic vote and the black vote. But with black employment zooming and black living standards rising in a way that just did not happen under Obama, there is little doubt that Trump would do better among black voters than any GOP candidate since Nixon and would almost certainly deliver the best ever GOP result among hispanics. But don't expect the mainstream media to tell you about that any day soon.
A few weeks ago the US Supreme Court threw out a case brought against a baker who had declined to bake a cake for a gay wedding. Though the owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop was happy to bake cakes for gay folks he, being a Christian, did not wish to be party to a celebration of something of which he did not approve. Oddly in the UK the Courts backed the gay couple but in the US the Courts accept that the State has no right to force a business to serve anyone. The liberal left moaned, wailed, shrieked and hurled abuse. This was outrageous they claimed - no business should be allowed to turn away customers on the basis of belief. It was not that the customers were gay it was that the cake ordered was for something the owner did not believe in. But the liberals said that did not matter.
At the weekend Donald Trump’s press secretary, the charming Sarah Huckabee Sanders joined seven friends at the Red Hen restaurant in Virginia. Some gay waiters said that the stance of the Trump administration on transgender folk serving in the army offended them and that they had a right not to serve Ms Sanders. The owner agreed with that and so asked Sanders to leave which she did without fuss.
The incident blew up not – as the fake news BBC reported – when Trump tweeted about it but when a waiter tweeted out the whiteboard showing a record of Sanders’ ejection which libtards across America spread like a virus across social media. Trump responded in his own way.
For the liberal left the Red Hen suddenly had every right to boot out Sanders to decline to serve her on the basis of her beliefs and those of the owner or rather her staff. Indeed now we see leading Democrat Maxine Walters urging businesses across America to stop serving officials of the Trump administration. That would all be part of the Love trumps Hate campaign that Dems are so keen on.
The hypocrisy of the left is obvious to all and this hateful action against Ms Sanders who is far more popular than Mr Trump will backfire. Trump is now at a 43% approval rating which at this point in the cycle (five months before the mid terms) is incredibly high, not seen since Reagan in the 80s. Given the phenomenon of shy Trumpers that might actually understate just how well this President is doing but it is not surprising when he is up against what is increasingly “the nasty party” and a party of obvious hypocrites.
Like many conservatives I support gay marriage. Why the hell should LGBT folk not suffer like the rest of us? But my position is consistent - a business should decide its own clientele. I’d hope – and expect – that a homophobic baker will in the end suffer from market forces as the west becomes ever more tolerant. I’m sure that the Red Hen is toast. Insulting someone like Sanders, who is well liked, on the basis of political belief sets an unpleasant precedent, it is just not in the spirit of Western liberal democracy. So many dems will not root for the Red Hen and its actions will thus alienate most of its customers.
The gay waiters can happily head off to the safe space called the soup kitchen not to serve but as customers and few will sympathise.
The problem of the left is that having argued two weeks ago that a business cannot turn away custom on the basis of belief, too many liberals today are arguing the exact opposite.
The liberal elite may not realise how daft they appear but mainstream America does. Keep it up libs: #Trump2020 becomes more of a racing cert every time folks like Robert de Niro or Maxine Walters start to opine.
Stranded in the car with the Mrs, I found myself forced to listen to the Jeremy Vine show on BBC Radio 2 as it discussed Donald Trump with the author, the Guardian writing metropolitan liberal elitist Christina Patterson. Listeners who liked Trump were invited to call in so that Christina could brand them as racists because she thinks all Trumpsters are racist. Keep it up liberal moron! Every such statement makes #Trump2020 even more of a shoo in.
Remember when Crooked Hillary branded Trump supporters as “Deplorables”. We took that as a badge of honour. Trump’s poll ratings improved. Smearing half the electorate is just not that smart. You kind of know that liberals like Patterson are losing the argument when they are forced to both deny what is fact ( Trump’s poll ratings at this stage of the cycle are very good indeed and getting better) but also just to resort to smears and insults.
The BBC then demonstrated exactly why it is not fair or impartial as Patterson discussed Trump’s policy on tariffs claiming that “it will hurt exactly the people he is trying to help, the white working class.” Consider that statement and let it sink in. Trump’s tariff plans are trying to help the entire working class in the rust belt, a working class that is both black and white. He has not inserted or talked of any measures to ensure only whites benefit. His anti illegal immigration policies, whatever you think of the, do not impact on working class blacks (or whites) in the rust belt except in that it might reduce competition for lower paying jobs.
What Trump is trying to do is to help the working classes. It was Patterson who inserted entirely without justification the word “white” to create fake news. The facts are that wages among black workers are rising faster than ever. Black unemployment is the lowest since 1972 having fallen sharply since Trump took office. The Dems may talk the talk on tackling black poverty but Trump walks the walk and that is why he increased the GOP vote among black voters in 2016, from 2012, and much to the annoyance of folks like Patterson, will increase it again in 2020.
Hands up I fell for fake news. That will teach me to believe every tweet and retweet from Donald Trump! What i wrote was:
The show Roseanne has been scrapped following some explicitly racist tweets by its star Roseanne Barr. ABC did the right thing. It has also pulled any re-runs of old shows. Perhaps that is a bit tough on other cast members who will lose royalties but there is a very strong case for it.
What is inexplicable as that instead ABC is showing re runs of the Cosby show starring a man just convicted of three counts of aggraved asaault, that is to say he is a sex offender. Only the statute of limitations saved him from more. We can all accept that racism is unacceptable but when did rape become acceptable?
Maybe it is just that famous Democrats called Bill get a free pass on that in America today?
In fact Cosby is also off air although it has taken a long time. The networks were a lot more forgiving of the old rapist. It goes to show that the best fake news is plausible. This was believable. It aslo begs the question of which shows of old will still be aired in a few years time. The day of 24 hours of Ellen re-runs is not far off.
The 2018 World Press Freedom Index is just out and following Leveson, Section 40 and the Lords' attempts to introduce press regulation by the backdoor the UK ranking has now slipped to No 40 in the world, in between Trinidad & Tobago and Burkina Faso. But heck we are still ahead of Burkina Faso but, perhaps, not for long.
It may stick in the craw to defend the fake news team at Channel 4 fake News or the grossly overpaid millionaire script readers at the BBC demanding, in the name of feminism and equality, gargantuan pay rises, paid for under threat of jail by folks earning a fraction of what they do. Too many of the media class are such good buddies with the folks in power who they are meant to hold to account that the Fourth Estate in Britain is, rightly, seen by many as corrupt, as part of the problem, not the solution.
Yet despite it all a free press will provide some check on corruption and abuse of power in the political, corporate and sporting world and elsewhere. There are many good folks in my profession who have not been corrupted and it is in all of our interests that they are allowed to work unhindered by the State. But in Airstrip One things are heading in the wrong direction.
This report tallies with that of Robert Fisk who is also in Douma. It looks more and more as if the claims of wretched Theresa May, the fag Macron and Donald Trump to have had proof that President Assad gassed Douma were lies and that makes the bombing of Syria, that they ordered, a war crime. When will the mainstream media stop behaving like war crazy jingoistic poltroons, spouting the Governmental fake news and start reporting what actually happened? Enjoy the video.
The 19.6% figure is the mean average gap but even Cathy Newman knows why we use the median number which is closer to 18%. If you don't know why listen to the Bath Spa lecture HERE.
But 18% is still very high. About half of the gap is down to just 17 employees. If the top 20 earners at ITN ( 17 of whom are men) and very few if any of whom are actual journalists as opposed to managers were removed that gender pay gap would be eliminated. Given that ITN is committed to halving the gender pay gap within the next five years if a senior managerial post falls vacant and you are a man I would not bother applying.
So what is the rest of the gap down to? Infuriatingly ITN does not break its gender pay gap down by age. But you can bet that its gap reflects that of society at large. That is to say among staff under 40 there will be no pay gap. It is not a matter of men and women getting different pay for different jobs. It is simply that the longer serving staff - who will be better paid- having risen through the ranks will be disproportionately men. Thirty years ago when I started in journalism most folks in my profession were men. When Old Jon Snow the anchor of Channel 4 Fake News started in about 1870, nearly everyone was male.
As time goes on and old farts like Snow are, finally and not before time, pensioned off the proportion of long serving and better paid staff who are female will increase and the gender pay gap will narrow. It is happening across the workplace. It will happen naturally at ITN. It is inevitable.
For a good while before she got thumped in the 2016 General Election a number of us pointed out that crooked Hillary Clinton kept on falling down and clearly had serious health issues. Natch we were dismissed as Alt-Right fruitcakes or Russian Trolls by the mainstream, liberal media. But the crooked one just keeps on falling on her fat arse. Here she is in India this week. Just when will the MSM admit that we critics were right all along and that their denial and failure to report issue during the campaign was the fake news.
Yeah that Donald Trump is a racist, our sort of story, says the Guardian and thus leads its foreign news section with a story "US Senator uses Trump Pocohontas jibe to raise awareness". Dem uber-bore Elizabeth Warren, according to the Guardian: "responded to President Trump's latest Pocohontas jibe yesterday by highlighting sexual violence against native American women, a tactic she said she would pursue every time the President "threw out" such a "racial slur"
Yes Trump calls Warren Pocohontas. The Guardian, being written by and for humourless liberal bastards desperate to show what an evil racist POTUS is, does not tell you why. So let me help. When Warren applied for a job at Harvard Law school she said that she was a Native American although if you look at her she appears to be whiter than most members of the Hitler Youth. But the liberals who run HLS loved the diversity cred and boasted about how they had their first "woman of color" on the payroll back in 1995.
Warren even contributed some old family recipes to a cookbook of Native American cuisine. Although it subsequently emerged that they were not very Native American at all less still part of the Warren family archive and, in fact, came from a plush restaurant she frequented. So then folks started pushing her on her claimed Indian heritage.
Eventually, by now in Congress, her staff managed to find a great great great grandmother who was designated as Cherokee in the online transcription of a marriage application of 1894. Great. So Warren was 1/32nd Native American and 31/32 white but she is still according to Harvard Law School a woman of color and according to the Dems a "Native American"
Unfortunately, the actual original marriage license does not list Great-Great-Great-Grandma as Cherokee at all so it now looks as if Ms Warren is in fact 32/32 white. Did you know I was 1/64th Swiss - can I claim any special exemptions if I go to Switzerland and claim my birthrights as being as Swiss as cuckoo clocks, alpine ski-ing and stashing gold stolen by the Nazis from Jews they had murdered? Have I told you about the old family recipe for Bűndnernusstorte passed down from my great, great great great Grandmother? Is there a compilation cook book I can submit it to as I reclaim my heritage? Of course not, my claim to be Swiss would be ridiculed. And as such for Trump to laugh at Warren's claim to be a Native American by calling her Pocohontas when she is, at the very best, 1/32 Native American but almost certainly, just like Frosty the Snowman, that is to say 100% white, seems perfectly fair.
It is not a racial slur on the Native Americans but a legitimate jibe at a woman who has played the race card to perfection to advance her own career in a way that will distract attention from the real issues Native Americans face. It is not a bad joke nickname but we all know that those on the left have no sense of humour at all and also a bit of a problem with real facts.
But its worse than that. By failing to put Trump's comments into their true context, the Guardian serves up what can only be seen as fake news. The article will confirm all the prejudices of its diminishing band of readers about the leader of the free world but it is one that is profoundly misleading.
For more than two decades the mad dog eating commies of North Korea have been trying to perfect missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads to the USA. Us President after US President has said how cross he is and if the dog eaters don't stop being so naughty they will impose more sanctions for China and most other folks to ignore.
Oddly enough this approach has not worked and after eight, especially spineless years, from President Hopey Change, Donald Trump came to power with North Korea having missiles that could nuke America. Naturally the liberal media had consistently praised the statesmanlike efforts of Nobel Peace Prize winner Hopey Change in attempting to secure peace & keeping the Korean Peninsula stable. They overlooked the fact that Obama had failed miserably in stopping the Korean nuclear & ICBM programmes, and so Obama handed over to Trump with a real hospital pass.
Trump told little Rocketman and North Korea where to get off. Mess with Trump's America and you will meet "fire and fury". Folks like the BBC's lamentable Jon Sopel or Beltway insider Kylie Morris of Channel 4 Fake News rounded up tame country club republicans and armies of Dems to say how POTUS was risking an apocalypse, threatening world peace and following a path of sheer insanity.
Wind forward and North Korea has now said that it will scrap its nuclear programme altogether if its safety is guaranteed. We do not know how this will play out but thanks to President Trump we have something we never saw under his predecessors who were lauded by the liberal media as sage diplomats on matters Korean. We have the chance of disarming a rogue nation, of taking away its nukes.
So who will bee first to apologise to the President for allowing their hatred of Donald Trump to drive them to call the past two decades of relations with North Korea so incredibly badly? Sopel? Morris? Any other member of the liberal news elite? Your silence is deafening guys.
My father has been watching the rugby like a hawk. Here in Greece I have been unable to watch but have kept in touch via the internet and calling my father after each game. Now this may not go down well with England supporters but in an Irish supporting family it was a perfect team as both our favourite teams won.
The "Old Country" defeated Wales. That has been a bad fixture for us for a while and in recent years my father and I have found ourselves exchanging the comment "at least that will make Olaf happy" after the final whistle. My daughter has a Welsh speaking mother, Big Nose, and is a strong nationalist. But this year we had no need for that consoling thought. Incidentally I loved this tweet from BBC Sport
Get Involved - There seems to be glowing sunshine in every part of the United Kingdom today, apart from Dublin. So where are you watching from? Send me your pictures on #bbcsixnations
You don't need to be a lifelong supporter of Irish Republicanism to see the flaw in that tweet but perhaps some basic history lessons might be helpful at the State funded fake news channel.
As for the other team whose victory we cheer? Our second team is, of course, anyone playing the Old Enemy. So there were cheers in both Shipston and Kalamata as Scotland put England to the sword. The win is all the more pleasant becuase of the pre-match swagger and arraogance olf the England team, manager and supporters. Pride, as they say,...
Next up for the men in Green it is Scotland in Dublin. Win that and the championship is almost in sight...
The narrative of folks like the BBC, The Guardian, CNN in fact the whole of the liberal media elite is that Donald Trump should not have defeated crooked Hillary in 2016. Without admitting that their gal was useless they agree that next time around the Donald just cannot win, in fact many argue that he will not stand at all. But have they actually looked at the polls in detail? If they have, they ignore them as they churn out yet more fake news.
On the impeachment level, after almost a year of Mueller nonsense a few folks associated with Trump have been charged with either financial crime pre-dating and unrelated to the campaign or of lying to the FBI. 13 Russians have been charged with interfering with the election, staring in 2014, a year before Trump decided to run. Facebook says most of the Russian money spent with it was spent after the General Election. No link has been shown between the 13 and the Trump campaign. In other words not a shred of evidence of Trump Russia collusion has emerged which is not surprising as there was none.
On the other hand the FBI, crooked Hillary and the Obama administration have been shown to have real links to Russia via the dirty dossier funded by Clinton, via Uranium One and have been shown lying to judges and destroying evidence of Clinton wrongdoing. Russiagate is a Democrat problem and Trump will just not get impeached. But can he win the vote?
As I noted repeatedly during the General Election there is always a "shy Trump" factor in all polls - something the liberal media ignores since it is their non stop vilification of Trump and his supporters that has created it. I am happy to admit to being a "deplorable" as Hillary Clinton branded 50% of her fellow Americans. And so are many others. But given the non stop attacks we Trumpsters have suffered in the press it is no surprise that some folks will pull the right lever on election day but don't dare admit it to anyone.
At this stage of his first Administration Obama was on 45% approving of his (dismal) performance. The most recent poll (Rasmussen) had Trump on an amazing 50% approving 49% not and he has been on the up in all recent polls. That Rasmussen poll is meant to have a margin of error of 2.5%. Now I concede that other polls (claiming a similar margin of error) taken a few days earlier have him on as low as 37% approval. One thing we can say for sure is that at least one of those polls is wildly wrong!
The overall tracking poll currently has Trump at c43% ( and rising). Throw in the shy Trumpsters and he is basically where Obama was at this point. But Trump's ratings are improving rapidly.
But there is another factor at play here. Trump lost the popular vote but stormed the electoral college. That is because millions of useless Dem votes piled up in safe and big Dem states like New York, California and Illinois. Whereas in smaller flyover states Trump won by a narrower margin. His landslides in the South and Mid West were also largely in smaller states - the only big red states being Texas and Florida.
There was a state by state poll on approval ratings undertaken some weeks ago when the overall picture was that Trump was nationally in the mid to high thirties. What was clear from that was that in places such as New York, New England and California, i.e safe Dem states, POTUS was even less liked than he was back in November 2016. There has been a large swing against him. But this makes no difference at all to the electoral college.
In the States that were safe Trump in 2016 he was still safe and in the swing states, back then he was in the 40s already. In other words, at what should be a low point for Trump (mid term year) he is still very much in contention in all the states that matter. Throw in the recent revival and the shy Trump factor and he could well be ahead or only marginally behind in all the swing states. At this point in the cycle that is a remarkably good showing.
The great unknown is how the economy fares between now and 2020. If it is stimulated by the Trump tax cuts and jobs continue to be created in those swing rust belt states the #Trump2020 victory party is s slam dunk cert. If it falters then the race is more of a toss up with a lot depending on which of the umpteen dwarfs the Dems are considering is selected as their candidate. Natch I am praying that Chelsea Clinton decides that it is her familial turn to steal the Dem nomination but the reality is that there is no strong and obvious choice bar Bernie Sanders who is a) very old, b) tainted by his wife's financial scandals and c) a total fruitcake.
When push comes to shove will folks in Ohio or Michigan want to back a man who thinks we should #takeaknee in solidarity with transgender campaigners in a programme funded by tax hikes? Okay I parody his position slightly, but on the big social and economic issues Trump stands with folks in Ohio, Bernie kneels with snowflakes in Brooklyn. It is the story I have commented on many times before, one of the two Americas.
The Bottom line is that any media outlet telling you that Trump has a 0% chance of residing in the White House after 2020 is just ignoring the facts to pedal fake news.
The liberal remoaning elite have spent the past year bleating on about Russian interference in the Brexit referendum. Loons like, person of the people, Carole Cadwalladr of the Guardian and all the folks at Channel 4 fake News have droned on ad nauseam. Sure there were only about 1000 tweets from Russian state related accounts on Brexit but that caused all 17.4 million of us to vote the wrong way. There is no evidence but that will not stop the Russian "exposes".
The remoaners argue, correctly, that foreign interference in a domestic vote is wrong. Oddly they did not complain when President Obama weighed in to intervene but folks like the Guardian editorial team operate in a post fact world where there is no need to be consistent.
So this week we learned that Hungarian American George Soros has given £700,000 to groups trying to overturn the referendum. Give her dues even the high priestess of barking mad metropolitan elitist remoaning, Gina Miller, says this is wrong. But most in the liberal media thing there is nothing to see here.
Thus, on Channel 4 Fake News, Krishnan Guru-Murthy, found himself interviewing Brexit supporting Richard Tice about the matter. Krishnan went straight for the smear as you can see below noting "There have been allegations of a nasty undertone in that George Soros, who throughout he's life has been attacked in an antisemitic way. That's been denied by various people today but what do you say to this allegation.
