A Place to Stand

From Mark Wadsworth's blog

Various studies by the Institute for International Economics in the 1980s and 1990s* found that two to three jobs are lost for every job saved whenever the government institutes a protectionist policy

He goes on to say he will, in due course, dig out the relevant studies which means I can lie back.

So next time Gordo announces in the supreme governing body, the Andrew Marr Show (& subsequently in Parliament) that he is "creating 100,000 new jobs" as he did on Sunday, Andrew will be able to say "Oh so you are destroying 250,000 jobs then" (or to be fair a net destruction of 150,000 jobs).

We will also be able to rely on the BBC "News" saying that he is destroying rather than repeating the official mantra that he is, somehow, creating them. After all the BBC has an impartial news broadcaster - not merely an instrument of statist propaganda aren't they?

On Friday the Herald published a disgraceful letter from Bashir Maan, a prominent former Labour Councillor & supporter of our pro-Nazi policies, deliberate civilian bombing & racial genocide in Yugoslavia. The letter was a barely veiled call for "reviving and spreading anti-Semitism" to ensure "this bodes ill for ... Jews all over the world". I wrote

I was very sorry to see the disgraceful letter from former Labour Councillor Bashir Maan on Friday. His letter is an explicit attack not merely on Israel but on Jews & a failure to denounce such words would indeed "bode ill for Jews all over the world" or at least in countries where such people have influence. May I ask where, over the last 8 years, were his call for attacks on Moslems for Hamas' unprovoked campaign of rocket attacks aimed purely at Israeli civilians? Had a prominent former member of the BNP been published by a newspaper calling for the "reviving" of attacks on citizens of Pakistani origin because of the Mumbai atrocity I think the authorities would, rightly, have been concerned about a breach of the law, but the parallel is precise.

The fact is that Israel is defending itself from people who, for 8 years have been launching attacks on their civilians & that it is Hamas, not Israel, which refuses to cease fire. Nonetheless Israel is making prodigious efforts to minimise civilian casualties, even though Hamas is using its own people as human shields. Compare & contrast this with the behaviour of NATO supported by the Labour party of which Mr Maan was a member & also the Liberal Democrats & Conservatives who participated in the genocide & ethnic cleansing of half a million Serbs from Croatia, a million from western Bosnia & 350,000 from Kosovo. Note their bombing was done to support unrepentant (ex-)Nazis publicly committed to genocide (many of them former members of the less attractive units of Hitler's SS). Under our authority they engaged not only in genocide but also child sex slavery & the dissection of living Serbian teenagers to provide organs for our hospitals. Note also that markedly unlike in Gaza, 80% of the people murdered in our government's criminal bombing were civilians. Such actions by our leaders obviously attract far less media attention than Israel's but the facts are indisputable.

Whatever the rights & wrongs of Israel's actions there are absolutely no circumstances in which any British politician who supported such actions is fit to cast the first stone against Israel. Mr Maan should, instead of threatening Jews; acknowledge the Israelis have shown so much more respect for human rights than our leaders..

Adding a personal note "I very much hope in light of "a failure to denounce such words would indeed "bode ill for Jews all over the world"" the Herald will, having allowed this attack on Jews as a race, also permit the publication of this defence. Not to do so would be clearly dishonourable".

They didn't. I did not expect it to go in uncensored since it has been obvious that our entire media are censoring any mention of our government's role in the massacres & dissecting of living people in Kosovo, but they could have edited it - they could have edited it extensively had they wished. They could even have published a letter from somebody else disagreeing with Maan. They didn't. It is clearly dishonourable.

On the same subject I have commented on Neil Clark's site. Neil is one of the good ones & has an honourable record of opposing the Nazis over Yugoslavia. I very much regret he seems to have fallen for exactly the same sort of propaganda which was used to sell our support of the Bosnian Moslem (ex-)Nazis. Our media is, of course, publishing every atrocity story & every picture of children with exactly the same enthusiasm they used to pump up hatred for Serbs.

