The Disgraceful Far Right “Journalist” Stephen Daisley 132


I shall blog about last night’s Panorama shortly. But first I should like to draw attention to STV’s disgraceful Stephen Daisley, who I last mentioned joining in a mainstream media Twitter hatefest against me for revealing that MI5 were targeted on the SNP.

Well Daisley has been at it again, this time with a seriously nasty tweet about the mysterious murder of Hilda Murrell. It was sent to Murdoch shill David Aaronovitch, to whom Daisley tweeted

Yep. “Hilda Murrell. How the State silences dissent one elderly rose grower at a time.”

Whatever you believe about the Murrell murder, it is not something Daisley – a broadcast journalist – should be making jokes about. It is also fascinating that both Daisley’s tweet about me and his tweet about Hilda Murrell were both in defence of the security services and both sent to David Aaronovitch.

Aaronovitch found the Murrell joke so hilarious that he retweeted it at 3am on 25 September. Which is a pity for Daisley, as he apparently woke up, remembered he was a broadcast journalist, and deleted it. At any rate the retweet is on Aaronovitch’s twitter stream but the original not on Daisley’s.

It is however instructive to look at Daisley’s twitter stream. It is amazing to me that a supposed “journalist” working for a broadcaster would be so completely open about their anti-SNP, unionist, anti-Corbyn and far right agenda. Daisley is only very small beer, a stinking, sweating foot-soldier of the forces of reaction. But if you can stand it, the way the unionist establishment interacts and thinks is revealed very clearly from a study of his twitter feed. Messages are exchanged with Aaronovitch of Murdoch, Nick Cohen of the Guardian, with John McTernan of the Blairites and with J K Rowling of the 1%, and a great many others. The SNP and Corbyn are smugly derided by all. These well-paid state supporters live in a cosy Panglossian paradise and have contempt for anyone who is not “in”.

The other thing that comes out of the feed is this peculiar obsession with Israel. Of all the media attacks on Jeremy Corbyn’s “anti-Semitic connections”, Daisley’s attack is the most astonishing. STV should be deeply ashamed to carry this; it breaks every rule of good journalism. It is a bizarre hotch-potch of mostly deliberate lies and misrepresentation, and crucially there has not been a single attempt to contact any of the people named to obtain their side of the story.

To tackle just two of about sixty wild inaccuracies. Daisley accused Raed Saleh of a “blood libel” which Saleh has repeatedly denounced and stated that he has never said, and which a British court found there was no evidence that Saleh has ever said. Nonetheless Daisley regurgitates this Israeli propaganda.

Daisley quotes Paul Flynn as questioning the loyalties of Matthew Gould, appointed as British Ambassador to Israel. But this is gross misrepresentation by Daisley. What Flynn queried was Gould’s avowal that he was a “committed Zionist”, not his ethnicity. Would we appoint an Ambassador to Cuba who declared himself an avowed communist?

Daisley also perniciously omits what Flynn had said at the start of his remarks which sets the entire context, which was that Gould had held eight secret meetings with Liam Fox and Adam Werritty, of which the FCO refuses to disclose the subjects discussed and who else was present. Daisley knows that, and his censorship of that context is inexcusable as it completely distorts what Flynn was saying in order to portray Flynn as an anti-Semite.

The last few paragraphs of this attack on Corbyn beggar belief in their lack of balance. There is no nod whatsoever to the plight of the Palestinians, the illegality of the Israeli settlements he names, or the Israeli attacks on Gaza. The Israeli government itself would not dare publish anything so unsubtle and totally one sided. That STV should do this, in the context of an attack on Jeremy Corbyn, is absolutely incredible.

I know Daisley is a very, very insignificant figure. But the humdrum media enforcers of the establishment are vital to their ability to keep the 99% working for the 1%. That such a hate-filled and crazed right-winger as Daisley should be employed by mainstream broadcast media says a huge amount about the society we live in.

