BBC having a breakdown over the fact that the DUP and the Conservatives have announced an arrangement that keeps Corbyn OUT of Downing Street. It also ensures that the triple lock and winter fuel allowance for pensioners is maintained. Oddly enough the BBC cheered Corbyn when he wanted that but when the DUP actually achieve it…silence.
If you don’t want to read the full post let me sum it up for you…..if you want to control immigration you are somehow morally deficient, lacking in compassion, honesty and intelligence and you are a racist. There should be no difference between economic migrants and asylum seekers and even confirmed terrorists should be allowed sanctuary here. Hislop’s whole argument is based upon his intepretation of the Victorian attitude towards immigration…
Britain was such a marvellous country that unfortunate people from countries that were not so marvellous (because they were run by foreigners) might well end up being forced to leave them.
Britain, as the moral as well as the political leader of the world, would therefore welcome these refugees in and trust them to contribute to their new home in a way that would make it even more marvellous.
The real world doesn’t seem to impinge upon Hislop’s utopian idealism at all. Just the usual smug, patronising elitist take on immigration the BBC has peddled, unsuccessfully, for years…not helped by the use of someone like Robert Windour, the author of Bloody Foreigners, who appeared as an anchor voice commenting on immigration…but again hardly the voice of the common man, as his superior smugness radiated from the screen.
Who are the real extremists, the racists, the immoral ideologues for whom rabid dogma and intolerant and prejudiced ideology trump common sense?
The BBC wants you to believe it is anyone who dares to raise the suggestion that immigration should be controlled, but in fact the real extremist and manufacturer of immigrant hysteria and racist propaganda is the BBC, the BBC that shouts down anyone who wants to control immigration as racists, immoral and stupid little Englanders, the BBC that demands an open door policy allowing in unlimited numbers without regard to their effect on society or indeed if they harbour extreme and violent intentions towards it. The BBC that pumps out endless pro-immigration propaganda that tries to portray mass immigration as a moral duty that to turn our back upon would reduce us to the level of Nazi barbarians.
Ian Hislop takes up the baton for the BBC as he is given licence to front a programme that is pure propaganda, sanctimonious drivel that has been produced by the BBC in order to influence the Brexit negotiations…highly politicised, partisan misinformation manufactured and shaped to alter your opinions about immigration and thus about the EU which the BBC hopes we will still remain a member of as it also works to undermine Brexit and the referendum vote. Hardly fulfilling its obligation to be impartial, accurate and honest.
Ian Hislop sinks ever further in my estimation as he sells himself cheap to produce this dishonest and extraordinarily one-sided rant in favour of immigration. The BBC’s use of Hislop shows they did not have any intention of a proper debate. Hislop is well known as being pro-immigration and pro-EU and so they knew he would produce a programme that would be ‘on-board’, and such was the case.
Hislop had two weapons…the first, the adoption of the moral high ground, an idealistic hubris that gathered around itself a righteous superiority that declared those who want to welcome all are moral and decent human beings whilst those who seek to slam shut the doors are morally deficient and inhumane racists. Look at how he talks to the ‘controversial’ Katie Hopkins [about 38 mins in] as he snears and grimaces as if there is bad smell and refuses to accept her language or the truth behind the language she uses that is an all too honest portrayal of the immigrant situation in some cases…..’cockroaches’, ‘feral’ and ‘festering sores’…they all sound prima facia tasteless and improper and yet in context they are not…Hislop wants Hopkins to wrap her allegedly unwelcome ideas in more pleasant, ‘acceptable’ language that doesn’t offend…or tell the truth. Classic BBC. The same BBC however that is prepared to label you a racist, a Nazi, an ignorant, bigoted little englander and who said Tommy Robinson was ‘polluting’ the public’s mind and that the ‘Christian’ DUP were ‘backward and unpleasant’ due to their religiously based views…..so apparently strong and ‘offensive’ language can be used depending upon who is saying it and who the target is.