What to say? We Brexiteers were onme led by a Jewish businessman, Sir James Goldsmith ( father of arch Brexiteer Zac), back in the days of the Referendum Party. Would Krish like to clarify who exactly has been daft enough to go on the record saying that the objection to Soros money is because of his faith? Krishnan did not elaborate on that matter. Jews gave money to both pro and anti Brexit campaigns in the referendum. This is not about faith it is because Soros is a foreigner trying to get Britain to change a policy voted for by 17.4 million folks who, unlike Soros, have a British passport.
This was not a question from Guru-Murthy it was just a nasty and silly smear. When did you stop beating your wife? Are you sure that some of you lot are not Jew haters?.
Channel 4 reporter Lindsey Hilsum could not contain her excitement as she reported on the drought hitting Cape Town. There were a number of factors to blame but Climate Change was repeated many times. Her conclusion was clear, Governments across the world must not wait for climate change to hit them as it had hit the Cape as that would be too late, they must act now. Hmm. Fake news alert! We know Channel 4 prefers pious virtue signalling to hard data analysis but this was extreme.
As it happens Lindsey's report was filmed earlier in the week and was not live. That was a pity as on Friday it rained in Cape Town and more rain is forecast today. But that is an aside.
First up we might look at how dry the Cape is in historical terms. Luckily we have data from three weather stations in the Cape (Vrugbaar, Rustfontein and Nuweberg) c/o the South African Weather Service (SAWS) and the Department of Water & Sanitation (DWS). Drought conditions cannot be created in just one year so - accepting that 2017 was very dry( the driest since 1933) - it is better to look at four year trailing trends and if we do that we see that the current dry spell is a bit wetter than that ending 2005, is the same as that ending in 1975 and only marginally drier than that ending in 1935, before all those cars and coal fired power stations caused all this global warming.
So why is the Cape only running out of water now? The next set of data ignored by Lindsey is population. Now there is a caveat here in that not all folks use the same amount of water. The blacks in the shanty towns do not have baths and showers so use far less than other folks and the growth in the population of Cape Town is in part, but only in part, down to shanty towns. So what was the population at the height of previous dry spells? I cannot find a 1935 number but in 1946 it was 383,000 having trebled since the turn of the century. By 1973 it was 1.2 million rising ro 2.9 million by 2005 and today it is 3.8 million. In other words demand for water has rocketed.
There is a third factor Lindsey ignored completely - leakage. The infrastructure of water supply in South Africa was put in place by the evil Britishers as part of our Colonial oppression. As all kids are taught today, the Empire was a force for evil and one of the way that we oppressed the poor folks of South Africa was by building a world class water supply system, Christ we were bastards. I feel so fecking guilty. And to show what real bastards we were we built a similar system at the same time back home in Blighty.
Politicians being politicians they the used water rates as another source of revenue and failed for decades to reinvest the proceeds in maintaining the water supply system. Thus by the 1980s leakage rates in both countries were alarming and rising. In the UK the wicked and evil Tories privatised the industry, part of which involved forcing the companies to spend set amounts on repairs and maintenance each year, amounts linked to profits. Guess what? Leakage rates in the UK have fallen by a third to just above 20% and are still falling! That bitch Thatcher and her privatisations she has a lot to answer for.
In South Africa they have been spared the evil Tories and their dastardly schemes and thus water supply is still in the benevolent hands of the state. Thus capital spend has been insufficient to stop leakage rates rising and they are now 35% and still heading North. So more than 1 in three gallons taken from the reservoirs of the Cape never makes it to a tap.
But Lindsey Hilsum and her colleagues at Channel 4 Fake News do not care about real data. This drought is largely down to climate change and Governments need to prepare for that or they will suffer as the Cape is suffering now. It is that simple in the post fact fake news world of Channel 4.
The veteran Labour equalities campaigner Harriet Harman is at it again. By it I mean lying. She has tweeted: "Women £8 per hour @Tesco . Men £11. The equal pay uprising continues. #tescowomen #bbcwomen. Pay inequality cannot survive exposure."
As I have noted before the idea that we poor folks have to pay more tax to help women already in the top 2% of earners earn even more cash in an industry where wages are in decline (news) is obscene especially when there is very limited evidence that there is a material pay gap based on gender at the BBC. The Tesco case, much promoted by the BBC and the rest of the liberal media, is even more fitting in the post fact era.
The facts are that at Tesco folks working on checkouts (mostly women) get £8 an hour while warehouse staff ( mostly men) get £11 an hour. But a man on the checkout gets £8 an hour and a woman in the warehouse gets £11 and there are plenty of both. This is not about gender inequality but about different jobs attracting different pay. What is so wrong about that?
I understand that being the niece of an Earl and having being educated at uber posh St Pauls, Ms Harman might not be entirely au fait with how the other half live but the fact that different jobs attract different salaries is surely not too difficult a concept for even Ms Harman and the overpaid fake news generators at the BBC to grasp?
My sister N is the sort of public sector employed lefty whose prime source of information is the Guardian. And since I am about the only Tory she speaks to, for there are few to no-one in her social circle, there is no-one to challenge the lies she is fed by the BBC's sister publication. And thus when I asked her if she had seen the Cathy Newman car crash interview with Jordan Peterson on Channel 4 Fake News she said "I've read about all the abuse and death threats she is getting."
Sadly it is true that a very small number of folk have posted the most vile abuse and threats against Ms Newman. Just as the Left has some vile trolls who post the most hateful abuse against Jews and enemies of the dear leader Mr Corbyn, we on the right have our arseholes too.
Thus Channel 4 News has branded critics of Ms Newman as misogynists and said it has called in its security experts. The fact is that 99.9% of her critics, including my own wife, a Guardian reading lefty, criticise Newman because her performance was just so dreadful. We have every right to point out that a presenter earning a six figure salary at a State owned broadcaster has recorded an interview which is so toe-curlingly bad and that it demonstrates the mentality and intellectual vacuum at the heart of the liberal media establishment.
Yet the few vile threats allow C4 to move the narrative. The story is now one of trolls, harassment and the loony right. For folks like N that is all that they will read and know of the incident. My sister is bright enough to watch the whole video and I hope that she will see that there is far more to this story than Channel 4 and the Guardian would have her believe. Sadly others will not watch the video and will conclude that Cathy is just another victim of we evil folks who do not follow JC as he seeks to build a new Venezuala.
Members of Congress have been shown a 4 page memo which details FBI spying under the Obama adminstration in which crooked Hillary Clinton served. The memo has been described as "shocking" and "worse than Watergate." Now the pressure is on to #ReleasetheMemo.
Oddly the Dems in Congress are all opposed to releasing it while Republicans want it out. I can't think why there should be this partisan divide.
Meanwhile the liberal media tries it best to report on almost anything else. I am yet to see the BBC bother to cover this story. Presumably its grossly overpaid fake news man in North America Jon Sopel is too busy still trying to find a shred of evidence to back up his numerous assertions of Trump Russian collusion.
The story of corruption should never have been about Trump it was always about Hillary. #Releasethememo and then start the process to #LockHerup
I cannot deny that the award winners were worthy recipients. President Trump handed out gongs to various outlets. CNN was given four “awards”, with The New York Times taking two and one each going to ABC News and the magazines Time and Newsweek. But none for the BBC. Shocking.
Who can forget that classic BBC Newsnight "scoop" that Trump was doing so badly that he would lose Utah and Alaska to crooked Hillary and thus the GOP had to dump him before it was too late? Or numerous utterly bogus stories and 99% of Sopel's coverage. Only the other day Sopel posted a whole report on the new Trump book by Michael Wolff listing the damning quotes but neglecting to mention both Wolff's history of making up quotes in prior books or the fact that several of those quoted in this book - including Tony Blair - had denied quotes in this book. Surely with Sopel as its lead man the BBC merited an award for fake news such as this gem on the embassy move in Israel? It was robbed. Next year maybe POTUS could like the Oscars introduce a best foreign language category for the BBC to win by a country mile?
As for Channel 4 News, the home of British fake News: well I guess with its audience size Mr Trump had to draw the line somewhere in terms of obscure crackpot outlets fronted up by millionaire elititst liberal nutjobs like Cathy Newman.
On C4 Fake News Newman introduced the Prof as a "hero of the Alt Right". Alt Right started as a term which was very specific in the US and liberals quickly started to use it as interchangeable with racist, bigot, fascist etc. And by implication they thus argued that anyone who was a hero of the Alt Right must also be a racist, bigot, fascist etc. As it happens Jordan is a hero of many folks on the centre and right for the way he shows how data can be used to mislead. But for folks like Newman anyone to the right of Kenneth Clarke is more or less Alt Right. So she introduced the interview with a smear.
What followed was 30 minutes of comedy. Time and time again Peterson would make a point. Newman would respond by stating that he had said something completely different and accused him of bigotry on that basis. Hence at 5 minutes 40 seconds she says "so you deny the gender pay gap". Of course Peterson had denied nothing of the sort - and this seems all to close to home for me with recent events at Bath Spa - he merely stated clearly that there are a number of facts that explain the gap of which gender is only one.
The interview is full of such classics from Newman " Why shouldn't women have the right to children" she asks. Natch Jordan had never said they did not. "You're saying (gender) equality won't happen" Cathy asserted. Jordan had said nothing of the sort. At 27 minutes in there is a superb segment on lobsters in which Newman asserts " You are saying we should organise our society along the lines of lobsters." It goes without saying that Jordan Peterson had said absolutely nothing of the sort.
At one point, after another ludicrous made up assertion from Newman, Peterson noted that her comments were made "because you are not listening.". At around 23 minutes on the matter of free speech which Peterson believes in for all, but Newman believes in only selectively, Peterson actually managed to silence his harpie interregator with a question she could not answer.
You might think that Newman's string of ludicrous bogus assertions and failure to grasp hard data is a sign that she is very stupid. That would be a mistake, she is not. Like nearly all the media liberals she is a product of public school ( Charterhouse) and Oxbridge ( dark blue). She is clever. Her problem is that she is liberal media establishment to the core. It is in her DNA. Thus she does not believe in free speech where it challenges her core beliefs and she will not listen to those who advance arguments or produce data which really threaten those beliefs. And it was actions driven by that mindset which left her looking so remarkably stupid in the interview below.
To her enormous credit, Carrie Gracie the BBC's former China editor turned down a £45,000 pay rise last year when she pointed out that on £135,000 she earned far less than other International editors such as Jon "fake news" Sopel in the USA and Jeremy Bowen in thee Middle east. One issue is an apparent gender pay gap. The real issue is that overall pay levels are bloated and the BBC is unaccountable and funded by you and I under threat of jail.
Gracie gets this point. She regards earning £135,000 a year for doing a job she loves as more than fair. It is £74 an hour and easily enough to get you into the top 2% of income earners. Her salary was paid by the BBC which is funded by the taxpayer through State subsidy and directly via a license fee which we must pay whatever we earn under threat of jail.
Too many of Gracie's fellow female stars have demanded that she get a big pay rise in the name of feminism and gender equality. These greedy women should realise that the struggle for gender equality should focus on those at the bottom of the heap, women who are vulnerable and suffer real poverty not pampered millionaires.
The real issue is why Jon Sopel earns £200-249,000 putting him in the top 1% of earners. Has he really shown such exceptional talent at reading a script tpo justify this. The answer as Gracie points out is not to give her a pay hike but to start to slash the salaries of men like fake news Sopel and Bowen. That is gender equality without transferring more wealth from the 98.5% to the 1.5%.
Who other than greedy millionaires like Claire Balding and Fiona Bruce could argue against that?
Guardian columnist and celebrated virtue signaller Owen Jones earns £500,000 a year for writing material which is, far too often, directly contradicted by facts. Here is his take on demonstrations in Iran which have left more than 20 dead.
Solidarity with any Iranian protestors who are fighting for democracy and freedom, both from a vicious regime and from US domination ✊
Of course the demonstrators really should have nothing to fear since Iran sits on the UN Human Rights Council.
Jones is right that the Iranian regime is vicious. It is a bigoted theocratic and corrupt regime that has caused bloodshed across the Middle East. And I suspect that the US has learned its lesson from the blowback it suffered from its joint intervention with Britain in Iran in 1953.
If Owen Jones listened to the wise words of President Trump or the woman we right thinkers hope will succeed him in 2024, Nikki Haley, it is clear that the US has no desire to intervene in Iran. The days of the US wading into Mid East countries to stir up a hornets next ended when Trump whipped the warmonger, crooked Hillary, in 2016.
There is no evidence that the US wishes to intervene. That the wonderful Miss Haley and the leader of the free world have stated that folks should be allowed to protest without being shot dead is surely something that we can all agree on, can't we Owen?
However there absolutely no evidence at all that the Iranian protestors are out on the streets fighting for freedom from US domination as Jones asserts. Most of the - largely working class and poor - folks risking a beating from the National Guard are protesting against the lack of jobs and spiralling food prices. Some others want regime change in Iran. Only Jones imagines that the protests are somehow against the country which he and Iran's rulers jointly view as the Great Satan.
Just sometimes Jones gets it right. But his propensity to assert things which are patently wrong means that even when he is correct you just assume that he is making it up. I guess round at the fake news publication that is the Guardian that may not matter but perhaps such willingness to publish such easily demonstrable lies might, in some way, explain the ongoing decline in circulation?
A friend who is the epitome of the remoaning metropolitan elitist emails me today to claim that "you really are becoming a fascist in your old age what with your support of Donald Trump and your climate change denial." The elitists always forget that labelling anyone with whom you disagree as a fascist demeans the true horror of what fascism is. But I suppose it is easier than actually debating facts. I shall deal with my admiration of the leader of the free world another day but let's look at some hard facts about climate change or , as it used to be known, global warming. I bring you three quotes:
The first is from 2000. David Viner who made his name at the world leading global warming (data bodging) establishment that was the University of East Anglia warned in 2000 in the Indescribably boring newspaper that because of global warming snow would soon become a “rare and exciting event”. He added: “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”
The UAE forecasts published in the late 1990s, replicated by other experts notably the IPCC, suggested that the world would just get hotter and hotter. That underpinned Viner's prediction. And this Group Think has formed the basis for the Paris Accord and other initiatives that will cripple Western economies in order to fight global warming. Only one world leader has dared to point out how horribly wrong the UEA forecasts ( and all the other "expert" projections) have been so far. If Viner at al cannot get their forecasts right for 20 years why should we believe their 100 year guesstimates?
Of course the only leader understanding this basic logic is Mr Donald Trump. Fools like Theresa May and all of the rest of the EU are happy to sign up to economic suicide for their own nations even though the data on which the hara kiri pledges are made is now utterly suspect.
So you understand Viner's predictions and the UAE/IPCC projections on which they are based. Now I refer you to the Guardian, the fake news publication of choice for metropolitan liberal elitists, from yesterday:
Record-breaking big freeze grips much of North America
Bone-chilling cold gripped the middle of the US as 2018 began on Monday, breaking a low temperature record, icing some New Year’s celebrations and leading to at least two deaths attributed to exposure to the elements.
The National Weather Service issued wind chill advisories covering a vast area from south Texas all the way to Canada and from Montana and Wyoming in the west through New England to the northern tip of Maine.
Dangerously low temperatures enveloped eight midwest states including parts of Kansas, Missouri, Illinois and Nebraska along with nearly all of Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota and North Dakota.
The weather service said a temperature of 15 below zero (-9.44C) was recorded in Omaha before midnight on Sunday, breaking a record low dating back to 1884, and the temperature was still dropping early on New Year’s Day. That reading did not include the wind chill effect.
etc etc etc
But maybe that is a one off? I now refer you to Uncle Chris Booker writing in the Telegraph ten years ago:
"The winter from hell’
Over the first three months of 2008, as global temperatures continued to fall, the world endured one of its coldest winters for decades, In January, the northern hemisphere recorded its most extensive snow cover for the month since 1966 (just before those predictions that the world might be entering a ‘new ice age’). Not only were there record snow falls across North America, but countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq and several regions of China experienced more snow than they had seen for 50 or even 100 years. NOAA and the US National Climate Data Center reported that on land it had been only the 63rd warmest January globally in 114 years.
In February the chill continued. Snow was recorded in the deserts of southern Iran where no one could remember it ever falling before. Jerusalem had its second snowfall in a month. Astonished Athenians gazed up at a snow-draped Acropolis, while more than 200 villages in Greece and Crete were cut off by blizzards. In Turkey the number of villages cut off was estimated at 1,000.] Further heavy snows across southern China added to a disaster which had already damaged 10 percent of the country’s forests and devastated thousands of square miles of farmland.
As the four official sources of temperature data agreed that global temperatures had fallen below their 20th century average, even Hansen’s GISS figures showed the steepest January-to-January global temperature drop (0.75 degrees) since surface records began in 1880.
In the US in early March there were blizzards as far south as Texas and Arkansas. In the northern US states and Canada what was being called ‘the winter from hell’ continued to break records for cold and snow going back in some cases as far as 1873. In Afghanistan it was reported that the abnormal snow and freezing weather had killed 1,500 people and 200,000 animals. In Tibet six months of snow and record low temperatures had killed 500,000 animals, leaving a further three million at risk of starvation.
Meanwhile in Antarctica sea-ice cover was at its highest March level since satellite records began in 1979, nearly a third above its 30-year average. In the Arctic, where sea-ice the previous September had dropped to 3 million square kilometres, its lowest level ever recorded, prompting frenzied media predictions that it would soon be gone altogether, the winter freeze had now returned the ice to 13 million square kilometres, the same level it had been at a year earlier.
In western Greenland, the Danish Meteorological Institute recorded temperatures 30 degrees C below zero, while more ice was clogging the strait between Greenland and Canada than at any time for 15 years.
Snow falling in record amounts in winter, whatever next?. To happen once in a decade looks like an inconvenient truth. To happen twice suggests that the predictions made to support the bogus religion that is global warming by the "experts" are just plain bollocks. Here in Europe we ignore the facts, the record snowfalls, the plunging temperatures and still stuff the peasants with energy tariffs to fight global warming, we crucify heavy industry with additional costs to stop the planet getting warmer, our leaders follow this religion blindly.
Only one politician looks at the real data and is brave enough to call out global warming for the fraud that it is. That admirable and brave man is Donald Trump and the true fascists are those who try to close down debate on climate change by saying that it is a settled science when the hard data of what is falling from our skies suggests that this is simply not the case.
As of 2019 new British passports will be coloured blue as in the good old days, not EU red. This will not cost £500 million as some remoaners like James Caan claimed. It will not cost a cent. But still the fake news continues with the loathsome Guardian leading the way. Its headline today is "Blue Passports to mean red tape say EU officials" Natch this is just sheer fiction.
Certain EU officials have told the Guardian that once we leave the Evil Empire those of us with British passports may face delays at airports as we leave the EU queues and go into the Rest of the World Queues. Well if EU countries wish to punish Brits for Brexit by under-staffing the RoW lines I am sure that it will do wonders for the tourist trade in Spain, Italy, Greece etc. In other words while the EU wants to threaten another punishment beating for we naughty Brits, the real casualties will end up being its own citizens.
But that is not the point. The point is that we will be punished for being Brits, the colour of our passport makes no difference. We could stick with EU red or go for a glorious LGBT rainbow to pander to the Guardian and it would make no difference. In other words the Guardian headline is just pure fake news bollocks.
