Red Bull CEO Dietrich Mateschitz plans to start a right wing media service ‘Quo Vadis Veritas’ (Where do you go, truth?)

Known for its drinks, sponsorships and events, Red Bull’s founder is creating a news service to deal with liberal bias and political correctness.

He recently participated in a rare interview to discuss Red Bull’s anniversary and state of politics.

Many music and art websites were outraged at his support for Trump and view of mismanaged immigration in Europe. Somehow they decided a supporter of cultural projects around the would couldn’t also view governments as having managed immigration badly and Trump having good ideas…

Perhaps it’s these misconceptions he feels need addressing and resulted in the creation of a news service to bring better balance to the discussion.

Extracts and key articles:

Kleine Zeitung – ‘Culture Dietrich Mateschitz’s new media project’

A multimedial, publicly accessible research platform was founded by Red Bull founder Dietrich Mateschitz. He is concerned with a journalistic response to the rampant mistrust of society.

Original article in German or open through Google Translate.

 

Kleine Zeitung – ‘Red Bull’s CEO is expecting Austria’s refugee policy’

The bad thing about democracy is that the majority is not always right. The good thing is that the insane is correctable, that everyone can be desponed as quickly as he was chosen. You should give Trump time.

Original article in German, or open through Google Translate.

 

Breitbart – ‘Red Bull Boss Slams Mass Migration, Forced Multiculturalism in Europe’
In a rare interview, Red Bull boss and Austria’s richest man Dietrich Mateschitz has slammed mass migration and political correctness, warning they threaten to destroy Europe’s true cultural diversity.

Original article (in English).

Advertisements

Bias in media by the way they ‘report’ incidents

A false version of the world is asserted by mainstream news agencies including the BBC and heavily biased versions of ‘reality’ are communicated by the likes of Guardian.

To defend yourself start by analysing and learning how each news agency unfolds breaking events, pay attention to the version of they’re pushing. Understand how they’re portraying a version of the world that doesn’t exist.

Expect the following to be liberal (left wing) and conservative (right wing):

  1. Guardian (ultra liberal fantasist)
  2. BBC (enforced imperial liberal apologist)
  3. Economist (analytical and overly optimistic)
  4. ITV (all things to all people, risk averse, barely has an opinion)
  5. Sun (straight talking and focuses on mainstream sentiment)
  6. Times (critical and pessimistic with strong well thought through views)
  7. Telegraph (critical of wishy washy liberal ideals and slightly unforgiving)
  8. Daily Mail (straight to the point, focused on what worries and excite the public)
  9. Breitbart (uses bad news to emphasise there are bad things and people in the world)

To protect yourself, check a range of news sources, in particular RT and Al Jazeera. Foreign agencies don’t have the same agenda as home news so they tend to be more honest about what’s happening.

Think about what it means when a news source reports in an overly objective way that ignores what people are thinking.

Key information for most incidents at the moment are: where the perpetrator is from and religious motives. If the perpetrator is an Arab looking man with a beard, this is relevant information and it is biased to ignore it.

When news agencies like the BBC avoid covering news with meaningful details they are denying the truth and forcing a false version of events in a subtle way.

Avoiding key details for hours (even after other agencies have communicated these not-so-secretive-details) is trying to control the narrative. Fortunately even the giant mega monopoly of the BBC can’t hold back the plain truth for long.

Actual sub title on the BBC News homepage on the evening of the Westminster attacks:

‘Four people have died, including a police office and the attacker, after a terror incident outside the Houses of Parliament in London’

Compare these actual headlines from the top of the websites and start to understand how liberal media are attempting to whitewash [how long till they consider that a racist term] horrendous incidents.

Their bias comes from a place of endless ‘white guilt’, desperation for meaningfulness from their privileged lives and naive thinking that bad people don’t really exist. Somehow it’s the West’s fault, ‘We did this to ourselves’, ‘We should’nt’ve bombed Iraq’, ‘We’re the real terrorists’ they say…

Bad things must be pointed out and not ignored, liberals are creating a dangerous world where there are too many themes that cannot be discussed because they are automatically described as racist. At close second, our priority must also be to protect associated communities (every muslim isn’t a terrorist), it is not a ‘right wing’ view that people should be unfairly persecuted. It should be all our view that we discuss bad things without big media hiding and misleading and liberals shunning any mention of race/religion/colour as racist.

Westminster attack - Guardian
Guardian
Westminster attack - Breitbart
Breitbart
Westminster attack - Daily Mail
Daily Mail
Westminster attack - BBC
BBC