His second weapon is of course the usual BBC one of omission, omission of uncomfortable facts about immigration such as crimes, terrorism, the negative effects upon schools, the NHS, housing, traffic congestion, and cultural take-over and suppression. Hislop only really told us of the supposed benefits of immigration missing out the huge amount of evidence that mass immigration and the inevitable lack of integration leads to separation, alienation and eventually conflict….welcome to now. He concentrated on a comparison from the past which he thought a golden age of immigration and upstanding moral behaviour…claiming that Victorian England would have welcomed in anyone in any numbers and if we lose this welcoming attitude towards immigrants we sink into some immoral cesspit. Naturally that is nonsense, we have always defended ourselves against invasion and defended our sovereignty and culture…the Victorians would not have allowed millions of highly alien immigrants to flood in who had no intention of integrating and whose own ideology set them against the host nation. Any sign of an intent to convert Britain to their ideology by subterfuge and force would have been met in return with massive force and crushed…and the guilty parties expelled.
Hislop’s take on immigration is just the usual simplistic, patronising, moralising, extremist open-door immigration puff that we come to expect from the BBC.
He ends with a somewhat pompous and smug moral lecture that said that what we need is facts [lol], less Press hysteria, less political bandwagons, less racism, less dishonesty…more compassion, more idealism, more common sense, a more open mind…and of course…a more open door immigration policy.
It is quite clear this was not an honest debate about immigration, it was itself a vehicle for hysteria, of those who panic at the first sign their East European nannies and plumbers may get more expensive, it was a racist tract that denounced anyone who opposed mass immigration as racist….the BBC always defaults to the idea that it is white little englanders who oppose it and do so because of skin colour [those black Muslim Poles….so many of them flood in here!] As for common sense, that was distinctly lacking.
Baroness Warsi of course finds her way into a BBC programme…in this case being held to account for her election leaflets that said we must control immigration, she naturally defends her position and then says however it is the racist arguments of the BNP and UKIP that we must not condone or pander to and that we mustn’t try to portray immigrants as ‘the other’ who don’t belong here….and at the beginning of the programme we get this clip of her….
Baroness Warsi: “How long before migrants stop having to take the loyalty test?”
Well in her case I’d say never…the woman whose loyalty is clearly for Muslim extremists first having resigned her government job in a show of support for the terrorists of Hamas whilst demanding Israel be disarmed and Hamas armed. The woman who is essentially a mouthpiece for the radicals in the UK, a woman who does all she can to thwart and undermine the government anti-terror programme, a woman who demands those radicals be included in talks about how Islam should be dealt with in society and seen as part of the solution…and terrifyingly she has been asked to join a government commission on countering extremism…be afraid.
Might suggest it is some immigrants who themselves decide to live completely separate lives and want nothing to do with ‘the other’ mainstream population.
Amazing, I wonder what the difference is.
A Tory council is absolutely smashed for its apparently terrible and slow response to the Grenfell Tower fire, criticised for a chaotic reaction with no one being accommodated, people not able to find relatives, no instant database of everyone in the tower and where they were, no coordination of relief services and people apparently just couldn’t find those relief centres even when the council did eventually manage to open them.
Trouble is most of that it is nonsense…a huge ‘towering inferno; in the middle of the night in which hundreds of familes had to be evacuated…any wonder there was a level of ‘chaos’ to start with? Families bomb-burst away from the scene to sleep in cars and parks or wherever and some seem to have made no attempt to contact the council but moaned to the media about lack of contact and services…that’s despite the council setting up several relief centres that, as they were flooded with people and donations, seem to have been easy to find for most people….the council was on the usual internet locations, as well as on the ground, pumping out information. Those volunter services were in fact organised by the council and they had to register with the council…so ‘disorganised’? The council housed nearly everyone in a very short space of time in temporary accommodation…and yet was still being heavily criticised for not doing so. The council was forced to close its main centre by the violent protests of Corbyn’s street thugs, the BBC reported this as a council that just didn’t care about people and which had just shut up shop and vanished…not mentioning that the centre had been forced to close [ and not mentioning the very obvious windows boarded up havng been smashed by the Corbynistas]…and never mind the work had had to be transferred to other centres. The BBC had only one narrative..a council that didn’t care about the poor and were hopelessly disronganised and chaotic in their response.
We heard that Grenfell was a ‘story about poverty’..meaning the rich just didn’t care if the poor burned to death in their homes….despite the fact that many of the flats were privately owned and were renting out for over £2,0000 a month…or that so many other properties are clad in the same material….such as Premier Inns…..just how many private blocks of flats have the same cladding? Loads I suspect. You won’t hear the BBC working the rich and poor narrative then…it’ll be conveniently forgotten.
