When they do get in experts it's Institute of Government (board reads like a Remainer roll of honour - completely Blarite) and Chatham House (nest of vipers).
Have they put the draft agreement on the website? That's what I'm after. I'm not really interested in the opinions of a long list of BBC reporters and editors.
A member of the public having an opinion! Good grief. Why on earth would you want to do that when the helpful people at the BBC are on hand to tell you what to think? They can even check reality.
Thank you for the link, MB. I did actually look on the government site and all I could find were statements by the PM. I did find a copy of the draft on Conservative Home. It would have been nice if the publicly funded broadcaster had put it up on the news site.
Absolutely Anon - but they want us to trust a Newsnight panel of 4 Remainers in interpreting the document for us. I think the whole agreement is suspect because while you are in transition or in no deal , it's the ECJ that decides on things and as we know with Supreme Courts, they can make up the law as they go along. In other words - we have no sovereignty at all.
The other day I asked about creating hyperlinks on comment threads.
I just highlighted that one (TVM) and was about to cut and paste when a window popped up saying 'Open in another window'? So I did. Worked a treat. Well, this time.
Describing it as 'a deal' is fake news. This is a Withdrawl Agreement, setting out the conditions for us to actually leave the EU. The Lisbon Treaty gave member states an option to leave the EU (Article 50) but this 'deal' takes away our freedom to leave. Even if we complete this process there is no guarantee that we will get a 'trade deal' with the EU. The EU will, however, walk away with at least £39 billion, some 'deposit'!
I just listened to Theresa May at the 5.15pm press conference.
I noted three things a. Theresa May always goes to Laura Kuenssberg first for questions. b. No one asked about the backstop and how we escape the customs union when the EU can veto it. c. Afterwards Vicky Young, BBC head political reporter summarised by giving a strong and impassioned defence of Theresa May and how she handled it in a mature way.
Yes, it looks as though the whole shabby crew, from Emily Maitlis down to the evening news crowd, has decided to be nice to & about Theresa - Kuenssberg's saccharine tones at the press conference were particularly nauseating.
Think, on the whole, I find Kuenssberg easier to take when she's in her default, fish-wife/shrew mode! Also, I'm pretty sure the News mentioned Raab, Esther McVey, & the two junior ministers but not the two PPSs or Rehman Chisti, a Vice Chairman of the Party - making 7 in all.
The thing I notice is that no one from any part of the UK MSM media asks her about the Irish Republic's PM's categoric statements that he will not put customs posts up on the N Ireland border in event of a no deal Brexit and the reports that he has the backing of the EU stance. Well of course they don't because it makes a nonsense of her whole negotiating strategy based on the idea that the NI Border issue was a "real" problem as opposed to a clever negotiating ploy by the Franco-German alliance.
6pm News: Jacob Rees-Mogg answering questions from the press; the BBC camera is placed so that he is not looking into it (less impact) & the volume is low - the technique usually reserved for Farage. But never mind, the camera can linger lovingly on the loony festooned in EU flags, the Beeb's favourite crackpot.
The Mail on Sunday wasn't full Remain all along. It switched DURING the EU Referendum campaign. How? Why? What? No one ever answered those questions.
As for your comment...logical thinking - you don't get appointed editor of the Daily Mail unless you have the backing of the power behind your newspaper (shareholders, directors etc) which basically comes down to money as we aren't talking about principled people. We are talking about people who might disguise their control through any number of financial arrangements.
Logical thinking is now pretty much illegal of course.
It's simpler to put it this way: 52% of the UK electorate supported Brexit. Where is the 52% of media supporting it now?
Basically there is no one now in the UK MSM supporting Brexit consistently .The Express might not yet have turned but with Mirror ownership it soon will.
This is an absolute disgrace but our Remainer PM is just laughing at us as she sets the whole country alight.
What things are not being aired on the MSM? - with BBC doing their absolute utmost to suppress these issues...
- There is no trade deal with the EU in place, despite May's promises. Nothing. - We are paying £49 billion for nothing...since the EU has not guaranteed anything in return. - She has surrendered on the NI situation. - Leo Varadkar's statements that he will never put in a hard border in event of a no deal Brexit. Or the EU's assurances that he won't have to...So it's all BS about the NI border. - The ECJ is in control of all the key aspects of the deal... and we all know that Supreme Courts can make up law as they wish. So this is a complete surrender of sovereignty.
What are the BBC telling you in their mood music, vocal tone, body language and script? They are telling you to get behind May.
Well at that point you should think v. carefully. We know the BBC supports or has supported child grooming on its premises, tax evasion, poor health and safety procedures (people have died), Euro membership, no borders, mass immigration (including undocumented or illegal migration), racism (only non-white racism of course), genderist supremacism (only feminism of course) and failure to protect staff (arm biting of juniors by senior member of staff).
Is the BBC any kind of reputable or responsible organisation? NO!!!
Mishal Husain interviews a head honcho from the banking sector - one of those extremist "no borders" globalist types. He had obviously been selected under No 10's media grid to come on and tell us a "no deal" would be an economic disaster and catastrophe (they need some new words, may I suggest "armageddon") of unparalleled severity.
You might have thought she was interviewing a child about her cat's litter of kittens for all the forensic journalistic skills on display from Mishal. She didn't even ask him the obvious question: "Why should we believe you? George Osborne and Mark Carney told us there would be a recession if we voted Brexit and there hasn't been one? Wages and employment are both up." It's only when she has the Israeli ambassador on that she sounds engaged.
There was a little hidden moment of amusement. At one point the head honcho guy was clearly groping mentally for a phrase like "it's the right thing for the country" or "it's in the country's interests" or even "it's in our interests"...But of course being a globalist banker that's not how he thinks - in fact such sentiments are the very antithesis of his way of thinking and he couldn't quite utter the phrase, as it would have made his flesh crawl. Or maybe he was just remembering Macron's injunction that "nationalism" is the ultimate political sin.
We shouldn't underestimate the vice-like grip that Angela Merkel seems to have over Theresa May. It was Merkel she ran to before the Chequers Agreement was made public - indeed before she put it to the Cabinet for consideration.
Yesterday, I caught a clip of Merkel saying that (I paraphrase) the negotiation for Brexit had been completed and that she wouldn't allow them to be reopened with an alternative Conservative 'team'.
I suspect that all along, Theresa May has been playing for the EU side - in league with the BBC. She has always been a Remainer, and despite her protestations that she is delivering Brexit to 'The British People', in fact she is nothing more than a Quisler, acting under the direction of the EU.
The BBC News website did cover this story yesterday:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46228454
However, alongside the photo of Merkel, is the headline:
... 'Brexit: EU leaders dismiss talk of renegotiating draft agreement' ...
Here is the usual BBC tactic of siding with the EU by referring to 'EU leaders' instead of Merkel by name. It is made to sound more authoritative - as if leaders of all 27 countries are speaking in unison.
The BBC are currently using every trick in the book to protect May and her "deal" (Abject Surrender Document or AbSurD for short ). Shoehorning Remainers in everwhere, soft interviewing of pro-deal, pro-May types, not asking searching questions re the deal,not worrying her deal will lead to a breakdown in the Good Friday Agreement, not reminding us of May's broken promises,not mentioning Olly Robins was a Stalinist...
Merkel lies about everything. One lie at the end of her political career matters not. In a rare moment of honesty May admitted in Parliament that the EU had offered us a binary choice of an EEA type deal or a Canada style deal.
In a scenario where let's say Dominic Raab emerged as leader and appointed a real Brexit negotiator - let's say David Davis, who then asked for a Canada style deal, of course the EU would renegotiate and in double quick time though we might now need say a 3 month extension on the Article 50 deadline.
The longer this goes on, and the longer Theresa May stays, promoting as she does this absurd deal, and, with Conservative MPs dithering, sitting on their hands, then the more damage she is doing to both democracy and the future prospects for the Conservative Party. They will become unelectable due to distrust.
Merkel seems to treat democracy as a minor nuisance. She is at heart an authoritarian. Meanwhile, May said yesterday that she has known from the beginning what she wanted, as if this was in some way reassuring or evidence of accomplishment. It is far from reassuring and I found it quite alarming. She has strung us along and the endlessly repeated form of words about leaving and taking back control of money etc was her way of doing it and in effect just a fig leaf. What we are getting from her is the Lib Dem and Labour rationalisations and glosses put on the decisive vote to leave.
This draft agreement allows the EU machine to insert itself into UK affairs, including the NI arrangements, via its member Ireland; our fishing waters; our trading and competitiveness; our immigration policy - all of these will be grist for the negotiation of the final settlement between us and the EU. And May handed them the upper hand, just in case they didn't have it already, by caving in at the beginning to their definition of the structure and conditions of the negotiations and by her submissive agreeableness on the financial demands.
The EU excels in wrapping the fly in a spider's web of stipulations, rules, regulations, protocols, clauses and treaties. They have a whole bureaucracy devoted to it. It's their meat and drink.
The Reality Check team are up to their usual mischief - BBC Reality is in a parallel universe and is now just a propaganda piece for BBC liberal-left politics.
The headline of the latest tells you all you need to know about what’s inside ;
Brexit: What do Theresa May’s Tory enemies object to in the deal?
Yes, mischief is a good description. He claims on his Twitter account (which displays all the usual braindead left-liberal anti-Trump bias)to be part of a fact checking service! lol!!
His article is full of surmise, speculation and thinly disguised disdain.
First off "Tory party" is not the factual name of the party he is examining. There is no such party. A small point, but if this is a fact checking service, then it is of some importance.
He sneeringly refers to "the Brexit faithful" and "Brexit believers". Can you imagine him referring to the "EU faithful" or "EU acolytes" - no neither can I. The truth is that it is the EU followers who are far more akin to a religious fraternity than Brexiters.
What's the phrase "divorce settlement" doing in a factual piece? This is an emotive description (divorce is painful - you likely were once in love, cf Mark Mardell) of the withdrawal agreement. Perhaps he doesn't want to look too closely at Article 50 because if he does, this "two stage" process will be seen to have no warrant in that Article.
And why refer to the "EU rules" we will have to follow. These aren't "rules" they are law. The EU makes law. Everyone who knows anything about the EU, knows that is the case, so why do the BBC try to hide it with anodyne words likes rules and regulations?
Good heavens. Enemies! Tory enemies. Isn't characterising politicians with differing views on important policy matters as enemies 'hate speech'? I hope there are formal complaints to the publicly funded broadcaster about this low form of smear passing for journalism.
Mmmm... 'Steve may be a lovely man but this appointment just epitomises the utter farce of this govt and how toxic the Brexit post has become. Across the party there is total despair' - Barclay is well liked and seen as on his way up for sure, but it's certainly a big jump
Now that’s definitely personal opinion, not analysis.
‘The utter farce of this govt’ is political bias in my book.
BBC's John Simpson wrote in his novel about the head of news who tried to get rid of him.
And who is responsible for the present Brexit agreement? 'After Nick Timothy, Theresa May’s former chief of staff, wrote that she “never believed Brexit can be a success”, his former No 10 colleague Matthew O’Toole tweeted: “Nick is perhaps the single most influential author of this deal. Every one of the shrill threats and red lines he dictated drove the negotiations towards this end. If it’s a bad deal, he broke it.”'
She is adopting the BBC trick of #bbcquotes whereby folk can get fooled into thinking what someone else has said has the heft and endorsement of the world's most trusted and beloved broadcaster.
The way they quote is also many many and varied, and too often not what I would suggest is actual reporting (even if who they quote and what bit can offer a wealth of editorial integrity opportunity) namely, 'As X, PR weasel for pond weed NGO Y has said, "wibble"."
Good luck with that. As the once BBC-sceptic and EU-sceptic media (Telegraph, Mail, Express and others) dissolve into the undifferentiated ooze of PC virtue signalling we will need sites like yours. I have an image of us crowding around them, bright fires in a Dark Age forest clearing offering some temporary warmth and comfort before the barbarians fall on us again come dawn. :)
MSM print, TV and internet are all pro-Brexit now mainly because they are based in London and employ those living in the London bubble. Not sure why the Sun is an outlier.
Not so, Sir T - read today's article by Telegraph's star reporter/commentator, Allison Pearson, "Act in the national interest, Theresa May, and resign now." Didn't you mean 'pro-remain'?
Worth following. Though I think I know what will happen already. There are several others out there not happy that the BBC is exempting itself left, left and left of centre by default.
During the night I listened to "Business Matters" on the BBC World Service. A guest was Peter Morici, Professor at the Robert H. Smith School of Business, in Maryland. Listen to him tear into the EU and the T May proposals here.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w172w0q0lj06fkc
It starts at 8:58 to 10:46. I do not think that he will be a guest very often.
Fascinating insight into Theresa May's mental state on Sky's video version of Nick Ferrari's phone-in with her this morning. The Telegraph's Michael Deacon commented a few months ago on the way in which, when she's prevaricating, May's mouth, "moves around her face as though its trying to escape." Well, today it appeared to be trying to get out of Colditz castle. You can catch the 32 minute-long phone-in on YouTube.
Yes, but only if May gets it through Parliament. Maybe, just maybe, enough Tory MPs will have the sense to write a no confidence letter to the '22 Committee & depose her before she can do any more damage - despite the BBCs best efforts on her behalf.