The first footage on the State funded broadcaster Pravda was of Palestinians throwing stones and other missiles at Israeli troops on the West Bank. The Troops responded with tear gas. The voice-over then talked of Israeli retaliation which saw two dead in Gaza after air strikes.
So what actually happened? Well the folks on the West Bank came out onto the streets where they celebrated 9/11 but did nothing last year when Russia recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel to chuck stones at Israelis to protest at the US following Russia's lead.
Meanwhile in Gaza, Israeli war planes precision bombed a site where Hamas fighters were sending rockets onto Israeli citizens. One of those rockets had landed on a nursery school. The aim was not to attack military targets in Israel just to kill Jews. So the Israeli air force bombed the site and killed two men who were in fact Hamas fighters engaged in attempted Jew killing. They knocked out a site whose sole purpose was Jew killing.
Linking the West Bank protests to the Israeli air strike was bad enough in that there was no link whatsoever. But then describing Israel's actions as retaliation is just an untruth, pure unadulterated fake news and it is fake news with menace. What Israel did is called self defence.
If someone was sending rockets onto civilian areas in any other country on earth the BBC would describe a targeted strike on those sending the rockets and their launch site as defence. Taking out the rocket launching site will save lives of civilians. But when those sending the rockets are trying to kill Jews the BBC describes it as retaliation.
Why is the life of a kid at a nursery in Israel not something the Jewish state is allowed to protect? Once again the BBC shows itself to be morally bankrupt when it comes to the treatment of the Jewish state. But here in Airstrip One, if I do not pay a poll tax to fund its work I will be threatened with jail. Wonderful.
A week ago it was ABC that caused a stockmarket mini crash by making up a story about Donald Trump and Russian collusion. 24 hours later it fessed to fake news. All those liberal Dems who had called for the head of POTUS on the original fake news, failed to apologise. But did they learn their lesson? Whaddyathink?
Yesterday CNN reported that senior Trump campaign figures including the Donald himself were sent emails giving them access to those DNC emails on Wikileaks, which showed what a bunch of crooks the Dems were, a whole month before anyone else knew about them. Ho ho ho Wikileaks/Trump collusion, once again the liberal media and the Beltway Dems screamed for blood as the failing Russia witch hunt circus continued.
24 hours later CNN has fessed up to serving up fake news again. The emails the Trumpers received were sent a day after Wikileaks dumped the emails for all to see. In other words the CNN story was utterly bogus, pure unadulterated fake news. Once again the liberal media trolls, the snowflakes on twitter and the Beltway Dems are not apologising for the calls for Trump blood.
Meanwhile real America increasingly agrees with the Donald that the liberal media will serve up any fake news it wants to try to smear him. They tried their best to get crooked Hillary elected in 2016 and they are already batting for whichever Dem flies the flag for Big Government and fiscal recklessness in 2020. But real America sees through this charade. In the face of this diet of fake news readership/viewing of the established MSM continues to dwindle.
I guess that means more worthless journalists fired as market forces kick in and a guaranteed re-election for The Donald in 2020. Good news all round.
For more than two decades Congress has pushed for the US to move its embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which is, after all, the capital. It is where the Knesset sits and is the logical place to be situated. Except of course that the Arab world would rather than the embassy was in Tel Aviv or better still scrapped altogether and the Jews pushed into the sea.
The BBC clearly sides with the Arabs and opposes anything Trump proposes which today will be to do what Congress urges and what he promised to do in the election. Gosh, a politician fulfilling a pledge, how awful.
The BBC insists that this will annoy the Arabs and cause protests on the Streets so challenging peace. Those streets of course were the same ones where many Palestinians celebrated 9/11. Twenty years of pandering to such hate has not exactly changed any minds has it? Why not show some support for the only democracy in the region and the only country allowing free speech, full rights for women and LGBTs? And of course are only steadfast ally in the Middle East?
On BBC Radio 4 Jon Sopel explained why not. Trump "was urged by everyone not to withdraw from the Paris climate accord and he did it anyway" and this will be the same. But Jon that is fake news is it not?
Paris commits the West to cut carbon emissions while allowing the big emitters (notably India and China) to belch out more than ever. It is economic suicide for the West which will not tackle carbon emissions. The link between them and climate change is not proven so America was asked to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of jobs for a bogus religion. Many in the US supported Trump all the way.
So the statement "everyone" opposed his move on Paris was a lie. Unless Jon defines "everyone" as just being the liberal elites and the beltway cliques which, in his patronising way, he quite possibly does.
Before she leaves in the morning, to fill the empty heads of impressionable snowflakes with left wing nonsense, the Mrs always switches on Radio 4. As I wander into the Kitchen to make morning coffees I am treated to some real gems and insight into the mad mindset of the state funded fake news outlet and the mindset of an utterly out of touch metropolitan elite.
On Women's Hour today a lefty academic and a mother were discussing make up for kids in schools. The host summed it up thus. So when girls wear too much makeup they are condemned but if boys experiment with the same make up they are applauded for experimenting....
Right so the schooling system is just sexist.
I give up. Are boys really universally applauded for experimenting with make-up in 2017? Maybe in zone 1 London, where the 1% dwell, they are but I sense that most of us in Britain really would not be happy with schools applauding such things. And is it really sexist to suggest that 11 year old girls sexualising themselves at an early age is not that wonderful either?
I'm sure that very few folks in Britain share the values of the BBC on this matter. But maybe I am wrong and am just old reactionary who is out of touch with the modern world and the BBC really does speak for the nation as it is today. Somehow I think not.
The loathsome, state funded, fake news producing, BBC will tonight tell you that “all your donation will go to Children in Need.” They will not tell you that "all your donations go to children in need." Do you get the difference? It is c£8 million quid of difference.
According to the June 2015 accounts, spending by Children In Need was more than £62 million but included £4.7 million costs of generating funds, £2.5 million grant-making and policy and £400,000 governance. Just under £55 million went out in grants. An awful lot of the 96 full time staff are earning more than £100,000 a year and all of them are very well paid.
Call me a hypocrite but at my son's nursery the staff have this week been raising money for Children in Need. After paying steep fees it is a bit rich asking for us to dip our hands in our pockets again but there was real moral pressure as they encouraged us to buy tea cakes and as they dressed up in animal costumes pedalling away on an exercise bike. So I gave a couple of quid.
I gave far more to Woodlarks which is not a fashionable charity so does not get a cent from Children in Need even though it helps children who being hugely disables really are in need. And I have asked others to donate too.
The celebs on the BBC tonight who boost their careers with a spot of charity virtue signalling are one reason I find the whole spectacle of Children in Need so nauseating. But it is the fact that so much of the cash given goes to Children in Need not children in need that really makes me angry. If you really want to help Children in Need this Christmas support the Woodlarks grotto campaign where we have raised almost 80% of our £2,500 target since Tuesday, by making a small pledge which will change someone's Christmas HERE.
My one year old son Joshua delights with playing with mobile phones and TV controls. Thus poor Sam Antar got a 3 AM call from me in New York when my son managed to press a few buttons in the right order. Just a few minutes ago I got a phone reminder of something important. I do not actually know how to set such a reminder but Joshua has managed it. At least it was not at 2.58 AM like last time.
He has also fiddled with the remote controls for the TV and done something I just cannot unscramble. The net result is that the only channel I can now watch is BBC 1. God, how have I sinned? The Mrs is away until Friday night so until then no Frasier, Midsomer, Lewis, Dalziel & Pascoe, The Sweeney, Morse. Instead it is just fake news and annoying overpaid luvvies preaching at me. It is either a preview of hell or a good excuse to catch up on some work.
Tax avoidance is legal - millions of us do it by owning an ISA. It describes legitimate ways to pay as little tax as you can do within the law. Tax evasion is avoiding paying tax by breaking the law. Simple enough? Not for John Humphreys, the grotesquely overpaid presenter of Radio 4's flagship fake news programme Today.
The pious Welshman described tax avoidance is "just legal". No John this is like pregnancy. You cannot be half pregnant. When it comes to the law on how you pay your taxes you either stick to it or you break it. Those engaged in tax avoidance ( does Humphrey's shelter any of his millions within an ISA?) are not doing something that is "just legal" but something that is 100% legal. Were they to be doing something that was illegal they would be evaders.
Is this slip of the tongue ignorance? Possibly. Today is pretty weak on basic economics. But it also has form. It pushes an agenda where the rich - whom it imagines to be evil capitalists and sports stars not grossly overpaid presenters - should pay more in tax to support a bloated state. Those fat cats who use legitimate means to ensure that they don't pay more than they have to to Nanny state are deemed to be fair game for attack.
Humphrey's throwaway comment again exposes the BBC groupthink.
The British liberal media are still wiping themselves down having been unable to contain their excitement as crooked Hillary Clinton allowed them to the chance to give fawning interviews as she plugged her Godawful book "What Happened?" As such they seem unable to report the big stories in US politics like Hillary's collusion with the Russians. Instead we are treated to Jon Snow on Channel 4 and the various BBC libtards telling us that the Republican Party has had enough of Trump as two senior senators line up to attack him. The truth is that Jeff Flake of Arizona an d Bob Corker of Tennessee are the sort of Country club Republicans who backed Romney and McCain enthusiastically but did not really mind that Obama won since they agreed with President Hopey Change on most things.
Realising that they could not win a GOP Primary let alone a Senate race next time around they are quitting ahead of defeat. They are out of tune with their party and out of tune with America. Pathetically Jon Snow stated that losing two senators when the Senate was splay 552-48 for the GOP showed what trouble Trump was in. The fact that Corker and Flake usually side with the Dems but will be replaced by Republicans who really are Republicans is actually a gain for Trump. Either Snow does not understand that point in which case the old fool is useless or he does but is so intent on Trump bashing that he carries on regardless.
Then came the Trump Dossier. This document is the basis for all the claims made against Donald Trump that showed him having links to Russia, colluding with it and being capable olf blackmail by the KGB. This dossier was leaked just months before the poll. Throw in the claim that it was Russia who hacked the DNC and you have a good old story to tell.
Of course Wikileaks has made it clear that the DNC dump did not come from Russia. And after almost a year investigating the Trump dossier it has been found to be either total fantasy or utterly unproven. The shock bombshell this week is the revelation of who paid millions of dollars for Fusion GPS ( a body with very close links to Russia) to compile the dossier. The answer came this week and it is Hillary Clinton.
Senior Dems are rapidly distancing themselves from the crooked one. Paying a company with close links to Russia to make up smears against Trump then leaking it is really very bad indeed. Throw in Uranium One and the Russian spies and the Russia scandal becomes utterly toxic for crooked Hillary. If "lock her up" was said tongue in cheek in 2016 surely it now becomes a very serious option. Like her husband before her she may end up facing a special prosecutor and she won't even have got a cute female intern to go down on her for her pains.
Of course, for the liberal media which has, without any evidence other than Hillary's discredited dossier, been banging on about Trump and Russia for the past year whilst fawning over Hillary this is all a bit embarrassing too. And maybe that explains the silence on this matter of the BBC, the Guardian, C4 and the rest of the fake news wolfpack?
Tory MP Christopher Heaton-Harris seems to be in a spot of bother in certain circles for writing to university vice chancellors asking for a list of those lecturers who were running course material on Brexit and asking to see that course material. That is what actually happened but the BBC's senior reporter John Simpson tweeted out something rather different. This is fake news surely?
Mr Heaton-Harris has his suspicions as to how the fortress of the liberal elitist left that is British academia is teaching our young folks about Brexit. So do I. Academia voted overwhelmingly to remain and as we have seen time and time again on campuses across the West those who dissent from what is deemed the orthodox view, that is to say the Guardian editorial line, are just not tolerated. Whether it be on global warming, transgender rights or Brexit the debate is settled and dissent is just not allowed.
But it could be that the Universities are teaching Brexit matters in an even handed manner with professors giving equal weight to arguments for and against and allowing their students to make up their minds. I hope that is what is happening. Mr Heaton-Harris made a request so that the facts are known. That seems utterly legitimate. He did not, as Simpson asserts, demand details of anti Brexit teachers. That would be wrong but it did not happen. Yet the most senior BBC reporter tweeted that it did. It is fake news. Why am I forced to pay a poll tax for the bloated salary of a tweeter of fake news, or lies as they used to be called?
Academia, including my Mrs, has reacted with outrage. I managed to stifle a laugh as she complained about the burden of work that would fall on stressed academics in complying with this. Surely they could find ten minutes during the forthcoming reading week, or during the 26 weeks a year when they do research during student holidays, to email over their lectures on this subject?
But the Mrs and others also bleat about Government interference in academic freedom. The move was branded "McCarthyite" by Prof Kevin Featherstone, head of the European Institute at the London School of Economics and "sinister" by Prof David Green, the vice-Chancellor of Worcester University who likened it to Newspeak and the Thought Police from George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Of course it is nothing of the sort. There is no proposal to ban anything. But surely as the taxpayer funds academia we have a right to know what is being taught? Had a Labour minister asked that all academics hand over course notes on immigration to establish that it was being taught in a fair manner would there be any objections? Of course not. It is right that all such matters are taught fairly and in a balanced manner with real debate allowed and indeed encouraged.
If academia is, indeed, embracing such an approach to its teaching of Brexit it has nothing to fear or to hide. The way that it has attacked Mr Heaton-Harris with such venom only confirms the suspicions of folks such as myself that, in at least some cases, its approach is far from balanced and that, like global warming, it regards Brexit as "settled science" with only one possible viewpoint deemed acceptable.
As she plugs her tawdry lie packed book "How I lost the election even though I was a brilliant candidate and it was everyone else's fault but I won really" Crooked Hillary Clinton tells every fawning liberal media interviewer in turn that the Russians worked hand in hand with Donald Trump to rig the poll and cheat her out of victory. After nine months of exhaustive investigations and any number of lurid smears not one shred of evidence has been produced to justify this assertion made to and by unquestioning MSM "journalists" . Indeed even the emails coming from the DNC and published by Wikileaks did not come from Russian hacking as Hillary asserts. But this is not the real Russian scandal.
That has broken this week with news that for six years the FRBI has been investigating how Russian businessmen, like Bill Clinton's fellow rapist and campaigner for women's rights Harvey Weinstein, made vast donations to the Clinton Foundation at a time when Lady MacBeth was Secretary of State. She then enforced a policy U-turn which allowed the Russians to buy 20% of all US uranium reserves.
This is, of course, a total coincidence.But it is not one that the liberal media is bothering to report to their ever reducing number of readers and viewers who actually enjoy consuming fake news. If a Trump associate is asked by the FBI if he has ever tasted Russian vodka, the Feds leak it and it is all over the New York Times, WashPo or CNN within minutes. The FBI has kept this story very quiet as it might have been electoral dynamite a years or so ago.
Incidentally, you may argue, as the mainstream press does when excusing the crooked one for not returning Weinstein's cash, that the Clinton Foundation does valuable work for good causes with donations as well as funding the $3 million wedding of the brat Chelsea. Well up to a point. The New York Post puts this in context:
The Clinton family's mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid. The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.
Chelsea not only had her wedding paid for by the Charity but was on the payroll too. This is a fake charity. And now we see what sort of favour donors got in return for their generosity. The real Russian scandal of the 2016 election is a Clinton one. Now when do you expect the BBC, The Guardian, C4 and the rest to get around to reporting this one? Don't hold your breath.
Meanwhile may I remind President Trump of a campaign pledge that inspired so many of us "Lock Her Up!" Mr President: What the hell are you waiting for?
Grossly overpaid Nick Robinson of the State Funded fake news broadcaster has taken to the BBC's sister paper, the Guardian, to bleat on about "guerrilla attacks" on the Beeb from nasty internet sites. Ah diddums. Poor baby.
Nick argues that these attacks corrode trust in the State broadcaster and picks one example from the left wing Canary website, which almost prides itself on not checking facts as that is what old style journalists do, to make his case. He seems to miss the point that as this story from the Canary was debunked as have been so many of its other made up pieces, no-one in their right mind takes it seriously.
But at least we plebs are not forced by threat of jail to pay a poll tax to support the Canary. As such, we plebs have no right to quiz its staff on how much they are paid and it does not really matter if it puts out fake news or shows utter editorial bias. But the BBC is state funded. The salaries of its staff, like Nick, are obscene and are not driven by market forces - as the BBC claims - when such a vast state subsidised operator dominates the market.
Moreover, the BBC is time and time again shown to be running with an implicit bias or simply to be broadcasting fake news. Since we taxpayers fund this shite we have every right to critique it whether we do so in the pub or by posting examples of the BBC's failings on websites as I do about three times a week HERE.
And if this upsets the overpaid and cossetted stars of the BBC I make no apology. Folks such as precious Nick should remember that they work for me (the taxpayer) not the other way round.
Let me be clear the right AfD party in Germany are vile folks. I would not have been among the 13% of Krauts who voted for them had I had the vote. Calling them Nazis, as a few hundred left wing protesters, covered extensively by the BBC, did diminishes the horror of what the Nazis actually did but they are the closest thing Germany has seen to a Nazi since 1945. That does not excuse vile smears the BBC carried against the AFD. It was pure fake news.
Last night's late evening news saw reporter Damian Grammaticas with the young, telegenic protesters at that rally. The AfD may have garnered 5 million votes that day but the 500 protesters were the ones to report on. Damian asked one very good looking young lady why she was there and she told him that an Afd leader had said that Germans should be proud of what Germany did during the war. Cripes that really is appalling thing to say.
But as Damian knows full well, no Afd leader has said that at all. Alexander Gauland a co-leader of the Afd gave a very widely reported speech two weeks ago which the young lady is horribly misquoting. Either through ignorance or malice her misquote is a smear on the Afd. The BBC must have known that but carried it on its main news anyway. It could have run an interview with a protester who did not lie smear, it opted not to. That is fake news.
What Herr Gauland actually said starts with an admission that there were "wrongs of the past" in relation to WW2. But in terms of the men who fought he noted that Germans should "be proud of the achievements of German soldiers in two world wars”. That is proud of achievements not of war crimes and other matters which are noted as wrong.
The snowflakes protesting, perhaps, need a history lesson. In World War One both sides committed war crimes such as executing men who had surrendered. But though the conflict was horrible and bloody the overall level of such crimes were low and there is scant evidence that the Germans were any worse than our side. The war was a pointless clash of Empires not one driven by one sided German aggression but one into which Germany and Britain were sucked by a complex string of alliances. Eleven million Germans served in that pointless war. Just as we in Britain look back and honour our dead and - while they lived - honoured the survivors as brave men fighting for their Country it is right that Germany should do the same.
And so to WW2 where the Wehrmacht, the army, did commit war crimes. Most German war crimes were committed not by regular soldiers but by the SS, politically driven volunteer fighters, but regular soldiers clearly had a pretty long rap sheet. However he vast majority - well over 95% - of the 13.5 million men who fought for Germany in World War Two were not guilty of war crimes. Five million of them never home. Those men who defended Stalingrad to the bitter end, who invaded Crete by Paratroop or who fought tooth and nail to protect Germany as it was clear the war was lost were incredibly brave.
We know of the awful war crimes Russian soldiers committed as they swept through Prussia. Systematic industrial scale rape should not be part of war. Yet Russia honours its fighters without mentioning any of this. And no-one objects. Herr Gauland makes it clear he does not celebrate war crimes and acknowledges that there were many but thinks it fit to celebrate the bravery and conduct the vast majority of ordinary German soldiers in WW2 in the same way every other country is allowed to. These soldiers were not fighting as Nazis but as Germans.
