There was, though, as Captain Blackadder might have observed, only one thing wrong with this idea - it was bollocks. The Fawkes rabble were indulging in a guilt by association tactic, and closer inspection of this steaming and not at all fresh pile of bullpucky shows that they have found a total of zero evidence to stand up the smear.
A site that has published articles by Eric Li has, surprise surprise, published articles by lots of other contributors. The Fawkes suggestion is rather like saying anyone who blogs at the Huffington Post shares the views of any other contributor.
That isn't a bit of sport, or the normal rough and tumble of the New Media, but a clear and calculated attempt to take out Byline by so damaging it that contributors and readers are frightened off. It is therefore potentially highly defamatory. And it shows the level of press establishment desperation.
The personal abuse meted out to the likes of Peter Jukes is one thing; what the Fawkes rabble have done is quite another. This is beyond the pale, and they should accept Byline as a New Media presence - then desist from the lies and smears. End of story.
6 comments:
Tim,
If that gang of far right charlatans have gone to those lengths, then......Byline has got to them good and proper.
So well done, Byline. Keep up the good work.
But there's nothing new in Staines's kind of behaviour. The Murdoch-Rothermere jobsworths have been doing it for years.
So they fool nobody who's managed to acquaint themselves with their poisonous methods. Or, for that matter, with the history of Josef Goebbels, the Friends at Vauxhall Cross, the Boys at Langley, and any other number of paid liars. Sometimes it's so predictable it gets to be tedious. This is one such occasion.
@ Anon
" Sometimes it's so predictable it gets to be tedious."
That indicates the depressing nub of the problem. They know they are untouchable because of their associates. Like Yates of the Yard they are "well connected" with various undesirables unfortunately placed in all areas of authority or power with enough wealth to pay/see off those wo disagree with them.
The fact that Byline and Peter Jukes are being targetted show that the edifice is worried that another side of their comfortable existence, like tax avoidance issue, is being threatened.
Good luck to all those at Byline, Hacked Off, Exaro and other independent bloggers like Zelo Street not frightened or paid off like our fearless UK MSM.
I don't think Murdoch is a fan of Staines any longer.
The only reason these people display a front of looking out for each other is they have to have a pact to stop each other ratting on the other.
Wait a while, when Stainers gets pushed, his bitter revenge tactics will be as venomous as anything we've ever seen.
All we need is for someone to push the button ! Or cut the coms.
;-)
@ Detonator
"The only reason these people display a front of looking out for each other is they have to have a pact to stop each other ratting on the other."
It's worked well so far! Listen to the Daniel Morgan Murder podcast on Byline to see how far the tentacles reached back thirty odd years ago and that cover up is still ongoing! Ask Brooks what she knew but don't expect a truthful answer. Hence the rottweillers attack on an independent organisation to try and undermine/destroy their credibility.
Rob,
What is needed is intel from other countries and they do have it.
It's about time they started sharing it and put this shitfest to bed once and for all.
I sometimes wonder if the agenda to attack surrogacy is in fact a snide assault on Brooks.
I doubt the Jewish community (formerly me) of the UK take The Sun seriously and can see through faux anti-Semitic smears and most readers would have a 5 minute memory cycle. Why they insist on printing this garbage is a mystery. Surely their failed adventure in trying to put The Sun behind a paywall demonstrates the Sinking Sun's days are limited and more so because it's now filled with utter tosh. Except the racing & sport's results. They may be accurate.
Post a Comment