Compare all that to how Labour run Camden is treated as they make the astonishing decision to evacuate a block of flats in the dead of the night…amidst the same chaos and lack of information that RBKC were accused of having been guilty of. Plucky Camden gets praise and cheerleading, no doubt we will be getting the line that ‘it’s all the fault of Tory cuts’ very shortly. Listen to Sarah Montague ‘interview’ the leader of Camden council [08:36]….on Thursday Camden told its residents that their flats were safe, on Friday night they were being evacuated as the flats were deemed an immediate and extreme risk…fair enough Montague asked why such a rapid about turn happened…however no-where does Montague ask the most relevant and biggest question…how is it that these flats were not checked before, after all they get an annual fire safety check and building inspectors must have approved the cladding…how did they miss the fact that this building is apparently such a death trap that the residents have to immediately, in the middle of the night, be evacuated to safety? If this had been a Tory council they would have been slaughtered, as we’ve seen, but a Labour one doesn’t even get asked the difficult question by the BBC’s premier news programme…surely they might have thought such a question was relevant…how is it that your building was a deathtrap that could potentially go up like a roman candle at any time killing hundreds and you didn’t know? Do you not care about the poor and marginalised in society like your nasty Tory neighbors?
No such difficult, searching questions…in fact this morning on Broadcasting House the BBC was praising Camden for their rapid response, organised ‘chaos’ in difficult circumstances and the very fast and high quality work that they had done to remedy the situation.
Guess the BBC are still hopeful of a early second election.
Sarah Montague was gushing all over Billy Bragg as they talked excitedly about Corbyn appearing at Glastonbury in yet another of his down-with-the-kids PR stunts. Tory MPs were apparently choking on their full english as they listened in disgust to the BBC pro-Corbyn hype which they declared would, with one more little push, see Corbyn in No10 . Can’t say they are wrong as Corbyn gets a free ride on the BBC Corbyn-for-Prez bandwagon.
Montague was all fur coat and no knickers as she proved her willingness to let Corbyn go all the way declaring unashamedly that he was ‘recognised as a man who doesn’t change his mind’!!!!
And yet that’s the biggest lie of all. Corbyn campaigned in the election on a raft of lies, his whole life, principles and ideology ruthlessly dumped in some dark room until he gets the reins of power…the BBC not bothering to turn some light upon these past glories.
Corbyn dumped his love of terrorists, his opposition to shoot-to-kill and his Euroscepticism, the man who declared he was the ‘ethical politician’ bringing a new, kinder, more gentle, more honest politics to Westminster lied through his teeth continuously throughout the campaign…even is famous beige clothing was dumped for a new, ‘respectable’ dark suit and a red tie. He’s living a lie and the BBC don’t want to know.
May on the other hand was mocked remorselessly by the BBC for her ‘strong and stable’ sales pitch…..now however she is mocked for apparently not being ‘strong and stable’….thus proving she was in fact right to press those characteristics as necessary for government. Note also that before the election the BBC were telling us that the EU were not concerned about the election and that the outcome would make absolutely no difference…now apparently it is crucial to our negotiations and a ‘humbled’ May cannot possibly hold her own in those negotiations…also the BBC told us during the election that whilst May wanted it to be about Brexit other issues had taken over…such as terrorism and the economy as Corbyn mostly ignored Brexit and campaigned on ‘austerity’ and the NHS…and then police and security [lol]….but now the BBC is telling us it was all about Brexit and the election changed everything and we must now surrender to the Remainders and go for a soft Brexit..ie stay in the EU.
The BBC just makes it up to suit as they go along hoping nobody will notice the complete change of narrative….as did Corbyn….and he got away with it.
As for austerity, Labour gets away with murder as it claims that austerity has destroyed the economy…and yet we know that there has hardly been any austerity…proven by the fact that Osborne’s plans have continuously been put back and the goal posts moved for the deficit target. Labour then criticises the government for not getting borrowing down quick enough…so Labour criticises for cutting spending too much and then criticises for overspending…and the BBC presenters make no comment. And Labour’s big plan? Massive borrowing and the highest taxes of any peacetime era ever.
Then we had the various police officers all suddenly appearing on the BBC complaining that the recent spike in terror attacks meant resources were being diverted from other areas of policing…and the BBC is shocked. Not so shocked when hundreds of police were diverted into checking up on child sex abuse claims against Tory politicians or when they were sent off to stitch up Sun journalists in the wake of the Leveson show trial.
The BBC is very selective in what it decides to see and not see.
