Majorityrights Central > Category: Media

For the last four or five weeks the Daily Telegraph’s new, relatively open comment policy has been reaping a distasteful reward for the Establishment stick-in-the-muds who normally read the paper.  Dozens of commenters have been encouraged to comment on “issue” threads in an increasingly eye-raising way.  Suddenly, it is possible to say almost anything, and possible, therefore, to influence discourse.

That possibility I suggested to articulate BNP members here a week and a half ago.  They weren’t interested.  But I am.  If any MR readers think it worthwhile operating on these threads as a team, working to stretch the envelope and get the right message out ahead of the misguided one, please feel free to say so.

To give you some idea of the kind of freedom of expression currently available here are four current “issue” threads:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/8302637/British-most-concerned-about-immigration.html#dsq-content
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/8304545/The-days-of-doing-deals-with-Muslim-extremists-are-over.html#dsq-content
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100074737/david-cameron-takes-on-the-ideology-of-islamist-extremism/#dsq-content
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100074751/wikileaks-americans-call-leicester-the-most-conservative-islamic-community-in-europe/#dsq-content

Irwin Stelzer can be justly proud of his career.  As his entry at Wikipedia makes clear:

Irwin M. Stelzer (born 1932) is an American economist[1] who is the U.S. economic and business columnist for the Sunday Times, the Courier-Mail, the Guardian and a contributing editor of the Weekly Standard. He is also an occasional contributor to the Daily Telegraph. He resides in London and the United States. Stelzer has served as a managing director of the investment banking firm of Rothschild Inc and was co-founder and president of National Economic Research Associates, Inc which became NERA Economic Consulting and which was subsequently sold to Marsh & McLennan, Inc. He is a signatory of the Henry Jackson Society, a senior director and fellow of the Hudson Institute and has edited and introduced a book on neoconservatism. He is a visiting fellow of Nuffield College, Oxford ...

... he is someone whose writings are taken seriously by powerful men on both sides of the Atlantic, and who is no doubt on first-name terms with many of them.  Today, in the Daily Telegraph, he offered them his view on How to make immigration work in Britain’s interests.  I won’t bore you with the details.  He is, as a man of the Establishment, concerned that “hostility to migrants is sweeping Europe”.  He has a plan.  “Britain can do little to reduce the flow of immigrants” from the EU, he says.  “Immigrants possess skills that are in short supply here, and add billions of pounds to national output,” he says.  But the losers who see their job prospects taken away by immigration and their neighbourhoods transformed could be paid off.  “How so?, he says ... “By requiring employers to bid for the limited number of entry permits, the proceeds to be remitted to the communities on which the immigrant imposes costs, or to HM Treasury.”  He says.

No doubt, “powerful men” will read the column, welcome Stelzer’s little scheme (with reservations, of course), and file it away for some opportune moment when the minister is in melt-down and the briefing paper for tomorrow’s Cabinet is still to be written.  But what of those damned losers in the migration game?  The indigenous, as they seem to be calling themselves these days.  Are they grateful for Mr Stelzer’s ingenuity?  Are their fears and hostility calmed?  Are they looking forward to selling-out to race-replacement for a few thousand quid?

Well, I’ve never seen a thread like this one in any English national daily.  Never.

READ MORE...

by Karl LaForce

I was very incredulous when I first saw this piece.

THE stunned black dad of a newborn, WHITE, baby girl declared yesterday — “I’m sure she’s my kid ... I just don’t know why she’s BLONDE.”

… But as the baby’s older brother and sister - both black - crowded round the “little miracle” at their home in South London, Ben declared: “Of course she’s mine.”

Blue-eyed blonde Nmachi, whose name means “Beauty of God” in the Nigerian couple’s homeland, has baffled genetics experts because neither Ben nor wife Angela have ANY mixed-race family history.

Pale genes skipping generations before cropping up again could have explained the baby’s appearance.

Ben also stressed: “My wife is true to me. Even if she hadn’t been, the baby still wouldn’t look like that.

It is much like several other reports that have appeared in the press over the past few years (for example, the mulato couple that had the twins, one white and one black, or the various white couples who have had a black baby).  Average people of all races see this sort of thing as feel-good human-interest material, so they do not look at it critically.  The automatic presumption is that the people reported to be the parents, are in fact the parents; you know, “momma’s baby, daddy’s maybe”.

READ MORE...

So why would David Aaronovitch justify Joseph McCarthy?

I mean.  Why?

