|
The MoA Week In Review – OT 2025-260
Last week’s posts on Moon of Alabama:
—
Other issues:
Gaza:
Grifters:
Venezuela:
Russia:
Use as open (not related to the wars in Ukraine and Palestine) thread …
BBC top brass resign-!
The British broadcaster’s top officials, Tim Davie and Deborah Turness, stepped down amid allegations that a documentary misleadingly edited Trump’s Jan. 6 speech.
“The more you try to drown out reality, the harder we’ll work to establish the facts…It’s the pursuit of truth that gives us our calling,” an ad for the BBC boasts. “Trust is earned.”
But just minutes after DJT gave his speech @ the Capitol on 6 January 2021, biased BBC News wonks were busily editing his words and the sequence of how he had uttered them in order to warp what had been DJT’s message to his supporters.
Panorama, a program on BBC News, edited DJT’s speech outside Congress on the day of the Capitol riots so that when he actually said he would walk with the protestors “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard,” he appeared instead to be inciting violence, telling them to “fight like hell.”
Panorama spliced together different and unrelated sections from the beginning and end of an hour long speech – then blended the video so the joins could not be seen, making it seem that DJT had said something he did not. His words were spliced together from three different portions of the actual speech, omitting his call for people to march “peacefully.” Who needs AI deepfakes when you have the BBC instead?
The BBC applied Insurrection Helper to the events of J6.
When Michael Prescott, an adviser to the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines and Standards Committee for three years until resigning in June 2025, highlighted what had happened, he was met with a wall of obfuscation.
Concerned he was getting nowhere with the chief executive of BBC News, Deborah Turness, he then contacted the BBC’s chairman, Samir Shah: “This is a very, very dangerous precedent. I hope you agree and take some form of action to ensure this potentially huge problem is nipped in the bud.” He did not receive a reply.
Donald Trump Jr was with his father on Jan 6 2021 as he addressed supporters before they stormed the US Capitol. criticized the BBC’s coverage of his father, calling its journalists “dishonest” after The Telegraph revealed concerns about the way the BBC had edited his father’s speech.
“The FAKE NEWS ‘reporters’ in the UK are just as dishonest and full of s—t as the ones here in America!!!!” Donald Trump Jr posted on X after he was told about the distorting edits.
The White House called out the BBC for its biased reporting: “Trust in the media is at an all-time low because of deceptive editing, misleading reporting, and outright lies. This is yet another example, of many, highlighting why countless Americans turn to alternative media sources to get their news.” Abigail Jackson, White House spokeswoman told The Telegraph.
CBS News paid out to DJT $16mn for its role in deceptively editing Kamals’s sit-down interview w/ the show ’60 Minutes,’ in which the news corporation heavily edited, remixed and spliced various word salad answers Kamala gave in order to make her seem coherently communicative.
DJT filed the lawsuit against CBS News alleging that the broadcasting network was recasting reality in these biased edits and therefore misleading the public.
CBS agreed to settle the lawsuit out of court, and DJT applied every dime of the $16mn payout to building the new ballroom @ the White House.
I can believe DJT will sue the BBC under similar circumstances—-and after receiving a hefty settlement, he will donate every dime to the ballroom costs.
Interestingly, the ballroom is becoming a shrine to the ways the media tried to bamboozle the public on what DJT said & when he said them.
Additionally in the matter involving the BBC, in the week before the 5 November 2024 presidential election, an influential U.S. pollster, Anne O. Selznick, showed Kamala winning the bellwether state of Iowa by 15% of the votes.
Although Selznick’s poll, the Des Moines Register Poll, was widely considered the gold standard of American polling, this particular report by Selznick seemed distinctly out of sync w/ an electorate which ultimately ensured that DJT would beat Kamala in Iowa by 7%. So close to the actual election, analysts found it odd that Selznick’s formerly so rock solid a poll could be so wrong. But it was.
And the BBC boosted & amplified Selznick’s faulty poll as if it was the New Jesus. Ditto w/ the legacy media, the Permanent Washington media, in the U.S.
Both media ecosystems, in the UK and in the states, tried to “speak Kamals’s win into existence” by magnifying the faulty polling, as if to discourage citizens from showing up to vote because the odds against a DJT win seemed so strong.
This is the hoodwinking mesmerism of disinformation/misinformation.
DJT filed a lawsuit against Selznick, and the Des Moines Register is footing the bill of her defense. I can believe that Selznick, via Iowa’s paper-of-record will wind up contributing to the new ballroom.
Some will cry that DJT is bitterly seeking retribution against his enemies—CBS News, Anne O. Selznick, and now the BBC.
Even if retribution were purely DJT’s motive, it would not excuse the outright warping of reality in which each of the above engaged: they asked the public to trust them but served up only lies.
As a member of that abused public, I may never sip from a sparkling flute of champagne under the shimmering chandeliers of the new ballroom, but I don’t have to. That it exists and that others will celebrate w/ champagne there is everything.
D.C. is full of heavy monuments, commemorating hallowed events. The ballroom will rightly assume its weighty place beside them, a cathedral to how they were not able to outrun their lies.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Nov 9 2025 23:40 utc | 110
Momentum and Kinetic Energy
Peter – I mentioned the relevance of momentum vs kinetic energy in the last thread. A brief demo calculation may shed a bit of light… This is why there is no free lunch with any type of rocket engine and space travel. A simple BOTE with very basic assumptions:
Assume a rocket propulsion system ejects 1 kg of material at 1,000m/s. It does not matter where the energy in the ‘system’ comes from (chemical, steam, nuclear, electromagnetic, solar, a hamster wheel, or an astronaut on a baked beans diet) or what that energy is converted into as the end product (soot, smoke, gas, ions, plasma), or what type of material (ions, plasma, steam, smoke, rocket exhaust, billy goat’s piss, or ‘chunks’ from that astronaut on a baked beans diet) is ejected. Basic physics determines the result, irrespective of what combinations or permutations of energy source, energy conversion products, or ejected material identity is selected. Velocity is what matters for momentum and propulsion, and velocity squared (assuming no losses) as a measure for the energy converted/expended.
Moreover, it does not matter how long it takes the ‘energy system’ (I could simply use the word ‘motor’, but that might set Mr. Gruff off on some tangent searching for some more descriptive adjectives) to eject the matter.
Let’s just say that, over the time of ejection of this matter, this ejected matter increases the speed of the caboose by one furlong per fortnight (1 f/f), and uses one unit of energy (say, one can of Watties baked beans).
Now, increase the power of the engine by a factor of ten. You are using fuel at ten times the rate, (ten cans of Watties baked beans) – all else being equal and no losses, and generating ten times the power. Let’s assume for simplicity that there are no losses in the conversion system, and all that extra energy goes into the velocity of the 1kg of ejected matter. So, KE is now 10X, and mass is still 1kg, so v^2 = 10 and v = sqrt(10) , or approx 3.16.
The simple relationship is momentum is linearly proprtional to v, KE is proportional to v squared. Four times the energy will double the speed, all else being equal.
Ten times the energy that was expended to get the caboose to 1 f/f will get that same caboose to 3.16 f/f.
Question for Mr. Gruff: “Where is the missing energy?” I thought energy was always conserved!
PS. Some ‘non-conventional’ units have been used. This does not change the basic physics.
Posted by: General Factotum | Nov 10 2025 8:03 utc | 196
|