More disconcerting is the behaviour of commenters on his site who state as fact that"

"The Israelis, on the other hand, certainly want to kill as many people in Gaza as they possibly can - just simply because they are Palestinians."

This is simply the exact opposite of the truth & yet another race libel.

Israel is quite clearly going to considerable lengths, using smart bombs, to focus on genuine military targets whereas it is their enemies who are deliberately placing themselves among civilians, as Hezbollah also did.

Compare & contrast the casualty ratio here with NATO's where 80% of the Yugoslavs they killed in their war were civilians.

If Israel were not thousands of times more civilised than the pro-Nazis running America, Britain & other NATO states she would have ethnically cleansed Gaza & the west bank years ago as we did Krajina, half of Bosnia & Kosovo to help our openly genocidal (ex-)Nazi friends.

I have no doubt that the same media that so heavily reported the faked marketplace attacks in Sarajevo & the equally faked Srebrenica massacre (while ignoring the genuine massacre of Serbs there & the 8 years of rocket attacks on Israeli civilians & censored any mention that the Americans had put them up to it) will also regale us with new Nazi-serving propaganda stories.

The basic starting point in any discussion of this war is to acknowledge that Israel is, under intense provocation, behaving with thousands of times more respect for civilisation than any member of our major parties. They are at least complicit in Nazi genocide & worse.

Anyone not acknowledging this is clearly failing to maintain a balanced position between Jews & Nazis. I can well understand why Anon wishes not to identify himself.

Though the debate has descended from that point nobody has sought to dispute this factually & indeed the claim that what Israel is doing, right or wrong, is in any way comparable to what NATO did or assisted in in Krajina, the Yugoslav cities & Kosovo is clearly untrue.

That Livingston, Short, Maan, the BBC, ITN, Herald & the overwhelming majority of our politicians & media supported deliberate bombing of civilians in the cause of racial genocide & now criticise Israel for some accidental killings (while not criticising Hamas who are using the people as their human body armour) in a war of self defence does not alter the fact that it is not possible to do so without being a wholly corrupt Nazi. There are decent people opposing Osrael who did act honourably during the KLA war - Tony Benn, George Galloway & Neil Clark spring to mind - & they are entitled to criticise Israel but they must be careful to dissociate themselves from those who are simply repeating the acts of the Nazis. Nothing less is honourable.

The good news via Neil Clark's blog is that, whatever the Great & Genocidal may say, ordinary people have more understanding as shown not merely by the vast number of emails sent to Melanie Phillips, for being an "uber Zionist" (not a phrase I would have chosen) but also her blog has suddenly rocketed into the lead in the voting for Britain's best. Neil suggests you place your vote here to stop her (& points out you can vote daily). I would also urge you to vote here.

---------------------
While I do not automatically subscribe to the Idea that Serbs & Jews are on the side of the angels merely because they share enemies this may be of interest:

Chaim Ben Pesach, the chairman of the Jewish Task Force in the United States, wrote recently about my very first video on YouTube:

"Our great member 4International has produced a very powerful video exposing the truth about the Albanian and Bosnian Muslim Nazis.

"This is professional, persuasive and compelling."

http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=nN_DdzC5Xr8

I first heard of Mr Singh Kohli when he was asked to write a Guardian article in which he was introduced as a Sikh alternative comedian, living in London & hence chosen by them as the right person to tell the Guardianistas what the typical Scot feels about the union.

Shortly thereafter the BBC did a Question Time from Scotland in which the 5 guest places were filled by the 4 party leaders (actually Jack McConnell had a stand in) & a typical Scot in the street for balance. Two guesses who.

He now seems to be popping up everywhere & was on Andrew Marr's this morning introduced as a political columnist (in the Scotsman) & cook. Alternative comedy's loss then. His contribution was to say that he didn't know much about foreign affairs & didn't understand why Israel was allowed to attack other countries. Surprising that such a respected political columnist (I assume that unlike many celebrities he does write his own column) is unaware that Gaza has been attacking Israel for 8 years - admittedly with far fewer civilian deaths than they would like but that is what makes the difference between aggression & self defence.