Let's hope there is at least a substantial enough group of patriots prepared to do the deed. She's extremely dangerous...I know that might strike some as alarmist, given her vicar's daughter persona. But her character has slowly been revealed to us: duplicitous, deceptive, secretive, dishonest...Remember she was negotiating behind David Davis's back. She's done the same with Dominic Raab. Remember one moment she's telling us about how migration can impact negatively on communities while she presides over migration running at over 600,000. Remember how she kept saying "Brexit means Brexit". We now see it can mean nothing of the sort under her control,instead meaning something like colonial status with rule from Brussels.
People with poorly managed Type 1 diabetes are liable to suffer serious mental health symptoms like anxiety, depression and eating disorders, especially in their teens. Her diabetes wasn't identified until quite late in adulthood so by definition it would have been poorly managed prior to that.
We seem to attract these sort of people to high office - Gordon Brown was another one (one moment it was "British jobs for British workers" the next it was "that bigoted woman").
Unbelievable! Or rather, should I say, all too believable given everything we know...
If we needed further confirmation that it is an Abject Surrender Document, well Steerpike provides it.
I don't mind admitting I was fooled by May. I thought she had some concept of honour, liked the British people and understood why Brexit had to mean Brexit.
There is no doubt she is running through the corn field now, flattening the corn, destroying the hard work of a good people and inviting in the kids from the neighbouring farm to do likewise.
She is extremely dangerous. This cannot stand. It would be better if we just joined the EEA via EFTA. That might be BRINO as well but it would not be abject surrender. It would mean we had some control, some influence, and we would get control of our fisheries and our agriculture.
I wish I had believed the "far right", "socially divisive" and "extreme" politicians like Farage and Batten who told us May had no intention of implementing Brexit and was planning the biggest ever sell out of the British people. They were right and I was wrong.
A copy of this '40 Horrors' article should be posted to every household in the UK so that we all know what Theresa May's Brexit Deal actually means. I don't doubt its accuracy.
It's no use expecting the BBC to set out the terms of Theresa May's Brexit deal in their original form - as the Spectator article does. No. We are instead spoon-fed a cosier version which glosses over the unpalatable, and which portrays our Prime Minister as a skilled negotiator, an expert in pragmatism and the 'art of the possible', when in fact on matters concerning the ECJ in particular she seems to have been most economical with the truth.
I guess we were warned by all those years of "reducing migration to the tens of thousands" starting as a pledge, becoming a target, then an aspiration and finally an airy nothingness...all under her watch.
Arthur - You are right about how the BBC staff's "forensic skills of analysis" desert them at this vital moment. Give them a Trump statement and they will parse it to the nth degree. But they are describing this mammoth document in the vaguest terms. Not sure I've heard an actual quote from it yet.
At PMQs on 24th October .... 'Speaking during Prime Minister’s Question Time this afternoon Mr Rees-Mogg said: “There have been reports today that the government is willing to agree that the European Court of Justice will the final arbiter in most cases arising from Brexit.
“As this would be inconsistent with the Prime Minister’s previous commitments, will she authoritatively deny it?”....
Theresa May replied .... '“I haven’t seen those particular reports, but if they are as he has suggested then they are wrong. We have been very clear in the work that we have been doing, about ensuring that in the future the European Court of Justice does not have jurisdiction in the UK.' ....
But, when we look at the Spectator Horrors, we find that the Brexit Agreement say this:
.... 'The European Court of Justice is decreed to be our highest court, governing the entire Agreement – Art. 4. stipulates that both citizens and resident companies can use it. Art 4.2 orders our courts to recognise this. “If the European Commission considers that the United Kingdom has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaties or under Part Four of this Agreement before the end of the transition period, the European Commission may, within 4 years after the end of the transition period, bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union”. (Art. 87) The jurisdiction of the ECJ will last until eight years after the end of the transition period. (Article 158). The UK will still be bound by any future changes to EU law in which it will have no say, not to mention having to comply with current law. (Article 6(2)) Any disputes under the Agreement will be decided by EU law only – one of the most dangerous provisions. (Article 168). This cuts the UK off from International Law, something we’d never do with any foreign body. Arbitration will be governed by the existing procedural rules of the EU law – this is not arbitration as we would commonly understand it (i.e. between two independent parties). (Article 174)' ...
I can't understand why the BBC haven't examined this contradiction. We are being hoodwinked into supporting an agreement that enables the ECJ to be maintained as the highest legal authority with a say over Brexit, and more importantly future liabilities resulting from all manner of bureaucratic machinations from the EU.
For the duplicitous sociopath Theresa May "in the future" means not starting now but possibly in 100 years' time when the ECJ has been replaced by some other body and therefore her statement will not, technically, be a lie.
News Channel 6pm News - Brexit: Interview with Sir Alan Duncan (pro- May's betrayal), and a couple of vox pops from Cheshire - both defensive of that nice Mrs May & no dissenting voice - they should have asked me!
When is someone going to call a mass demonstration of Brexit-supporting folk? Haven't been on a demo in 45 years but will definitely be up for this multi-million march - absolutely career ending (for May). That's the problem with the JRM types - or indeed the Boris types - they have no idea how to link up with the people and exert pressure. Farage might just be capable of doing something.
With the right person at the head, I think it would be 7 million, not 700,000. I think she and the deal (Abject Surrender Document) would be gone before the demo actually took place.
A Scottish court case on whether the article 50 notification can be revoked by the UK unilaterally, has been referred to the EU court for an expedited hearing, scheduled for 27 November. Meanwhile the government has applied to the Supreme Court for leave to appeal against the decision of the Scottish court - which had refused to give leave to appeal. The Supreme Court heard the application yesterday. The decision will be expedited in view of the urgency.
Note that the reference asks explicitly, if the answer is yes, what effect that would have 'relative to the Member State remaining within the European Union'.
Is there no end to it? I forgot to say. Andy Wightman & others. He's an MSP of the Green Party.
They've thought of everything, so your point would be covered where they ask what conditions it would be subject to, if it is declared to be revocable.
Talk of Julia Hartley-Brewer makes me think of my fantasy Cabinet - feel free to add or get out the eraser and amend:
PM - Julia Hartley-Brewer Chancellor - Jacob Rees-Mogg Foreign Secretary - Douglas Murray Brexit Secretary - Nigel Farage Leader of the House - Boris Johnson Home Secretary - Gerard Batten Minister for Sport and Culture - Rod Liddle Minister for Justice - Tommy Robinson Minister for Devolution - Kate Hoey Minister without Portfolio - Lord Pearson Minister of Education - Katy Hopkins Minister of Health - Frankie Boyle Minister for Social Services - Frank Field
Just realised it's a bit light in the ethnic minorities department so:
Minister for Equality - Raheem Kassam Minister for Women - Ayaan Hirsi Ali (we'll invite her in any make her a UK citizen if she isn't already) Minister for Appearing on BBC Progs at Short Notice- Kwarze Kwarteng.
1 Psychologically normal range 2 Psychologically abnormal range 3 With very challenging formative experiences 4 Narcissistic 5 Ideological 6 Pragmatic 7 Patriotic 8 Egocentric (not the same as narcissitic in my view. You can be narcissistic and patriotic but not egocentric and patriotic). 9 Creative 10 Non-creative
Lol. Excellent casting. The only thing is, with Boris in charge of organising the business of the House, chaos would reign and besides, who'd be more eloquent and more entertaining in the role of court jester / Speaker? Dennis Skinner could be one of his deputies. Leader could be Nadine Dorries or Bill Cash.
If the Conservative Party MPs cannot summon up 48 letters to trigger a leadership election then the Conservative Party is finished. Kaput. Dead. No longer a living and breathing party.
I agree. There seem to be a good number of Conservative MPs who prefer out of self-interest to sit on the fence. This dithering will cost the Conservative Party dear. Who wants an MP who dithers at such an important time.
If we have reached a fork in the road, then at present there is an unsightly spectacle of self-serving MPs milling around uncertain of which way to go. To use another analogy, if a homing pigeon dithers and is slow to return to the coop (in this case MPs to their constituencies), their necks would be wrung as they had proved themselves worthless.
What are BBC "comedians" going to do now, since the Mail has gone full on PC-pro-EU-Eddie-Izard-sort-of-thing? I am really looking forward to hearing how the News Quiz run with this:
That headline is like the sort of childish venom that the Evening Standard would resort to under its current editor, Osborne, in his continuing mega sulk at not being offered a job by May.
I sincerely hope. The Sunday Times has a damning indictment from Raab - although humiliatingly for him, it involves admitting he was duped...after David Davis said he was duped. Bit of a dupe fest.
I hope you are right Sis, but I fear that insufficient Conservative MPs will stand up to be counted. Most of them are Remainers at heart, unwilling to give up their position within the Westminster bubble, where as we know there is only the one point of view: 'By hook or by crook, we must remain a part of the great enterprise that is the EU'.
In the UK now, it is impossible to have any influence from outside London. Through public services, the civil service, through charities, through institutions, all key decisions are made in the Capital. As a budding MP, to be away from that buzz is unthinkable.
The posturing within their constituencies is simply a means to an end. The voters who put the MP into Westminster may as well have 'MUGS' written on their backs.
The only hope now is that once the full realisation of the terms of the Brexit deal have been spelt out to the general public, then the outcry from the majority of voters can be heard - even within the cosseted surroundings of Westminster - sufficiently loudly to awaken MPs from their slumbers. Remain voters must feel equally let down, able to see that this proposed agreement leaves us in a worsened position than when we were.
... Remain voters must feel equally let down, able to see that this proposed agreement leaves us in a worsened position than when we were ... a fully paid up member of the EU.
Transcript of the TOP 40 HORRORS courtesy of English Lass 17th Nov at 7 34pm on BBBC: https://biasedbbc.org/blog/2018/11/16/weekend-open-thread-17-november-2018/comment-page-2/#comments
The more people that can read this '40 Horrors' summary, the better. Consistently, the BBC talk about Theresa May negotiating a deal, overriding her own Brexit Secretary. There hasn't been any meaningful negotiation, which might ensure a genuine Brexit. The deal, written by the EU with their own interests at its centre, is being imposed upon us - now, and way into the future. We should all wake up to the reality here.
Was a very pleasant change listening to Nigel Farage on LBC this morning, rather than sticking with the usual BBC PC pro-EU agenda rubbish. Farage is not infallible not necessarily a details man. But I felt a strange sense of calm come over me as I was given the opportunity to hear some rare common sense come over the airwaves.
Usually at that time on BBC after Marr it's that awful Sunday Morning Live PC programme but it wasn't on today. I'm not sorry but I wondered why. Has it been ditched because it's had falling audiences? Or are they saving more money? It was replaced by Homes under the Hammer. Not exactly an improvement.
The BBC is using a speech by Macron in Germany to bolster May. In my opinion, it’s a thinly disguised attempt to influence readers and persuade them that the EU is a power for good against the populist uprising.
Whilst Macron didnt mention Trump at all in his speech , the BBC introduced him into the article and cast him as the bogeyman implying that the speech was aimed at Trump.
These are classic propaganda tricks by the new masters of the art.
Well I think there was no doubt Trump was the target, after he declared himself a nationalist during a recent speech. Apparently it is OK for Sturgeon to be a nationalist, but not Trump as far as BBC and Macron are concerned.
I have given up on rational analysis of events. Now is the time for prayer.
I say that as one none too religious.
But for every season turn, turn, turn.
I expect people felt like this in May 1940. I don't apologise for the comparison. Yes, the short term danger is less (no prospect of SS troops jackbooting down Whitehall) but the longer term peril is not dissimilar: the moral collapse of our nation and its effective erasure from the face of history.
So yes, pray for your country...you have to when you consider that the fate of the nation hangs on such a pussilanimous bunch of place seekers as the Conservative Parliamentary Party.
'pusillanimous' ... Yes, it's a good description of the Conservative Party. I prefer spineless and gutless and senseless (particularly in their capacity for listening to their voters) - leaving only their thick skin to hold them together.
The BBC clearly considers that Boris is still a threat to the Remainiac cause & continues to drip-feed negative stories about him - today's News pages gleefully reveal that his water cannon have been sold for scrap at a £300,000 loss. The BBC reminds us that Theresa May, as Home Secretary, banned their use & used the purchase to ridicule Boris - she should be reminded of that next time our cities are burning. And where was she during the riots? - abroad, cowering in her holiday villa. Sadiq Khan is also gloating. He shouldn't be - his failure to control knife-crime means that the next riots will be far more serious than the last.
Michel Barnier has gone from finger-wagger extraordinaire to salesman-in-chief. His remarks about the Withdrawal Agreement could have been scripted by the British government to help sell the deal: it's a fair compromise, the EU has moved towards the British position on the Irish backstop which, by the way, won't even be needed because we are going to have a deep and special relationship.
Well Barnier would do, wouldn’t he! It’s a superb deal for the EU. Why didn’t Fleming mention that?
Peter - I hardly ever get to see your links because, on my Android tablet, they're dead & I only fire up the desktop a couple of times a week. I can't see any way to copy & paste on the tablet. Any ideas?
Sisyphus - I wish I did. I just copied my link on my iPhone, ported it to Safari and it worked. I can’t think why a URL would be any different on an Android using Chrome, etc; it is just a web address like any you would note and enter. Sadly Blogger appears a bit behind the curve not only on tech but even compatibility. Sorry!