— The Agitator (@UKDemockery) June 20, 2017
Who knew? Who’d-a-thunk eh?
You might have thought it was a no-brainer, a 23 storey tower block to be clad in insulation and rain-proof cladding…it’d have to be fire proof, surely? You wouldn’t wrap a building in flammable material would you when non-combustible materials were available, materials that not only didn’t burn but didn’t give off cyanide gas when burnt? And yet that is precisely what did happen.
What went wrong? ‘Experts’, political hubris, time and money, good intentions and lack of supervision.
The BBC et al scoffed loudly at Gove when he suggested perhaps ‘experts’ weren’t all they were cracked up to be and perhaps we shouldn’t listen to them quite so much, maybe with a touch of scepticism. Indeed the Brexit vote was a vote by the People flying in the face of ‘expert’ advice telling them how great the EU was. The problem was that the peoples’ own experience on the ground, living with the consequences of EU membership, was entirely different to what they were being told they should appreciate….they were told what they saw as EU failure was their own fault, they didn’t understand, they were ignorant or they were prejudiced and bigoted.
Trouble is they were not stupid or bigoted, they knew full well what was going on and that they were being lied to. The same goes for tower blocks like Grenfell Tower…the residents, not experts in architecture, building design or in building materials, could tell from living the reality that the place was a death trap. But the experts knew better.
The trouble is the politicians, local and national, all have to rely on the experts…for the design, for construction and for overseeing any project. And of course they will rely on them and their advice. What else can they do? Then there is the politics. Housing in desperately short supply and politicians make promises to build, build, build and then they get elected and have to make good on those promises…luckily new building techniques and materials are available that will speed up and lower the cost of mass producing news homes. It then falls to the local councils to carry out those promises, find the money and to supervise the jobs. It just doesn’t happen as good intentions fall by the wayside and the pressure is on to get the new homes built to a budget…and the new techniques aren’t properly researched and developed so that ultimately the buildings fail in some shape or form. The buildings are either demolished or attempts made to repair them…repairs which suffer the same problems of insufficient development and supervision. These also fail as at Grenfell.
None of this is new. New techniques and building materials have been around for over a century as prefabs using concrete became the common solution to rapidly building mass housing. The politicians naturally having to rely on experts to assure them this was the best solution, and safe.
Here are some phrases that sum up the time from a 1984 investigation…. ‘Get it built’, ‘the mood of the times’, ‘time and money’, ‘euphoric times’, ‘people swept along’.
The politicians et al were swept along on a tide of hubris…an Obama-like ‘Yes we can’ mood that meant the details and the criticisms were swept aside and ignored in the ‘euphoria’ of getting the job done.
Watch the film, below. It’s frightening how good intentions result in costly and dangerous end results, the politicians not deliberately setting out to build shoddy and lethal housing but a perfect storm of time and budget pressures, contractors failing to provide quality materials and good work standards and a failure of supervision by the councils all combined to produce homes that were deadly.
The while film illustrates the process by which failure was built into the system but the last 5 minutes brings it all into clear focus and relevance to today as it gets to the cladding repair systems and then the failure of politicians to listen to the people, preferring as they did, to listen to the experts.
This was in 1984….33 years ago…lessons learnt? None.
What caused the Finsbury Park attack? Was it somehow the Mail and The Sun?
This is what caused Finsbury Park…..No Muslim terrorism…no ‘blowback’…..and who helped ‘radicalise’ Muslims and thus in turn ‘radicalised’ the Finsbury Park terrorist? The BBC and Guardian.
Blood on their hands.
This is not ‘rhetoric’, this is not an inappropriate tone, this is not Islamophobia…this is death, this is terrorism, this is the bloody reality not some cheap point scoring game by some smart-arse prat at the Guardian……why is he angry at the Mail and The Sun and not this….? The Guardian and BBC make excuses for the killers but condemn these newspapers? There is something very, very wrong with the people at those two organisations.
The Guardian produced a cartoon image of the van used by the Finsbury Park attacker blaming the Sun and the Mail for ‘radicalising’ the driver…
Just the usual anti-Mail and Sun slurs that we come to expect….not just from the Guardian but the BBC also which never lets a day go by without some snide passing comment about the Mail and of course blaming the tone of the Right-Wing Press for stirring up hate and division.