McCarthy: There Were Reds Under the Bed
Sunday, 13:30 on BBC Radio 4 (FM only)

David Aaronovitch thinks the unthinkable about the McCarthy period.

The hunt for the so called ‘Reds under the beds’ during the Cold War is generally regarded as a deeply regrettable blot on U.S history. But the release of classified documents reveals that Joseph McCarthy was right after all about the extent of Soviet infiltration into the highest reaches of the U.S government.

Thanks to the public release of top secret FBI decryptions of Soviet communications, as well as the release under the fifty year rule of FBI records and Soviet archives, we now know that the Communist spying McCarthy fought against was extensive, reaching to the highest level of the State department and the White House.

We reveal that many of McCarthy’s anticommunist investigations were in fact on target. His fears about the effect Soviet infiltration might be having on US foreign policy, particularly in the Far East were also well founded.

The decrypts also reveal that people such as Rosenberg, Alger Hiss and even Robert Oppenheimer were indeed working with the Soviets. We explore why much of this information, available for years to the FBI, was not made public. We also examine how its suppression prevented the prosecution of suspects.

Finally, we explore the extent to which Joseph McCarthy, with his unsavoury methods and smear tactics, could have done himself a disservice, resulting in his name being forever synonymous with paranoia and the ruthless suppression of free speech.

Hearing from former FBI, CIA and KGB operatives as well as formerly blacklisted writers, David Aaronovitch, himself from a family of communists tells the untold story of Soviet influence and espionage in the United States.

The lesson of Ian Tomlinson’s death

... the Establishment does not care that, as a nation, we grow cynical and resentful.  It will do what it wants anyway.

READ MORE...

Five years ago the distinctly loose journalistic cannon that is Rod Liddle opined on things he shouldn’t say about black people.  It was one of those moments when the thought crosses one’s mind, “what does this person think privately?”  Now we know:

Former Today editor Rod Liddle under fire over ‘racist’ posts on football supporters’ website

Former Today programme editor Rod Liddle has been accused of racism after writing a series of inflammatory messages on a football supporters’ website.

Mr Liddle, who now works for The Spectator magazine and is tipped to become the next editor of The Independent, used crude language to argue for the axeing of all black-only organisations.
He also contributed to a debate in which supporters demanded violent attacks on a black footballer.

The 49-year-old left the messages on Millwall Online - an independent website unconnected to the club - under the username ‘monkeymfc’.

The first message was written in October, when he contributed to a debate about whether the BNP should admit non-white members.

He wrote: ‘There’s thousands of organisations catering exclusively to black and asian minorities. **** ‘em, close them down. Why do blacks need a forum of their own? As a power base and cash cow for ****s and in order to perpetuate the myth of widespread discrimination.’

The next day he joined in a thread about a row between Millwall’s Neil Harris and the Ghanaian-English player Kevin Amankwaah, who had accused Harris of racially abusing him - an allegation Harris denies.

After abusive comments about Amankwaah by other users, Liddle writes he has heard Harris’s alleged comment was: ‘**** off you spearchucking African ****.’

Later that month, another comment written by monkeymfc appears in a thread called ‘Channel 4 claiming blacks are thick’, about a documentary alleging racial differences in intelligence.

In comments Liddle strongly denies writing, the contributor says: ‘On average a little under 10 per cent thicker than whites; 15 per cent thicker than east Asians. I thought everyone knew, too. Some argument about cultural bias of tests, but same results come up in US.’

READ MORE...

Nothing much doing, so here’s a trawl through some current news stories in the British papers.

When the history is written of how the native English finally woke up, the press’s ineptness at managing the public’s frustration and discontent will surely figure somewhere.  They know what can’t be discussed, of course (so do you, so I won’t labour the point by listing it all).  And they know what has to be discussed (mostly the “racist” and “fascist” BNP).  But they cannot find it in themselves to maintain a consistent line.  Maybe it’s the recession, which is a permanent feature in the newspaper industry, but they are perpetually oblivious to the accumulative effect of all these juicy news stories they run.

Like these:

Flugate

After Climategate ...

The swine flu outbreak was a ‘false pandemic’ driven by drug companies that stood to make billions of pounds from a worldwide scare, a leading health expert has claimed.

Wolfgang Wodarg, head of health at the Council of Europe, accused the makers of flu drugs and vaccines of influencing the World Health Organisation’s decision to declare a pandemic.

This led to the pharmaceutical firms ensuring ‘enormous gains’, while countries, including the UK, ‘squandered’ their meagre health budgets, with millions being vaccinated against a relatively mild disease.