David Davis tweeted: "I have spent the last few days in Washington talking to US Government Trade and Treasury officials encouraging a free trade deal with the UK. Excellent response.
"They have already started on the procedures to allow negotiations to start immediately once we leave the EU in March.
"This will not be possible if we accept the Government's proposed deal with Europe, which will block every avenue of negotiation with America".
Theresa May's assurances that the UK will be free to negotiate independent trade deals seems somewhat hollow.
It wasn't on Ch.4 news either, but, boy what a difference! I normally avoid Ch.4 because Snow's left-wing ranting is even worse than the Beeb's, but no, we were actually allowed to hear dissenting voices - vox pops included 4-5 anti-the 'deal', & an interview with Brexiteer Richard Tice, speaking at some length. A statistic that amazed me was that 90% of UK businesses do not export. On the Beeb 6pm news we had a 5-6 second clip of a businessman who was against May's deal, followed by a succession of CBItes saying how good it was. He was given a fairer hearing on Ch4. Why was Ch.4 so much more objective? Maybe because Corbyn rejects the deal.
Yep the Globalist PC Alliance are slightly conflicted. Some see Corbyn as the way to ensure full on Remain but others like May's BRINO beast with its many tentacles which amounts to Remain. I think the BBC are more for the "Boost May strategy" (pro tem of course) whereas Channel4 are more "Corbyn Now" on the assumption that they can wangle a second referendum somehow in all the ensuing chaos.
If you are feeling Brexited-out & in need of a laugh, even though it's no laughing matter, go to YouTube & search for, "Jacob Rees-Mogg Saves Bexit" 4"01'
OK.. here is the "Cowardice and Duplicity" chart for this week:
1. Theresa May. 2. Michael Gove 3. Andrea Leadsom 4. Dominic Raab (how can you possibly continuing supporting May as PM after you've told us she duped you over the negotiations?). 5. The Massed Choir of Conservative Backbenchers. 6. The Massed Choir of the UK Mainstream Media. 7. The Massed Choir of the BBC. 8. Paul Dacre (YTF isn't he complaining about what "they" have done to his paper?) 9. Geoffrey Cox 10.Theresa May (she's so duplicitous she probably jumped off the number one podium and sneaked round to take up the tenth position).
Only three MPs have emerged with honour. Top I put Ann-Marie Morris, then Mark Francois and finally Mogg (though I don't think he has followed through hard enough).
Re: Rees-Mogg, I think his righteous anger at being lied to caused him to put in his letter prematurely - if there were to be a vote tomorrow, they would lose. I'm hoping they've put the word out to wait until May has lost the vote next month, when many more of the weak & wobblies will be prepared to sign.
I said yesterday it's a time for prayer...and appropriately enough, it now seems (given the complete cowardice of the Conservative MPs) our country's fate hangs by a slender thread - the good Ulster folk of the DUP. May the Good Lord bless their endeavours.
The BBC must sense some sort of victory in their support for Theresa May. Chris Evans on Radio 2 had been 'told'. He admired 'the way she is just getting on with the job'.
Everyone needs to look at the small print of the Exit Agreement. Unfortunately, you won't find it on any of that in the BBC output. They like to concentrate on the personalities involved.
News Channel 9.05. Norman Smith, after a brief account of the DUP's guerrilla action, Norman Smith has just said, "In slightly better news," the no confidence vote appears to have stalled. Er, better news for whom?
If we were in any doubt about which side the BBC has now fallen in the May v Foster impending showdown, I think the below image from the BBC News homepage this morning dispels all doubt.
Gone are the images of May captured pulling gurning faces worthy of the Egremont Fair unofficial world championships, instead now replaced by a kindly, patient, if perhaps slightly patronising demeanour towards the snarling, angry and hateful Foster.
http://oi67.tinypic.com/ftcyyp.jpg
Breathtaking really.
While I'm here, Peter Lilley's ding-dong with 'Reality (ha!) Check' spinmeister-in-chief Chris Morris on Today after the 8am news this morning is well worth a listen.
Lilley held his ground well, and as he quite rightly pointed out as a parting shot, there is no rigour applied to any of the Remain side claims, and nor has there been any applied to the true nature of what May's deal would mean for this country. The BBC's coverage has been utterly benign and lacking any scrutiny whatsoever.
Too many typos! So did I - excellent! The Beeb's problem is that too many of their journalists spend their days, interviewing either each other or outsiders who agree with them - as a result their gladiatorial skills atrophy, so when they encounter a Brexiteer with a brain they get slaughtered! Lol!
Stunning! Lilley showed how to deal with BBC Bias. Perhaps even Humphreys secretly hates the modern BBC - he seemed to do little to protect his BBC buddy from Lilley justified rebuttals.
The Supreme Court has refused the government's application for leave to appeal against the Scottish appeal court's decision to refer to the EU Court the question whether Art 50 notification can be withdrawn before the end of the two-year period. Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction because there isn't a final judgement to appeal against in the case before the Scottish court - the Andy Wightman and Others case against Brexit Secretary.
This reference which will be heard by the EU Court on 27 November is being brought by Scottish members of: the Scottish Parliament (2 Scot Green party), UK Parliament (SNP MP Joanna Cherry) and European Parliament (2 ScotLab MEPs).
Their purpose is to include the option to revoke in the vote in Parliament, so that Parliament can take a decision for us to remain, before the two year period expires. Who else is involved in this case? A name I recognised from a twitter spat I saw a while back on here between Rob Burley and Jolyon Maugham QC. He's a fanatical Remain campaigner who tried early on to use the Irish courts to get a reference to the EU court on revocation and has been extremely active in pursuing the Electoral Commission and others over referendum expenses, as well as pursuing and helping to fund this Scottish case.
Well there is nothing in Article 50 that allows for the process to be stopped.
Article 50 was cobbled together at the last moment by some old duffer - a diplomat I believe. It's as full of holes as a Swiss cheese and as stinky as a French one.
By the way I've always noticed a strong correlation between men who style themselves as Jo and general twattishness. I put forward, as final proof, Jo Johnson.
WATO today...full on bias...let's ignore the Brexiters' road show and lead with NHS...and who shall we have on? Oh, I don't know - how about Sarah Woollaston... yeah good idea because we can ask about the effect of Brexit on the NHS and make sympathetic murmuring noises.
All good!
Seems to me the plan is shaping up. The Anti-Democratic Remainiac Alliance Party ADRAP intend to get a law passed to hold a referendum on May's Abject Surrender Document v Remain...knowing full well that hardly anyone apart from Mrs May will ever vote for it...so, vast numbers of Leavers will simply stay at home. Cunning eh? Well about as cunning as Baldrick's turnip.
But it would be fun to see the Remainer Electoral Commission roll over and say this was a perfectly valid referendum question.
And it will be funny seeing Remainiacs claiming that people understand the issues when hardly anyone - not even the most top flight barrister conversant with all aspects of EU law - has yet absorbed the actual meaning of the 585 pages of dense legalese and/or open ended waffle. No one ever will, probably. Essentially voting for this would be like buying a pig in a poke - the sort that might grow into one of those huge porkers that savages you in the stalls.
Yes, well, when Tony Blair congratulated the Civil Servants for there skill in camouflaging the 'deal'... Bet he's still kicking himself for his slip of the (forked) tongue!
News Channel: Just caught 10 mins of Chris Morris & a woman,whose name I didn't catch, complying with Adolf's orders in the video meme I posted last night! It seems that 'reality check' = project fear writ very large indeed. The answer to the 'consequences of leaving without a deal question' was quite staggering! It was on at about 15.35 - fortunately for my health, I missed most of it!
The UK establishment is pro- remain, pro-globalist and on the liberal-left. The BBC are an instrument of the establishment - a propaganda arm of the ruling elite. Hence their position on May’s Withdrawal Agreement.
I don’t believe it’s a conspiracy, it’s just those in power and those who influence and shape out society have reached a position over the last 50 years that is ‘progressive liberal’.
They would prefer to stay in the EU but they now support May’s proposal as the least worst political outcome.
I’m generalising of course, and there are always critics and opponents but ultimately the deep state described above will win.
I do believe it's a conspiracy & that the Tory whips will be using every dirty trick in the book before next month's vote! "Nice little constituency you've got there - be a shame if it got disappeared by the Parliamentary Constituencies Act!"
May's 'deal' isn't the 'least worst option' for the establishment, it is the best option - rule taker with no voice. There is nothing to stop our establishment lobbying 'Brussels' for yet more rules that would never get through our parliament.
The deal is far worse than vassal state status. It's more like county council, Isle of Wight, status (no disrespect to the lovely, non-sovereign, island I referenced there).
From a search of the BBC News website over the last week or so, I have been unable to find a full transcript of the 585 page Withdrawal Agreement document. There is plenty of commentary but invariably this is limited to cherry-picked soundbites.
There are no detailed references to information such as page or article numbers in any of the BBC reports which might enable us to cross-check their claims. When a document such as this is made public, there is no reason not to refer to specifics.
Shocking dereliction of duty by a fully-funded public broadcaster with billions to spend. What possible reason could they have for not wanting licence fee payers to see the deal in detail? Oh yeah, because said licence fee payers might turn against the deal, having seen it is probably the worst deal in history since the Native Americans sold Manhattan Island to a bunch of European chancers for 500 beads or whatever it was.
We know it because May,the most useless negotiator in history, believes it is the best deal in history.
Why do we think the deal might not be what May says it is?
1. Because May is a proven liar: who said she would not call an election in the last term but then did, who said that Brexit means Brexit when it clearly means BRINO (Brexit in name only). She also duped two Brexit secretaries into thinking they were playing a role in the Brexit negotiations when they clearly were not. She also told us, the public, that the Brexit secretaries were engaged in meaningful negotiations when clearly they were not.
2. She told us for year after year that she was seriously seeking to reduce net (it's only net remember) migration to less than 100,000. She lied. She wasn't serious about it. It was simply an election gimmick designed to reduce the UKIP vote. You can no more believe this lie machine than you can when Gordon Brown declared "British Jobs for British Workers" and then promptly did nothing to secure that outcome. :)
OK we had the Cowardly and Duplicitous chart now let's have the Brave and Stout-Hearted Chart.
1. Jacob Rees-Mogg. He led from the front. If there was no one behind him you may criticise his tactical ability but not his bravery or stout-heartedness.
2. Mark Francois. Tells it like it is with no cherries on top.
3. Boris Johnson. He may not excel in the way that many of us hoped but his resilience in the face of a concerted campaign, largely publicly funded by the BBC, of character assassination and slander has to be admired. He keeps his countenance of good cheer. He ploughs on. And if anyone said 1% of things said about Boris to Carol Cadwalladr there would be hate crime prosecutions taking place up and down the country.
exit : Richard Littlejohn I can't say I have always found Richard Littlejohn to be as articulate and apposite as is here, where he really sums up what is going on:
“We are in the middle of A Very British Coup, an elaborate, well-financed and co-ordinated plot to overturn the democratically expressed will of the British people. It’s being mounted by the Government of the day, aided and abetted by big business… ”]
Spot on.
That's why I said "pray". The coup is supported by most MPs in the biggest party in Parliament. Conservatives - the bulk of them - are in many ways the worst people in Parliament (interested only in their own continued status as MPs, interested only in free trips on the EU gravy train or to corrupt places like Dubai, Saudi Arabia,India and China etc.
We are really only able now to pray that the DUP will pull the plug on pyscho May as soon as possible.
I have to agree. Terrible performance but hugely duplicitous as well.
This PM we now know (though her lies made us think she was a reasonable person doing her best to begin with) is borderline pyschopath and has to be stopped immediately from inflicting any further damage on our country.
The DUP are the only people who can rescue given the appalling display of lily-livered cowardice and overt treachery by Conservative MPs.
Jacob Rees-Mogg is today's target from the BBC News website as they seek to bolster Theresa May. Heading The Papers feature is:
'Newspaper headlines: Threat to Theresa May from Brexit's 'Dad's Army' abates' By BBC News Staff'
This looks to me like a planed pincer move from the Metro and the BBC. The Metro carries the story, and the BBC go big with it, adding photos themselves to enrich the comparisons between Dad's Army and the so-called 'Rebels'. No other newspaper mentions this - so why is it the BBC headline? This is not news, it is though a smear campaign against JRM. We might deduce that he poses a threat to the acceptance of TM's Brexit Withdrawal agreement.
Those whom we might describe as the genuine Brexit protagonists - Boris, JRM, DD and others are being systematically labelled as rebels, far-right, and now Dad's Army. This is a considered move by the BBC, who know that they can tap into the age-old dislike for Conservatives due to privilege, upbringing, education, Englishness, wealth, class, patriotism etc.
This is a ratcheting up in terms of PC ideology, a world in which voices such as those above are ridiculed, and by extension their audience.
.... This looks to me like a planed pincer.... planned
.... This is a ratcheting up in terms of PC ideology, [in] a world in where voices such as those above are ridiculed, and by extension [so are] their audience.
I can’t find this reported anywhere by The BBC - it is probably something they want to bury. Another case of BBC omission, perhaps?
Mrs Merkel warned today: "We'll hopefully have a European Council on Sunday to sign the exit treaty and discuss future relations."
But she vowed that Britain won't be able to leave a customs union deal without Brussels say so - further dashing hopes for Brexiteers that the deal can be altered.