What Gauland actually said in his speech is, objectively, at least worthy of discussion if not completely fair. What he did not say at all is what the BBC contrived to smear him with. That is fake news. Either Mr Grammaticas is so profoundly ignorant of the German election that he was unaware of the smear in which case the BBC should apologise and fire him at once or he knew it was a smear as did the rest of the editorial team and just went along with the fake news agenda anyway. I'd bet the ranch on option two. Pravda has "form."
You may not remember the name but surely you remember the wall to wall coverage in late August 2016 when a Polish man was "murdered" in Harlow, Essex. On the state Broadcaster Pravda Daniel Sandford led the main news bulletins claiming this was a ‘frenzied’ race-hate murder by feral youths, triggered by Brexit. Ramming home this core message we had comments supporting that agenda from the local MP and a Polish diplomat. There was no question of "waiting for the facts" as we are all urged to to after each terror attack - though we all know that it was not Colonel Mustard wth the bucket bomb in the library. The liberal media had an agenda and Mr Jozwik's corpse would support that agenda.
The BBC's sister paper the Guardian was worse. Its lead opinion piece on September 5 was headlined "The killing of a Polish man exposes the reality of post-referendum racism". It continued "Arkadiusz Jóźwik died after an attack in Harlow. The government must not allow xenophobes to set the tone since the Brexit vote"
Over on the BBC's flagship fake news programme John Sweeney carried an interview in which a friend of the dead man suggested that Nigel Farage ‘now has blood on his hands’. There was no challenge to that then as the rest of Sweeney's piece followed the same theme.
The liberal press reported gushingly on protest marches against Brexit racism spurred on by the dead pole. Mr Jozwik's killer has now been tried and convicted of manslaughter. Here is what actually happened. There was no feral gang of racist youths in Harlow last August 31. One 15 year old lad, said to be a ‘shrimp’ little more than five feet tall was convicted of manslaughter. He floored Jozwik with one ‘superman’ punch from behind but it was not the punch that killed but Jozwik hitting the street. The CPS admitted that the punch was not intended to kill but was a reaction.
To what you ask? It seems that Mr Joswik (a large man) and a pal had been out drinking and Mr Joswik was - according to numerous witness statements - hammered. He was not quite the sober, gentle quiet giant we had been told he was by the liberal media last year.
It gets better. The Poles made a stream of racist remarks to "the shrimp" and his pals inviting the smaller Brits to have a go. So it was drunk Poles who made racist remarks and incited violence. What followed was bad and sad but the whole truth exposes the complete tissue of reported lies and agenda driven fake news of the Guardian, the BBC and the rest of the liberal MSM as sheer fantasy. Again. And again, when caught with their pants down there is no apology or retraction let alone an enquiry into how such shoddy journalism could have been allowed.
For the dozens injured today they have changed. Lots of us are bloody terrified. And I feel no sense of unity with those who just want to light more fucking candles, who cannot accept that Islamophobia, though wrong, has not blown up civilians across Europe this year and is not the real threat to our lives and who do not want anything to change.
You may remember that last December, shortly after the US election The mainstream media was filled with reports of hate crimes against immigrants and muslims in particular surging across America. The highest profile victim whose plight the BBC , the Guardian etc reported enthusiastically without verifying was Yasmin Seweid. She was an international cause celebre.
She claimed that several Trump supporters verbally assaulted her while she was on the New York City Subway. On her Facebook page she posted, “Three white racists yelled such disgusting slurs at me, I was so helpless and felt defenseless.” She claimed that these Trump supporters said, “Look it’s a f-king terrorist”, “go back to your country, you don’t belong here” and directed other racial slurs toward her.
Fabbo said the liberal media, not concerned that while Yasmin said the subway car was packed there were no witnesses and - amazingly - no-one filming on their mobile. Who cares about checking facts? We are fake news and this shows Trump supporters are racist scumbags.
Last week Yasmin pleaded guilty to falsely reporting an incident and disorderly conduct. She admitted that she wasted valuable police resources. A pathetic liberal judge sentenced her to six months of counselling and three days of community service.And what sort signal will that send out about committing such a crime? Thankfully there were no good ol' boys from Alabama wearing MAGA baseball caps on Yasmin's train. But imagine what would have happened had there been as the cops pulled them in for questioning with the liberal media wolfpack, Jesse Jackson and thousands of virtue signalling millennials on new media all baying for blood. Imagine such an ordeal Yasmin - as liberals often forget actions do have consequences.
Anyhow the poster girl for the wave of - alleged - Trump inspired hate crime is convicted as a fraud and a liar. So where is the mass coverage of this real news on outlets such as Channel 4 Fake News to balance their lazy, unverified, agenda driven fake news of eight months ago?
Harpie Green MP Caroline Lucas attempted to hijack a debate about the Government's feeble response to Hurricane Irma by banging on about how the storm was caused by man made climate change or, as we used to call it before the world started getting colder, global warming. Rightly she was slammed for being a shameless opportunist, pontificating in the face of real human suffering. But there is a bigger inconvenient truth...the humourless bitch just has not been reading her history books. Something she fails to grasp as she bleats away on twitter.
The moment the Government accused me of 'lacking humanity' for mentioning climate change policy in relation to Hurricane #Irma. Unreal. pic.twitter.com/GAIMZjesU2
Hurricane Irma is a category 5 hurricane (the most severe), on that we can all agree with the dreary Lucas. Now for a history lesson and we start with that excellent source of liberal fake news USA Today which reports "Hurricane Irma: Only 3 Category-5 storms have ever hit the U.S." Well up to a point. What USA Today really means is not "ever" but "since records began in c1850." The reality is that there have probably been hundreds or thousands of category 5 hurricanes in millions of years before 1850 but let's just go with the modern era and back to USA Today:
It's been 25 years since a Category 5 hurricane struck the U.S., and Irma could potentially become just the fourth storm of that strength to barrel into the states. Hurricane Irma is a monster storm in the Atlantic with maximum sustained winds of 185 mph. Only one Atlantic hurricane on record, Allen in 1980, contained stronger winds, at 190 mph. The only Category 5 hurricanes to hit the U.S. are Andrew in 1992, Camille in 1969 and an unnamed storm in 1935.
Ok. Ms Lucas can you please explain how a weather pattern that also occurred in 1935, 1969, 1980 and 1992 is evidence of how the large increase in man made carbon emissions since the 60's and accelerating in the 1990s (as per the computer models of your climate change co-religionists) caused all these weather patterns. Where were the SUVs back in 1935? And the fact that Irma is less powerful than Allen in 1980 - again how does that fit with your bodged computer models and belief set?
The most destructive hurricane to hit the USA in modern times was a category 4 storm which hit Galveston killing 6,000 folks back in 1900. Natch that was down to man made climate change caused by carbon emissions too. Right, Ms Lucas. Hurricanes happen every year and whilst the BBC laps up this nonsense about climate change and carbon emissions the history books show a different tale. In ignoring the recurring power of nature, or the way God set up this planet, in ignoring hard facts to support her bogus religion of climate change, Ms Lucas is worse than shameless she is just ignorant.
5,000 folks marched through London yesterday to demand that we stay in the EU. The speakers included some poor incoherent dishevelled Irish chap who I thought was a Big Issue seller invited onto the platform as part of a drive for diversity but turned out to be Bob Geldof. Though the folks, most of whom seemed to be notably physically unattractive and/ or significantly overweight showing, once again, that politics really is show business for ugly people came up with all sort reasons for protesting its clear that all wanted stay in the EU.And that is how they felt before the nation vote the other way year. These remoaners just cannot accept democracy.
We need another vote they said. What happens if we vite again for Brexit. Then we can have yet another one. That is EU style democracy. Keep voting you fucking plebs until you vote the right way. Meanwhile we will all insult you for being thick and/or racist for voting the wrong way.
5,000 people in a country of 65 million really is not a lot. Put it this way, 6,730 folks felt strongly enough about watching Oxford United to pay to go to the home game against Gillingham in the 3-0 Division One match yesterday. Of those 382 were travelling Gills. Thus 6,448 were there to cheer for the boys in Yellow. More folks care about Oxford United than about frustrating the will of 17.4 million of their fellow citizens expressed in a democratic ballot, the biggest exercise in democracy this country has ever seen.
Were the BBC and C4 Fake News covering another win for mighty Oxford in full detail. Oddly no. But this really very small demonstration by those who reject democracy got mass coverage. Was it really deserved? Was that really balanced coverage? The answer has to be No. It says an awful lot about those who control the media and nothing whatsoever about what the country actually thinks.
As to those middle class folks who think their voices are more important than yours...I bring you a tweet and a video that says it all...
@Holbornlolz : This alone is reason to widen and dredge the English Channel
This alone is reason to widen and dredge the English Channel
Before the US election there were numerous reports of voter fraud almost all of which were linked back to the Democrat Party, the party of crooked Hillary Clinton. After polling day President Donald Trump said that there had been industrial scale voter fraud and that without it he would have won the popular vote as well as the electoral college. The liberal media said that this was just another case of POTUS lying and in reporting him as lying they served up their version of news. It will not surprise you that it can now be shown that the liberal media was itself serving up fake news.
Over to Melanie Phillips who writes:
An inquiry by the Republican Speaker of the New Hampshire House Shawn Jasper has discovered that more than 6,000 people registered to vote in New Hampshire for the presidential election had used out-of-state drivers’ licenses — and since then the vast majority have neither obtained an in-state license nor registered a motor vehicle.
In New Hampshire, in the Presidential poll, Crooked Hillary beat Donald Trump by just 2,736 votes. In the Senate race Democrat Maggie Hassan beat the incumbent Republican Kelly Ayotte by 1,017 votes. When Mr Trump stated that he lost New Hampshire because thousands of Massachusetts residents crossed state lines to vote the fake news media stated that his claims were groundless.
Massachusetts is the safest Democrat state in the USA. Democrat votes there are weighed not counted which means that most are not needed. How tempting it must have been for some Dems to switch their vote to somewhere where it mattered like New Hampshire. We must now hope that Mr Jasper urges the authorities to chase up on those 6,000 new voters to find out where they actually live. It will make no difference at a Presidential level since Trump won the electoral college 306 to 232 despite the 4 New Hampshire electoral college votes all going to the Crooked One. But if it is shown that many of those 6,000 "new voters" were phoney, if "Senator" Maggie Hassan has any honour she will quit and call for a new poll.
If there was large scale fraud was it all "lone wolves" or was there an element of organisation? Questions, questions for sure but will the fake news liberal media bother to ask them? I am not holding my breath.
The choice here in this part of Greece, if one wants an English language newspaper, is not a great one: The Daily Mail or the New York Times. The Mrs was planning a rest day while Joshua and I went on another road trip so bought both. On my return I tucked in.
The Daily Mail was, as ever, jam packed with articles about how immigrants give you cancer, social workers have caused house prices to collapse and how the late Princess Diana was a modern day saint. After about five minutes I could stand it no more and so to the NY Times which is America's Guardian, only worse. Every story is about the evils of Donald Trump expect when it it is about global warming which, as you know, is being made worse by Donald Trump.
But I write in praise of the NY Times not as an organ of truth for it is fake news to the core but as a commercial enterprise. The NYT has recognised what British papers have been slow to note, that news is a commodity which is available for free everywhere. Therefore the idea of a "newspaper" is redundant. Why should folks pay for a 24 hour old rehash of what they have watched on TV or on the web already? Of course they are ever more reluctant to do so and, hence, the traditional newspaper is doomed.
What folks will pay for is opinion or analysis which adds value to their lives or which, they perceive adds value. And thus the Times is packed with opinion articles - flagged up as such - from the front page to the back. Folks will pay for that.
The Times goes a step further in that it makes its news pieces so utterly slanted that they are almost opinion too. Take this front page article on North Korea and the POTUS. I quote:
The world's attention has understandably focused on Mt Trump's saber rattling threats against Mr Kim - most dramatically, his promise to rain "fire and fury" on North Korea if Mr Kim fired ballistic missiles at US territory"
Ends. Now there was I thinking that the UN Security Council was this week discussing how North Korea had fired a missile over Japan and that this is where the world's attention was focused. But no, for a US liberal this is all down to evil Mr Trump. The phrase sabre rattling does indeed refer to someone who threatens military action. but it is invariably used in the context of aggressive, proactive action. Trump's "fire and fury" comment was a clear warning that IF the US was attacked it would retaliate in a most brutal manner.
Sabre rattling is a term that is used in a negative sense, it is a bad thing. But until now it has not been used to describe someone discussing how they would react IF they were attacked. The NY Times ignores convention so to present Trump in a bad light. Would it really prefer it if POTUS had said "if North Korea fires missiles on US territory we will all go on a march, light candles, say we stand together and that we will not allow this to change our lives." maybe the NY Times has not learned the lessons of the 1930s when dealing with rogue states run by crackpots. Thankfully Mr Trump has.
So even the "news" in the New York Times is really fake news, it is at best opinion. In making this paper a news free zone the Times is being smart in a commercial sense. There is a ready audience of rich liberals on the US coasts who are happy to read a broadsheet that they perceive as adding value since its opinion pieces and fake news/disguised opinion articles confirm their own particular world view. As they sip fair trade semi skinned organic lattes in coffee bars on the Upper East Side or in Park Slope the metropolitan elite can agree with each other that the dreadful Trump's sabre rattling is causing tensions out East. They know its true because the Times said it was true in a "news" piece and stated that the whole world knew it was true. okay it is not true but the liberal readers of the NYT do not want to hear that. So by publishing as it dies the NY Times ensures its survival.
But it cannot argue that the NY Times is in any way a trusted source of real news, what used to be termed a newspaper. Subjective opinion and fake news in a broadsheet is something else, i am just not sure what the term should be. A Viewspaper perhaps?
As an alternative to the fake news, non stop diet of Trump and Brexit bashing that is the BBC, our hotel offers up DW News, a German channel presented in English which offers up a non stop diet of Trump bashing and explanations of why the EU is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Today's winner was a story about a farm in Southern Italy run by a yuppie ancient history graduate which farms donkeys.
The young lady took over the place from her father and now earns an income by selling donkey's milk either as a drink or having turned it into soap or shampoo. The trouble is than donkeys do not yield much milk, just over half a litre per day per animal when in season.But fear not, the yuppie classics student turned farmer sells her milk at 14 Euro a litre. But even this is not enough to cover her costs so, the report, conceded that the farm is reliant on heavy EU susbsidies.
So in real world maths poor folks across Europe pay taxes so that the EU can employ officials to check out a donkey farm and then hand over slugs of cash so that a yuppie can ear a straw hat and designer jeans having a great lifestyle and sell her product at only 14 Euro a litre. Rich folks are the only ones who can afford to pay that and are delighted that the price is not even higher thanks to that EU subsidy. So rich folks get to save money, a spoiled princess gets to play farmer with her donkeys, men in suits are paid great salaries to organise this and poor folks pick up the tab through their taxes.
Naturally DW described this arrangement as "another European success story." Oddly I suspect that I am not alone in not viewing it quite in that manner.
The BBC, Channel 4, the Guardian and the rest of the liberal media on both sides of the Atlantic have been gagging to interview Nobel Prize winning former US Vice President Al Gore about his latest film. But at the Box Office, An Inconvenient Sequel Truth to Power is bombing. The liberal elitists may love but the great unwashed is turned off. Why? Perhaps it is because Al Gore's net worth has soared to $200 million thanks to his work, jetting across the world to fight man made global warming. Or perhaps it is because the facts show clearly that his first opus magnus, An Inconvenient Truth, was just plain wrong.
You will remember Gore's warnings of how the world was getting warmer thanks to our carbon emissions. The polar bear was his icon. They would die out because of what we were doing. In fact there were 7,000 polar bears left the year Al Gore was born. Today there are only 30,000. And the number is increasing. And guess what the world is not getting warmer as Gore predicted. He explicitly stated we had to act NOW back in 2006 as the change was already afoot. Here we are 11 years on and the graph below tells its own tale.
We plebs, we ordinary deplorables have footed the bill for this mega scam via higher energy prices and taxes. And folks like Al Gore have grown rich at our expense. The media/political groupthink does not dare question this patently bogus "science". The facts are an inconvenient truth that the elites opt to ignore as we foot soldiers pick up the tab. Of course there is one politician who dares to challenge this insanity, Donald Trump. But of course the fake news media insist that, as with his condemnation of desecrating war memorials, POTUS is out of touch and causing outrage.
We, the people, the 99%, know otherwise. That is why, however many glowing write-ups it gets in the Guardian and the New York Times, however many fawning interviews Gore is offered on CNN or the BBC, the new Gore film is proving to be such a box office disaster.
Of all of the liberal media harpies covering the US election, beltway Kylie Morris of Channel 4 fake News was the most openly partisan as I exposed time and again HERE. Her crowning glory was to make up words for Donald Trump to smear him as a racist HERE. Like her fake news colleagues Kylie cannot get over the defeat of crooked Hillary so she fights on, twisting the truth to smear POTUS. The pulling down of Confederate staues and war memorials has been one of her finest hours.
To recap, President Trump condemned such acts. He did not say that they were morally equivalent to the Neo Nazis on the march, he made it clear that the latter were far worse. Trump is not - as the Guardian and BBC have falsely stated - any any way an apologist for the fascists. But he attacks those tearing down memorials to brave men who fought and died with their neighbours to, as they saw it, protect their homelands.
Kylie and her fake news colleagues as well as the liberal luvvies from Hollywood and the metropolitan elites smeared Trump as an apologist for Nazis but also said that there was outrage in America at his comments. The conclusion - it was POTUS that was out of touch.
I found that impossible to believe. Most Americans are good decent folks who would find the real outage being the desecration of a war memorial to their fellow Americans. And blow me down with a feather, polls out yesterday showed that I was right. A YouGov poll showed that of those with an opinion 39.5% of all Americans approved of taking down a statue of General Robert Lee in North Carolina but 61.5% disapproved. Marist conducted a poll about all Confederate monuments not just the Lee statue and the scores of those with a view were 30.3% for removal and 69.7% for staying up.
Hell's teeth among black voters the split on the latter poll was - among those with a firm view - 52.4% versus 47.6%. By the way that is in favour of keeping the monuments up!
Trump again tweeted that the statues should stay up which prompted Kylie to say that he was a) just playing to the polls and b) risking dividing America.
That is a shocking distortion of the truth. Trump has maintained his consistent position throughout. And it is clear that his stance is one that reflects a clear majority view and an overwhelming majority view in America. The outrage that C4 fake News and the rest of the liberal media has been reporting on for two weeks is not an outrage across America but an outrage of a minority of folks who backed the losing side on November 8 and, unable to accept that it is their party that is out of touch not Trump, just cannot help themselves.
As for the assertion that Trump's comments risk dividing America, how on earth can that be justified in the face of poll numbers which show that, once again, POTUS holds views that reflect those of most Americans, though they may be alien to those in the degenerate liberal media bubble in which Kylie lives.
The liberal media might think that dishonouring brave Americans who died in a horrible war. But however much they bully us into thinking that it their way is the moral way, to anyone with a shred of decency - including it seems 70% of Americans - their views are quite simply loathsome. And the more they and the Dems on Capitol Hill spout such views, the more certain a Trump win in 2020 becomes.