The BBC and the Guardian have over the years mounted a sustained and violent media campaign against British troops, the security services, anti-terror legislation, the police, the government and of course against all those who would speak up against the Jihadi Islamist threat…including many Muslims. They have done more to help radicalise Muslims and justify terrorism in the name of Islam, done to ‘protect’ Muslims and an Islam under attack from the West, than any other MSM or unofficial media sources…..the stamp of approval from two such ‘respected’ and credible news organisations must have been invauable to the Jihadi cause as the Muslim community saw their prejudices and conspiracy theories confirmed by these two news sources. Trouble is the BBC narrative is entirely false, its history a lie, a very dangerous lie. Even now it is still pumping out the Jihadi narrative of the West using, exploiting and destroying the Muslim world…The BBC’s latest history of the Middle East was a complete travesty, lie upon lie upon lie. And these lies have consequences….in places like Manchester, London Bridge, Westminster, 7/7, 9/11…not to mention in the Muslim world itself…where as is often said Muslims are the main victims. But the consequences are far broader and more abstract than terrorist bombs and murders as the Media, politicians, authorities, education centres, legal system, workplaces and society as a whole appeases the Muslim community and adopts its Islamic practices in order to make Muslims feel part of society…Islamic State and its terrorists blow up their bombs in order to force Islam upon us…our answer…more Islam….we do exactly what the terrorists want…when we don’t, we get threats from ‘community leaders’ that Muslims will be angered, some will be radicalised and there may be bombs…instead of arresting these community leaders we give them money, positions in our political parties and favoured status…any wonder why many have no interest in stopping the terrorism whilst at the same time ‘condemning’ it?
Remember this letter ‘blackmailing’ the government to change foreign policy…Sadiq Khan was one of those who signed it…you know, Khan who thought those who helped the government in its anti-terror programme were ‘Uncle Toms’…the man who is now Mayor of London…..
British Muslim groups have written to the prime minister calling for “urgent” changes to UK foreign policy.
In an open letter they say British policy is putting civilians at increased risk in the UK and abroad.
‘It is our view that current British government policy risks putting civilians at increased risk both in the UK and abroad.
To combat terror the government has focused extensively on domestic legislation. While some of this will have an impact, the government must not ignore the role of its foreign policy.
We urge the Prime Minister to redouble his efforts to tackle terror and extremism and change our foreign policy to show the world that we value the lives of civilians wherever they live and whatever their religion.
Such a move would make us all safer.’
The Mail hit back with a full page editorial today slamming the Guardian as the real Fascists and manufacturers of hate and fake news…all accusations that could so readily be made about the BBC…
The Daily Mail has launched its most savage ever editorial attack on long-time critic The Guardian accusing it of “fake news” and being a “purveyor of hatred”.
The excoriating attack appears to be a declaration of all-out war against its left-wing rival. It follows various pieces of Guardian coverage including one which compared the Daily Mail to an “open sewer” and a letter which said it was an “organ of hate speech”.
Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre appears to have been spurred into action by a Guardian cartoon which depicted the van which attacked mosque worshippers at Finsbury Park with the words: “Read Sun and the Daily Mail” on the side of it
In a comment piece headed: “Fake news, the fascist Left and the REAL purveyors of hatred” it said today: “..this week the Guardian published a cartoon so sick and disgusting – so deranged and offensive to the four million decent, humane and responsible people who read us – that we owe it to every one of them to lay to rest this malicious smear.”
It added: “The Guardian was telling its followers that the Daily Mail and its readers are vicious bigots with the blood of innocent, peace-loving Muslims on their hands.
“If this had been an isolated example of the Left’s bilious malice, we might have let it pass with nothing more than a shudder of revulsion…
“But this is far from a one-off insult to our readers, who – as should go without saying – were as horrified and appalled as the rest of the country by the Finsbury Park attack.”
It noted that earlier this month Guardian online columnist Sophie Heawood tweeted: “Genuinely excited for a future in which the Daily Mail readers are all dead.”
It also singled out Guardian writer Owen Jones who described the Daily Mail as an “open sewer” in March and complained about a Guardian readers’ letter which yesterday described the Mail as “the main organ of hate speech in Britain”.
It said: “For the Guardian’s editor to publish such deluded, defamatory nonsense – which in itself is a naked incitement to violence – speaks volumes about the hatred that drives this ‘voice of liberalism’.”
The Mail said it wouldn’t matter if The Guardian’s “infantile lies” were confined to the pages of a “little-read dying paper”.