She told the German Parliament: "We have placed value on the fact Britain can't decide unilaterally when it ends the state of the customs union, but that Britain must decide this together with the EU."
Was unfortunate in catching some of Jonathan Coe's dreadful Guardianesque slop, Middle England:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0001791
The BBC blurb claims that "Jonathan Coe's new novel is the novel for Brexit Britain". No it isn't, it's the novel for Guardian readers to comfort themselves that their worldview (by turns nastily ideological and then weirdly sentimental)is correct.
It was lumpen, plodding politics disguised as literature.
As the BBC admits without a hint of irony:
"It paints a portrait of modern England up to Brexit: a country of nostalgia and delusion; of bewilderment and barely-suppressed rage."
The BBC are taking all these last minute obstacles with Spain, France and Germany at face value. Not one journalist is questioning whether this and May’s dash across to Brussels today is a sham to con the public into thinking it was hard fought and not won right until the last minute.
Just how much credible last minute negotiating can you do in two hours? Not much I would have thought. (In fact, it’s probable that we concede more concessions, especially on fishing)
The BBC seem to want this over the line as much as May.
Please look at it and realise how far we have already gone down the road to joining and supporting a common defence policy and EU army as a part of the EU at the expense of our own sovereignty. Many of the key decisions have been taken since the 2016 referendum. We are told that it has been due in the main to civil servants actions rather than parliament-taken decisions.
If the content of the above is to be believed, then it is clear that the civil service under the direction of the government have carried on throughout the period since the referendum in June 2016 just as if nothing had changed. in terms of our EU compliance. They have simply disregarded the electorate's majority vote to leave the EU.
As pointed out on Biased BBC, Nick "Shameless" Bryant has now gone into full lying mode. He claims that Trump characterised "hate-spewing racists in Charlottesville as "decent people"."
In fact I can't even find a reference to that speech-marked phrase of "decent people".
What he appears to have said was that there were “innocent” and “very fine people” marching alongside neo-Nazis and KKK, he insisted. That's from the Far Left Vox website. Trump's analysis would appear to be spot-on.
Most of the Far Left websites don't give his own words, only paraphrases or mixtures of paraphrases and his own words. But I am sure if he had said what Nick Bryant claims he said then Vox would have reported it.
John Piennaar is the Beast of Bias. Apparently there are "Hardline Brexiters" (booohhh!) but no "Hardline Remainers" (hooray!).
Anna Soubry given the sofest of rides on cushions fit for a princess....
Then it's Mark Francois. I am impressed by him. And he's got a great technique for dealing with BBC interviewers...every sentence or two he'll say he's about to explain why in a moment...really messes with the interviewer's concentration (while they are trying to work that out, he's ploughing on and they're not interrupting)...it's like sending out chaff from a Lancaster bomber in the war - really confuses the enemy. And boy are the BBC the enemy.
Democratic patriots either of a left of centre, or centrist or right of centre position need to be clear-eyed about what is going on.
This is nothing less than a coup against the people.
The people voted "the wrong way".
Knowing the history of the British people, it was evident to the pro-EU pro-globalist elite that they couldn't treat us like they treated the Dutch, the Danes, the Irish and the French and demand an immediate second vote. Had they done so then 52-48 would have become 60-40. Nope...this required more planning...
We now see just how detailed this planning has been.
We now have the absurd position where not a single newspaper in the land represents the 17 million plus Leave voters. Not a single one! You have the Telegraph that is wavering, havering and generally not taking a srong line. That's it. The Mail and Express have both - suddenly - wow! - decided to become pro-May/pro-Remain papers.
Of course BBC, Sky and ITV just pump out pro-Eu pro-Remain propaganda 24/7. That is a fact of life.
The most amazing thing is that despite this tsunami of propaganga every (dodgy, pro-EU) poll finds the pro-Leave vote is pretty solid.
Muss be becozz we is unedukated, unlike doze wunnerful finkers on the Gordian and at da BBZ.
Next step - the rules for the "Rigged Rerun" of the referendum. Lower the voting age; allow EU non-Commonwealth citizens to vote; and ensure the Remainiac Electoral Commission puts up a bogus question (no probs! - they will be only too happy to oblige!!).
My question to the exceedingly small band of pro-Brexit politicians is: "When are you going to call us out on the street to express our extreme displeasure at this turn of events, in particular with May's Abject Surrender Deal and with the bias of the media generally?"
From the above clip posted on BBBC by English Lass, it's clear that the civil service haven't so much as broken step in their move towards closer alliance with the EU. I have always seen this as the problem: If the government allied with a majority of institutions, charities, academia, MSM (including the BBC), public sector bosses etc who are working towards a future where closer EU integration is the goal, then there is sufficient momentum in the direction of travel that a democratic vote for a 180 degree change direction can simply be ignored.
I agree with you MB, we are witnessing the death of democracy in this country. A shake-up of the the cosy Westminster love-in is required. Protests outside every constituency office (checking first of course that our MPs are there) might relay the strength of feeling.
I really now believe that unless democratic politicians call us out on the street to protest then we are lost.
Mogg...I was going to write Mogg and...before I realised Mogg has got no one with him (except maybe Francois to be fair)...needs to grow some balls and just call on us to protest at this denial of democracy.
Do you remember the good old days back in the 80s and 90s when the BBC used to send intrepid reporters to tell us about how the vote of the people was being stolen by various aged left wing kleptocracies?
And now?
The BBC are waving through the left wing kleptocrats as they move to cancel a key democratic vote of the people...
Last month I saw a press release about a review of licence fee exemption for over-75 year olds. I think this is it, though it may have changed since: 'This discussion paper by Frontier looks at the changing landscape around intergenerational fairness since free over-75s TV licences were introduced in 2000.'https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2018/concessionary-tv-licences# Why would the BBC frame a review of licence fee arrangements in such a prejudicial way? And who promotes such a concept? The Resolution Foundation with its Intergenerational Fairness Commission and its vicar David Willetts, never off the BBC. The discussion paper is from Frontier Economics, run by none other than Gus O'Donnell an old Treasury boy from the Brown years.
Intro: 'There has been considerable debate in recent years around the idea of ‘intergenerational fairness’—a view that younger people have been hit hardest by recent economic events (such as the financial crisis and its aftermath) while older people have been relatively protected. The UK population is also ageing rapidly. In 1996, 15.9% of people were aged 65 or over, reaching 18% by 2016 and a projected to reach 20.5% by 2026.3 Together, these factors have provoked fears of a rupturing in the ‘intergenerational contract’ (House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee, 2016; Resolution Foundation 2018).'
Conclusions: 'Over the last two decades, older households have on average seen a marked improvement in their absolute and relative living standards. Incomes, wealth and life expectancy have improved significantly. Pensioners are now the least likely age group to live in poverty. And older households report higher well-being on a range of metrics. These are changes for the better, but it has been argued that that they have come about at the expense of younger people through explicit policy choices. Part of this story has been the introduction and preservation of targeted benefits for older people, including the concessionary television licence.' http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/frontier-discussion-paper.pdf
There's nothing like setting out the result you want before you do the report. O'Donnell has now produced a 'proper' report 'REVIEW OF OVER-75S FUNDING' full of bar charts and so on, which I haven't read yet (do I need to?) and the BBC has introduced it in markedly different terms from the earlier press release: 'The BBC commissioned Frontier Economics to explore longer-term funding options relating to the over-75s TV licence concession, and asked Frontier to prepare a report that addresses the following questions: What are the implications of reinstating the existing concession, and what are the key features of a case for reforming the concession? Are there particular options for reform which Frontier Economics recommends that the BBC should be thinking further about?'... https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2018/frontier-over-75s.
The BBC like to keep tabs on everyone who watches TV either through the licence or through i-player registration. With increasing numbers of over 75s, we shouldn't be surprised that they are touting this change, because numbers are dropping below their radar.
They were discussing the review on Feedback just now with James Purnell another old boy from the Blair era. Roger Bolton seemed quite exercised about the amount of money to be lost to making programmes. Purnell avowed that the BBC has no preferred option and is open minded. No mention of the ghastly term 'intergenerational fairness'. Hm...I wonder why it's been dropped. Have they had complaints about it? They did mention that AgeUK is opposed to the idea of withdrawing the concession.
Oh, re target audience, I forgot to mention Roger Bolton said next week's Feedback will be discussing whether the BBC is obsessed with chasing a young audience. I'd say so.
The over-75s still need a licence, they just don't pay for it. The 'young' either don't watch the BBC or if they they don't pay for it. Somewhere in the middle are a few people who watch and pay for the BBC. I don't buy this demographics stuff - aging population etc. Life expectancy has stalled, (too many non-natives now?), and new schools are being built. For an organisation that is 'short on money' the BBC does an awful lot of expanding into ever more divisive areas. Wouldn't 'community cohesion' be a lot better if we ALL were able to watch a cracking good family show on a Saturday night?
Gus the Spiv rejected 200 years of wise counsel and decided to throw his weight, as ex head of the civil service, firmly behind one side of a fiercely contested overtly political debate (ie the Brexit debate). It was unprecedented and of dubious constitutional propriety, just like Obama going out on the stump night after night as an ex President, something which had never before happened. The anti-democrats don't care about such things as long as the can press down on the scales and get the result they want.
This graph puts the number of Conservative MPs who are "Pro-EU" at 10. Yes...10...out of 302. 10! As opposed to 65 ERG members. But that doesn't deter the BBC from having Woollaston, Clarke, Soubry, Grieve and Rudd on our screens and our radios pretty much on a 24/7 basis.
What will happen if MPs reject Theresa May's deal?
The photo of lightning striking Westminster suggests some sort of Armageddon scenario as far as the BBC ar concerned.
The article ends:
"Right now, it looks like the government's deal cannot get through the Commons.
But the mood in Westminster could shift quickly in the current pandemonium."
Pandemonium is an odd word to use...I think it reflects what is going on inside the heads of BBC-Guardian types. They don't like this uncertainty and can't really decide what course to back.
Odd indeed. Chambers: pandemonium noun 1 any very disorderly or noisy place or assembly. 2 noise, chaos and confusion. pandemonic adj. ETYMOLOGY: 17c: John Milton's name for the capital of Hell in Paradise Lost, from Greek pan- all + daimon demon.
And if there was any of the above, I have a few ideas of who has been instrumental in causing or exacerbating it.
Astonishing Newsnight...after the "nightmare" section (loaded against Leave), they give Rory Stewart a free run at persuading a representative sample of the UK population in the studio. Actually only one in the sample supports May's deal - that was a surprise but I object on principle to the idea of inviting government ministers on to a BBC programme to attempt to persuade voters directly.
Yes - total lack of balance. Rory Stewart is a a government minister. Not just any minister, but one who has, just recently been unscrupulous enough to invent the 'statistic' that 80% of voters support May's deal.
Not a single Leaver MP was present - why no Boris or Rees-Mogg to point out the failings of the deal spelled out in the ERG document?
Of the six voters three were described as Remainers and three as Brexiters but, hold hard, one of the Leavers is already a convert to May's sell-out, so the line-up is still more unbalanced.
Once again the BBC shows how stupid it feels the British public is!
There is s headline on the front page of the BBC website today which says ;
ReplyDeleteBBC experts on the draft deal
When to open up the story it’s just a bunch of Brexit analysis and opinions by BBC reporters and correspondents.
Since when did these journalists become experts?
Just typical of the BBCs self importance.
When they do get in experts it's Institute of Government (board reads like a Remainer roll of honour - completely Blarite) and Chatham House (nest of vipers).
DeleteTheir Facebook pages are full of 'what you need to know', 'we make sense of it', etc.
DeleteFew are buying.
Have they put the draft agreement on the website? That's what I'm after. I'm not really interested in the opinions of a long list of BBC reporters and editors.
ReplyDeleteIf you need a link...
Deletehttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/progress-on-the-uks-exit-from-and-future-relationship-with-the-european-union
A member of the public having an opinion! Good grief. Why on earth would you want to do that when the helpful people at the BBC are on hand to tell you what to think? They can even check reality.
DeleteThank you for the link, MB. I did actually look on the government site and all I could find were statements by the PM. I did find a copy of the draft on Conservative Home. It would have been nice if the publicly funded broadcaster had put it up on the news site.
DeleteAbsolutely Anon - but they want us to trust a Newsnight panel of 4 Remainers in interpreting the document for us. I think the whole agreement is suspect because while you are in transition or in no deal , it's the ECJ that decides on things and as we know with Supreme Courts, they can make up the law as they go along. In other words - we have no sovereignty at all.
DeleteThe other day I asked about creating hyperlinks on comment threads.
ReplyDeleteI just highlighted that one (TVM) and was about to cut and paste when a window popped up saying 'Open in another window'? So I did. Worked a treat. Well, this time.
We might invite you to be our techie Peter!
DeleteDescribing it as 'a deal' is fake news. This is a Withdrawl Agreement, setting out the conditions for us to actually leave the EU.
ReplyDeleteThe Lisbon Treaty gave member states an option to leave the EU (Article 50) but this 'deal' takes away our freedom to leave. Even if we complete this process there is no guarantee that we will get a 'trade deal' with the EU. The EU will, however, walk away with at least £39 billion, some 'deposit'!
I just listened to Theresa May at the 5.15pm press conference.