Back in 2004 there were horrible bombings in Madrid. The attackers at that point were Al Qaeda who stated that they were attacking Spain because it was involved in the war in Iraq. The Spanish surrendered. A new government pulled out of Iraq at once. Of course these days we give guns and money to Al Qaeda factions in Syria because we have a new enemy. As Orwell might have pout it: We are not at war with Al Qaeda. We were never at war with Al Qaeda, We have always been at war with ISIS. Anyhow the Spanish surrender has done it a fat lot of good as today ISIS has killed a stack of folks in Barcelona. The reaction of the world's leaders is to show cowardice, double standard but we are all to familiar with this are we not. First up was Donald Trump.
The Donald suggested from the outset that this was ISIS at work. The world's fake news liberal media went into attack mode because POTUS was jumping to conclusions, albeit ones that seemed fairly obvious to the rest of us. After 99% of attacks of this nature have been carried out by Islamofascists with just one or two right wing nutters also attacking and those chaps have been US based. So it was a bit of a slam dunk cert that the Donald was right. Over on this side of the pond, the leader of the Welsh Nationalists, Plaid Cymru, a woman of little brain called Leanne Wood jumped to a different take on who was likely to be to blame. Yup someone driving a car into a stack of European civilians who on earth could it be? Natch it is those right wingers again, get ready to blame Trump and Farage and to burn effigies of Katie Hopkins in the valleys.
is the tweet below an indication of a deranged mind set or just crass stupidity? The people of Wales might want to ask that question. Natch, not one member of the liberal media was "outraged" at Leanne for jumping to conclusions or not waiting till more facts were known. The liberal media is only ever outraged by we conservatives.
The rest of the political elite were not long in reacting as they took to twitter. #Barcelona. We stand in #solidarity. We will not change our Western way of life as that is what the terrorists want. We will defeat them by carrying on as normal. Yadda, yadda. Yadda.
Now where have we heard that before. Oh yes. #Barcelona. We stand in #solidarity. We will not change our Western way of life as that is what the terrorists want. We will defeat them by carrying on as normal. Yadda, yadda. Yadda. Or was that #Manchester or #Paris. It is #wherever innocent civilians get butchered by the Isalmofascists except when it is in Israel as the fucking Jews asked for it anyway. That is how the political elite, shielded by security barriers and men with guns, always react. And we carry on as normal waiting to see where women and kids will get butchered next.
Great, I can't think what is wrong with this policy other than it is a complete failure. I am just so tired of "defeating them by carrying on as normal and am prepared to risk defeat by doing things like rounding up all known ISIS supporters and sending them packing to Raqqa to let the Kurds, Syrians and Russians send them all packing to meet the 72 virgins. But clearing our country of folks who might want to kill us would be to admit defeat so I guess that is unthinkable. A selection of tweets from the "great and the good" who are happy to risk your lives in order to carry on as normal is below.
42 grossly overpaid readers of autocues at the state funded generator of fake news that is the BBC have written to their boss today demanding that they be even more grossly overpaid. The least grossly overpaid of these women earns £150,000 a year or, put another way, just over 1000 license fee payments. They have made demands for substantial pay rises because they are doing their bit in the invaluable fight for women's equality, they are fighting as feminists. This is a truly selfless act on their part. Yup.
There are many issues which feminists have every right to rage about in today's world. In our own country and overseas, FGM is an abomination with no place in 2017. Across the third world women are forced into marrying older men when in the UK they'd still be at primary school. Slavery, forced prostitution, rape as a weapon of war, economic slavery and political disenfranchisement are massive issues. The lack of a decent education for girls in too many societies should make us all angry.
Yet for the past few days getting Laura K a massive pay rise has been the most talked about issue on the feminist agenda. I care far more about the women at the bottom of the UK pay scales where the gender cap is far greater than it is at the BBC. 13,000 such women were last year threatened with jail for not paying the most regressive of all taxes, the license fee which supports Laura K's salary. Those are the battles that matter most yet we are forced again to consider the plight of Laura K and Fiona B as a matter of urgency.
Outside the media and political bubble the reaction to the BBC salaries was not of gender gaps but of complete anger at the obscene wages paid to folks for reading an autocue something which, having done it with no training whatsoever on C4's award winning mind rot that was Show Me The Money, many years ago, I can tell you is child's play. The way to close that gender pay gap is simple, slash the wages of the overpaid men to 5% below those of the women who bleat today. Then slash those of the beating 42 by 5% for good measure. The savings can be used to abolish the license fee for another swathe of lower earners.
But that will not happen. For folks like Fiona Bruce and Laura Kuenssberg do not care about the really poor in our society. They are not prioritising the real issues on the agenda of those who care about women's rights. They dress up as a feminist fight what is nothing other than naked greed.
Much of what makes me despair about life in this country appeared just before 9 AM on BBC Radio 4's flagship fake news programme Today. It started with a segment on global warming...
In that piece a reporter looked at power stations belching our carbon and asserted that this caused climate change and that as a result on the meadows in front of him the wildlife diversity was changing. Some species were disappearing and new ones were arriving. Then he rolled back over the past few thousand years and discussed how the climate and landscape and wildlife diversity had changed many times in relatively recent history. And, though he failed to note this critical point, it had done so without any contribution from mad made carbon emissions.
None the less for the BBC this is not a logical flaw to be discussed it is just glossed over. The liberal establishment just KNOWS that THIS TIME it is different and whilst God caused all other periods of dramatic climate change, this time it just has to be man. We are now far more powerful than nature and its cycles.
Just when I thought it could get no worse John Humphries piped up with a section on the threat posed to Britain by the extreme right. His guest was Paul Stocker, a Research Associate in Fascist Studies at the prestigious academic hothouse that is the University of Teesside. I bet his students get a high quality balanced education and emerge with degrees that leave them well placed to thrive in the private sector. And to think that Mr Stocker only got a 1% pay rise this year plus grade increments fir all his valuable work.
Stocker has written a book called the English Uprising and this was linked to the threat of the extreme right via the Brexit vote. Stocker pointed out that Northern Ireland and Scotland voted to remain so Brexit was an English thing. Of course that rather ignores how our friends the cottage burners voted - Wales wanted out too but let's not spoil the plot. So what if the fellow falls into the first logical trap to point out this huge flaw in his work is an insult to all hard working, underpaid and dedicated propagandists. Oops I meant academics.
Stocker asserted that many of the concerns of we Brexiteers, such as immigration and multiculturalism were those of the far right. "ideas of the far right, a radical critique of immigration and multiculturalism" droned Stocker and Humphries did not dissent.
That chap Trevor Phillips who formerly headed the Commission for Racial Equality but now says that multiculturalism has failed - he must have been intellectually captured by the far right then: send out a rescue mission. So too must all 17 million of us who voted for Brexit even though many of us did so in support of things like a desire for greater democracy.
As it happens i support unlimited immigration (combined with a slashing of the welfare state) but as a tolerant sort of fellow I cant see why we cannot debate immigration or multiculturalism. The true fascists are those who say that anyone offering a critique of our current policies is of the far right or is accepting the ideas of the far right. Is tolerance of FGM compatible with true multiculturalism? Discuss. Or rather do not discuss in case you fall off the path of political correctness because you have accepted an idea of the far right.
This is the same sort of lunacy that used to see the bien pensants of the liberal media say "you cannot fly a Union Jack as it is the preserve of the far right." Of course that was rot but in ensuring that good ordinary patriots did not fly the flag for fear of being slated they allowed the far right to be seen as the main flag wavers.
Thankfully we have moved past that sort of nonsense but the fascist left has not given up and in its strongholds of the media (especially the BBC) and in academia its attack on free speech, on our right to challenge what the left has dictated be regarded as an unassailable othodoxy, grows ever more unpleasant.
As the flagship fake news liberal elitist broadcaster in London it is no surprise that Channel 4 hates the State of Israel with a passion. And to that end the channel that just loves its fake news had a field day yesterday as three Palestinians opened fire on security guards at the sacred Islamic site, the old Temple. The terrorists were shot and killed but not before they had killed two Israeli guards.
As it happens those guards were from the Druze community. The Druze are an offshoot of Islam but most Moslems regard them as heretics. Thus they have almost since the start of the Israeli state sides with the evil Jews. The fight in the army, the air force, sit in the Knesset and are 100% pro Israel. It is self interest - if Hamas gets its way and fulfils the aims of its charter and sweeps the Jews into the sea, the Druze will almost certainly suffer the same genocidal fate.
The way that most Arabs who live within 1948 borders and thus have full Israeli nationality are enthusiastic supporters of the State of Israel is something Channel 4 is unlikely to dwell upon. Instead its reporter noted that the old City of east Jerusalem was "occupied by Israel 50 years ago and then annexed."
Hmmm so this small plot of land with its Jewish quarter, its Muslim quarter, its Christian Quarter and its Armenian quarter was owned by whom beforehand? As it happens it was ruled by Jordan although like the Weest Bank there were almost no Jordanians actually living there. But the wicked Jews occupied it and annexed it right?
Er...roll back to 1967 and the six day war. The Egyptians threatened to close off access to Israeli ports. Israel said it would treat that attempt to isolate it as an act of war. Egypt massed troops and planes on the Israeli border and moved to close the shipping lanes. At that point the Israeli Air Force went into action and attacked the Egyptian Air Force on the ground thereby gaining air superiority and allowing ground forces to push the Egyptian army back in chaos, capturing both Gaza and Sinai. At that point Egypt appealed to its fellow Arabs.
Syrian tanks rolled down from the Golan heights and started heading round the Sea of Galilee but the Israeli's held them off at a Kibbutz near the river Jordan. And then the Israeli Air Force knocked out the Syrian Air Force on the ground and as free troops arrived Israel went on the offensive eventually capturing the Golan Heights, mountains from which Syria used to shell Israeli civilians with impunity.
In Jerusalem, Jordanian forces started attacking the Jewish quarter of the old City and then West (Israeli) Jerusalem. Almost 1000 civilians were injured or killed and targets included hospitals and the Knesset. Israel was by now fighting on three fronts and was stretched but it hit back as best it could before more Jewish civilians were slaughtered just for being Jews. In due course air power was again the key and by the end of this brief conflict the Jordanians had been pushed back across the river Jordan, the West Bank and the Old City of Jerusalem were no longer in their hands.
So the FACTS are that Jordan attacked Israel and also Jewish civilians living within its control in the Old City. Israel responded not by attacking civilians but by attacking those who were attacking civilians. And it drove them back. Does C4 really think that after that Israel should have simply invited the Kingdom of Jordan who has no legitaimate claim to the Old City, to finish off its Jew Killing? Really?
So in this brief history lesson I recount what actually happened but you would not have guessed it from the language Channel 4 Fake News uses as it simply attempts to rewrite history. Like so many on the left these days C4 believes that if you tell a lie often enough about historical fact then in the end the lie becomes truth.
The shamed broadcaster then went onto quote a Palestinian spokesman from the West Bank who referred to "Zionist invaders." Israelis sure but Zionists is he 100% certain of that? Did C4 fake News ask him to justify that assertion? Of course it did not.
Having failed to lay a glove on Trump senior for getting help from the Russians during hos election triumph, the Democrats and their allies in the liberal media fake news departments tried to show he was blocking their futile investigations. That failed too. Now the Dems really are clutching at straws.
Given that Trump's popularity is improving as folks rather like his policies on immigration and the economy, liberal America is in trouble. It lost what they called " a Referendum on Trump" in the Georgia 6th as their policy ideas of the east and West coast metropolitan elites who dominate the Dems just do not resonate on main Street America. The Russian issue is a non issue but since Trump & the GOP are winning on policy and winning on personality what other card do the elitists who run the Dems have to play?
Okay no-body cares any more outside the Beltway, Broadway or Hollywood but that is not going to stop the Fake News outlets going for it anyway. Thus the latest "scandal" is that Donald Trump junior ( son of POTUS) met with a Russian connected lawyer during the campaign who promised to have some filth on how Crooked Hillary's campaign was being supported by the evil Russians. As it was the lawyer had no filth, tried to raise another issue, got nowhere and everyone moved on. This is a total non story.
Had, in June 2016, someone approached one of crooked Hillary's aides or one of the Dems from the Beltway who spend their entire life these days banging on about Donald and the Russians, to say that they had some filth on how the Russians were helping Donald what would they have done? Would they have said:
1. The Clintons always fight really clean campaigns, we are above such matters and we decline the meeting?
2. When can we meet? Dirt to sink the Donald, bring it on. We can get our pals at CNN/The Washington Post/ the NY Times to splash so our fingerprints are not on it and we get to win the election.
Of course it is 2. In any election folks are always keen to get dirt on their opponent. And when it comes to fighting firty the Clintons do not pull any punches.
The BBC commented that this "scandal" has "not damaged President Trump directly" since he knew nothing about it. FF. It has not and will not damage President Trump at all since it is obviously not a scandal at all and everyone outside the beltway and liberal media bubble can see that.
The fake news media junkies are so obviously clutching at straws now. One almost feels sorry for these pathetic creatures.
The debate about public sector pay is predicated on the myth that it has gone up by just 1% since 2013. The liberal media, the Labour party and indeed almost everybody just accepts this is a fact. But it is not true. It is fake news spun and reported by those who cannot be arsed to check their facts. If you actually bother to check the data from the Office of National Statistics you will see that it is a lie.
In 2013 the average wage for public sector employees was £26,933. That was above the overall national average wage showing that public sector workers actually earn more than private sector workers. By 2016 the ONS shows that number had increased to £27,974 - which works out at an average wage increase over three years of not 1% compounded but of 1.3% compounded. That is a striking difference is it not? It is a 30% differencce in the annual claimed increase.
So how has that happened? It is very simple. All public sector workers received a standard 1% increase per annum. But in vast swathes of the public sector - certainly across the NHS, schools and universities there are what are termed grade increases. You do the same job with the same title but move up a grade and so earn more.
These grade increases are not decided on you having achieved certain goals or delivered on certain targets as would be the case in the reviled private sector but simply are a recognition of years of service. In the real world of the private sector they would thus be described as a "pay increase" but in the make believe world of public sector finances they are described otherwise.
Of course there is nothing wrong with that. The economy is growing and that means that private sector pay is going up by more. But public sector workers should remember the dark days of 2008-2010 when the economy was in crisis. At that point average private sector pay actually fell while in the public sector it carried on rising in both real and in absolute terms. In bad times the public sector wins and in good times..it wins as well. In the private sector it is very much a case of the years of the lean calves and the fat calves. Indeed if the calves get too lean there is no calf. In the public sector a recession does not bring the risk of job losses as it does for we evil capitalists.
Next time you hear the BBC, Channel 4 Fake News or the rest of the liberal media banging on about this wicked 1% pay cap please remember it is just not true and if they could be bothered to check their facts or had a desire to report non fake news they would be behaving otherwise. They should also put the pay rises of 2013 onwards in the context of what happened in 2008-10 and remember that public sector workers simply do not earn less than those of us in the accursed private sector. They earn more, get better pensions - paid for by the grateful taxpayer - have, on average, more sick days and get longer holidays.
It will be no secret that I shall delight when the falling circulation of the tax dodging Guardian newspaper makes it uneconomic and it closes. Until then it continues to pump out the most odious fake news and spiteful virtue signalling junk on a daily basis. But is the article and headline below a contender for its most appalling effort in history? I think we all now accept that Muslim gangs in places such as Rochdale, Bradford and Oxford have been responsible for the rape and abuse of thousands of young girls. that is a fact. One reason they got away with it for so long was virtue signalling by rich liberals such as the Guardian's Libby Brooks who would, of course, never be affected by what actually goes on in deprived working class communities. Oh no...Guardian writers don't actually mix with the workers but they are very righteous are they not? Read on and feel angry and disgusted...
A report by the Institute of Fiscal Studies suggests that the average student is now leaving colleague with debts of £51,000 a figure seized on by the left and the liberal media as a sign that everything should be handed out for free. The right insisted that it showed how the system was working. Everybody lied.
The IFS report also suggested that over half of students would end up not repaying their debts at all. And that is the massive elephant in the room all chose to ignore. Naturally the BBC managed to grasp the wrong end of the nettle firmly in both hands. On the Radio 4 Today programme John Humphries quizzed a spokesman for Britain's universities insisting that such terrifying debts will scare clever folks from poor backgrounds from going to get their - in far too many cases - worthless degrees. Natch Channel 4 Fake News took the same line.
Okay it is one not born out by the facts. The number of folks from poor homes going to University has, in fact, never been higher. And why not, if you a smart 18 year old whether rick or poor this is a nil brainer: go to Uni for three years to get your 2-1 as almost everyone does these days. If you then get a good job as a result of that degree you pay back the loan. If you don't you don't!. What is not to like?
In the old days 10% of 18 year olds went to University. They were the elite. They got degrees in proper subjects from proper universities and generally got good jobs as a result. That still happens now for the elite. Go to Oxford and pay £9,000 a year and that should set you up for a good job. In the old days academically weaker young folks did not go to Uni and generally earned less. These days they also pay £9,000 a year to go to De Montfort Uni ( 2 Es entrance needed) but will end up, at best, stacking shelves at Tesco and so will never earn enough to pay back the loan.
The impulse of the BBC and Channel 4 Fake News is to parrot Jeremy Corbyn's line which is that these vast debts deter smart kids from poor families. The facts show this is rubbish but we live in a post fact era. The Tories, on the other hand, blather on about more poor kids going to great universities thanks to this wonderful self-funding student loan system. They boast how the burdern on an expanded uni system is now ,rightly, largely carried by those who benefit rather than ordinary working folks without degrees who don't. Except that is a lie.
The stunning level of default means that the expansion of universities has been funded not by students, not by adding to the deficit but by adding to the debt. More than half of student loans issued are assets which will turn out to be worthless. And as such that gap will have to be funded by the UK state taking on yet more debt - you may remember we have the highest State debt in the EU already and if we were honest about matters such as student loan defaults it would be higher still.
The question the BBC and the media should have asked is why we are lumbering the taxpayer, most of whom will not have enjoyed three years at Uni, with vast future liabilities on student loans that are never repaid which have produced young folk whose education is not good enough to obtain a job earning even £21,000 a year. The degrees, it seems, are worthless, the debts are for all of us to pay in the years that lie ahead.
Natch the BBC and Channel 4 Fake News believe in Money Trees so it would not occur to them to ask such a question.
Ooooh you are awful said Dick Emery. In the case of London Mayor Khan that is awfully politically correct. And awfully useless. Fresh from supporting the Al Quds day, aka lets blame the Jews for Grenfell Tower, march, hapless Sadiq Khan has a new battle: saving LGBT bars and clubs and he has promised "urgent action." Politicians always promise urgent action never just action but what exactly is little Khan's understanding of why gay bars are shutting?
Actually this is an old battle - the initial report on this crisis was published last December and back then May Khan pumped £10,000 of taxpayers cash into more research. But ahead of the Pride rally this weekend he has duped George Osborne's Evening Standard into making this its lead story. Pliant press gives free PR to useless Mayor making this fake news.
