Tag Archives: extreme

Jewish Chronicle Editor Stephen Pollard’s Noxious, Extreme Rightwing Views | Beastrabban\’s Weblog

Jewish Chronicle editor Stephen Pollard: His political views aren’t pretty.

Here’s some information courtesy of Beastrabban and the Ducksoap website that makes This Writer extremely pleased to have beaten the Jewish Chronicle with my complaint against that publication to the press regulator IPSO.

Read on, and then take everything said by Stephen Pollard, or in his rag, with a hefty dose of salt.

I found a very interesting article on the Ducksoap website detailing the very right-wing views of Stephen Pollard, the editor of the Jewish Chronicle. The article’s entitled ‘Do Stephen Pollard’s political views give a clue to why he opposes Corbyn?’ And the article makes it very clear that the answer is definitely in the affirmative.

It quotes Pollard to show that he welcomes the introduction of increased charges in the NHS and its further privatisation. He hates the unions, and claims that the reasons behind the strikes called by the railway unions – safety and the absence of guards on trains’ – were spurious. He also dismissed the criticisms and concerns the postal workers’ union raised about the privatisation of the Post Office. As for dealing with unions, he glowingly praised Ronald Reagan sacking of 11,000 air traffic control workers, and stated that we needed similar actions to be taken against British trade unionists.

He attacked the Fabian Society for stating that Tory cuts had increased child poverty, and defended Ian Duncan Smith and his wretched Centre for Social Justice, whose policies against the poor, the unemployed and the disabled Ducksoap characterises as ‘social murder’.

Against all the available evidence, Pollard regurgitates the claim that people are choosing to live permanently on welfare, repeating the Tory/Republican lies about ‘dependency culture’. He even goes so far as to attack child benefit!

He’s also a massive fan of Rupert Murdoch, and is peddling more fear about Putin planning an attack on a NATO state. He claims that the West’s ‘feeble response’ to Putin’s invasion of the Ukraine sent a bad message to the Russian leader. But Ducksoap rightly points out that the trouble began when the West encouraged a non-democratic change of government, which created a Ukrainian government full of far-right extremists.

And Pollard should know about at least one of these. He was all over Paul Nuttall when he took over leadership of UKIP. He then went on to attack the Left’s response to the death of Castro, which he contrasted with that of ordinary people, who realised the Cuban dictator was a mass-murderer. He claimed that Corbyn doesn’t believe in any restrictions on immigration, because they’re racist, and that not only does the Labour leader want to scrap Trident, he also automatically supports this nation’s enemies.

He also claimed that May wasn’t moving the Tory party rightward, she was just turning it into the equivalent of a continental Christian Democrat Party. Ducksoap then adds that this is the same party that has introduced the policies of social murder, especially against those with disabilities, and is privatising the NHS.

Pollard has also published numerous rants against Socialism and Communism, and claimed that Corbyn is the most extreme leader that any party has put forward as a prime minister. He claims that Corbyn worships tyrants, and compared the Venezuelan leader, Hugo Chavez, to Idi Amin because Corbyn welcomed some of Chavez’ policies. He also claims that Corbyn is unpatriotic, and excuses ‘Russian imperialism’ against NATO. He also attacked Corbyn’s close ally, John McDonnell, by interpreting McDonnell’s comments about ending capitalism with ending democracy.

The article concludes:

“Stephen Pollard’s political position is hard-right economic libertarian similar to the Tea Party in the USA, the current Australian government, Dan Hannan, Iain Duncan Smith, Priti Patel, Jacob Rees-Mogg and a variety of right-wing think tanks – Adam Smith Institute, Tax-Payers’ Alliance, Institute of Economic Affairs, Centre for Policy Studies, etc.

“He is opposed to the NHS and to workers’ rights, he supports fully the Tory government’s policy of Social Murder and he is keen to finance the arms industry. His hatred of socialism throbs. He has no concept of what a public service is and he has no concept of society.

“His political analysis is ignorant, illogical, dishonest and petulant. He is a very poor writer and is as thick as mince.

“It is no surprise that he is very fearful of the possibility of a left-leaning Labour government led by Jeremy Corbyn because such a government would enact policies that are diametrically opposed to Pollard’s demands.”