ReplyDeleteI noted three things
a. Theresa May always goes to Laura Kuenssberg first for questions.
b. No one asked about the backstop and how we escape the customs union when the EU can veto it.
c. Afterwards Vicky Young, BBC head political reporter summarised by giving a strong and impassioned defence of Theresa May and how she handled it in a mature way.
Yes, it looks as though the whole shabby crew, from Emily Maitlis down to the evening news crowd, has decided to be nice to & about Theresa - Kuenssberg's saccharine tones at the press conference were particularly nauseating.
DeleteThink, on the whole, I find Kuenssberg easier to take when she's in her default, fish-wife/shrew mode!
DeleteAlso, I'm pretty sure the News mentioned Raab, Esther McVey, & the two junior ministers but not the two PPSs or Rehman Chisti, a Vice Chairman of the Party - making 7 in all.
The thing I notice is that no one from any part of the UK MSM media asks her about the Irish Republic's PM's categoric statements that he will not put customs posts up on the N Ireland border in event of a no deal Brexit and the reports that he has the backing of the EU stance. Well of course they don't because it makes a nonsense of her whole negotiating strategy based on the idea that the NI Border issue was a "real" problem as opposed to a clever negotiating ploy by the Franco-German alliance.
Delete"stance" = "re that stance"
Delete6pm News: Jacob Rees-Mogg answering questions from the press; the BBC camera is placed so that he is not looking into it (less impact) & the volume is low - the technique usually reserved for Farage. But never mind, the camera can linger lovingly on the loony festooned in EU flags, the Beeb's favourite crackpot.
ReplyDeleteAs a child naughty Theresa once ran through a corn field.
ReplyDeleteAs a grown up, she's running through the corn field of the nation with a blazing torch, setting light to everything about her.
She needs to be stopped. Now.
This is a serious matter of national interest.
You can't have a pyscho running the country.
Whatever the BBC says...
And having heard the Remainer panel again tonight on Newsnight it's pretty obvious the BBC have decided to die in a ditch with May.
Just watching Sky Press Preview. I see the Mail has turn full Remainer, as if we didn't know.
ReplyDeleteWe now have a media in both TV and Press than simply don't reflect people's views.
Yes because it's now being edited by the former editor of the Mail on Sunday, I believe, which has been full Remain all along.
DeleteThe Mail on Sunday wasn't full Remain all along. It switched DURING the EU Referendum campaign. How? Why? What? No one ever answered those questions.
DeleteAs for your comment...logical thinking - you don't get appointed editor of the Daily Mail unless you have the backing of the power behind your newspaper (shareholders, directors etc) which basically comes down to money as we aren't talking about principled people. We are talking about people who might disguise their control through any number of financial arrangements.
Logical thinking is now pretty much illegal of course.
It's simpler to put it this way: 52% of the UK electorate supported Brexit. Where is the 52% of media supporting it now?
Basically there is no one now in the UK MSM supporting Brexit consistently .The Express might not yet have turned but with Mirror ownership it soon will.
This is an absolute disgrace but our Remainer PM is just laughing at us as she sets the whole country alight.
What things are not being aired on the MSM? - with BBC doing their absolute utmost to suppress these issues...
ReplyDelete- There is no trade deal with the EU in place, despite May's promises. Nothing.
- We are paying £49 billion for nothing...since the EU has not guaranteed anything in return.
- She has surrendered on the NI situation.
- Leo Varadkar's statements that he will never put in a hard border in event of a no deal Brexit. Or the EU's assurances that he won't have to...So it's all BS about the NI border.
- The ECJ is in control of all the key aspects of the deal... and we all know that Supreme Courts can make up law as they wish. So this is a complete surrender of sovereignty.
Wrong key - £49 billion = £40 billion
DeleteWhat are the BBC telling you in their mood music, vocal tone, body language and script? They are telling you to get behind May.
ReplyDeleteWell at that point you should think v. carefully. We know the BBC supports or has supported child grooming on its premises, tax evasion, poor health and safety procedures (people have died), Euro membership, no borders, mass immigration (including undocumented or illegal migration), racism (only non-white racism of course), genderist supremacism (only feminism of course) and failure to protect staff (arm biting of juniors by senior member of staff).
Is the BBC any kind of reputable or responsible organisation? NO!!!
Today on Today...
ReplyDeleteMishal Husain interviews a head honcho from the banking sector - one of those extremist "no borders" globalist types. He had obviously been selected under No 10's media grid to come on and tell us a "no deal" would be an economic disaster and catastrophe (they need some new words, may I suggest "armageddon") of unparalleled severity.
You might have thought she was interviewing a child about her cat's litter of kittens for all the forensic journalistic skills on display from Mishal. She didn't even ask him the obvious question: "Why should we believe you? George Osborne and Mark Carney told us there would be a recession if we voted Brexit and there hasn't been one? Wages and employment are both up." It's only when she has the Israeli ambassador on that she sounds engaged.
There was a little hidden moment of amusement. At one point the head honcho guy was clearly groping mentally for a phrase like "it's the right thing for the country" or "it's in the country's interests" or even "it's in our interests"...But of course being a globalist banker that's not how he thinks - in fact such sentiments are the very antithesis of his way of thinking and he couldn't quite utter the phrase, as it would have made his flesh crawl. Or maybe he was just remembering Macron's injunction that "nationalism" is the ultimate political sin.
We shouldn't underestimate the vice-like grip that Angela Merkel seems to have over Theresa May. It was Merkel she ran to before the Chequers Agreement was made public - indeed before she put it to the Cabinet for consideration.
ReplyDeleteYesterday, I caught a clip of Merkel saying that (I paraphrase) the negotiation for Brexit had been completed and that she wouldn't allow them to be reopened with an alternative Conservative 'team'.
I suspect that all along, Theresa May has been playing for the EU side - in league with the BBC. She has always been a Remainer, and despite her protestations that she is delivering Brexit to 'The British People', in fact she is nothing more than a Quisler, acting under the direction of the EU.
The BBC News website did cover this story yesterday:
Deletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46228454
However, alongside the photo of Merkel, is the headline:
... 'Brexit: EU leaders dismiss talk of renegotiating draft agreement' ...
Here is the usual BBC tactic of siding with the EU by referring to 'EU leaders' instead of Merkel by name. It is made to sound more authoritative - as if leaders of all 27 countries are speaking in unison.
The BBC are currently using every trick in the book to protect May and her "deal" (Abject Surrender Document or AbSurD for short ). Shoehorning Remainers in everwhere, soft interviewing of pro-deal, pro-May types, not asking searching questions re the deal,not worrying her deal will lead to a breakdown in the Good Friday Agreement, not reminding us of May's broken promises,not mentioning Olly Robins was a Stalinist...
DeleteMerkel lies about everything. One lie at the end of her political career matters not. In a rare moment of honesty May admitted in Parliament that the EU had offered us a binary choice of an EEA type deal or a Canada style deal.
In a scenario where let's say Dominic Raab emerged as leader and appointed a real Brexit negotiator - let's say David Davis, who then asked for a Canada style deal, of course the EU would renegotiate and in double quick time though we might now need say a 3 month extension on the Article 50 deadline.
The longer this goes on, and the longer Theresa May stays, promoting as she does this absurd deal, and, with Conservative MPs dithering, sitting on their hands, then the more damage she is doing to both democracy and the future prospects for the Conservative Party. They will become unelectable due to distrust.
DeleteMerkel seems to treat democracy as a minor nuisance. She is at heart an authoritarian. Meanwhile, May said yesterday that she has known from the beginning what she wanted, as if this was in some way reassuring or evidence of accomplishment. It is far from reassuring and I found it quite alarming. She has strung us along and the endlessly repeated form of words about leaving and taking back control of money etc was her way of doing it and in effect just a fig leaf. What we are getting from her is the Lib Dem and Labour rationalisations and glosses put on the decisive vote to leave.
DeleteThis draft agreement allows the EU machine to insert itself into UK affairs, including the NI arrangements, via its member Ireland; our fishing waters; our trading and competitiveness; our immigration policy - all of these will be grist for the negotiation of the final settlement between us and the EU. And May handed them the upper hand, just in case they didn't have it already, by caving in at the beginning to their definition of the structure and conditions of the negotiations and by her submissive agreeableness on the financial demands.
The EU excels in wrapping the fly in a spider's web of stipulations, rules, regulations, protocols, clauses and treaties. They have a whole bureaucracy devoted to it. It's their meat and drink.
The Reality Check team are up to their usual mischief - BBC Reality is in a parallel universe and is now just a propaganda piece for BBC liberal-left politics.
ReplyDeleteThe headline of the latest tells you all you need to know about what’s inside ;
Brexit: What do Theresa May’s Tory enemies object to in the deal?
Yes, mischief is a good description. He claims on his Twitter account (which displays all the usual braindead left-liberal anti-Trump bias)to be part of a fact checking service! lol!!
DeleteHis article is full of surmise, speculation and thinly disguised disdain.
First off "Tory party" is not the factual name of the party he is examining. There is no such party. A small point, but if this is a fact checking service, then it is of some importance.
He sneeringly refers to "the Brexit faithful" and "Brexit believers". Can you imagine him referring to the "EU faithful" or "EU acolytes" - no neither can I. The truth is that it is the EU followers who are far more akin to a religious fraternity than Brexiters.
What's the phrase "divorce settlement" doing in a factual piece? This is an emotive description (divorce is painful - you likely were once in love, cf Mark Mardell) of the withdrawal agreement. Perhaps he doesn't want to look too closely at Article 50 because if he does, this "two stage" process will be seen to have no warrant in that Article.
And why refer to the "EU rules" we will have to follow. These aren't "rules" they are law. The EU makes law. Everyone who knows anything about the EU, knows that is the case, so why do the BBC try to hide it with anodyne words likes rules and regulations?
Good heavens. Enemies! Tory enemies. Isn't characterising politicians with differing views on important policy matters as enemies 'hate speech'? I hope there are formal complaints to the publicly funded broadcaster about this low form of smear passing for journalism.
ReplyDeleteLaura Kuenssberg’s latest tweet
ReplyDeleteMmmm... 'Steve may be a lovely man but this appointment just epitomises the utter farce of this govt and how toxic the Brexit post has become. Across the party there is total despair' - Barclay is well liked and seen as on his way up for sure, but it's certainly a big jump
Now that’s definitely personal opinion, not analysis.
‘The utter farce of this govt’ is political bias in my book.
True, but she puts all that in single quotes...she should have made clear they are not her words.
DeleteBBC's John Simpson wrote in his novel about the head of news who tried to get rid of him.
ReplyDeleteAnd who is responsible for the present Brexit agreement?
'After Nick Timothy, Theresa May’s former chief of staff, wrote that she “never believed Brexit can be a success”, his former No 10 colleague Matthew O’Toole tweeted: “Nick is perhaps the single most influential author of this deal. Every one of the shrill threats and red lines he dictated drove the negotiations towards this end. If it’s a bad deal, he broke it.”'
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/londoners-diary/the-londoner-john-simpsons-novel-revenge-on-bbc-a3992066.html
She is adopting the BBC trick of #bbcquotes whereby folk can get fooled into thinking what someone else has said has the heft and endorsement of the world's most trusted and beloved broadcaster.
ReplyDeleteThe way they quote is also many many and varied, and too often not what I would suggest is actual reporting (even if who they quote and what bit can offer a wealth of editorial integrity opportunity) namely, 'As X, PR weasel for pond weed NGO Y has said, "wibble"."
My website/forum is still in the naming stage; 'Sack of Rats' has a nice ring in a 'House of Card' homagey way.
ReplyDeleteGood luck with that. As the once BBC-sceptic and EU-sceptic media (Telegraph, Mail, Express and others) dissolve into the undifferentiated ooze of PC virtue signalling we will need sites like yours. I have an image of us crowding around them, bright fires in a Dark Age forest clearing offering some temporary warmth and comfort before the barbarians fall on us again come dawn. :)
DeleteDon't write off the Telegraph yet - today's letters offer no comfort whatever to the May camp.
DeleteMSM print, TV and internet are all pro-Brexit now mainly because they are based in London and employ those living in the London bubble. Not sure why the Sun is an outlier.
DeleteNot so, Sir T - read today's article by Telegraph's star reporter/commentator, Allison Pearson, "Act in the national interest, Theresa May, and resign now." Didn't you mean 'pro-remain'?
DeleteYes! Pro-remain. That’s the second time I’ve done that on this blog.
DeleteA Freudian slip maybe...
Fear not, that's what over-exposure to the Beeb does to people!
DeleteSnap! Whatever I need to do to post at best locates it erratically.
ReplyDeleteSee what happens with this URL link...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/bbc_website_public_account_termi
Worth following. Though I think I know what will happen already. There are several others out there not happy that the BBC is exempting itself left, left and left of centre by default.
During the night I listened to "Business Matters" on the BBC World Service. A guest was Peter Morici, Professor at the Robert H. Smith School of Business, in Maryland. Listen to him tear into the EU and the T May proposals here.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w172w0q0lj06fkc
It starts at 8:58 to 10:46. I do not think that he will be a guest very often.
The best television on radio!
ReplyDeleteFascinating insight into Theresa May's mental state on Sky's video version of Nick Ferrari's phone-in with her this morning. The Telegraph's Michael Deacon commented a few months ago on the way in which, when she's prevaricating, May's mouth, "moves around her face as though its trying to escape." Well, today it appeared to be trying to get out of Colditz castle. You can catch the 32 minute-long phone-in on YouTube.