The data from University College London Urban Laboratory published almost 8 months ago showed that in 2006 there were 127 gay bars and clubs in London. Today there are just 56. or is that the real data. Having actually read the research which is loaded with C Grade sociologist jargon I note:
"Between 1986 and the present, we have recorded the presence of 233 venues, 80 nights/events. This is, of course, just a snapshot, based on the particular listings we have identified and recorded"
In other words the data is not comprehensive and is thus almost certainly therefore wrong. But let us accept that there is a trend. The study covers the years 1986 to 2016 and "peak gay bar" was 2004 since when there has been a steady decline. Mayor Khan thinks this is awful saying:
I hold LGBT+ venues in very high regard and have made it clear that protecting them is an integral part of my plans to grow London’s night-time economy and culture. The importance of LGBT+ venues cannot be overstated in the role they play in helping members of an often vulnerable community to take pride in their identity, and enriching London as a whole. These shocking figures show urgent action needs to be taken.
Now let us put this in context. This weekend a million folk will march and celebrate gay pride in London. The population of London is 8.8 million and - according to the ONS - 2.6% of Londoners identify as L, G or B so that is c 250,000 people. Moreover the pink pound phenomena is well documented meaning that on average these quarter of a million souls are more affluent than straight Londoners.
The ONS identifies an increasing trend for folks to identify as LGBT with younger folk regarding sexuality as more fluid than we oldies. Thus there are more gay Londoners with more cash to spend and more of an age when they's rather go out, than stay in to watch Midsomer Murders, than ever before. Yet gay bars are closing. So too are pubs as a whole by the way,between 2006 and 2015 pub numbers fell by c16% across the UK and at an even faster rate than in London.
If there was a genuine need for more gay bars then a large and affluent population would - via market forces - ensure that they were opening. Bars that are open to all and do not practice sexuality based apartheid would be turned by their owners into gay bars. But that is not happening. It seems that the trend is the other way.
Those who run bars and clubs do not do so as a charity, they do so to maximise returns and what this data shows us is perhaps that society as a whole is moving away from bars and clubs, thanks to the smoking ban and a general desire to be more healthy. But also that especially in uber tolerant and liberal London gays now feel increasingly relaxed about drinking and dancing with non gays. If they felt otherwise, the vast wealth of London's gay community and its material size would, via market forces, see gay bars opening not closing.
Mayor Khan probably knows this in his heart of hearts. But that is the point. It is not that this useless man will manage to turn back the tide driven by the invisible hand, but that he will use scarce resource, taxpayer's cash, to show that he cares. In short, this is just another pointless exercise in virtue signalling for the pathetic Evening Standard to run - without critique - as real news.
The conversation turned to how people in Middle America, the flyover states, could bring themselves to vote for Trump. And to so do in droves. Snow boasted that he had been there! Cripes Glasto, New York, LA and then the flyover states. Next they will be sending the great metropolitan liberal to spend a week on a council estate in in Rochdale. Naomi looked impressed - Jon seemed to have survived his encounter with horrible, god fearing, gun owning, hard working and patriotic Americans unscathed.
They discussed Trump rolling back Obamacare, something that most Americans support because President Hopey Change's mad scheme does not help the poor but costs ordinary folks an arm and a leg. But while most Americans want Obamacare rolled back which is one reason the Donald lives where he does today, that does not impress Naomi at all. FFS Next these disgusting rednecks will want America to have real jobs rather than exporting them to Mexico or China. Naomi is convinced that what folks in the sort of states in America's heartland that she would not visit without getting her jabs first, wanted is more than Obamacare "they want an NHS but one that is properly funded."
Oh yes, the world's third largest employer, the financial black hole that gave you Mid Staffs, Harold Shipman, the deaths at Bristol kids hospital and natch hair removal operations for transexuals on demand. It's Obamacare on Steroids. The polls - either opinion polls or that glorious poll of last November, the one where Naomi would have voted for the losing candidate had she not been an Alien, show most Americans wanted, at best Obamacare light, very few wanted a US NHS. But heck, Naomi knows better than the great unwashed. Millionaire liberals from the Coasts always do, especially those who have lived their entire lives in the leafy groves of academia and journalism.
Natch Snow did not challenge Klein's assertion that Americans really want their very own Mid Staffs. She said it. He has not met anyone who would think otherwise apart from a few folks on his brief tour of the flyover states and he has tried to forget that mixing with the great unwashed. So it was just left in the air as a fact. That's Channel 4 Fake News for you.
It was the second lead story on the BBC News last night. The metropolitan elitists, the liberals inside the Westminster media bubble, spluttered with indignation as they talked to liberal minded colleagues inside the Washington Beltway. It is the story everyone is talking about they agreed. Of course that was more fake news too. Out there in the real world no-one really cares what President Trump tweets or perhaps, judging by the RTs, a lot of folks like what he tweets. Unlike 99% of liberals he has a sense of humour.
Donald Trump's latest crime is to tweet some footage of a mocked up wrestling match showing him duffing up a man whose head is replaced by the CNN logo. At the end the logo Fake News Network appears. The president's point uis that he will fight back against fake news. The media's response "The President is inciting violence against journalists and America is outraged."
That would be the same liberal media that has shown on magazine covers Trump's face in cross hairs, the same liberal media which defended as artistic freedom Shakespeare in Central park showing Donald Trump being violently stabbed to death. that is the same liberal media that tried to defend Kathy Griffiths for her "comedy sketch" with her displaying Donald Trump's severed and bloodied head. Time Magazine called that "free speech." It is the same liberal media that showed time and time again the placard at Saturday's march in London with a picture of Prime Minister May's severed head on a spike. That is satire. And that theatre production with Trump getting butchered is just so brave.
You see when liberals make jokes about executing conservative politicians it is free speech or cutting edge satire. When Trump tries his hand at humour (albeit not very funny humour) it is incitement. I see no valid point in making jokes about killing POTUS but Trump does have a very real point about fake news. Over the past week CNN has been battered by a hidden documentary which caught its lead presenters and producers on tape admitting that the whole Trump Russia story was a non story and there was not a shred of evidence against him but that they were chasing ratings. The liberal fake news media is all guilty of that except Channel 4 Fake News which has almost no viewers, it is not chasing ratings, it just likes making things up, such as claiming that Donald Trump wants America nto be more white - see HERE.
As for the rest of America they mostly just don't care. Outside the beltway folks are worried about jobs, immigration, terror, putting food on the table. Only smug well fed liberals living in multi million dollar houses in Washington, LA or New York care about this story and any suggestion otherwise is just more fake news.
To those reading this article in the USA I offer you one consoling thought. At least you do not suffer state funded broadcasters the BBC and Channel 4. They make CNN seem like the living gospel.
All journalists have opinions. None of us can be truly impartial as we have our own views and prejudices. If you are a columnist, that is to say you write opinion that is why you do what you do. The views of Polly Toynbee, George Monbiot and Owen Jones are well known. They are Big State money tree worshipping lefties and argue that line. On the other side Mark Steyn, Melanie Phillips or Peter Hitchens take a different tack. I do not hide my own libertarian take on life. But none of the above are reporting news and when doing that your prejudices do matter. You should bury your on news when reporting FACT.
Channel 4 News is the UK's biggest fake news reporter. It openly detests Trump, happy to make up quotes to support its thesis that he is a racist, is violently anti Brexit and massively anti Tory. And that has led to it NOT reporting or really taking to task certain issues relating to parties or issues it supports but time and again simply reporting fake news about issues or folks it opposes.
I do not think that its ageing anchorman Jon Snow or most of his colleagues actually want to report fake news. Kylie Morris, the Trump bashing correspondent is different, she is clearly happy to make things up to support her case, or rather that of her beloved Dems. But the massive prejudices of the UK based team just mean that they are prepared to take on trust sources who have "stories" that support the platform of the liberal metropolitan elites. All too often that leads to fake news reporting. It also leads to C4 running utterly unbalanced panels of "experts" to discuss a given issue and to some very dubious story selection.
So what is the tweet? It has now been deleted and the user has locked down his account but it refers to Snow's pilgrimage to hear the Messiah preaching to the faithful at "Glasto." Quite simply Snow hates those of us on the right with with a visceral passion. That spirit runs throughout the team at C4 News and that is why its news is so often fake news.
In the UK the narrative from the liberal media fake news outlets let by the accursed BBC is that Donald Trump and his Republicans are enmeshed in scandal, in league with the accursed Russians and loathed across America. So what if the FBI has cleared Michael Flynn? So what if there is scant or no evidence that Donald Trump obstructed justice let's shriek on about a new Watergate anyway. Fake news tells you that Trump is on the ropes and so an special election in Georgia's 6th Congressional district was hailed as a "referendum on Trump". The vote was yesterday.
This has been a safe GOP seat since 1979 but demographic changes mean that Trump win it by just 1.5 points over crooked Hillary. With no incumbent there the Dems thought it was totally in play and so poured 30 million dollars into their campaign aiming to back up the media narrative that Trump was on the ropes. Guess what, Republican Karen Handel won by 6 points.
Make no mistake this was a referendum on Trump because the Dems fought it that way and Trump won. As Handel thanked her supporters the chants were not about her but was Make America Great Again and President Trump.
Once again the liberal elites for all their money just got it wrong. Channel 4 Fake News which was naturally predicting a Dem victory got it wrong. Outside the beltway no-one in America gives a flying fuck about Congressional machinations to smear the President. On main street they care about jobs, which Trump is delivering on. They care about making America safer where at least Trump, unlike his useless predecessor, is trying. They do not believe in fake news.
Well done the Georgia Sixth. Jon Sopel at the fake news BBC, Kylie Morris at Channel 4 fake news, the arsehole Dem pundits on CNN, the NY Times, the Hollywood luvvies and the Democrat Establishment can smear as much as they want, they can chuck as much money as they want at elections. But while they continue to ignore the concerns of those Americans living outside the asset bubble economies of the North East and West Coasts they will continue to lose.
The Georgia 6th, good god fearing tax paying hard working Americans, just sent a $30 million fuck you to the liberal elites and the Beltway swamp dwellers.
I could just about accept the poll tax that is the BBC license fee if I was served a diet of high quality non news, as Lord Reith desired, and full impartial news. But in fact my license fee goes on paying idiots such as the tax dodging, virtue signalling, fraudsters pal Gary Lineker seven figure salaries to front up crap. And as for the news?
On BBC World about ten times a day we have an advert fronted by Katty Kay in which she boasts of how the BBC never takes sides in any war, election or dispute and that makes it the most trusted brand in world news. Does the silly woman believe that pap or is she being ironic?
The headline below came out today:"Three Palestinians killed after deadly stabbing in Jerusalem." Fuck me those Jews are evil. Fucking Israelis butchering three poor Palestinians. Bastards. Total bastards. Er....
Er.... well what actually happened was that three Palestinian men pulled out knives and started attacking anyone they could find - all they wanted to do was kill Jews. A number of civilians were injured and a 23 year old female cop was stabbed to death. To end this rampage other cops shot the terrorists and killed them.
Their families will now receive a mega "pension" from the Hamas run authority in Gaza, a body that is heavily funded by EU money. What's not to like? They are set up for life and we EU taxpayers get to fund it. Great.
Does this incident ring any bells? Did the BBC run the headline "Three muslims killed after deadly stabbing in Borough Market". It did not but the facts are broadly the same. The only difference is that Israeli cops carry guns so the death toll was much lower in Jerusalem than it was in London.
How can this headline be seen as anything other than misleading? Wherever you stand on this conflict surely you find something Orwellian in the reporting of the state funded broadcaster? The BBC gave up on showing any balance in its coverage of Israel ages ago. The BBC was slammed by watchdogs for its lack of balance on Brexit. Donald Trump got it right in calling the BBC out as a fake news channel.
I make no secret of the fact that I stand with Israel. So for me to be forced to pay for these lies is something that I find personally offensive. Let us hope that the DUP sticks to its manifesto pledge and as part of a deal with the pathetic Tories, forces Mrs May to slash state funding for this shameless propaganda and for the ghastly Lineker once and for all.
Tim Farron was a pretty hopeless leader of the Lib Dems. His weasel words and demands for a second vote on Brexit were laughable and the way that he kept on insisting that he was the only working class ( pronounced with no r) was just plain cringe worthy. But the reason that he has quit as Lib Dem leader is that in modern Britain being a Christian is not acceptable, at least to the fake news wolf packs of the liberal metropolitan media.
Farron's faith is strong and for that I admire him. I have no faith but often wish that I did. Timmy is, because of his faith, unable to accept gay marriage and indeed homosexuality as morally neutral with a straight marriage and heterosexuality. It is his view and for that he was relentlessly persecuted in a way that de-railed his wider campaign.
And he knows it will happen again and again until the media gets their man. He has accepted the inevitable and quit. I wish him well.
I have no moral issue with homosexuality. The LGBT community should get exactly the same treatment as straight folks. If they want to get married why not? Why should they not suffer like the rest of us? But I understand that there will be those whose religious faith means they take a different view including, according to recent polls, more than 52% of British Muslims.
The liberal elites cannot bring themselves to say how appalling the views of most British Muslims are but Christians are a soft touch. Its not racist or a hate crime to bash a Christian. It never is. A cartoon of the bible being flushed down the toilet is art. The same cartoon with the Koran is a hate crime.
Sure ,the Metropolitan elites celebrate Christmas but not in a way that has anything to do with Jesus but purely as a consumerist spendfest and a chance to drink as much as possible. Indeed those of us who actually do link Jesus and Christmas are derided. My Islington dwelling daughter insists that Christmas has nothing to do with Jesus and her view, not mine which happens to be based on fact, dominates.
For the metropolitan sophisticates the power of prayer is denied, except that is when they are tweeting #prayforwhereverISIShasbeenbutcheringthisweek and even then they are not trying to talk to God they are just mouthing platitudes as part of an exercise in Group Think as if this will actually deal with the problem.
In such a climate poor Farron was obviously doomed. Already the liberal bien pensants on new media are tweeting en masse about how he should join the other current objects for communal hate-mongering, that is to say the DUP. I suppose that is what goes for humour if you are left wing.
Good luck Tim Farron you are better off without this nonsense.
Radio station LBC yesterday fired right wing loudmouth Katie Hopkins. I don't agree with a lot of what the Daily Mail columnist says but quite a few folks do. She is outspoken and a hate figure for the free speech hating intolerant liberal left. Over in the US comedian Tim Allen saw his long running hit show Home Improvement canned two weeks ago by ABC. Other less popular shows have not been axed. But then Tim is that rarity from Hollywood, a Republican and a Trump supporter to boot. Hollywood rejoiced at Tim's downfall.
There are many on the left whose views and comments are offensive to many of us but the liberal media elites will never ever fire a left wing gobshite. I find Brendan Cox the man who was married to the late Labour MP Joe Cox lecturing we Brexit supporters about how we are thick racists with blood on our hands pretty offensive but these days he practically lives in TV studios. I find protesters who hold up banners showing a star of David with a swastika in its centre, very ofensive. That C4 Fake news reporter Assad Baig who described his fellow British Moslems as "Uncle Toms" is offensive.
But the best way to show that Baig is a horrible extremist with a range of vile views is to keep him on air. it exposes him and exposes his views. If various hate preachers and ex Lib Dem MP David "the Jews" Ward want to compare Israel to the Nazis go ahead. It shows them up for the awful people they are. We on the right believe in free speech, it is increasingly clear that many on the left would rather silence those with whom they disagree than debate them. In doing so they lose the argument by default.
Katie Hopkins will not be silenced. I advise her to set up her own website with a pay to hear podcast. She would soon be making far more than she made at LBC and would be free to say exactly what she thought. That is the power of the internet. Folks do not need established media to offer a platform. And moreover if you have pulling power as Hopkins does why should you not enjoy all the financial upside. At LBC Katie pulled in the listeners other broadcastsers failed to do. Her pulling power and the revenies that generated subsidised those who said very little of interest.
Five years ago I involuntarily left a company that censored what i wrote. I cannot describe the joy I have felt ever since in having total editorial freedom. And there is a second joy. Running your own show means that if you are a commercial draw you get to see the benefit. My days of my talent subsiding the lazy and the talent free, like the disgusting piece of excrement that is Richard "Gollum" Gill, are over. What a great feeling that is.
Katie should have a look at the business model of Mark Stein and give it a go. I won't be listening as I find Hopkins either dull or offensive or both but I wish her the very best of luck becuase, unlike most of the "tolerant & pious" left, I do actually believe in free speech.
Listen to the mainstream press and, natch, the real victims of the Manchester terror attack are the poor Muslims of Britain who - the liberal media rushed to assure us - are set to suffer a barrage of hate crime. So far Katie Hopkins has been reported to the Met 934 times for tweeting so that the "real victims" can rest more easily. Sod the 22 kids and teenagers who are dead or the dozens lying injured and maimed in hospital. Sod their families, C4 News rushed off to Manchester's "Curry Mile" to meet the real victims, as you can see below.
Of course, and for the avoidance of doubt, hate crime is a crime and is wrong. But the real victims of this attack are those who got blown up by a bomb. Surely even the metropolitan elitists can see that? I think not. Over on the BBC the Regional News had some pompous bitch on who it turns out is our local Police & Crime Commissioner. The BBC asked if there was a call for tougher measures to make us all feel safer. Good point. How about we deport some former ISIS fighters? The Police & Crime Commissioner replied that "hate crime will be treated with zero tolerance." Does this ghastly creature not realise what the real threat is, a threat that leaves folks of all faiths and races fearful for the world we live in. It is not Kate Hopkins it is ISIS!
Back to C4 Fake News. Pompous and plump elitist Krishnan Guru-Murthy was interviewing various members of the local Muslim community who were - to be fair - overwhelmingly reasonable. They - unlike Krishnan appeared to recognise who the real victims of this attack were. Among those interviewed was this woman below wearing a niqab with the word LOVE on its front. But look carefully, The L is a pistol, the O is a grenade, the V is a knife and the E is a machine gun. How very tasteful. What message was that sending out and why did Channel 4 feel it was right to broadcast it?
The uber liberal fake news outlet the Washington Post broke the story which may or may not actually be true. Given its history or Trump bashing, bogus opinion poll interpretation and all round fake news, many of us would not believe the Washington Post if it declared that the sun was going to rise tomorrow. Notwithstanding that, the BBC and other bastions of liberal Trump hating have been going to town on the "Trump leaks state secrets to the Russians" story. The liberals again demand impeachment as they do every week or so. In doing so they show their ultimate moral bankruptcy.
Let us give the Washington Post the benefit of the doubt and assume that, for once, it was not pushing fake news. What is Trump alleged to have handed to the Russians? Apparently it was intelligence on ISIS.
In Iraq the US is fighting ISIS. In Syria it is Russia who is helping the regime fight ISIS. While we in the West support other islamofascist fighters whose ranks include a number of recent defectors from ISIS. God only knows why we in the West are backing these nutjobs who like decapitating 12 year old boys and chucking civilians off high buildings but we are. And our misguided involvement means that the US must have data on Syria which could help Russia to wipe out ISIS.
Since ISIS operates on a cross border basis if it gets its butt kicked in Syria by Russia that will help the butt kicking in Iraq which the USA is driving. Does it not make complete sense for Trump to assist Russia in wiping out ISIS in Syria?
Indeed given the appalling acts that ISIS sponsors across the globe is there not a strong moral case for applauding Donald Trump's act in helping fight this global menace? The Western liberal mainstream media do not care about this. The sad reality is that they hate Donald Trump more than they hate ISIS. And in showing such twisted and distorted values they again show why they continue to lose their audience.