“But in this age of social media, they are spread and amplified through the great distorting echo-chamber of the internet, where the mob really does rule…”
It said: “For the record – not that this matters to the fake news the Guardian creates about the Mail – this paper has always been against UKIP, so much so that Nigel Farage blamed as for his lack of electoral success.”
It also noted that Mail was against the wars in Iraq and Libya, was the first paper to condemn Guantanamo Bay and has consistently opposed UK involvement in torture.
It also noted that its campaign to bring the Stephen Lawrence murderers to justice “did more to improve race relations in this country than anything the Guardian has ever achieved”.
The leader accuses The Guardian of “criminally stupid business decisions” which have lost it hundreds of millions and says “in the name of sanctimony, what, when you handle your own affairs so badly, gives you the right to sit in judgment on other papers?”
And it says: “Your jaded product is addicted to subsidy and steeped in public sector mentality.”
It concludes: “The truth is that the Guardian and the fascist Left are the real purveyors of hate in this country.”
It also notes that Mail Online is a “totally separate entity” from the daily paper with “very different world view”.
Hitting back at a Guardian story that claimed controversial columnist Katie Hopkins wrote for the daily paper, the Daily Mail said: “That was a lie.
“The Guardian and its writer know that Ms Hopkins has nothing to do with the Daily Mail, but works for Mail Online – a totally separate entity that has its own publisher, its own readership, different content and a very different world view.
“The Guardian knows this because the Mail has told it countless times, but, hey, why let a little lie get in the way of a good smear?”
A Guardian spokesperson said: “Guardian journalism is based on principles of quality, trust, integrity and facts.”
In the last post we had a reminder of the BBC’s extremely partisan reporting on Blacks killed by US police officers…the BBC wrongly claiming that Blacks are more likely than whites to be shot…not true…whites are in fact more likely to be shot…and note that a good proportion of the cops when they do shoot Blacks are in fact Black or other non-white ethnicity.
When a black person is shot by the US police it is big news for the BBC, they devote a lot of time and resources to reporting the shooting and in following up the story later on as well as tying it in to other shootings so as to make that narrative that they seem so eager to create of racist white cops…..despite knowing many of the cops are not white.
How different when it is a cop who gets shot or stabbed…of course the BBC’s ‘racist cop’ narrative has no doubt contributed to the heightened racial tension and subsequent shootings of police officers in the US by Blacks out for ‘revenge’.
A recent stabbing of a police officer in the US by someone shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’ is not clearly one of those ‘revenge’ attacks but it is interesting to see the way the BBC report, or hardly report it at all in comparison to their reporting when a Black gets shot by a cop. A police officer is attacked by someone who is likely an Islamic terrorist and the BBC doesn’t manage to get it onto the frontpage, or even on the world page….it is however top story on the US page….but how does a ‘top story’ from the US page about such a sensitive issue in light of present day circumstances and threats not merit a mention on the frontpage? A bit of news management in light of those circumstances…once again the BBC playing down the violence coming from Muslims…and of course cops are legitimate targets…especially the white racist type…and if they’re white they must be racist..it’s a known BBC fact.
The BBC continues to try and suggest the shooting of Philando Castile by a US police officer was a cop shooting a man because he was black…never mind that the cop must have plenty of ‘black’ or other non-white heritage himself [photo above]…as with so many other shootings the police officer is not white and the BBC had to rapidly change its own racist narrative about ‘racist’ white police officers shooting blacks…Clive Myrie suggesting white cop racism is just the American way…
Well, slavery may have long gone, but apprehending someone because they could be up to no good, simply because they’re black is still police policy in much of the land.
The cop who shot Castile, Jeronimo Yanez, was found not guilty of manslaughter and the dashcam video of the shooting has been released [above].
The footage appeared to corroborate Ms Reynolds’ account of the incident. which she filmed immediately following the shooting.
The footage does not corroborate her account because we don’t see what is going on in the car…but obviously Castile is reaching for something and continues to do so when told not to…then he is shot. When you’ve just told a cop you’re armed and he says don’t reach for anything, then don’t reach….even across the Pond we know not to wind up US cops and not to give them any suggestion that they are in any danger from us.
The BBC says..
The officer called for emergency responders and later is heard saying: “I don’t know where the gun was.”