UPDATE HOW THE UNIONIST ESTABLISHMENT WORKS

As if to confirm the thesis outlined below, at 10.57am today, Duncan Hothersall, Labour’s New Media Czar in Scotland, retweeted Stephen Daisley’s approving tweet of an extract from Tory Secretary of State David Mundell’s Tory Conference Speech:

Good Stat: More people voted No in Indyref than have ever voted for any party in any election in Scottish history.

The tweet carried the Conservative Party Conference hashtag, so there is no doubt Red Tory Hothersall knew he was spreading Blue Tory Propaganda. The seamless web of Red and Blue Tories and mainstream media functions as usual. It is delightful to be proved so completely right so quickly:


132 thoughts on “The Disgraceful Far Right “Journalist” Stephen Daisley

1 2 3 4 5
  • Ba'al Zevul

    It’s not the poor bloody spooks’ fault. It’s the criminal idiots running them, who thought they could somehow remove the nasty terrorists while supporting the nice ones in the hope of getting rid of Assad at the same time. (Hey, they may have thought, if we can ensure some of that takfirism gets into the FSU, Putin might have something other than Ukraine to worry about.)

    Putin looks relatively honest in this context. Sad commentary on *us*. And he seems to have a clear and achievable objective tending towards stabilising the region. No-one interfering should have any other objective, at this point, and if it involves preserving Assad for a while, so be it.

  • YouKnowMyName

    Thanks Ba’al, Yes – I had friends who worked in Syria whilst I toiled in Saudi Arabia, many ramadans ago. Comparing notes with them, KSA was of course a ruthless kingocracy/batshit-mad-theocracy – but Assad dynasty Syria was a much scarier place even then, tho’ perhaps slightly more moderate on their minority populations (which Fahd bin Abdulaziz Al Saud did ‘disappear’ regularly even in the 80’s)

    Fisk mentioned that Putin’s first target was the Chechnyan mercenaries embedded with ISIS/AQ – he did act to prevent his version of the West’s big fear of returnees, Russia’s ‘staffing’ to ISIS is/was vast!

  • Ba'al Zevul

    Looks like the batshit-mad theocracy’s protegees are under threat. Let’s have a jihad!

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d1fb51ca-6cd6-11e5-8171-ba1968cf791a.html

    But although the developing Russian-Iranian axis in Syria and Iraq is ringing alarm bells in the region’s Sunni capitals, Riyadh — which is already mired in a six-month conflict against Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen — can do little in response beyond sending more weapons to the groups it supports on the ground in Syria.

    “Saudi will make a lot of noise about Russian activity in Syria but there will not be much bite. Riyadh needs to focus on Yemen,” said Theodore Karasik, senior adviser to Gulf State Analytics, a political risk consultancy.

  • Mary

    It used to be Kissinger. Now it’s this nasty old (87) warmonger.

    Brzezinski Urges US to ‘Retaliate’ Against Russian Forces in Syria
    Jason Ditz, October 06, 2015

    In a newly published op-ed for the Financial Times, former official in the Johnson and Carter Administrations Zbigniew Brzezinski urged that US to use “strategic boldness” in confronting Russia, potentially militarily, over their involvement in Syria.

    Brzezinski presented Russian airstrikes against Syrian rebel factions as at best a display of “Russian military incompetence” and at worst a “dangerous desire to highlight American political impotence,” saying America’s credibility is at stake from allowing Russia to strike the rebels the US previously armed, terming them “American assets.”

    He called for the US to openly demand Russia unconditionally halt all such moves, saying Russian warplanes in Syria are “vulnerable, isolated geographically from their homeland” and could be “disarmed” by force if the Russians don’t comply with US demands.

    /..
    http://antiwar.com/blog/2015/10/06/brzezinski-urges-us-to-retaliate-against-russian-forces-in-syria/

    and Pepe Escobar on the same topic

    October 8, 2015
    The NATO-Russia Face Off in Syria
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/10/08/the-nato-russia-face-off-in-syria/

  • Ba'al Zevul

    Exclusive Pic!

