 |
| ITMA |
I've resisted this for so long...so please forgive me...but I just can't contain my inner Katty Kay any longer. So:
Here's a new headline from the Spectator today:
Who wrote this piece? I kid ye not, it's the BBC Paul Wood, the BBC reporter most intimately associated with promoting the Trump-Russia conspiracy theories on the BBC!
"Why didn't we see this coming?" he ends his piece by asking!
To repeat myself:
OMG...
To quote a much-mocked-but-ever-more-pertinent phrase, you couldn't make it up!
"But is a mea culpa required? Perhaps. Perhaps not", Paul writes!
[Obviously, the answer on Paul's part was very, very clearly 'Yes, a mea culpa was required, especially on my part as I'm as bad if not worse than any of them, and I am very, very sorry and will try to do better from now on or leave the BBC and seek a more suitable partisan job'].
[Obviously, the answer on Paul's part was very, very clearly 'Yes, a mea culpa was required, especially on my part as I'm as bad if not worse than any of them, and I am very, very sorry and will try to do better from now on or leave the BBC and seek a more suitable partisan job'].
.
Satire is dead! Self-reflection (at the BBC) is dead! BBC reporting is a sick joke!
And I see comments are turned off below his Spectator piece (so far)!
I wonder why!!!
I wonder why!!!
"Mea culpa? - you-a culpa!" as Chico Marx might have said. [Younger readers may be puzzled by this comment.]
ReplyDeleteHere are some random bits picked from the Wood article in the Spectator this week. You could say he still sees the wood even when there aren't any trees:
ReplyDelete"Reverse ferret" (Wood references Kelvin McKenzie term for stories that had to be reversed...you wouldn't expect Wood to do a reverse ferret would you? - that would so vulgar, just like Kelvin.)
"we in the media" (well that's the problem isn't it?...you mean the left-liberal BBC-CNN type media, not Fox News)
"Hannity is Trump's favourite journalist" (why shouldn't he be? Hannity is basically just calling on the Trump-deranged media to back off and behave like a responsible media with some basic commitment to the constitution - the American MSM has been aiding and abetting an unconstitutional slo-mo coup d'etat. )
"there does have to be a reckoning" (Of course there won't be. The American MSM are already back on an anti-Trump war footing supporting the frontline Dem troops).
"the shock of the moment has sent the herd squawking in the opposite direction" (really? - not much evidence of that from the left-liberal media, ie about 95% of the American media).
"Barr's letter is four pages long and it fails to quote a single complete sentence of Meuller's" (conspiracy theory anyone? - desperate stuff)
"Is Mueller saying he got nothing on collusion, or just not enough to prosecute?" (My thought: could any of the Presidential candidates have stood up to this sort of scrutiny regarding contact with Russia and other countries? We know Clinton was up to her neck in it, but Wood never reports on that)
"compromised" (This is the new Democrat talking point...Trump may not have colluded but he was "compromised" - whatever that means...Wood helpfully amplifies it).
"Two weeks ago, the former head of the CIA John Brennan told MSNBC that he expected more Russia indictments." (Wood places great store by "intelligence sources". But his reliance on Trump-hater-in-chief and probably origin of the whole plot against Trump, John Brennan, shows how misguided that approach has been. Hypocritically Wood uses the article over-reliance on intelligence sources, having just virtually admitted that he has been relying on intelligence sources.)
"...he's a mob boss" (Wood just can't give up on the Trumpophobia, even now.)
I am certainly not saying Trump was/is a saint. But just take that last quote from. Wood is saying that everyone around Trump knows they have to lie and act in his interest. What about the people about Clinton and Obama - people like Huma Abedin (ex Sharia propagandist) or Loretta Lynch (the tarmac meeting)?
There was a virtual ban with the American publishing industry on writing real biographies of Obama during his presidency! Can you believe that? A serious biography only appeared after he left the Presidency and it was a v. anodyne version. Obama was a mob boss protected not just by his immediate entourage but the whole of the left-liberal media.