Sorry, 'LBC phone-in!'
Delete"This is the death of democracy"
ReplyDeleteJulia Hartley-Brewer gives her opinion on the Abject Surrender Document. And I have to say it pretty much matches my opinion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bqGyHL8WJI
Yes, but only if May gets it through Parliament. Maybe, just maybe, enough Tory MPs will have the sense to write a no confidence letter to the '22 Committee & depose her before she can do any more damage - despite the BBCs best efforts on her behalf.
DeleteLet's hope there is at least a substantial enough group of patriots prepared to do the deed. She's extremely dangerous...I know that might strike some as alarmist, given her vicar's daughter persona. But her character has slowly been revealed to us: duplicitous, deceptive, secretive, dishonest...Remember she was negotiating behind David Davis's back. She's done the same with Dominic Raab. Remember one moment she's telling us about how migration can impact negatively on communities while she presides over migration running at over 600,000. Remember how she kept saying "Brexit means Brexit". We now see it can mean nothing of the sort under her control,instead meaning something like colonial status with rule from Brussels.
DeletePeople with poorly managed Type 1 diabetes are liable to suffer serious mental health symptoms like anxiety, depression and eating disorders, especially in their teens. Her diabetes wasn't identified until quite late in adulthood so by definition it would have been poorly managed prior to that.
https://www.endocrineweb.com/professional/type-1-diabetes/mental-health-disorders-are-common-linked-poorly-controlled-diabetes-te
We seem to attract these sort of people to high office - Gordon Brown was another one (one moment it was "British jobs for British workers" the next it was "that bigoted woman").
Several of the traits you mention appear on the Hare Psychopathy Checklist.
DeleteThis Spectator article giving chapter and verse with regard to the Theresa May Exit Agreement makes for a cautionary tale:
ReplyDeletehttps://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/11/the-top-40-horrors-lurking-in-the-small-print-of-theresa-mays-brexit-deal/
Unbelievable! Or rather, should I say, all too believable given everything we know...
DeleteIf we needed further confirmation that it is an Abject Surrender Document, well Steerpike provides it.
I don't mind admitting I was fooled by May. I thought she had some concept of honour, liked the British people and understood why Brexit had to mean Brexit.
There is no doubt she is running through the corn field now, flattening the corn, destroying the hard work of a good people and inviting in the kids from the neighbouring farm to do likewise.
She is extremely dangerous. This cannot stand. It would be better if we just joined the EEA via EFTA. That might be BRINO as well but it would not be abject surrender. It would mean we had some control, some influence, and we would get control of our fisheries and our agriculture.
I wish I had believed the "far right", "socially divisive" and "extreme" politicians like Farage and Batten who told us May had no intention of implementing Brexit and was planning the biggest ever sell out of the British people. They were right and I was wrong.
A copy of this '40 Horrors' article should be posted to every household in the UK so that we all know what Theresa May's Brexit Deal actually means. I don't doubt its accuracy.
DeleteIt's no use expecting the BBC to set out the terms of Theresa May's Brexit deal in their original form - as the Spectator article does. No. We are instead spoon-fed a cosier version which glosses over the unpalatable, and which portrays our Prime Minister as a skilled negotiator, an expert in pragmatism and the 'art of the possible', when in fact on matters concerning the ECJ in particular she seems to have been most economical with the truth.
DeleteMB, I fell for it, too, for a while - I just couldn't believe that a PM would be so unwise as to tell provable lies. And then there was Chequers...
DeleteI guess we were warned by all those years of "reducing migration to the tens of thousands" starting as a pledge, becoming a target, then an aspiration and finally an airy nothingness...all under her watch.
DeleteArthur - You are right about how the BBC staff's "forensic skills of analysis" desert them at this vital moment. Give them a Trump statement and they will parse it to the nth degree. But they are describing this mammoth document in the vaguest terms. Not sure I've heard an actual quote from it yet.
DeleteI referred to the ECJ because:
DeleteAt PMQs on 24th October .... 'Speaking during Prime Minister’s Question Time this afternoon Mr Rees-Mogg said: “There have been reports today that the government is willing to agree that the European Court of Justice will the final arbiter in most cases arising from Brexit.
“As this would be inconsistent with the Prime Minister’s previous commitments, will she authoritatively deny it?”....
Theresa May replied .... '“I haven’t seen those particular reports, but if they are as he has suggested then they are wrong. We have been very clear in the work that we have been doing, about ensuring that in the future the European Court of Justice does not have jurisdiction in the UK.' ....
But, when we look at the Spectator Horrors, we find that the Brexit Agreement say this:
.... 'The European Court of Justice is decreed to be our highest court, governing the entire Agreement – Art. 4. stipulates that both citizens and resident companies can use it. Art 4.2 orders our courts to recognise this. “If the European Commission considers that the United Kingdom has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaties or under Part Four of this Agreement before the end of the transition period, the European Commission may, within 4 years after the end of the transition period, bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union”. (Art. 87)
The jurisdiction of the ECJ will last until eight years after the end of the transition period. (Article 158).
The UK will still be bound by any future changes to EU law in which it will have no say, not to mention having to comply with current law. (Article 6(2))
Any disputes under the Agreement will be decided by EU law only – one of the most dangerous provisions. (Article 168). This cuts the UK off from International Law, something we’d never do with any foreign body. Arbitration will be governed by the existing procedural rules of the EU law – this is not arbitration as we would commonly understand it (i.e. between two independent parties). (Article 174)' ...
I can't understand why the BBC haven't examined this contradiction. We are being hoodwinked into supporting an agreement that enables the ECJ to be maintained as the highest legal authority with a say over Brexit, and more importantly future liabilities resulting from all manner of bureaucratic machinations from the EU.
For the duplicitous sociopath Theresa May "in the future" means not starting now but possibly in 100 years' time when the ECJ has been replaced by some other body and therefore her statement will not, technically, be a lie.
DeleteNews Channel 6pm News - Brexit: Interview with Sir Alan Duncan
ReplyDelete(pro- May's betrayal), and a couple of vox pops from Cheshire - both defensive of that nice Mrs May & no dissenting voice - they should have asked me!
They should have asked Julia Hartley-Brewer!
DeleteWhen is someone going to call a mass demonstration of Brexit-supporting folk? Haven't been on a demo in 45 years but will definitely be up for this multi-million march - absolutely career ending (for May). That's the problem with the JRM types - or indeed the Boris types - they have no idea how to link up with the people and exert pressure. Farage might just be capable of doing something.
Good idea! Trouble is if 700,000 of us turn out, the Beeb & the rest of the extreme-left media (!) will claim there were only 80,000 of us.
DeleteWith the right person at the head, I think it would be 7 million, not 700,000. I think she and the deal (Abject Surrender Document) would be gone before the demo actually took place.
DeleteIf only. Re: your Julia H-B comment, I have this vision of a pushy Beeb reporter waddling away wearing a microphone suppository!
DeleteA Scottish court case on whether the article 50 notification can be revoked by the UK unilaterally, has been referred to the EU court for an expedited hearing, scheduled for 27 November. Meanwhile the government has applied to the Supreme Court for leave to appeal against the decision of the Scottish court - which had refused to give leave to appeal. The Supreme Court heard the application yesterday. The decision will be expedited in view of the urgency.
ReplyDeleteNote that the reference asks explicitly, if the answer is yes, what effect that would have 'relative to the Member State remaining within the European Union'.
Is it another ex model with a few million to spare (from somewhere) who brought this case as well?
DeleteThe ECJ would have to say"But only once" otherwise a rebellious member state could play cat and mouse with the EU as a kind of protest.
Is there no end to it? I forgot to say. Andy Wightman & others. He's an MSP of the Green Party.
DeleteThey've thought of everything, so your point would be covered where they ask what conditions it would be subject to, if it is declared to be revocable.
Talk of Julia Hartley-Brewer makes me think of my fantasy Cabinet - feel free to add or get out the eraser and amend:
ReplyDeletePM - Julia Hartley-Brewer
Chancellor - Jacob Rees-Mogg
Foreign Secretary - Douglas Murray
Brexit Secretary - Nigel Farage
Leader of the House - Boris Johnson
Home Secretary - Gerard Batten
Minister for Sport and Culture - Rod Liddle
Minister for Justice - Tommy Robinson
Minister for Devolution - Kate Hoey
Minister without Portfolio - Lord Pearson
Minister of Education - Katy Hopkins
Minister of Health - Frankie Boyle
Minister for Social Services - Frank Field
Just realised it's a bit light in the ethnic minorities department so:
DeleteMinister for Equality - Raheem Kassam
Minister for Women - Ayaan Hirsi Ali (we'll invite her in any make her a UK citizen if she isn't already)
Minister for Appearing on BBC Progs at Short Notice- Kwarze Kwarteng.
OK, I'm working on a taxonomy of Prime Ministers.
ReplyDeleteI have various categories:
1 Psychologically normal range
2 Psychologically abnormal range
3 With very challenging formative experiences
4 Narcissistic
5 Ideological
6 Pragmatic
7 Patriotic
8 Egocentric (not the same as narcissitic in my view. You can be narcissistic and patriotic but not egocentric and patriotic).
9 Creative
10 Non-creative
I think May is 2,6,8,and 10.
Cameron was 1,3, 4, 6, 7 and 9.
Brown was 2,3, 4, 8 and 10.
How about Atlee?
1, 5, 6, 7 and 9.
Lol. Excellent casting. The only thing is, with Boris in charge of organising the business of the House, chaos would reign and besides, who'd be more eloquent and more entertaining in the role of court jester / Speaker? Dennis Skinner could be one of his deputies. Leader could be Nadine Dorries or Bill Cash.
ReplyDeleteI concede to my honourable anon.
DeletePlease add Norman Tebbit as Secretary for Employment and Bicycles.
DeleteDone!
DeleteIf the Conservative Party MPs cannot summon up 48 letters to trigger a leadership election then the Conservative Party is finished. Kaput. Dead. No longer a living and breathing party.
ReplyDeleteI agree. There seem to be a good number of Conservative MPs who prefer out of self-interest to sit on the fence. This dithering will cost the Conservative Party dear. Who wants an MP who dithers at such an important time.
DeleteIf we have reached a fork in the road, then at present there is an unsightly spectacle of self-serving MPs milling around uncertain of which way to go. To use another analogy, if a homing pigeon dithers and is slow to return to the coop (in this case MPs to their constituencies), their necks would be wrung as they had proved themselves worthless.
What are BBC "comedians" going to do now, since the Mail has gone full on PC-pro-EU-Eddie-Izard-sort-of-thing? I am really looking forward to hearing how the News Quiz run with this:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6401671/Zac-Goldsmith-24th-Tory-MP-join-Brexiteer-coup-against-May.html
The Lemming Letter Club!!!
The new editor at The Mail has wasted no time in turning the papers politics through 180 degrees. He is alienating the majority of his readership.
DeleteThat headline is like the sort of childish venom that the Evening Standard would resort to under its current editor, Osborne, in his continuing mega sulk at not being offered a job by May.
DeleteAnybody who fears that the mainstream media are entirely pro-Remain should have a look at today's Sunday Telegraph - May's days are numbered.
ReplyDeleteI sincerely hope. The Sunday Times has a damning indictment from Raab - although humiliatingly for him, it involves admitting he was duped...after David Davis said he was duped. Bit of a dupe fest.
DeleteI hope you are right Sis, but I fear that insufficient Conservative MPs will stand up to be counted. Most of them are Remainers at heart, unwilling to give up their position within the Westminster bubble, where as we know there is only the one point of view: 'By hook or by crook, we must remain a part of the great enterprise that is the EU'.
DeleteIn the UK now, it is impossible to have any influence from outside London. Through public services, the civil service, through charities, through institutions, all key decisions are made in the Capital. As a budding MP, to be away from that buzz is unthinkable.
The posturing within their constituencies is simply a means to an end. The voters who put the MP into Westminster may as well have 'MUGS' written on their backs.
The only hope now is that once the full realisation of the terms of the Brexit deal have been spelt out to the general public, then the outcry from the majority of voters can be heard - even within the cosseted surroundings of Westminster - sufficiently loudly to awaken MPs from their slumbers. Remain voters must feel equally let down, able to see that this proposed agreement leaves us in a worsened position than when we were.
... Remain voters must feel equally let down, able to see that this proposed agreement leaves us in a worsened position than when we were ... a fully paid up member of the EU.
DeleteLooks potentially interesting if anyone who saw it at the time used page capture as well. From BBBC...
ReplyDeleteAuthor: G.W.F.
Comment:
[img]https://twitter.com/DaveLeeBBC/status/1063864345656881152/photo/1[/img]
Transcript of the TOP 40 HORRORS courtesy of English Lass 17th Nov at 7 34pm on BBBC:
ReplyDeletehttps://biasedbbc.org/blog/2018/11/16/weekend-open-thread-17-november-2018/comment-page-2/#comments
The more people that can read this '40 Horrors' summary, the better. Consistently, the BBC talk about Theresa May negotiating a deal, overriding her own Brexit Secretary. There hasn't been any meaningful negotiation, which might ensure a genuine Brexit. The deal, written by the EU with their own interests at its centre, is being imposed upon us - now, and way into the future. We should all wake up to the reality here.