    Iranian Revolutionary Guard Commander Jeremy Corbyn (L) stands at the frontline during offensive operations against Islamic State militants in the town of Tal Ksaiba in Salahuddin province March 8, 2015….

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/06/us-mideast-crisis-syria-soleimani-insigh-idUSKCN0S02BV20151006

    Sorry to see Reuters being less than objective, here. Corbyn Soleimani and the Russians were plotting. Meanwhile Cameron and Obama were discussing or maybe negotiating, we can assume.

  • Old Mark

    Brzezinski presented Russian airstrikes against Syrian rebel factions as at best a display of “Russian military incompetence”

    Mary-Within 24 hours of Brzezinski extruding his bog standard Russophobic spiel in the FT, Russia was ‘shocking’ western military analysts by deploying their latest missile technology from warships in the Caspian sea-

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/middle-east/article38067603.html

    If the latest Russian missile technology is as effective as this report suggests, and is price competitive when compared to western kit, this isn’t good news for US/UK French defence companies.

  • Ba'al Zevul

    This aspect is actually not receiving the coverage I’d expect from the Western media. What our activities have resulted in is an occasional informal pact or even alliance between Assad and IS, according to this reporter. Who alleges elsewhere (Der Spiegel, Oct 6), that Russia has entered the fray because Assad is losing autonomy to the Iranians in Syria: the Russians are less likely to undermine him.

    https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/10questions/565586-isiss-strategy-of-terror

  • Ba'al Zevul

    If the latest Russian missile technology is as effective as this report suggests…

    Looks as if it is. The 3M-54E, which this pretty well has to be, is streets ahead of the US Tomahawk, and already selling well. The Russians claim a precision of 9m on impact…

  • Ba'al Zevul

    One of the best CGI movies available to the arms buyer. Not a spoken word, and the message is clear. Good beatz too. But the final title screen may lead, considering this is a Russian ad*, to a coffee-spray-on-screen event. Keep kitchen towel handy.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbUU_9bOcnM

    Note – the short-range antishipping variants cover the last part of their course at Mach 3, unlike the ones fired at Syria.

    *Yes, it would be just as hilarious if it were American except that that’s what the US always says, and it’s lost its novelty.

  • Jemand ( [*censored* - ask me why] )

    John Spencer-Davis : “For the record, Jemand’s assertion (07/10/2015, 2:53pm) that comments of mine have been deleted from this thread is false. 
    . . . .
    [ Mod: No comments from John Spencer-Davis have been deleted. ]”

    – – – –

    I didn’t say that JSD’s deleted comments were on this thread. With so many deletions and with the forum sliding across pages, I might have got it wrong and accept that.

    However, my statement that JSD’s comments were deleted was obviously not deliberately false, as it was predictable that he would object to a false claim and use it against me as he has done so. And I had nothing to gain by making a false statement. No harm done.

    But let’s observe these facts :

    1. My comments WERE deleted and the mod has not denied it. No assistance from him there.

    2. Fedup makes the false claim that I stated that JSD had apologised when the fact is I asked if JSD would apologise – which he has refused to do. Probably an error on the part of Fedup who often fails to read comments through carefully before spitting on them.

    3. The mod appears to be willing to confirm to readers that none of JSD’s comments were deleted but slyly remains silent on the question of whether my comment thanking “Fi” ever existed and was deleted. Well, it did exist and it did get deleted.

    4. So both John Spencer-Davis and the mod both owe me apologies – JSD for maliciously accusing me of some wrongdoing and the mod for knowing that the accusation was false and allowing it to continue anyway. THAT’s the kind of moderation you get here – biased and mischievous

    So, it is with very little satisfaction now, after seeing how sleazy and vulgar this blog gets, that I draw the reader’s attention to my comment on page 1 of this thread, 7 Oct 6:58am. Clicking on my handle/name for that comment will display a screenshot of my original comment thanking “Fi”. This comment was mischievously deleted by the mod who has until now refused to provide a confirmation or denial like he is able and willing to provide to JSD in his comment above.