Following the first round of the French Elections the liberal press was quick to spin the line" the results are a a vote against the establishment, against the elites". The spin here was that both Marine Le Pen and Tony Blair clone Emmanuel Macron were outsiders, anti establishment candidates while the traditional parties of Government had been beaten badly. This was spin. It was fake news designed to assist Macron. Marine Le Pen's job before the second round is to demolish that idea and so far she is doing a fairly good job of doing just that.
In its attempts to keep Le Pen out of the second round the press has thrown every bit of dirt it could find against her. Macron has escaped such scrutiny. That will change now that we are in the final stretch. Already stories of his secret fund raising dinners with investment banker millionaires are seeping out. Anti establishment candidate. Mon derriere.
Please do not get me wrong - I could not back Marine Le Pen, even against someone as loathsome as Macron. For starters she is from a party which was founded by a Jew hating holocaust denier (her Dad) and which still contains more than a sprinkling of folks with vile views. She may not be the FN candidate as she is now an independent, but Marine has the FN in her DNA. And secondly, other than leaving the Euro, Marine's economic policies are largely barking mad socialist nonsense. So there are two reasons why Le Pen is not someone to back. But against that Macron, is just a fraud as he pretends to be an outsider and a man of the people. And the media is complicit in this fraud.
Having trashed the economy because, like all Socialists, he eventually ran out of other people's money, President Hollande groomed Macron as his heir. The Socialist brand was toxic so Macron set up his own party. But he was Holland's finance minister so must share some of the blame for the mess that France is in. And he is thus not a an independent and a political virgin but a well established part of the political elite. He is Hollande's chosen heir.
Then look at who is backing him. The entire liberal press, all the mainstream politicians across Europe, the banksters, big business. This former investment banker is no "man of the people". He is part of the elite and part of the political class. All this talk of " a breath of fresh air, the winds of change" is so much Obama/Blair spin. You thought you'd seen the end of President hopey change well now meet his French clone.
If the froggies want to give a corrupt establishment that has trashed the French economy and has no answers to its problems a good kicking the only option is a vote for Marine Le Pen. However tempting that might sound I hope, for the reasons above, that the froggies resist the temptation. But I sense that a good number will not and that Le Pen will lose but may well score a credible 40% plus.
In campaigning, so far in the second round, she has not put a foot wrong. Macron, on the other hand, has looked smug and out of touch. Those who were predicting that the phoney so called outsider would get well over 65% will, I think, be disappointed. The only Macron thing that will remain well over over 65, is his better half, his old school teacher Mrs Robinson.
On the day that Marissa Mayer, the CEO of Yahoo, increased her net worth by $187 million to c $700 million by selling the company, there was a conference in Berlin yesterday to discuss gender inequality, glass ceilings at al. Most of the big names were career politicians with zippo private sector experience. Convicted fraudster Christine Lagarde - who somehow remains head of the IMF despite her criminal conviction - was there and so to, representing the US was Donald Trump's charming daughter Ivanka. Cue: a fake news outburst from the liberal media.
But she is not elected say the MSM? er yes... Do they not understand how American politics works? Folks elect a President and he chooses his cabinet and advisors. None of them are elected. So who the President opts to send to a pointless conference in Germany is completely up to him. Whoever he sends is going to be unelected.
If you remember President Rapist got his wife crooked Hillary to mastermind his disastrous healthcare reforms. No-one elected crooked Hillary to do that job, President rapist just appointed her as he was totally entitled to do.
As it happens Ivanka has run her own business so was probably more qualified than almost anyone else in Berlin to talk about gender issues in the workplace in that she has actually spent some time in the workplace while the flock of career politicians also present have not.
But for the fake news outlets to say that Ivanka not being elected is an issue is just fake news. It is not.
And you wonder why fewer and fewer folks trust a word they read in the deadwood press, especially the loathsome Daily Mail. It is only one week since I picked it up HERE on its 100% fake ISIS news from Syria. Now it is making things up again and once more it appears to be at the behest of Tory Central Office. The headline screams " Tory lead is slashed in half after tax U-turn: Bombshell Mail on Sunday poll shows May plummeting by 11 points ...denting hopes of a landslide." Bollocks.
As it happens two other polls out today show the Tory lead increasing. A ComRes poll has figures of CON 50%(+4), LAB 25%(nc), LDEM 11%(nc), UKIP 7%(-2), GRN 3%(-1). ComRes has never shown any party at 50% before. UKIP looks to be dead in the water and some of its remaining votes will probably drift to the Tories to make sure of Brexit.
YouGov‘s Sunday Times poll has topline figures for Great Britain of CON 48%(nc), LAB 25%(+1), LDEM 12%(nc), UKIP 5%(-2) – changes are from the YouGov/Times poll in the week. Again one story here is that UKIP is continuing to fall, 5% is the lowest YouGov has shown the fruitcakes attracting for five years.
And so to the Mail. It uses a Survation poll. Its figures are CON 40%, LAB 29%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 11%. The way that the Mail contrives to show the Tory lead collapsing from 21% to 11% in just four days is by comparing not Survation with Survation but Survation with a ComRes poll. This is insanity. Different pollsters use different methods and so it really is comparing apples with pears. That high UKIP showing looks all wrong and the idea that Labour has gained 4 points in 4 days and the Tories lost six just beggars belief.
The last Survation polls was several months ago and the change if one compares apples with apples since then is Conservatives up two, Labour unchanged, the Lib Dems up one and UKIP down two. that looks a bit more like it.
So why run a clearly misleading headline? Simple. The Tories biggest fear is that its supporters think the election is in the bag and don't turn out. Since one assumes that anyone still voting Labour is highly committed ( they should be committed) they will vote and a bad differential turnout split could cost Mrs May a raft of marginals. Central office could have written this article. It probably did.
Yes, Mrs May's belief that spending taxpayers cash on girl bands in Ethiopia and Jew killers from Gaza while withdrawing the triple lock on pensions and threatening to put up taxes is an insult to all core Tory values. She has not started the campaign brilliantly but then when you are up against Jeremy Corbyn you probably don't have to. Anything can happen over the next seven weeks but one thing we do know is that the Daily Mail has again printed fake news.
I was delighted to see the loathsome Daily Mail cough up for its disgraceful slurs on the charming Mrs Trump. I suspect many on the left will have had their loyalties divided in that battle, irrespective of the fact that it was the Mail that libelled Melania, but what about the Mail's mega lie today, on Syria. It boasts the headline "At least 100 people dead as a suicide car bomb hits convoy of busses evacuating residents from the clutches of ISIS to safe havens in Syria". This is quite simply a lie. It is fake news. It is a lie born of the insane and confused policy of the West in this godforsaken country.
Let's rewind a couple of weeks to when dozens of folks died after chemical weapons were detonated in an area controlled by the coalition of forces known loosely as the Free Syrian Army. The West instantly blamed the regime of President Assad although he pointed out that the UN itself had said he had no chemical weapons left but that it could not be sure that the FSA did not. Might conventional weapons have set off a chemical attack by landing on a store run by the FSA? We don't know for sure.
I suspect Assad was somehow responsible but there was no concrete proof when President Trump ordered a retaliatory bombing raid on an Assad air base, an attack which caused material collateral damage (i.e. the deaths of women and kids). Trump had said that he would not bomb Syria ( as Obama had done) without Congressional approval but I guess he had changed his mind. The mainstream liberal press suddenly applauded him for his Damascene conversion to the warmongering policies of the Clinton Obama regime.
We in the West stood firm against Assad once more. Hooray! Since we clearly don't back ISIS that leaves us supporting the FSA which last week apologised for beheading a 12 year old boy. It was not the beheading for which they expressed regret just that they got the wrong boy. For the FSA are largely Islamofascists, many of them are Al Qaeda followers and decapitation, and chucking folks off buildings are the sort of acts they deem acceptable.
Wind forward to this attack on a convoy of folks who were leaving two villages which had been besieged not by ISIS but by FSA forces. They were being evacuated as part of a deal that saw civilians from FSA outposts besieged by Assad also to seek safety. The Syrians who died in this outrage, mainly women and kids, were Assad supporters. They were killed,almost certainly by FSA/Al Qaeda backers. One thing we know is that they were not being evacuated from the clutches of ISIS but from the clutches of the maniacs we in the West are supporting.
The mainstream liberal press denounced the chemical attack as a war crime. It was. But so too was this suicide bombing.. So who will Trump and his poodles May and the EU leadership bomb now? Presumably Assad again. Meanwhile a pliant media lies to us and muddies the waters by blaming ISIS who, we can all agree, are really bad guys.
In Aleppo today for the first time in several years St Elijah's cathedral sees the celebration of a full Easter Mass. That is because the folks we are supporting banned Christains from celebrating their faith and St Elijah's was in the smaller part of Aleppo (the East) controlled by "our guys". President Assad has always allowed Christians full freedoms which is why that persecuted minority support him unswervingly. The liberation of Eastern Aleppo allows them to celebrate Easter without the risk of execution. Is that not a rather good thing?
I do not argue that Assad is an angel. But to say that he is a devil, like the ISIS devils, and that we must thus back the other team as being relatively good guys is just to deny the truth of what is happening on the ground. In this post fact era, organs like the Mail are printing fake news to justify an intervention that is unjustifiable. The world would be a better place if the West recognised that President Putin had been, rightly, backing the least worst side all along and fell in line with him to allow Assad to cleanse his land of both ISIS and Al Qaeda. But that is not going to happen is it?
So who do Trump and the Mail propose bombing in response to this latest war crime?
The BBC's flagship News programme Newsnight is staffed by the grossly overpaid liberal elite who care about the sort of issues we in the 99% don't give a stuff about and who show an open hostility to Brexit. Impartiality is not the name of the game here. Last night's main feature was on that silly woman who claimed to be a black rights campaigner before - after many years on the liberal civil rights gravy train - she was outed as being er...`100% white.
All that time banging on about how being black had left her victimised and oppressed started to ring a bit hollow. At that point, she claimed that she "identified" as being black. Anyhow she has now got a big wonga book deal so maybe that will go some way to make up for all the hurt she was caused by slavery.
Then it was onto the thrice weekly Brexit bash with a report on farming. Naturally most of the farmers interviewed were those operating the sort of economically unviable farm in places such as the Lake District or Exmoor which cannot exist without mass subsidy. The government has said that it will replace the handouts with UK handouts until 2020 at least. Remember that as we send a NET £350 million a week to the Evil Empire those EU handouts are actually our taxes in the first place.
Natch these folks are worried that the meal ticket for life may be threatened so farmers - Newsnight opined - are demanding many things out of Brexit. Farmers in the Lakes, miners, banksters all demand that profitable industries and those working in them pay more in tax to subsidise unprofitable industries. The blessed Maggie was right about the mines, Brown was wrong about the banks - for capitalism to work, subsidies for unviable enterprises must go. Only one chap at the end was given far too short a time to explain that.
The landscape of the Lakes is an artificial one created by farming. But if the farms are unviable why not let it return to its natural state and let 31 million taxpayers keep a bit more of the money they earn without their employer needing subsidy?
The bias of the reporter was made clear with her throwaway remark about "many a myth" about EU regulations banning bent bananas and other matters. That is a standard line of the pro EU forces: we wicked Brexiteers make up all these myths. And so the BBC reports that charge as fact as part of its fake news service.
In fact the EU did ban bent bananas in the early naughties. In the end the ban was overturned but that the Evil Empire felt that EC Commission Regulation No 2257/94, which stated that bananas must be "free of abnormal curvature" and at least 14 cm in length was a good idea in the first place is worthy of note. Yet the BBC on a regular basis insists that this is all a myth dreamt up by lunatics like Chris Booker and Richard Littlejohn. And so to report bent banana banning as a myth is just common or garden fake news.
And it is fake news from an organisation which is able to pay its staff mouthwatering sums not because it is economically viable but because of a vast taxpayer subsidy. Does that sound familiar in any way?
As they prepared to lay the coffin containing the remains of the murderer Martin McGuinness into the ground in a place which the craven liberal British media termed Derry but which we know as Londonderry, the old killer's comrade in arms Gerry Adams screamed to the crowd "Martin McGuinness was not a terrorist". They howled their appreciation. Adams continued "Martin McGuinness was a freedom fighter". The fenians howled some more. But of course Adam was lying - not that the liberal British media dared to flag that up.
McGuinness personally killed people for the IRA. As a senior figure in the IRA he ordered countless other deaths. Some were soldiers in the British Army or loyalist paramilitaries. But I shall take the easy targets for St Peter to decide upon: the women, the children, the civilians, those who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
With one or two exceptions McGuinness did not apologise for those deaths, nor did he express remorse or regret. That makes him a murderer of innocents in my book. That he did it for a cause not pleasure makes him a terrorist.
Now Adams, who also has vast amounts of blood on his hands, says that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. We might look at Mandela as a case in point. But old Nelson expressed remorse, old Nelson tried for real reconciliation by forgiving those on "the other side" in a way that McGuinness never did, instead demanding enquiry after enquiry into what the wicked Brits did in Ulster.
But the real difference was that Mandela was fighting for a cause nearly all of us see as just. Certainly most folks in South Africa wanted an end to Apartheid. So he was fighting for freedom. From the start of the troubles to the signing of the Good Friday accord the majority of folks in the six counties wanted to stay in Britain. The IRA was killing for the cause of a United Ireland. That has always been its stated goal and was throughout the troubles.
To pretend otherwise, as the BBC and Channel 4 Fake News have been doing all week, is simply to rewrite history. Surely killing innocent folks to achieve a political structure strongly at odds with the wishes of most of the population simply cannot be described as freedom fighting. It is terrorism and the failure to accept that is one of many reasons why Mr Adams will in due course find his soul roasting in the same place as that of Mr McGuinness.
Other outlets and photos on twitter suggested that the attacker was Asian, Channel 4 named the culprit as Abu Izzadeen a gentleman who is clearly not Asian but black and was formerly known as Trevor Brooks. Mr Brooks looks nothing like the attacker. The evidence was everywhere that it could not be Brooks but to the C4 liberals, I guess, all those darkies look the same. The Independent Newspaper - another stronghold of the metropolitan elite - was running the same line. But but about half way through the programme C4 was saying that maybe it was not so sure about its lead story.
The truth was that Abu's lawyer had gone public to point out that his client was safely ensconced at Her Majesty's Pleasure. It could not have been him.
So what was the "source" that C4 Fake News reporter Simon Israel had cited as saying Abu was the killer? Was it The Independent or the same source as the Indy? And why did C4 ignore the evidence of its own eyes that the attacker was clearly Asian not black?
What happened next was shameful. There is a channel C4 +1 where I - and others - tend to watch the news. I tuned in at 8 PM and the programme started but after 30 seconds it stopped and on our screen a message appeared saying that the programme was "temporarily unavailable". That continued all the way through so that the fake news was covered up. There was no admission that C4 had got it wrong just a cover up. And no admission that C4 needs an urgent enquiry into its culture of fake news.
Meanwhile on twitter the SNP MP John Nicholson was all too keen to lap up C4's nonsense. A man whose entire career has been spent in the Westminster bubble firstly with the BBC now as an MP seems to dismiss the idea of going to original sources but just takes reports from fellow members of the liberal media establishment as gospel. That Mr Nicholson is an idiot is clear from the tweets below.
What is critical here is whether Mr Israel can demonstrate that he had a real credible source or was he simply relying on the fake news in the online Indy? Let's tune in tonight to see if C4 wants to come clean. Somehow I doubt it will.
The BBC started its Ten O'Clock News with its reporters and presenters visiibily delighting in the FBI stating that it was investigating allegations of links between members of the Trump Campaign team and the Russians. But why stick to facts on a day like this? it was time for some classic fake news from Pravda's gimp in Washington, Jon Sopel.
He asserted that these new "facts" about team Trump were sending shockwaves across Washington. A fact is something that has happened. There were no new facts revealed yesterday at all just the FBI saying it was investigating allegations, largely made by the liberal media. But when it comes to bashing POTUS, little Sopel always operates in a post fact era.
Then it was onto Brexit where the BBC revels in its unbalanced approach. Supporters of leaving were seen popping champagne corks. Yes what fascist toffs they are. And then a Labour shadow minister Kier Starmar was interviewed. He is a remoaner. So for balance they interviewed one more MP. Some SNP Loon. A Remoaner. Yup real balance from taxpayer funded Pravda once more.
Buzzfeed likes publishing fake news about Donald Trump and others. It ignores basic journalistic ethics on fact checking but when its pea brained columnists get to twitter they just make things up. Meet Leticia Miranda, Consumer Affairs Reporter who asks on twitter "Is this offensive?"
Of course for Millennial snowflake bimbos who cannot do their homework most things are offensive. The implication here, one assumes, is that Nazi regalia is offensive. Whatever. But the symbol depicted is an Iron Cross on a first world war plane, probably belonging to the Red Baron.
As those who can bother to check basic facts know, the Iron Cross was first awarded in old Prussia in 1813 and was a military award until Prussia became the leading force in a united Germany. It was a WW1 honour and again an honour in WW2. But as even Ms Miranda might be aware, the Nazis did not gain power until 1933, 120 years after the Iron Cross was first awarded in old Prussia.
So is an symbol which is 200 years old pained on an aircraft that predates the Nazis by more than fifteen years offensive? I would suggest that unless you cannot be bothered to do one historic fact check it is not. But then Buzzfeed does not go in for fact checks, just fake news.
In the budget yesterday, hopeless Chancellor Hammond stated that he did not expect to be running a balanced budget until 2025 - his even more hopeless predecessor had - without much justification - predicted he'd be in balance a few years earlier. Channel 4 Fake New seized on this as a statement that the wicked Tories planned eight more years of austerity. Time and time again this mantra was repeated without challenge. It is, of course, just a fake news invention.
This hopeless Government has seen the debt to GDP ratio soar on its watch to 89%. that is an all time high. And it is also a critical level in that economists agree that at above 90% the burden of debt - and funding that debt - places a real brake on the ability of the economy to grow. Already we spend 3% of our GDP, and 8% of Government income, just servicing that debt.
The reason why that debt has rocketed is not that tax receipts have slumped under the Tories but that Government expenditure has continued to rise to ever higher - record - levels. And there is now no pretence by hopeless Hammond that he will curb the inexorable profligacy of the State. He merely hopes that - long after he has been stood down - economic growth will bring in more taxes so bringing the State budget to balance. He hopes, that is it.
But this spendfest is not austerity. It is fauxsterity. Naturally those on the left such as Channel 4 fake News ignores the data and just shouts austerity.
But it is worse. Since when does running a deficit equate to austerity? There is no linkage at all. That we will run a deficit until 2025 does not mean we face eight more years of austerity. If anything it means the exact opposite. But then for Fake News outlets such as Channel 4 who live in a post fact era, that is just a minor detail.
This is a delight. Millionaire liberal media elitist Evan was wetting himself on the BBC's fake news flagship Newsnight as he got to interview two delightful ladies who are black and voted for Donald Trump. Evan started by saying that since black folks did not vote for Trump so he was puzzled by these ladies.
After Donald Trump's comments on Sweden and immigration, the Swedish home secretary Ylva Johansson gave an interview on the BBC News channel when she said there was no connection between crime and immigration and the level of rape in Sweden is “going down, and going down, and going down.”
