Wednesday 17 July 2019


At about ten past eight this morning. Today Programme. Cosy chat with John Humphrys and Chief Strategist for Barack Obama, David Axelrod.
The BBC is cherry-picking again. John Humphrys was oh so chummy with David Axelrod as they vied with each other to find the most fitting superlative to emote President Trump’s racism.

“Isn’t Trump racist?  
“Yes he certainly is, but he’s not only racist, he’s playing to his base - a bunch of racists. 
 “Yes, and the more racist he is, the more they love him.  
“Yes, and it’s hard to see how much more racist he could get.  
Yes, and to tell four Americans to go back to their own countries, well, just how more racist-er could anyone be? 
 “No, this is the ultimate racism of all racism, on stilts.  
“And he’s rewarded for it.  

Not verbatim, but that was the gist of it. Then, on the line, Brian Lanser was introduced as one of Trump’s deputy communications directors from his presidential campaign. (I couldn’t find him online - maybe he spells his name differently) 
The atmosphere froze. An argumentative, waspish tone crept into Humphrys’s questioning.

Hear me out while I cite Sir Rod of Liddle. (£) writing about something Matthew Parris (miss)-spoke about (which resonates with what happened in the Humphrys - Lanser interview)
Rod Liddle:
“A perfectly sensible observation from Matthew Parris has incurred the wrath of his colleagues on the Times. Speaking of Trump’s “racist” comments, Parris writes: 
“I don’t like his attacks but I think they will strike a chord among millions who should not be called racists. It’s just futile to suppose that arrivals from another country, and their children, immediately and automatically assume an identity as citizens that is indistinguishable from that of the population already there. They have all the same rights but will be seen, for a generation or two, as neither better nor worse but different.” 
That seems to me precisely the case. And I suspect the majority of Americans think the same, not to mention British people.”

That’s almost exactly what Brian Lanser replied when Humphrys stated confidently that the ‘majority of Americans’ were horrified at Trump’s racist Tweet. Wrong. Most Americans probably agree with Rod and Matthew.

Rod again:

“Yet you would have thought he had donned a pointy white hood to listen to the wailing from Caitlin Moran and Sathnam Sanghera who said:
‘I’m forever being told, as a second generation immigrant, that I should be “more grateful”, when I’m just doing the same job as him, being critical of aspects of Britain. That is racism.’
Followed up with:
‘I’ve left a comment on the website, Matthew often responds, so hopefully he will reflect.’ 

Me sticking up for Parris will simply confirm to people of such Manichean, absolutist beliefs, that Matthew is a raaaccissst. They are impervious to everything else. There is nothing else but racism. No nuance, no context, no truth.”

That’s it. The way the BBC has been running with this story for two days. No context, only Racism. Racism. Raaaccciismmm. Race. Ism.

Trump’s biggest error was probably including the word “back” in that dreaded Tweet. It was technically incorrect, at least in respect of three out of the four. 

The BBC and most of the MSM completely ignore the context around this storm-in-a-teacup, while amplifying the juiciest fragment of ammunition with which to attack Trump is the only thing that interests them. That’s what they all do these days. 

They speak as if the ‘squad’ are clean and unblemished, 'without sin',  confident  (because of their blind-eyed, politically correct reporting) that hardly anyone knows what these four ladies have constantly been saying. If a fraction of their ugly rhetoric had been honestly reported it would be plain to see who the actual racists are. 


  1. Excellent observations Sue. Your last paragraph is spot on but of course, their words will never be reported or questioned by the BBC. Trump is the target and the crosshairs are on him.

  2. Interesting stuff.

    I am just so sad about the BBC's race baiting. For a while, in the post war period, it seemed we were moving beyond racial categorisation and appreciating each other as individuals - judging people by "the content of their character" to quote MLK. The BBC was part of that positive development for a time. But it's all gone very, very wrong in the last couple of decades.

    The BBC has hypnotised itself into a state of hyper-race awareness and fully committed itself to the absurd and undeliverable ideology of "equality of outcome".

    This is doing untold damage to our society. It is poisoning relations between communities. It is creating fanciful excuses for failures that should properly be ascribed to individuals, communities, family structure and cultural traits.

    Even though statistics show many non-majority ethnic groups outperform the majority (showing that "racism" in the "system" is a myth) or that it is inner urban white boys who are most "unequal", the BBC picks and chooses its figures to continue spinning the "racism" myth.

    Matthew Parris makes a very reasonable point (is he coming out of his Brexit Derangement Syndrome?). I only wish he had applied that wisdom to Gina Miller. People who did wonder why a relatively recent arrival in the UK felt so moved to revamp our constitution were accused of racism. I just can't imagine emigrating to another country and taking it upon myself to lecture my compatriots on how to conduct their lives. That's just a matter of good manners, the way I see it. Same applies to YAB. I suppose you could argue it's payback for the British Empire...

    1. My father and grandfather 'fought the Germans' in WW2 and WW1 respectively, am I expected to inherit an anti-German legacy? (My father did business with German companies post-war and never expressed any anti-German feelings).

      YA-B though never experienced 'the empire'. If anything she experienced the racism of the black man and the humanity of the white man, yet she continually bleats, aided and abetted by the BBC, about being a 'woman of (very pale) colour and invokes the imaginary tears of her adult daughters as her trump card. What exactly is she (and the BBC) trying to achieve? Certainly not 'a better world'.

  3. It was only on FOX that I heard the full trump quote: "Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done."

    That last sentence I have never heard on the BBC.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.