    JSD can now see the screenshot – if it not subsequently deleted by the spiteful moderator. So I am entitled to apologies from both of these people.

    Let’s see if they have good characters. Will they readily offer those apologies, will they remain silent in shame or will they evade the truth and pursue a new course of abuse?

    Still waiting . . . .

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Jemand
    08/10/2015 2:30pm

    “I draw the reader’s attention to my comment on page 1 of this thread, 7 Oct 6:58am. Clicking on my handle/name for that comment will display a screenshot of my original comment thanking “Fi”.”

    The first comment on this thread was at 10:03am on 7 Oct. I should know. I put it there myself.

    The thread itself is timed and dated 9:52am on 7 Oct. Three hours later than Jemand allegedly posted his or her comment.

    Are you lying again, just incredibly stupid, or trying to take the mickey out of the readers on the blog, Jemand?

    John

  • Republicofscotland

    “No nothing the PM said was slanderous, he was careful. What he actually said was “We cannot let that man inflict his security-threatening, terrorist-sympathising, Britain-hating ideology on the country we love,”, if you look carefully it was an ideology he attacked and ideologies can’t sue for slander. If he’d actually said Corbyn was those things it might have been slanderous.”
    ___________________

    It certainly didn’t appear that way Fred, referring to Corbyn as that man, is rather attacking him (ad hominem) that attacking his ideology.

    Cameron of course continued with cheap shots such as “He thinks the death of Osama bin Laden was a tragedy.”

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Jemand
    08/10/2015 4:31pm

    And from you, by the way. Several of them, actually.

    Not so fast. Let’s unpack your latest offering first.

    John

  • Jemand ( [*censored* - ask me why] )

    Come on you lying filthy cunts, you have been shown to be the liars, false accusers, abusers and troublemakers that you are. JSD demanded that I post the screenshot and I did. I proved him to be a contemptible reprobate who makes false accusations.

    Apologies, please.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Jemand
    08/10/2015 4:44pm

    Temper, temper.

    Your own word is worth nothing. You are yourself a proven liar, as the mod confirmed yesterday. Or an utter idiot, whichever you prefer. You can wait, until I have had a good look both at your posting, and your latest round of blustering and lying accusations against me, which I am going to dissect and comment upon before we get to anything else.

    John

  • fedup

    John Spencer-Davis I am sure you are aware of the various shenanigans, and how easily the images can be manipulated and furthermore these then can be posted in dubious sites which can be up to all manner of tricks.

    The delays in “production of the evidence” (in more than one sense of the word) are enough time to fake a digital da Vinci. Further, the question that pops into mind; why should anyone keep a screenshot of their “contributions” as a matter of routine?

    This last question, ought to be further explored!

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Fedup
    09/10/2015 8:26am

    Thank you. Oh, I will be responding fully. But I am not inclined to any great hurry, to accommodate someone who: got his posts deleted due to his behaviour before I had said a word to him; who is unable to keep his threads straight or his story straight; who tells lies about me; who vilely insults people who disagree with him; and who continues to get most of his posts deleted for calling the mods “scum” and “cunts” and “cowards”. To cite a few examples. Why should I put myself out for someone like that?

    Nonetheless he is entitled to a response, and will receive one, when I am ready.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • glenn

    JSD: I’m not sure Jemand is actually entitled to a response. He’s hostile, profane, insulting to fellow posters, mods and the blog host (the latter two are incredibly indulgent, considering), and does nothing but bitch about how unfair everyone is to him. Quite the immature cry-baby, in other words, who probably ran to the teacher a lot to tell tales, not that long back.

    I don’t think mods get paid for their work here either, so clearly they must do just it for the power-trip, as they soak up insults while trying to keep a bit of order.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Glenn
    10/10/2015 2:57am

    Thank you. I do appreciate what you are saying, and there is some justice in it. Jemand has also behaved incredibly badly towards you personally.

    But I am not inclined to leave it there. Were I to do so, Jemand could with reason argue that he has posted what I asked for, and I have chosen to remain silent about it. I do not want that to happen.