The intention of including that is to cast doubt on his account, never mind he has just been found not guilty…he actually said the ‘Zip’ [Zipped pouch] the man was reaching for was a lot wider than a wallet, thus indicating he believed the gun may be in the ‘Zip’…presumably something along these lines…
Look at the BBC’s romanticised version of events at the time of the shooting which is wrong and clearly very pro-Castile…the timing is wrong, the shots were fired earlier than in the transcript and most of what Castile says is inaudible…I cannot hear him say he was reaching for anything…or that he said ‘I’m not pulling it out…’
Philando Castile: Sir, I have to tell you that I do have a firearm on me.
Officer Jeronimo Yanez: (interrupting) Okay. Okay, don’t reach for it then.
Castile: I’m … I’m … [inaudible] reaching …
Yanez: (interrupting) Don’t pull it out. [Shots actually fired here]
Castile: I’m not pulling it out.
Reynolds: He’s not pulling it out.
Yanez: Don’t pull it out! (Yanez opens fire)
Castile: I wasn’t reaching for it. [The guy’s just been shot 4 times and he’s still chatting away?]
The BBC’s massive covergage of the shootings of Blacks, and nearly always only Blacks, not bothering with Whites being shot, will almost certainly have contributed to the atmosphere in the US that was whipped up into an orgy of violence and cop killing by blacks….justified by the coverage and fake news by the likes of the BBC….and they’re still at it..slyly insinuating the cop is guilty whatever the court says.
The BBC is desperate….frontpage news….
The Queen has opened parliament to lay out the government’s plans for the next two years.
At the top of the agenda was Brexit, and as the monarch proposed new laws to prepare the UK for its departure from the European Union (EU), some social users couldn’t help noticing the Queen’s choice of headwear.
Following recent events in the news you might have been hearing a lot about Islam and maybe the term ‘Islamophobia’ – but what does this mean?
The UK is full of people who follow lots of different faiths and religions.
Most of the time they all get along and people are free to live the way they want to.
However, some groups are targeted because of their beliefs, and because of events that people blame them for – even if this is incorrect.
Islamophobia is when Muslims are the victims of attacks just because of their religion.
It is something that worries a lot of people.
Many people think Islamophobia is created when a person doesn’t properly understand what Muslims do or believe, and that the best way to combat it is to have a better understanding of Muslims and Islam.
In fact as David Goodhart points out as people understand and get to know Islam they realise it is totally alien and contrary to their own beliefs and values and they would become less tolerant of it….
The gulf between conservative Islam and secular liberal Britain is larger than with any comparable large group….for those of us who value an open, liberal society it is time to explain why it is superior to the alternatives.
Some claim that if people understood Islam more everything would be fine, they would be more tolerant, I think quite the contrary….the more they understand about it the more alien they would find it…authoritarian, collectivist, patriarchal, misogynist…..all sorts of things that Britain might have been 100 years ago but isn’t now.
Trevor Phillips, that well known Islamophobe, will tell you that there is a wide and ever-growing gap between conservative Muslims in their ghettoes and Britain and its democratic, liberal values.
The BBC’s piece on Islamophobia, rushed out after the attack in London on Muslims, is naive and simplistic and is designed to hide the uncomforatble truths about Islam and the beliefs about Britain that many Muslims hold…no such articles from the BBC rushed out in the wake of Manchester and London Bridge or Westminster telling Muslims to stop being anti-British.
‘Religion of peace’ is not a harmless platitude
To face Islamist terror, we must face the facts about Islam’s historyIt is not surprising that politicians have tried to avoid this debate by spinning a lie. The world would be an infinitely safer place if the historical Mohammed had behaved more like Buddha or Jesus. But he did not and an increasing number of people — Muslim and non-Muslim — have been able to learn this for themselves in recent years. But the light of modern critical inquiry which has begun to fall on Islam is a process which is already proving incredibly painful.
We have spent 15 years pretending things about Islam, a complex religion with competing interpretations. It is true that most Muslims live their lives peacefully. But a sizeable portion (around 15 per cent and more in most surveys) follow a far more radical version. The remainder are sitting on a religion which is, in many of its current forms, a deeply unstable component. That has always been a problem for reformist Muslims. But the results of ongoing mass immigration to the West at the same time as a worldwide return to Islamic literalism means that this is now a problem for all of us. To stand even a chance of dealing with it, we are going to have to wake up to it and acknowledge it for what it is.