... Dr Wodarg said: ‘The governments have sealed contracts with vaccine producers where they secure orders in advance and take upon themselves almost all the responsibility.
‘In this way the producers of vaccines are sure of enormous gains without having any financial risks.

‘So they just wait, until WHO says “pandemic” and activate the contracts.’

He also claims that to further push their interests, leading drug companies placed ‘their people’ in the ‘cogs’ of the WHO and other influential organisations.

The rest of this article is here.

Cameron jumps on the Balanced Migration bandwagon

READ MORE...

The last few days have been a fallow period at MR for me as for others.  But that doesn’t mean that I haven’t been working away diligently elsewhere.  Aside from actively seeking material to post, I’ve planted the usual incendiary devices on various MSM threads.  Some made it on to the page, some were lifted quickly, some did not make it at all.  John Standing wrote a couple of letters to Waitrose (who, as a result of a campaign by supposed cusomers, pulled their advertising from Fox over the Beck/Obama affair).  Another Guardian ban has come my way.  It’s been, as Vinny Jones once said, emotional.

The main activity has been thread fighting at the Guardian’s CiF facility, which seems to be especially Judaised at the moment. 

During his leadership election David Cameron made a promise to the “right-wing” Cornerstone group of MPs that he would pull the party out of the federalist EPP grouping in the European Parliament.  Give him his due - he was true to his word, and entered an alliance with some pretty sturdy and loyal Poles, Czechs and Latvians in the European Conservatives and Reformists.  In the process Edward McMillan-Scott, who seems to have scarcely been a Tory at all, has wound up getting himself expelled from the party.

McMillan-Scott has been writing articles regularly about his hate-object in the ECR, Michal Kaminski of Poland’s Law and Order party.  By British political standards Kaminsky has a fine record.  In 2001 he distinguished himself by campaigning against the then left-wing Polish government’s apology for the fictional 1941 murder by Poles of a fictional number of Jews at Jedwabne.  McMillan Scott has been promiscuous in his use of the Jedwabne narrative in each missive, and I’ve tried to provide the counter-arguments in the threads.  But he isn’t the only journalistic shyster trying to nail Cameron by nailing Kaminsky.  There are at least four others at it and, on top of that, there is a second anti-Cameron front centred on the Latvians in the ECR (who, of course, are “SS apologists”, but we’ll come to that).

Today one Jonathan Friedman entered the attack on Kaminsky.  The following (now removed) comment of mine provides some background to the attack:

READ MORE...

Simon Darby posted this link to a news report on a BBC regional programme, Look East.  John Standing found the opening remarks by reporter Nikki Jenkins so staggeringly dishonest he took it upon himself to contact the lady’s employer:

This mail is a complaint about the journalistic standards and political bias displayed by Nikki Jenkins of Look East in the video report currently online here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8232154.stm

At this stage I am not seeking a formal process, and will be satisfied with an honest and sincere reply from Nikki to the following questions, which I put to her in good faith and out of a desire to better understand what motivates this sort of journalistic behaviour.

Dear Nikki,

You opened a video report on an attack of the police in Luton by Muslim youths with the following words:-

“Well, the Home Secretary’s ban on marching worked.  The BNP didn’t turn up.  But there again they didn’t have to.  These young men did their job for them.”

I have the following questions for you, Nikki:

1. Were you mistaken about the British National Party being due to attend the banned English Defence League march, organising it or being in any way associated with it?

2. If you knew the BNP was, in fact, totally unconnected to the banned march but you wished to make an association nonetheless, what reason did you have for doing so?

3. Would making such an association be within the BBC’s rules on journalism?

4. Did you attempt to contact the BNP to find out if it was involved in the banned march?

5. Would misrepresenting the BNP in your report be acceptable journalism?

6. Will you issue a public retraction?

7. If not, why not?

8. Why did you not identify the youths attacking the police as Muslims?

9. Was their behaviour racist?

10. Why did you not apply the moral yardstick to them that you wrongly applied to the BNP?

Now, I am loathe to place my real name and address on the contact details below this panel because of the violence of the forces opposing the BNP and its supporters.  Notwithstanding my anonymity, I wish you, Nikki, to take this mail as a serious matter that requires your earnest attention.  Would you provide me, please, with the answers I am seeking?

Ignoring this mail or attempting to answer my questions in any way other than fully and honestly will result in a formal complaint to the Corporation.

In the event of a reply John Standing will no doubt post it here.

UPDATE 09.09.09

READ MORE...