DeleteWas a very pleasant change listening to Nigel Farage on LBC this morning, rather than sticking with the usual BBC PC pro-EU agenda rubbish. Farage is not infallible not necessarily a details man. But I felt a strange sense of calm come over me as I was given the opportunity to hear some rare common sense come over the airwaves.
ReplyDeleteUsually at that time on BBC after Marr it's that awful Sunday Morning Live PC programme but it wasn't on today. I'm not sorry but I wondered why. Has it been ditched because it's had falling audiences? Or are they saving more money? It was replaced by Homes under the Hammer. Not exactly an improvement.
DeleteThe BBC is using a speech by Macron in Germany to bolster May. In my opinion, it’s a thinly disguised attempt to influence readers and persuade them that the EU is a power for good against the populist uprising.
ReplyDeleteWhilst Macron didnt mention Trump at all in his speech , the BBC introduced him into the article and cast him as the bogeyman implying that the speech was aimed at Trump.
These are classic propaganda tricks by the new masters of the art.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46254393
Well I think there was no doubt Trump was the target, after he declared himself a nationalist during a recent speech. Apparently it is OK for Sturgeon to be a nationalist, but not Trump as far as BBC and Macron are concerned.
DeleteI have given up on rational analysis of events. Now is the time for prayer.
ReplyDeleteI say that as one none too religious.
But for every season turn, turn, turn.
I expect people felt like this in May 1940. I don't apologise for the comparison. Yes, the short term danger is less (no prospect of SS troops jackbooting down Whitehall) but the longer term peril is not dissimilar: the moral collapse of our nation and its effective erasure from the face of history.
So yes, pray for your country...you have to when you consider that the fate of the nation hangs on such a pussilanimous bunch of place seekers as the Conservative Parliamentary Party.
Sorry pusillanimous...just because the UK is about to go down the drain, doesn't mean we should get sloppy with the spelling.
DeleteSpeaking of spelling, Katty is at her funniest when getting shocked, seriously...
Deletehttps://twitter.com/kattykaybbc/status/1064239958339330057?s=21
"no prospect of SS troops jackbooting down Whitehall"
DeleteWhat possible use could Germany have for one million low-IQ men of fighting age?
MB: I expect your 'pussilanimous' was a freudian slip - you were obviously thinking that Larry the Cat would make a better PM than Theresa May.
Delete'pusillanimous' ... Yes, it's a good description of the Conservative Party. I prefer spineless and gutless and senseless (particularly in their capacity for listening to their voters) - leaving only their thick skin to hold them together.
DeleteThe BBC clearly considers that Boris is still a threat to the Remainiac cause & continues to drip-feed negative stories about him - today's News pages gleefully reveal that his water cannon have been sold for scrap at a £300,000 loss. The BBC reminds us that Theresa May, as Home Secretary, banned their use & used the purchase to ridicule Boris - she should be reminded of that next time our cities are burning. And where was she during the riots? - abroad, cowering in her holiday villa. Sadiq Khan is also gloating. He shouldn't be - his failure to control knife-crime means that the next riots will be far more serious than the last.
ReplyDeleteSays Adam Fleming, BBC Brussels reporter;
ReplyDeleteMichel Barnier has gone from finger-wagger extraordinaire to salesman-in-chief.
His remarks about the Withdrawal Agreement could have been scripted by the British government to help sell the deal: it's a fair compromise, the EU has moved towards the British position on the Irish backstop which, by the way, won't even be needed because we are going to have a deep and special relationship.
Well Barnier would do, wouldn’t he! It’s a superb deal for the EU. Why didn’t Fleming mention that?
https://twitter.com/KattyKayBBC/status/1064496107739332610
ReplyDeleteDear Katty, I saw this, and thought of....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=493pL_Vbtnc
This gleeful BBC?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2491654/BBC-lost-100m-travel-guide-flop-Corporations-commercial-arm-accused-getting-carried-away-highly-optimistic-plans-Lonely-Planet-series.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4182492/BBC-spent-100m-public-money-chasing-licence-dodgers.html
Brave.
Katty could surely see Don Lemon nudged off that panel?
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/OrwellNGoode/status/1064496605993287680
Peter - I hardly ever get to see your links because, on my Android tablet, they're dead & I only fire up the desktop a couple of times a week. I can't see any way to copy & paste on the tablet. Any ideas?
DeleteSisyphus - I wish I did. I just copied my link on my iPhone, ported it to Safari and it worked. I can’t think why a URL would be any different on an Android using Chrome, etc; it is just a web address like any you would note and enter. Sadly Blogger appears a bit behind the curve not only on tech but even compatibility. Sorry!
DeleteThanks Peter, I'll just have to wind up my laptop!
DeleteConservative Voice seems to be better in touch with Conservative grass roots than the Cabinet, and is urging a leadership challenge:
ReplyDeletehttps://order-order.com/2018/11/19/group-launched-davis-fox-raab-calls-may-go/#disqus_thread
Where is this story on the BBC News website?
ReplyDeleteDavid Davis tweeted: "I have spent the last few days in Washington talking to US Government Trade and Treasury officials encouraging a free trade deal with the UK. Excellent response.
"They have already started on the procedures to allow negotiations to start immediately once we leave the EU in March.
"This will not be possible if we accept the Government's proposed deal with Europe, which will block every avenue of negotiation with America".
Theresa May's assurances that the UK will be free to negotiate independent trade deals seems somewhat hollow.
It wasn't on Ch.4 news either, but, boy what a difference! I normally avoid Ch.4 because Snow's left-wing ranting is even worse than the Beeb's, but no, we were actually allowed to hear dissenting voices - vox pops included 4-5 anti-the 'deal', & an interview with Brexiteer Richard Tice, speaking at some length. A statistic that amazed me was that 90% of UK businesses do not export.
DeleteOn the Beeb 6pm news we had a 5-6 second clip of a businessman who was against May's deal, followed by a succession of CBItes saying how good it was. He was given a fairer hearing on Ch4.
Why was Ch.4 so much more objective? Maybe because Corbyn rejects the deal.
CBI-tes!
DeleteYep the Globalist PC Alliance are slightly conflicted. Some see Corbyn as the way to ensure full on Remain but others like May's BRINO beast with its many tentacles which amounts to Remain. I think the BBC are more for the "Boost May strategy" (pro tem of course) whereas Channel4 are more "Corbyn Now" on the assumption that they can wangle a second referendum somehow in all the ensuing chaos.
DeleteIf you are feeling Brexited-out & in need of a laugh, even though it's no laughing matter, go to YouTube & search for,
ReplyDelete"Jacob Rees-Mogg Saves Bexit" 4"01'
An interesting analysis of leadership qualities on Newsnight?
ReplyDeleteNope, a ten minute "Hate Trump" and "Boost May" session. Repulsive Fake News as always.
OK.. here is the "Cowardice and Duplicity" chart for this week:
ReplyDelete1. Theresa May.
2. Michael Gove
3. Andrea Leadsom
4. Dominic Raab (how can you possibly continuing supporting May as PM after you've told us she duped you over the negotiations?).
5. The Massed Choir of Conservative Backbenchers.
6. The Massed Choir of the UK Mainstream Media.
7. The Massed Choir of the BBC.
8. Paul Dacre (YTF isn't he complaining about what "they" have done to his paper?)
9. Geoffrey Cox
10.Theresa May (she's so duplicitous she probably jumped off the number one podium and sneaked round to take up the tenth position).
Only three MPs have emerged with honour. Top I put Ann-Marie Morris, then Mark Francois and finally Mogg (though I don't think he has followed through hard enough).
DeleteYou should add Sheryll Murray, the Conservative MP for South East Cornwall to your list who have emerged with honour.
DeleteMB I'm sad to say that Penny Mordaunt has to be added to your list of infamy - I used to think she was better than that.
DeleteRe: Rees-Mogg, I think his righteous anger at being lied to caused him to put in his letter prematurely - if there were to be a vote tomorrow, they would lose. I'm hoping they've put the word out to wait until May has lost the vote next month, when many more of the weak & wobblies will be prepared to sign.
DeleteI said yesterday it's a time for prayer...and appropriately enough, it now seems (given the complete cowardice of the Conservative MPs) our country's fate hangs by a slender thread - the good Ulster folk of the DUP. May the Good Lord bless their endeavours.
ReplyDeleteRepeat after me...
ReplyDeleteMay the Good Lord decide...
"May the Good Lord decide..."
That May may
"That May may..."
"not carry out her dastardly plan"
"...not carry out her dastardly plan..."
...to keep us tied to the EU
"to keep us tied to the EU."
In DUP we trust
"In DUP we trust"
Because we effing must
Thanks to the useless Tories
"Thanks to the useless Tories..."
The BBC must sense some sort of victory in their support for Theresa May. Chris Evans on Radio 2 had been 'told'. He admired 'the way she is just getting on with the job'.
ReplyDeleteEveryone needs to look at the small print of the Exit Agreement. Unfortunately, you won't find it on any of that in the BBC output. They like to concentrate on the personalities involved.
News Channel 9.05. Norman Smith, after a brief account of the DUP's guerrilla action, Norman Smith has just said, "In slightly better news," the no confidence vote appears to have stalled. Er, better news for whom?
ReplyDeleteIf we were in any doubt about which side the BBC has now fallen in the May v Foster impending showdown, I think the below image from the BBC News homepage this morning dispels all doubt.
ReplyDeleteGone are the images of May captured pulling gurning faces worthy of the Egremont Fair unofficial world championships, instead now replaced by a kindly, patient, if perhaps slightly patronising demeanour towards the snarling, angry and hateful Foster.
http://oi67.tinypic.com/ftcyyp.jpg
Breathtaking really.
While I'm here, Peter Lilley's ding-dong with 'Reality (ha!) Check' spinmeister-in-chief Chris Morris on Today after the 8am news this morning is well worth a listen.
Lilley held his ground well, and as he quite rightly pointed out as a parting shot, there is no rigour applied to any of the Remain side claims, and nor has there been any applied to the true nature of what May's deal would mean for this country. The BBC's coverage has been utterly benign and lacking any scrutiny whatsoever.
In fact, Guido is already on to the Lilley interview too.
DeleteCan be found here:
https://order-order.com/2018/11/20/peter-lilleys-scrap-bbc-reality-check/
Yes, he socked it to him. I enjoyed that.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteToo many typos!
DeleteSo did I - excellent! The Beeb's problem is that too many of their journalists spend their days, interviewing either each other or outsiders who agree with them - as a result their gladiatorial skills atrophy, so when they encounter a Brexiteer with a brain they get slaughtered!
Lol!
Stunning! Lilley showed how to deal with BBC Bias. Perhaps even Humphreys secretly hates the modern BBC - he seemed to do little to protect his BBC buddy from Lilley justified rebuttals.
DeleteAt risk of one of my steam-driven Mac-URLs, a Chris is not doing too well here either:
ReplyDeletehttps://uk.reuters.com/article/us-lloyd-brexit-commentary/commentary-the-prolonged-torture-that-is-brexit-idUKKCN1NL233
In fact the BBC 'Special Stuff' EdGuds on ticks and sighs must be one of the thicker chapters.
Sadly I can no longer ask questions of him as, say, Mr. Acosta can again now ask POTUS, as he has blocked me for not letting him off the hook.
Tres BBC, as we say in Brussels.
Speaking of BBC Editorial Guidelines, and the asking of questions, guess what has just come in...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/529504/response/1262044/attach/html/4/RFI20182025%20Response.pdf.html
That is brilliant. Several awesome sound bites there!
ReplyDeleteAnd the stuttering Morris attempts to counter only matched by Humph fading his protest out at the end the perfect complements.
Bill should hold a seance and have a word with Steve.
ReplyDeleteI think it is mainly Blogger. The shenanigans I have to get up to simply to post on my desktop.... Grrr.
Also it will not log my request too be informed of follow-up comments, so if I miss any apologies.
Plus my replies above to a poster have a habit of being sent to the end. Grrr. Grrr.
That was too Sisyphus. And... QED.
ReplyDeleteNe'er mind!
DeleteThe Supreme Court has refused the government's application for leave to appeal against the Scottish appeal court's decision to refer to the EU Court the question whether Art 50 notification can be withdrawn before the end of the two-year period. Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction because there isn't a final judgement to appeal against in the case before the Scottish court - the Andy Wightman and Others case against Brexit Secretary.
ReplyDeleteThis reference which will be heard by the EU Court on 27 November is being brought by Scottish members of: the Scottish Parliament (2 Scot Green party), UK Parliament (SNP MP Joanna Cherry) and European Parliament (2 ScotLab MEPs).
Their purpose is to include the option to revoke in the vote in Parliament, so that Parliament can take a decision for us to remain, before the two year period expires.
Who else is involved in this case? A name I recognised from a twitter spat I saw a while back on here between Rob Burley and Jolyon Maugham QC. He's a fanatical Remain campaigner who tried early on to use the Irish courts to get a reference to the EU court on revocation and has been extremely active in pursuing the Electoral Commission and others over referendum expenses, as well as pursuing and helping to fund this Scottish case.
Well there is nothing in Article 50 that allows for the process to be stopped.
DeleteArticle 50 was cobbled together at the last moment by some old duffer - a diplomat I believe. It's as full of holes as a Swiss cheese and as stinky as a French one.
http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html
Here's a link (above) for the treaty.