Looking up wikipedia on him I see that he started his career at the BBC on their "diversity graduate production trainee scheme" where he produced the comedy Meet the Magoons which I will admit to never having heard of but the critics raved "woefully unfunny" "once was enough", "your sides will be safe from harm" which classes it as alternative.

Now I know nothing personal against him & am perfectly willing to believe he is a nice guy. He is not the first person to rise to something close to celebrity status with no visible talent. But it is quite clear that his media visibility is entirely because he is something the BBC/Guardian/PC crowd running the media would like the typical Scotsman to be - while being perfectly certain that he will never say anything which doesn't fit their agenda. Not like David Bellamy.

And that is what is wrong with a state controlled media, completely divorced from ordinary people, where political approval matters so much more than competence.

UPDATE 23rd Jan - Last night the question Time MC said that next week the programme will be from Fort William in the Highlands & that the non-politician guest, once again representing the typical Scot will be London cook/alternative comedian/non-political columnist/diversity graduate Hardeep Singh Kohli, for the 2nd time.

What a pity that Question Time do not think there is more than 1 typical Scot in Britain.

UPDATERER Yep he was on with 4 party representatives. During the programme he said that while Conservative MP Teddy Taylor was very good & respected (not least by the electors) he would not have voted for him while he had a breath in his body (or presumably thereafter). Thus, by introducing their "typical" vox pop the BBC achieve balance.

UPDATEIST I have received this from Mr Kohli which is phrased in terms perhaps more restrained than I have used:

hi there. Just came across your blog. Thought you might want to correct a couple of factual inaccuracies.

"Looking up wikipedia on him I see that he started his career at the BBC on their "diversity graduate production trainee scheme" where he produced the comedy Meet the Magoons which I will admit to never having heard of but the critics raved "woefully unfunny" "once was enough", "your sides will be safe from harm" which classes it as alternative."

The training course I attended at the BBC was in fact The Graduate Training Course. It was NOT a diversity training course. The other six graduate trainees were white in terms of their ethnic origin. 1500 people applied for 6 places. I have never attended a diversity training course.

Meet the Magoons was produced for Ch4 some seven years after I had left the employ of the BBC. Your quotes while accurate are selective. There were plenty of positive crits, even from AA Gill and Nancy Banks Smith. The series rated more highly than Peep Show.

"once again representing the typical Scot will be London cook/alternative comedian/non-political columnist/diversity graduate Hardeep Singh Kohli, for the 2nd time."

I do live in London and was forced to come here because there was so little work in Scotland. The issue is about the centralisation of the media in London and you are quite right to rail against that. More media power needs to be decentralised then maybe some of us can come home. I am not an alternative comedian. Never have been. I am not a stand up comedian either. I have written comedy but have never been paid to perform stand up comedy in public. by extension therefore i cannot be an alternative comedian. unless the alternative is never having been one. I also have never been described as a political columnist by anyone other than you. I wrote a column and sometimes write about m politics, but I have no training or qual;ification in politcal journalism and therefore have never been so described. I am simply a columnist.

And i have appeared on Question Time on three occasions.

I look forward to your corrections. I am reassured by your reference to there not being any personal antagonism harboured against me. I realise you are carrying out a valuable public service for which you receive no fee. this is why i am so keen that you carry fact rather than fiction in your blog. I await your reply

BW

HsK


I did indeed rely on Wikipedia for your career details & having previously complained about Wikipedia's wholesale lies about Srebrnica, Milosevic & co am perfectly willing to accept that you know the facts infinitely better than they do. I note also the Wikipedia entry no longer says these things though there is, currently, another unflattering review quote which I will be polite enough not to repeat. I therefore also accept that the BBC programme, whatever it was, was not an official diversity graduate one.

On my main point, that you are not a representative Scot, which is what the BBC presented you as, but a representative of those who control the media who can be trusted to say what they want while being portrayed as a representative Scot I'm afraid I cannot change my mind. That you do not claim to be a political writer, though there is a regular column in SoS & a number of Guardian articles, makes it even more statistically improbable that you would be chosen as a representative of Scotland on a major political programme 3 rather than 2 times (& I first ran across you writing on an article in the Guardian as a representative of Scots just before the earlier QT episode). From memory you were intriduced on QT as an alternative comedian but I grant I haven't seen that used since.