Perhaps now after this latest example of Far-Right ‘radicalisation’ and anger we will have ‘Baroness’ Nick Griffin made chair of the Tory Party in order to appease the angry youth of the Far-Right community, maybe Far-Right extremists will be put in charge of the Prevent programme or used to advise government action on tackling the social and cultural discrimination that mean the Far-Right become alienated and angry and then become ‘victims’ of extremist Far-Right recruiters who pervert Nationalism and hijack the Union Flag for their own poisonous purposes. Maybe millions if not billions will be poured into Far-Right communities so that they are not ‘left behind’, marginalised and disaffected. Maybe the government will work to create a pro-Far-Right narrative across the media and political spectrum..with police officers, local councils and the likes of the BBC roped in to spin a message about the Far-Right being essentially a peaceful movement that loves Britain and British values…more so than anyone else in Britain in fact. Just remember …..’Fascism’…is the political ideology of peace.
Maybe we should keep the borders to the EU open….is this why so many Muslims voted for Brexit….white Catholics who know and speak the truth….who will the Polish kids believe…the BBC or their parents?…..
Polish woman totally destroys Islam and its deception. pic.twitter.com/Uxj15FCkm8
— Voice of Europe (@V_of_Europe) June 11, 2017
Last week we had the anniversary of the murder of Jo Cox. Naturally the BBC gave up plenty of airtime to talking about this and Brendan Cox is the new goto fixture at the BBC for any comment on terrorism and Far-Right hate. Jo Cox’s actual murder was of course headline news for days, if not weeks and is still a pivotal point of reference when the BBC wants to ‘warn’ us of the perils of Far-Right extremism and its lurking presence as it readies itself to take over the country.
We were told that attacks on the likes of Jo Cox were an attack on democracy itself and could not be tolerated. Similarly the shooting of US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was given massive coverage here and blamed squarely on ‘Right-Wing rhetoric’, Sarah Palin coming in for particular blame as she had ‘targeted’ Giffords in the election.
Sarah Palin at centre of storm over political vitriol after spree leaves six dead and congresswoman in critical condition
This was highly synthetic outrage from the Left trying to claim that certain completely innocent remarks were the incitement for a murder. How different when the Left ran an actual murderous campaign against Trump which resulted in an attempt to kill senior Republican politicians.
The BBC barely mentioned the attempt to shoot Republican Steve Scalise, the story soon vanishing from view….from the Mail….
House Majority Whip Steve Scalise was in a critical condition in hospital on Wednesday afternoon after he was shot by a Trump-hating gunman who opened fire on Republican congressional baseball practice.
The Louisiana congressman was shot in the hip as he stood on second base at the field in Alexandria, Virginia at 7am on Wednesday. His staff initially described his condition as ‘stable’ but the Medstar Hospital in Washington DC later said that Scalise was in critical condition after having surgery.
He was among five injured when James T. Hodgkinson, 66, opened fire on the Republicans with an assault rifle from the third base dugout at Eugene Simpson Stadium Park in Alexandria, Virginia, as the group practiced batting at around 7.00am.
You would hardly know that such an attack had happened had you relied on the BBC, little to nothing on the radio and the story vanished rapidly from the BBC news consciousness…in contrast Democrat Giffords’shooting dominated the news for a long time and was referenced frequently….as well as the blaming of ‘Right-Wing’ rhetoric for the attack.
No such angst about violent Left-Wing rhetoric and actions, no qualms at all it seems about the endless appeals to someone, anyone, to assassinate Trump or about the ‘resistance’ that is in fact violent thuggery by the Left, much as Corbyn’s stormtrooping Brownshirts enact here on our streets.
Where is the outrage at such attacks and threats to kill the President, even a play running at a New York theatre encouraging his assassination?
Hollywood has issued dire predictions and hysterical warnings about Donald Trump ever since the Republican businessman first announced his candidacy for the presidency in June 2015.
But the level of vitriol and violent rhetoric against now-President Trump has increased substantially in recent weeks, from comedian Kathy Griffin’s now-famous shock “beheading” photograph to Shakespeare in the Park’s not-at-all-subtle “assassination” of Trump on a stage in New York City’s Central Park.
Unfortunately, Griffin and the director of Julius Caesar are not anomalies in Hollywood; actors, writers, directors, and other celebrities have fantasized about using violence against Trump, his supporters, and other GOP lawmakers for at least the past 18 months.
Quite quite extraordinary how the BBC practically ignored the attempted murder of a US Republican and the campaign to kill Trump.