Fair enough. That interview took place last week. The BBC did not challenge the minister at all since her pro immigration Trump bashing agenda is that of the UK state funded broadcaster. There is just one problem. The Minister lied.
She went on to lie. "The level of rapes is not actually high in Sweden”, contradicting another BBC hate figure Nigel Farage claiming he “doesn’t really know what he is talking about.”
There is only one problem with that statement which the BBC also did not bother to challenge since the elitist liberal broadcaster hates Farage almost as much as it hates Trump. That statement was also a lie.
Sweden, as you can see here, has the sixth highest rape rate in the World and the highest in Europe. Okay it is lower than Lesotho but it is still utterly shocking. A woman is more than three times as likely to get raped in Sweden than in Norway and six times as likely as across the EU as a whole. But maybe things are getting better? Er no.
The latest figures show a 13% increase in reported sex crimes in Sweden in 2016, and there has been a general increase over the past ten years. She has been slammed by a raft of MPs in Sweden from across the political spectrum but has the BBC run a correction or pulled the original programme yet?
Clearly it was running fake news but it is fake news that suits its agenda so that is all okay then is it not. It is not as if it will lose any revenue to fund its overpaid staff as a result of broadcasting lies and then refusing to withdraw them or correct them. We lucky Brits have to pay a poll tax to fund this rubbish or else we are threatened with prison and however low the fake BBC news stoops, that never changes.
When you want to campaign for a change in the law it helps when you are not telling complete lies on day one. And that brings me to liberal email campaign group Change.Org which wants pregnant mums to be given more time than the rest of us to sue for unfair dismissal. So I get an email from a woman called Jodi Brearley of "Pregnant then Screwed". Jodi's personal tale is heart warming but then she starts lying.
As many as 54,000 women a year lose their jobs for getting pregnant, yet less than 1% of victims use the law to protect themselves.
The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) and the Equality and Human Rights Commission commissioned a programme of research to investigate the prevalence and nature of pregnancy discrimination and disadvantage in the workplace. The Equality Act 2010 legislation prohibits pregnancy and maternity discrimination.
The results in this report are based on interviews with 3,034 employers and 3,254 mothers.
Around one in nine mothers (11%) reported that they were either dismissed; made compulsorily redundant, where others in their workplace were not; or treated so poorly they felt they had to leave their job; if scaled up to the general population this could mean as many as 54,000 mothers a year.
So let's drill down a bit. In fact the data shows 1% of mothers were dismissed, 1% were made redundant while other workers were not and 9% said they felt that they were treated so poorly they had to leave.
In the real world some staff are dismissed for being rubbish each year and some of them will be pregnant so not ALL of the 1% will be unfair dismissals. Ditto redundancies...they do happen you know and when you are doing it you risk matrix it and the staff most suited to a redundo get it. So not all of that 1% will be unfair. By definition when redundancies take place in a form unless it is down to the form going bust, not all staff get P45s.
Finally to the 9%. These are women who felt they were treated so poorly they had to leave. That is a very different thing from saying they "were treated so poorly they had to leave". It seems highly likely that a good number of that 9% were not treated so badly that they had no choice but to quit.
So on the back of a really very small survey indeed ( a sample size of less than 0.66% of the relevant population), Jodi reads data that is clearly open to very significant challenge to make the headline grabbing assertion that "As many as 54,000 women a year lose their jobs for getting pregnant."
I actually have some sympathy with this request to change the law but this is a clear case of lies, damned lies and (lying about) statistics and that severely dilutes my sympathy. But then this is a campaign group run by liberal snowflakes for liberal snowflakes so they are quite happy to live in a post fact era and devour fake news as long as it suits their agenda which in this case is the traditional one: business bad/world sexist. Whatever..
Jon Snow the uber liberal presenter of Channel 4 Fake News took to twitter last night bleating about how his channel was being denied access - along with others - from White House press briefings. I pointed out why this was fair on the part of the new administration. But do so again in more than 140 characters. Snow regards this ban as an attack on the free press. But why the hell should Trump pander to a new outlet which specialises in fake news about POTUS. I cite below a slam dunk and vile fake news C4 special from the last campaign.
I think Snow means working on it.
Now to that fake news. C4's Washington reporter Kylie Morris ventured outside of the Beltway and went to a retirement village which was red hot for The Donald. In her report - which I exposed in full at the time - she described the retirement village where old folks have "found the American dream he is promising: its predominantly white and predominantly conservative"
Donald Trump at no point in the campaign or in his life promised a dream for America that is predominantly white.
Kylie and C4 put words in his mouth which were racist and that is fake news. Does Snow not realise how serious this is? And does he not accept that such slanderous fake news may have consequences? The awful thing is that this was not a one off slip by a rogue reporter.
If C4 is content to slur Mr Trump by inventing things he said why does it need to attend press conferences? Surely it can just carry on making things up as it goes along. Kylie can just watch the press conferences on Fox News from her luxury apartment and then report back to the UK with some more made up quotes bearing no reality to what she has actually seen. That is how fake news works on C4.
Donald Trump is not assaulting a free press in denying folks like Kylie access to press briefings. She and C4 are free to report whatever they want. But in giving a seat in the briefing room to organisations that like to report what is actually said rather than just make things up to suit their own agenda what is Trump doing that is so bad?
Jon Snow can bleat all he likes,but until C4 starts to report real news rather than fake news when it comes to US politics why does the sanctimonious old fool expect to be treated any differently?
I am watching BBC World News which has just carried a clip of an interview with Republican grandee John McCain, who explicitly stated that he does not think that Donald Trump wants to be a dictator and explicitly did not link a tweet of the POTUS to such a goal. McCain is no friend of the Donald but the BBC cannot help itself. So flashing across my screen right now is:
McCain on Trump's tweet "that's how dictators get started"
Oh what irony. The actual transcript is below:
CHUCK TODD:I'm curious of your reaction to a tweet that the president sent Friday night. "The fake news media, failing New York Times, NBC News, ABC, CBS, CNN is not my enemy. It is the enemy of the American people." You believe the press is the enemy? You believe any group of Americans are the enemy of another group of Americans?
JOHN MCCAIN:I was talking about the period as, you know, of the new world order. A fundamental part of that new world order was a free press. I hate the press. I hate you especially. But the fact is I, we need you. We need a free press. We must have it. It's vital. If you want to preserve-- I'm very serious now-- If you want to preserve democracy as we know it, you have to have a free and many times adversarial press. And without it, I am afraid that we would lose so much of our individual liberties over time. That's how dictators get started.
CHUCK TODD:That's how dictators get started, with tweets like that?
JOHN MCCAIN:With-- No. They get started by suppressing a free press. In other words, a consolidation of power, when you look at history, the first thing that dictators do is shut down the press. And I'm not saying that that's, that President Trump is trying to be a dictator. I'm just saying we need to learn the lessons of history.
I have to pay a TV license, a poll tax, irrespective of my income and that cash goes to the BBC to pay the, hugely inflated, wages of preening liberal poltroons like Sopel. If I do not pay, even if I elect NEVER to watch the BBC, I am threatened with jail. To describe the BBC's service as free is thus a lie.
As for fair and impartial, that is even more of a monstrous lie. On every great issue of the past year the BBC has a partisan stance. There is no debate on global warming or climate change or whatever it is called these days - it is a given. All the economic good news in the UK since June 23 has been reported as "Despite Brexit" and ahead og June 23 the Beeb went out of its way to report as fact the laughable claims made by Remainers such as Carney and Osborbe warning of economic doom if we voted to quit the EU.
As for its coverage of the Trump campaign there were so many low points of bias and fale news that it is hard to pick out one crowning moment where the BBC showed it was neither fair or impartial. But my favourite remains a Newsnight with Emily Maitlis where she seized on two polls in tiny states which showed that Trump was not only going to lose rock solid GOP states (Alaska and Utah) but that mean he was such a liability that he'd ensure the Dems swept the House and Senate too. Emily thus suggested that the GOP had to think about dumping Trump. That was the BBC line in October as the liberal media tried to derail the Trump campaign. If course it was utter bollocks at the time as I demonstrated HERE
This was one of many times that the BBC showed itself to be neither impartial or fair. It is an organisation staffed by very well paid members of the liberal elite pushing a clear agenda. The tosser Sopel is part of that elite.
His statement yesterday is patently untrue and as the BBC aired it surely it classified as 100% fake news.
The current abuse scandal of the day concerns young men from Winchester College who were beaten savagely at some Christian camp attended by the current Archbishop of Canterbury wet Justin Welby. As if to make the scandal even more at the heart of the establishment Cathy Newman of Channel 4 Fake News told us that Winchester was Britain's oldest public school. In a sort of post fact era maybe. It was founded in 1382.
My own school Warwick was founded in 914 AD so, even in a post fact era, it is much older than Winchester. I believe that four schools are even older than Warwick: King's Canterbury and St Peter's York being the only two I can name.
The Warwick School of c914 was in town not on the edge as now and clearly had many structures over the centuries that followed. Warwick today is essentially a child of the nineteenth century. It is really a nouveau school and thus it only got around to getting its coat of arms with the words Altiora Peto ( I seek higher things) in the last Century. How do I know this becuase as I entered the building there was a document sent to the school from the College of Heralds.
It was signed by a senior herald of the time, Arthur Cochrane. That would be Sir Arthur to you, the nouveaus at Warwick, Sir Arthur of the Cochrane's of Edenmoor House Co Donegal, my paternal Great Grandfather. Neither my father or I had ever noticed this before.
Flagging this up was a good way to break the ice with the Headmaster as I headed back to discuss the sadistic abuse handed out by school teacher Geoffrey Eve to myself and others some 40 years ago.
Since 1947 The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists have once a year recalibrated an imaginary Doomsday Clock tracking how close we are to midnight, the point at which man destroys the planet. To mark the election of Donald Trump the clock was pushed forward 30 seconds to two and a half minutes to midnight. How the Guardian, Channel 4 and the BBC loved it "He's going to kill us all". Did any of these screaming hysterical liberals watch the last episode of the current series of Endeavour?
It started in 1962 and the radio is playing coverage of the Cuban missile crisis. The Russian foreign minister has just announced that if Soviet ships sailing to Cuba are intercepted by the Americans - as JFK had pledged to do - this will start a global thermonuclear war. Folks who were alive in 1962 tell me that they felt terrified.
As a boy when Russia invaded Afghanistan and Reagan and Thatcher stood up to the original Evil Empire I felt scared. The Government distributed leaflets to every British household "Protect & Survive" showing how in a manner of which Blue Peter would have been proud we could all make our own bomb shelters if the sirens went off. Demand for proper bomb shelters went through the roof. That was scary.
Donald Trump says he wants to work with Russia and get along with President Putin. The Ideological divide ended with the fall of the Berlin wall. These days Russia and America have far more in common and, unlike Obama, Trump recognises that and wants Jaw Jaw not (cold) War War? So why is he a threat?
The Bulletin states that: "the United States and Russia, are currently at odds in a variety of theaters, from Syria to Ukraine to the borders of NATO". On Syria it seems that Obama was at odds, backing Al Qaeda supporting rebels, with Russia which did not back terrorists. It seems as if Mr Trump wants to join Russia in clearing terrorists from Syria. It was the former US regime that racked up tensions in the Ukraine encouraging a revolution to oust a democratically elected President and replace him with a regime which within 24 hours had made ethnic Russians feel like second class citizens, by ceasing to recognise Russia as a language. Go back to WW2 and what happened in the Ukraine for a history lesson. Did President Obama know on whose side the grandfathers of many of those he is backing fought? And what atrocities they committed. Trump wants to talk to Putin to find a solution.
The logic of the Atomic scientists is flawed, the clock should be nowhere near midnight and under Trump it should be moving backwards not forwards. Aha, but these "peer group selected scientists" have another agenda. Back in 1947 this clock was about nukes. Today the report also cites "the lack of immediate progress in fighting climate change". Aha Trump is a denier. So what if the arctic icecaps are getting bigger and global land temperatures are falling at a record pace this winter, Trump does not believe in global warming and so the world is going to burn up soon. There is no room to debate those who believe in this false religion for they act in a post fact era.
Meanwhile for the liberal media establishment it was a day to celebrate. Report the headline but do not ask is the world really so close to wipeout and so much closer than in 1962 or 1983? Of course it is not but when you pedal fake news every day what do you care about facts?
Pastor Burns countered with facts but over at Channel 4 Fake News they live in a post fact era and Burns was backing racism and that was it. Frei put the darkie in his place by ignoring facts and just repeating the mantra that Trump is a racist. That showed him did it not? Boy the whole C4 team must have creamed themselves with that interview.
The good pastor is obviously a glutton for punishment as he has come over to Britain for a holiday and found himself face to face with little Frei again.
Joining Frei and Burns was Mhari Black the rather stupid SNP loudmouth MP. Poor Burns tried to talk facts, pointing out this was not a Muslim ban, noting that the vast majority of Muslims are not banned he was just targeting seven nations infested with terrorists. He also pointed out that Carter and Obama had imposed similar bans to no liberal howls of protest.
The gobshite money tree worshipping MP and little Frei interrupted repeatedly insisting that Trump was a racist, islamophobe, etc etc. Burns said he was a black man from Southern USA and new full well what racism was. Mhairi said that he was just being naive. Too right, dem der Niggers just don't know what racism is, they should listen to the white scottish lady and learn the facts of life.
When the MP interrupted Burns, Frei allowed her to shout over him. When the pastor tried to respond to smears that is to say vile opinions presented as facts, Frei told the darkie to let Mhari finish. Know your place boy!
One of the MPs taking part in tonight’s demonstration, Mhari Black from the SNP, and Mark Burns, a evangelical pastor who has been vocal in his support of Trump in the past.
That makes it appear that Burns may be thinking again after what the Donald has done. But he is not. He backs POTUS all the way. Burns is STILL vocal in his support.
Frei reminded the Pastor that 1.5 million folks had signed a petition saying the Donald should not have a state visit here. Okay most of them are bots or not British but this is Chanell 4 Fake News. It lives in a post fact era. And don't let any upstart darkie from the cotton fields tell it otherwise.
The tweet below from Nick Robinson should annoy you. The antics of silly Laura Kuenssberg in Washington yesterday should appall you. The wages of Gary Lineker, Graham Norton and Fiona Bruce are nauseating and via the license fee poll tax we, the great unwashed, are paying to make these multi millionaires even richer as they treat our views with scorn and contempt. The fake news pumped out by Emily Maitlis on Donald Trump was a disgrace while her open disdain for his poorer less educated supporters was shocking and failed to give British viewers a balanced impression of what was going on. The Brexit coverage of the BBC was and is shamefully partisan. The only answer is the privitization of the BBC as I explain in this podcast
You know when your kids ask you "Daddy would you rather jump into a room full of poisonous snakes or an aquarium full of great white sharks?" and you just say " It is not a choice I expect to make? This morning lefties across Britain and all those pampered posh liberal nitwits (and my daughter) from the Wimmin's March wake up facing just such a choice.
During the US election a deranged Hillary Clinton supporting blogger Griffin Webster Tarpley posted a (100% fake news) story suggesting that the wonderful and intelligent six language speaking Melania Trump had been a high class hooker. Britain's Daily Mail duly repeated this lie and smear without checking any facts. A US Court yesterday ruled that the fragrant Melania can go ahead and sue Tarpley for $150 million - we await a ruling on whether the Mail can also be sued.
I look forward to Melania destroying Tarpley in Court as one hopes that the rat squeals and reveals what links, if any, he had with the dirty tricks specialists in team Crooked Hillary, for whom he batted with such dedication all summer.
But a case against the Mail would be even more joyful for the quandary in which it would put Britain's lefties. Hating the Mail is in their DNA but so too is hating anything to do with Donald Trump incvluding his Mrs. Poor Melania has never done anything wrong but she is the one immigrant the lefties love to bash for everything from her margoinally less than perfect English to what she wears or the air she breathes.
So for Owen Jones, Polly Toynbee, the BBC's dim Laura Kuenssberg et al the question is "who would you rather go down in flames and who triumph and be utterly vindicated: The Daily Mail or Mrs Trump?" There will be much angst over the muesli as they consider that question across Islington today.
Channel 4 News this week is wall to wall Trump bashing ahead of the great handover day on Friday. Just now and then we get a bit of remoaning about Brexit but the main focus is nailing The Donald. Having engaged in serial fake news reporting of the actual campaign as I pointed out here on numerous occasions, with beltway liberal Kylie and little Matt Frei the worst offenders, C4 just won't let go.
The final segment yesterday saw coverage of Obama's final press conference. Cue Jon Snow: "we will miss him." No pretence of impartiality there from the dozy old posterboy of the liberal media establishment. Meanwhile Kylie was really agitated, warning that Trump may change the format of White House press briefings and who was invited and that this threatened the freedom of the press.
Hell's teeth, the freedom of the press is about being allowed to print or report what you want and there is no suggestion that Trump will repeal the Speech Act or enact Leveson type controls. He is not going to stop Kylie reporting half truths and smears about him.
How he communicates with the established mainstream press has nothing to do with press freedom. If CNN, the BBC and C4, which happily reported the Golden Shower allegations as fact/quasi fact even though they are either unverified second hand rumours or, in many cases, now already proven as false, maybe Trump might decide that such outlets are so "fake news" driven that there is no point in showing civility to folks who clearly just hate him and do not pretend otherwise.
Or perhaps he now accepts that more Americans get their news from "new media" than from Newspapers so maybe he should democratise news dissemination by giving equal access to all media outlets not a privileged front seat to establishment beltway liberals like Kylie.
The dossier is, of course, unverified and already big sections of it are proving to be clearly false. The rest will follow that path and reporting unverified allegations as fact is at worst just dreadful journalism and, in the view of a rational being, the ultimate in "fake news". that did not stop the BBC and C4 leading with it as if it was gospel. If it is Donald Trump the liberal media establishment just lives in the post fact era.
Greenwald is a liberal too but he is also a good journalist who rather likes facts. Snow started by comparing the Trump dossier to the leaked Clinton emails, arguing the former was fact and the latter "fake news". Greenwald pointed out correctly that the dossier was not verified so could not be described as fact while the emails were so genuine that they cad caused 5 senior Democrats to quit as their corruption was exposed. Those emails were not fake news.
Snow was having none of it. He accused Wikileaks of hacking the emails which meant they should have published. A rather startled Greenwald pointed out that Snow was the only person who had accused Wikileaks of hacking. Snow did not stand corrected. As a high priest of the liberal establishment he is never wrong.
So he continued with his assertion that the Russians had got the emails. Again this is not proven and - for what it is worth Wikileaks has said its source was not Russian. Snow said that if emails or information is obtained illegitimately they should not be published if they sway an election.
Really? Greenwald noted how Trump's tax returns were obtained illegitimately by the NY Times and published. C4 lapped that up saying it did not matter how such information was obtained it was in the public interest. Surely emails showing senior Dem staffers being corrupt, rigging polls, etc are also in the public interest. We on the right want to see the filth on both sides published. That is part of the idea of liberty and democracy.
Snow patronisingly dismissed that and said we will have to leave it there wuth some more condescending words. That was it. Snow got his facts wrong, he brands news as fake only if it does not fit his agenda and he regards it as acceptable to publish stolen information if it hurts a REpublican but not a democrat.
Snow has just lost the plot along with the rest of the liberal establishment press. Even by the low standards of C4 News this interview was a car crash.