My problem is not just that media control is concentrated in London but the broader point that it is concentrated in the hands of people who will censor any fact & tell any lie to promote state power (which is not quite the same as party power). That real alternative views are completely excluded & people like you used to provide the illusion of diversity. That such facts as the Dragodan Massacre (as bad as My Lai) or even the dissection of 1,300 teenagers while still alive for their organs (as bad as any act of Hitler's) by our "police" are wholly censored by media so keen to give you space. It may be hypocritical but if, next time you are on QT, you accuse Mr Dimblebey & all the politicians present of being personally complicit in these acts of genocide I would be happy to consider you a representative Scot. However I suspect, like Professor Bellamy, telling the truth would mean the end of your media career.

I very much appreciate your comment about me providing a valuable public service - having myself been banned from Guardian & C4 discussion groups I am quite certain there are a number of people there & at the BBC & MSM generally who do not share this appreciation. I appreciate your correction since The BBC generally do not respond when errors of fact are pointed out (or obviously correct them). Indeed the only time they did so was to ask for evidence of the Dragodan Massacre which they had censored & when I did so their communication ceased.

I am also happy to confirm that I bear no personal ill will to you. Indeed I have said worse, on another blog, about recent QT guest Monty Don "as somebody who can be relied on to say the right duckspeak - He duly obliged by being one of the 4 to say that freedom of speech was less important than stopping Geert Wilders getting into the country & by saying that "99%" of scientists support the global warming lie." (in fact no warming alarmist document bears nearly as many signatures as the 31,000 scientists who signed the Oregon Petition saying CO2 rise is a good thing - this has gone unreported by the whores running the BBC). Though this was not, I fear as bad as Mr Devil's Kitchen had already said of him.

Also on my blog 22nd Feb

A letter from the Crown Prosecution Service to lawyers for Greenpeace reveals that the Attorney-General is close to referring the case of the Kingsnorth Six to the Court of Appeal in an effort to remove the defence of ‘lawful excuse' from activists.

The Kingsnorth Six faced a charge of criminal damage at Maidstone crown court in September. A year earlier the Greenpeace volunteers had entered Kingsnorth coal-fired power station in Kent before scaling the chimney, closing the station and painting Gordon Brown's name down the smokestack.

If so Baroness Scotland (correspondenceunit@attorneygeneral.gsi.gov.uk) will be behaving with rare integrity. I previously reported on how I reported a case of mass murder to her which she clearly decided should not be investigated because the murderers are her cabinet colleagues. A previous F0I decision that the public should not only not be allowed to know what the advice of the AG on whether our most important recent war was criminal or not but that we were not even to be allowed to know if the AG had even been asked, also reinforces the conclusion that our senior law officers are merely corrupt political poodles. Or perhaps it is just that even our government recognise that giving the eco-fascists the right to attack our electricity suppliers is potentially infinitely damaging.

I wrote before on this & said that the jury's decision was understandable in light of the alleged "prosecution's" decision to give the great & evil of the eco-fascist movement not only a lot of time to say how important this vandalism was but, more importantly, prevent any defence involving warming scepticism.

I have also written about how James Hansen's witness statement "....What has changed recently is the steady global warming, at a rate of about 0.2°C per decade" was clear perjury (as were some other things he said though, to be fair to him, most of it was merely tendentious & subjective theorising).

I very much hope that if the AG does indeed decide to take this injustice back to court some authoritative sceptical scientists offer to testify. I think it unlikely that such an offer could be refused & have little doubt that in any serious investigation carried out under legal rules, as in Gerald Monckton's case against Gore's lying film, the result would would be a humiliation for the alarmists. It would also be worthwhile seeing Hansen & perhaps others, explaining how previous testimony wasn't really prejured.

If so Kingsnorth could turn out to be a trap for the alarmists of their own making.