This shows very clearly that Pollard’s spurious accusations of anti-Semitism against the Labour leader and his party are very definitely politically motivated from the fear that Corbyn, actually a traditional Labour centrist and certainly not part of the hard left, would actually do something to end the privatisation of the NHS, stop the benefit sanctions and welfare to work tests, that have resulted in the ‘social murder’ of the poor, unemployed and disabled, restore proper union power, and actually do something to empower Britain’s working people.

Who naturally include Jews.

But Pollard also despises liberal and Labour-supporting Jews as ‘the wrong kind of Jews’.

Source: Jewish Chronicle Editor Stephen Pollard’s Noxious, Extreme Rightwing Views | Beastrabban\’s Weblog

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Guardian seems happy to carry on Corbyn-bashing. Why?

Look how hard-left he is! He's wearing a cap and speaking in the open air! But anti-Corbyn hysterics in the media are the one's who look silly.

Look how hard-left he is! He’s wearing a cap and speaking in the open air! But anti-Corbyn hysterics in the media are the ones who look silly.

Wasn’t The Guardian forced to analyse its own coverage, only a few days ago, amid complaints that it was overly critical of Labour leadership candidate Jeremy Corbyn?

The verdict was that some articles had taken an overly-‘anti’ tone – but they’re still coming. Today’s Observer (the Graun‘s Sunday sister) has three in a row.

Yvette Cooper: ‘You can be strong without being extreme’ begins with the tagline, “The Labour leadership candidate says she understands the frustration and anger of Corbyn supporters but warns against losing the wider electorate.”

It continues: “The wholly unexpected obstacle to Cooper’s ambition to be Labour’s first female leader is the hard-left Jeremy ‘Jez We Can’ Corbyn.”

So Jeremy Corbyn is “extreme”, is he? He’s “hard-left”? When was that decided?

Most rational thinkers in the UK now accept that Corbyn is absolutely not “extreme” or “hard-left”. He’s left-wing in the classical Labour mould, in line with most of Labour’s loyal membership. If labels like “extreme”, or “hard” are to be applied anywhere, they would more properly belong with fellow candidates Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and especially Liz Kendall, whose attitudes – in Labour terms – would be described most accurately as “hard-right“.

Here’s another article – no headline this time, just straight into the aggro: “With Labour fixated by Corbyn, the Tories have taken advantage of a feeble opposition. Here’s how they did it…”

The text itself makes no mention of Corbyn – he’s just a handy peg on which the sub-editors have hung a headline. The author, Daniel Boffey, accepts that Labour could not be at full strength while the future leader is unnamed and shadow cabinet members have no idea whether they are likely to remain in their posts.

Finally, we have Jeremy Corbyn suggests he would bring back Labour’s nationalising clause IV. Apparently we are supposed to think this is a bad thing but the text of the article betrays the headline once again.

“I think we should talk about what the objectives of the party are, whether that’s restoring clause IV as it was originally written or it’s a different one,” is what Corbyn actually said.

He’s telling the country that, as Labour leader, he would listen to the wishes of his supporters and work to give them what they want.

That’s better than Burnham, Cooper and Kendall rolled together – and much more than the likes of David Cameron, Boris Johnson or George Osborne would ever willingly provide (although we know that their offers aren’t worth the air used to speak them or the paper on which they are written).

This Blog is happy to support Jeremy Corbyn – if only for one simple reason:

He is the only Labour leadership candidate to have shown any support for the Early Day Motion calling for the Conservative Government to publish statistics on the deaths of Incapacity Benefit and Employment and Support Allowance claimants (EDM 285).

In fact, he co-sponsored it.

It was signed by 93 other MPs in the week or so between its creation and the day Parliament went into recess for the summer. I’ve been reminded that Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall cannot sign EDMs because they are members of the shadow cabinet and are barred from doing so. Why haven’t they spoken in favour of it, then? How many of their supporters have signed it?

What does that say about those other leadership candidates?

Does it not tell us that they are happy to collude with the Conservatives in keeping the casualties hidden?

And here’s another good question:

Why aren’t newspapers like The Guardian asking Burnham, Cooper and Kendall about that, rather than stirring up non-existent muck about Corbyn?

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook