The Pacific Forum- A Collection of Dirty Stinking Conscienceless Liars

NZ Herald report-

The leaders of 15 Pacific Island countries held their annual retreat on Waiheke Island yesterday – the high point of a week during which the visit of United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon ensured climate change was top of mind.

In a communique released after the meeting, the leaders said there was a “critical and urgent need” for finance to help countries affected by rising sea levels to cope with the problem, especially nations such as Kiribati, Tokelau and Tuvalu where people have already been displaced.

There is no sea level rise. Every one of these parasitical scum who says they are threatened or affected by sea level rise is lying. Most of all the dirty little opportunist from Kiribati. This bunch of self serving scam artists lie without a shred of conscience and go unchallenged by a politically partisan mainstream media itself without a conscience and happy to promote their lies as truth. A real newspaper (that employed real journalists) would challenge and confront this pack of propagandising liars.

8 thoughts on “The Pacific Forum- A Collection of Dirty Stinking Conscienceless Liars

  1. “A real newspaper (that employed real journalists) would challenge and confront this pack of propagandising liars.”

    Why is there none? How have the Statist bigots managed to gain complete control in an otherwise conservative marketplace? You’re pretty good at finding news stories RB and are clearly not lazy. Have you or can you collect enough facts and details to comprise two lists of this is why causes and this is likely causes? From such a list you may be able to come up with a way to break the back of the Leftist/Statist monopoly on news. In fact don’t know why I never asked this question before. Who has? I bet those who keep the monopoly as it is know the answers just so they can stem any new startups. Let me know how I may help.


  2. Pascal- The control of the media is a direct result of journalism students being indoctrinated by left wing university tutors. The whole university process has been captured by the left, and not any department more so than that of journalism. (Trevor Loudon has done some good research into this.)

    Take for example Auckland University. This is considered by many to be NZ’s most prestigious academic institution. It is so controlled and perverted by left wing political agents, it would be almost impossible for any young apolitical and impressionable student to graduate through the university’s education/ indoctrination process without assuming a deep left wing political orientation.

    Only a day or so ago I was reading a newspaper article where two of NZ’s most hard left and communistic so called “journalists” Bolshevik Bradley (aka Bomber Bradbury) and John Campbell (front man to TV3 current affairs show for a decade or more) were lecturing to journalism students at some NZ university. (probably Auckland).

    For these two extremely partisan insults to the trade to be actually invited by so called tutors to lecture young aspiring journalists is as stark a demonstration of how the left have so totally corrupted the learning process as you would ever need to win your argument.

    If there was a true journalist there teaching real journalism, he would specify that such perverted extreme left scum as Bradbury and Campbell should never be permitted within a light year of his classes and his students. The system is utterly and hopelessly politically corrupt. Its how the left work..


  3. That explains institutional rot and is an old story. What’s preventing the creation of new institutions to convey credentials and new outlets to accept only those accredited from the new institution? That’s at the heart of my question. I’d have to say that you and I are agreed a new start is needed. What other obstacles are there beyond the rotted accrediting universities and the news bureaus that find that acceptable?


  4. There are a few out there.Not necessarily journalists,like David Round and Steven Franks.
    The journo that comes to mind is Du Fresne, he has a blog. He has written about the scandal of these lefties teaching.
    But these folk are very much voice in the wilderness and will never get the mass exposure that the likes of Campbell gets.
    Perhaps the closest was that clown Paul Henry. He could have gone on to bigger things in MSM but his own adolescent behaviour got the better of him in the end.But once again he was a victim of the ever powerful race card.

    The Pacific Islands lie is huge though and with the worlds media like the BBC,our own TV1 and 3
    and the warmist NGOs and UN behind it then honesty and integrity will never win out.

    One answer is what you do,Red, keep fighting the good fight.


  5. “The journo that comes to mind is Du Fresne, he has a blog. He has written about the scandal of these lefties teaching.”

    Pascal- Kowtow is right. NZ journalist and radio commentator Karl Du Fresne wrote a blog article not so long ago complaining of left wing tutors dominating journalism classes.


  6. Ian Wishart’s Investigate magazine is now my only print-media source for news. Occasionally scan (other peoples) newspapers. Not often.


  7. RB, Kowtow: I found and read two post by Mr. Du Fresne. Another reason to be suspicious of journalism schools, and In defence of duFresneism. In each instance he simply provided more evidence for what we all already know — that the existing journalism institutions are tightly controlled clubs, exclusionary at best, behaving in a decidedly bigoted fashion against any conservative notions no matter the pretenses of its self assessed “liberalism.”

    I could ask Mr. Du Fresne this question I asked of you above, but he does not know me from Adam.

    So let me put it another way. There is a vacuum that blogs such as yours are filling, yet there is no teaching institution that encourages and supports arguments such as you raise daily? Clearly there is a market for teaching how to promulgate your views, so why is there no institution that caters to it? Or is it only us old farts who were not reached way back when and it’s primarily mostly the younger generation that is too deluded to know they need to be thinking as you do? Come to think of it, what is the average age of your reader? I’m in my mid sixties.

    Aside: I think tutor means something different in your lexicon than mine. In the states, a tutor is someone who is paid to help a student learn what they didn’t learn in class. That is, someone who is not officially part of the school system itself. It seems when you say tutor, you mean someone who is intrinsically part of the system. How do they differ from a professor or class instructor, or is tutor with you simply synonymous with those?


Comments are closed.