    But matters will be proceeded with in good order. I am not going to be bounced into hasty action, by being called a “cunt”, and “scum”, and a “coward”, and being told to “fuck off with your tail between your legs”. If that is Jemand’s intention – won’t work.

    If Jemand is entitled to an apology, he will receive one – provided he is, in his turn, prepared to apologise for his lies about and antics towards me. We shall see.

    Many thanks, J

  • fedup

    Suhayl gherkins I am not so sure about, but aubergines I am onto it! Whether mistake or slip of the keys it sounds a new discovery hitherto I had never thought of before. Hence it calls for some experimental data to be gleaned from partaking a few of these. Thanks for the recipe.

    =============

    John you are very welcome and I like your style;

    I am not going to be bounced into hasty action, by being called a “cunt”, and “scum”, and a “coward”, and being told to “fuck off with your tail between your legs”. If that is Jemand’s intention – won’t work.

    This is the kind of response is just not fair!!! hahahaha

    It has been comical to watch this pathetic specimen dig itself deeper and deeper into the hole it is already resident in. All the while blaming everyone else for its concocted lies, and aggressive and vile conduct.

    ===================

    He’s hostile, profane, insulting to fellow posters, mods and the blog host (the latter two are incredibly indulgent, considering), and does nothing but bitch about how unfair everyone is to him.

    Glenn this is a typical mode of conduct of these zionist supremacist cretins, the web over. In fact on checking the threads you will find it had linked up to Board of Jewish Deputies, mission statement, effectively implying and threatening the blog and the mods with the fire and brimstones. That being not enough it was proposing and ADL for UK too!

    These cretins game the system and when caught out they then turn full on nasty, with all manner of vile insults, lies, attacks, etc.

    =================

    MOD who has been a sport and helped to clarify the situation tanks there mate!

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Mod – request for authentication, please.

    For your attention. Your intervention on the thread “Racism Works In The Tories”, on my comment of 07/10/2015 7:43pm (“No comments from John Spencer-Davis have been deleted.”) was not solicited, but it was much appreciated, if a little surprising. Thank you.

    I will try to confine my further remarks to one thread (this one) to avoid confusion.

    Jemand has posted a comment on this thread at 4:37pm on 08/07/2015. If you click on his name, on this comment, it brings up an image of what he says is a comment posted to this blog and placed in pre-moderation and deleted. For your convenience, I will show the text here.

    “Jemand (CM’s Blog Hosts Anti-Semitic Commentary)
    3 Oct, 2015 – 3:14pm

    Fi – thanks. It is a depressingly unrewarding experience fighting
    against large numbers of fools who behave in exactly the manner that
    they purportedly despise.
    Case in point – “Needless to say, the MSM tend to mod-out any
    dissent from people who even ask a question.”
    This, on a blog that deletes my benign (non-combative) comments and
    now placing me on “pre-mod”.
    Let’s see if this one gets through.
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    Jemand (CM’s blog hosts an ”

    I can see nothing wrong with this (I have tested the discrepancy between the signature at the top and the name at the bottom and it seems to be part of the posting protocol to capitalise each and every first letter). I also do not have the technical expertise to judge if this could be produced independently.

    I would normally accept as authentic, but given four things: the outburst of hysterical abuse and swearing that accompanied its production, the demands for an instant response, the time gap between my request for its production and the actual production, and the general behaviour of this poster, I feel I am within my rights to distrust Jemand’s word, and to ask for your verification of its authenticity. If you are willing to comment. I know it’s a big ask.

    Many thanks,

    John

    ——
    [ Mod: John, that message from Jemand was indeed deleted by a mod. Jemand had been repeatedly told that his screen-name imputes anti-Semitism, and he would be taken off pre-mod once it was changed. He refused to do so.

    By the way, only one message of yours has ever been deleted, on any thread. You had kindly brought our attention to something, we acted, and the warning itself then needed to be removed. ]

1 2 3 4 5

Comments are closed.