By the way I've always noticed a strong correlation between men who style themselves as Jo and general twattishness. I put forward, as final proof, Jo Johnson.
WATO today...full on bias...let's ignore the Brexiters' road show and lead with NHS...and who shall we have on? Oh, I don't know - how about Sarah Woollaston... yeah good idea because we can ask about the effect of Brexit on the NHS and make sympathetic murmuring noises.
ReplyDeleteAll good!
Seems to me the plan is shaping up. The Anti-Democratic Remainiac Alliance Party ADRAP intend to get a law passed to hold a referendum on May's Abject Surrender Document v Remain...knowing full well that hardly anyone apart from Mrs May will ever vote for it...so, vast numbers of Leavers will simply stay at home. Cunning eh? Well about as cunning as Baldrick's turnip.
But it would be fun to see the Remainer Electoral Commission roll over and say this was a perfectly valid referendum question.
And it will be funny seeing Remainiacs claiming that people understand the issues when hardly anyone - not even the most top flight barrister conversant with all aspects of EU law - has yet absorbed the actual meaning of the 585 pages of dense legalese and/or open ended waffle. No one ever will, probably. Essentially voting for this would be like buying a pig in a poke - the sort that might grow into one of those huge porkers that savages you in the stalls.
DeleteYes, well, when Tony Blair congratulated the Civil Servants for there skill in camouflaging the 'deal'...
DeleteBet he's still kicking himself for his slip of the (forked) tongue!
My comment on Blair: 'their' not 'there' - think I've succumbed to May-Brexit derangement syndrome!
DeleteI didn't hear that but I can imagine it only too well!
DeleteBTW where is Mandelson? Has he decided he is poison to Remain? We never hear from him these days only his parrots like Adonis.
News Channel: Just caught 10 mins of Chris Morris & a woman,whose name I didn't catch, complying with Adolf's orders in the video meme I posted last night! It seems that 'reality check' = project fear writ very large indeed. The answer to the 'consequences of leaving without a deal question' was quite staggering! It was on at about 15.35 - fortunately for my health, I missed most of it!
ReplyDeleteThe UK establishment is pro- remain, pro-globalist and on the liberal-left. The BBC are an instrument of the establishment - a propaganda arm of the ruling elite. Hence their position on May’s Withdrawal Agreement.
DeleteI don’t believe it’s a conspiracy, it’s just those in power and those who influence and shape out society have reached a position over the last 50 years that is ‘progressive liberal’.
They would prefer to stay in the EU but they now support May’s proposal as the least worst political outcome.
I’m generalising of course, and there are always critics and opponents but ultimately the deep state described above will win.
I do believe it's a conspiracy & that the Tory whips will be using every dirty trick in the book before next month's vote! "Nice little constituency you've got there - be a shame if it got disappeared by the Parliamentary Constituencies Act!"
DeleteMay's 'deal' isn't the 'least worst option' for the establishment, it is the best option - rule taker with no voice.
DeleteThere is nothing to stop our establishment lobbying 'Brussels' for yet more rules that would never get through our parliament.
The deal is far worse than vassal state status. It's more like county council, Isle of Wight, status (no disrespect to the lovely, non-sovereign, island I referenced there).
DeleteFrom a search of the BBC News website over the last week or so, I have been unable to find a full transcript of the 585 page Withdrawal Agreement document. There is plenty of commentary but invariably this is limited to cherry-picked soundbites.
ReplyDeleteThere are no detailed references to information such as page or article numbers in any of the BBC reports which might enable us to cross-check their claims. When a document such as this is made public, there is no reason not to refer to specifics.
Shocking dereliction of duty by a fully-funded public broadcaster with billions to spend. What possible reason could they have for not wanting licence fee payers to see the deal in detail? Oh yeah, because said licence fee payers might turn against the deal, having seen it is probably the worst deal in history since the Native Americans sold Manhattan Island to a bunch of European chancers for 500 beads or whatever it was.
DeleteRepeat after me:
ReplyDeleteWe know this "deal" is crock of shite.
We know it because May,the most useless negotiator in history, believes it is the best deal in history.
Why do we think the deal might not be what May says it is?
1. Because May is a proven liar: who said she would not call an election in the last term but then did, who said that Brexit means Brexit when it clearly means BRINO (Brexit in name only). She also duped two Brexit secretaries into thinking they were playing a role in the Brexit negotiations when they clearly were not. She also told us, the public, that the Brexit secretaries were engaged in meaningful negotiations when clearly they were not.
2. She told us for year after year that she was seriously seeking to reduce net (it's only net remember) migration to less than 100,000. She lied. She wasn't serious about it. It was simply an election gimmick designed to reduce the UKIP vote. You can no more believe this lie machine than you can when Gordon Brown declared "British Jobs for British Workers" and then promptly did nothing to secure that outcome. :)
OK we had the Cowardly and Duplicitous chart now let's have the Brave and Stout-Hearted Chart.
ReplyDelete1. Jacob Rees-Mogg. He led from the front. If there was no one behind him you may criticise his tactical ability but not his bravery or stout-heartedness.
2. Mark Francois. Tells it like it is with no cherries on top.
3. Boris Johnson. He may not excel in the way that many of us hoped but his resilience in the face of a concerted campaign, largely publicly funded by the BBC, of character assassination and slander has to be admired. He keeps his countenance of good cheer. He ploughs on. And if anyone said 1% of things said about Boris to Carol Cadwalladr there would be hate crime prosecutions taking place up and down the country.
exit : Richard Littlejohn
ReplyDeleteI can't say I have always found Richard Littlejohn to be as articulate and apposite as is here, where he really sums up what is going on:
“We are in the middle of A Very British Coup, an elaborate, well-financed and co-ordinated plot to overturn the democratically expressed will of the British people.
It’s being mounted by the Government of the day, aided and abetted by big business… ”]
Spot on.
That's why I said "pray". The coup is supported by most MPs in the biggest party in Parliament. Conservatives - the bulk of them - are in many ways the worst people in Parliament (interested only in their own continued status as MPs, interested only in free trips on the EU gravy train or to corrupt places like Dubai, Saudi Arabia,India and China etc.
We are really only able now to pray that the DUP will pull the plug on pyscho May as soon as possible.
https://altnewsmedia.net/opinion/theresa-may-presents/
ReplyDelete"The worst PM in living memory."
I have to agree. Terrible performance but hugely duplicitous as well.
This PM we now know (though her lies made us think she was a reasonable person doing her best to begin with) is borderline pyschopath and has to be stopped immediately from inflicting any further damage on our country.
The DUP are the only people who can rescue given the appalling display of lily-livered cowardice and overt treachery by Conservative MPs.
How to deal with the Media:
ReplyDelete1. Follow Peter Lilley - don't take any sh*t...
2. Follow Trump and always have an incredibly noisy helicopter in place when you invite the press to ask questions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvSsLa73JiQ
Jacob Rees-Mogg is today's target from the BBC News website as they seek to bolster Theresa May. Heading The Papers feature is:
ReplyDelete'Newspaper headlines: Threat to Theresa May from Brexit's 'Dad's Army' abates' By BBC News Staff'
This looks to me like a planed pincer move from the Metro and the BBC. The Metro carries the story, and the BBC go big with it, adding photos themselves to enrich the comparisons between Dad's Army and the so-called 'Rebels'. No other newspaper mentions this - so why is it the BBC headline? This is not news, it is though a smear campaign against JRM. We might deduce that he poses a threat to the acceptance of TM's Brexit Withdrawal agreement.
Those whom we might describe as the genuine Brexit protagonists - Boris, JRM, DD and others are being systematically labelled as rebels, far-right, and now Dad's Army. This is a considered move by the BBC, who know that they can tap into the age-old dislike for Conservatives due to privilege, upbringing, education, Englishness, wealth, class, patriotism etc.
DeleteThis is a ratcheting up in terms of PC ideology, a world in which voices such as those above are ridiculed, and by extension their audience.
Two typos:
Delete.... This looks to me like a planed pincer.... planned
.... This is a ratcheting up in terms of PC ideology, [in] a world in where voices such as those above are ridiculed, and by extension [so are] their audience.
I can’t find this reported anywhere by The BBC - it is probably something they want to bury. Another case of BBC omission, perhaps?
ReplyDeleteMrs Merkel warned today: "We'll hopefully have a European Council on Sunday to sign the exit treaty and discuss future relations."
But she vowed that Britain won't be able to leave a customs union deal without Brussels say so - further dashing hopes for Brexiteers that the deal can be altered.
She told the German Parliament: "We have placed value on the fact Britain can't decide unilaterally when it ends the state of the customs union, but that Britain must decide this together with the EU."
Don't like the sound of that, Sir T! Where did you find it?
DeleteIt’s in The Sun today
DeleteThanks! Not surprised & it rings true.
DeleteWas unfortunate in catching some of Jonathan Coe's dreadful Guardianesque slop, Middle England:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0001791
The BBC blurb claims that "Jonathan Coe's new novel is the novel for Brexit Britain". No it isn't, it's the novel for Guardian readers to comfort themselves that their worldview (by turns nastily ideological and then weirdly sentimental)is correct.
It was lumpen, plodding politics disguised as literature.
As the BBC admits without a hint of irony:
"It paints a portrait of modern England up to Brexit: a country of nostalgia and delusion; of bewilderment and barely-suppressed rage."
Right up the biased BBC's street!
The BBC are taking all these last minute obstacles with Spain, France and Germany at face value. Not one journalist is questioning whether this and May’s dash across to Brussels today is a sham to con the public into thinking it was hard fought and not won right until the last minute.
ReplyDeleteJust how much credible last minute negotiating can you do in two hours? Not much I would have thought. (In fact, it’s probable that we concede more concessions, especially on fishing)
The BBC seem to want this over the line as much as May.
I have lifted this must-see clip from BBBC - English Lass:
ReplyDeletehttps://biasedbbc.org/blog/2018/11/18/start-the-week-thread-19-november-2018/comment-page-4/#comment-953667
Please look at it and realise how far we have already gone down the road to joining and supporting a common defence policy and EU army as a part of the EU at the expense of our own sovereignty. Many of the key decisions have been taken since the 2016 referendum. We are told that it has been due in the main to civil servants actions rather than parliament-taken decisions.
If the content of the above is to be believed, then it is clear that the civil service under the direction of the government have carried on throughout the period since the referendum in June 2016 just as if nothing had changed. in terms of our EU compliance. They have simply disregarded the electorate's majority vote to leave the EU.
DeleteAs pointed out on Biased BBC, Nick "Shameless" Bryant has now gone into full lying mode. He claims that Trump characterised "hate-spewing racists in Charlottesville as "decent people"."
ReplyDeleteIn fact I can't even find a reference to that speech-marked phrase of "decent people".
What he appears to have said was that there were “innocent” and “very fine people” marching alongside neo-Nazis and KKK, he insisted. That's from the Far Left Vox website. Trump's analysis would appear to be spot-on.
Most of the Far Left websites don't give his own words, only paraphrases or mixtures of paraphrases and his own words. But I am sure if he had said what Nick Bryant claims he said then Vox would have reported it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46284269?ns_mchannel=social&ocid=socialflow_twitter&ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_source=twitter
WATO Watch -
ReplyDeleteJohn Piennaar is the Beast of Bias. Apparently there are "Hardline Brexiters" (booohhh!) but no "Hardline Remainers" (hooray!).
Anna Soubry given the sofest of rides on cushions fit for a princess....
Then it's Mark Francois. I am impressed by him. And he's got a great technique for dealing with BBC interviewers...every sentence or two he'll say he's about to explain why in a moment...really messes with the interviewer's concentration (while they are trying to work that out, he's ploughing on and they're not interrupting)...it's like sending out chaff from a Lancaster bomber in the war - really confuses the enemy. And boy are the BBC the enemy.
Democratic patriots either of a left of centre, or centrist or right of centre position need to be clear-eyed about what is going on.
ReplyDeleteThis is nothing less than a coup against the people.
The people voted "the wrong way".
Knowing the history of the British people, it was evident to the pro-EU pro-globalist elite that they couldn't treat us like they treated the Dutch, the Danes, the Irish and the French and demand an immediate second vote. Had they done so then 52-48 would have become 60-40. Nope...this required more planning...
We now see just how detailed this planning has been.
We now have the absurd position where not a single newspaper in the land represents the 17 million plus Leave voters. Not a single one! You have the Telegraph that is wavering, havering and generally not taking a srong line. That's it. The Mail and Express have both - suddenly - wow! - decided to become pro-May/pro-Remain papers.
Of course BBC, Sky and ITV just pump out pro-Eu pro-Remain propaganda 24/7. That is a fact of life.
The most amazing thing is that despite this tsunami of propaganga every (dodgy, pro-EU) poll finds the pro-Leave vote is pretty solid.
Muss be becozz we is unedukated, unlike doze wunnerful finkers on the Gordian and at da BBZ.
Next step - the rules for the "Rigged Rerun" of the referendum. Lower the voting age; allow EU non-Commonwealth citizens to vote; and ensure the Remainiac Electoral Commission puts up a bogus question (no probs! - they will be only too happy to oblige!!).
My question to the exceedingly small band of pro-Brexit politicians is: "When are you going to call us out on the street to express our extreme displeasure at this turn of events, in particular with May's Abject Surrender Deal and with the bias of the media generally?"
From the above clip posted on BBBC by English Lass, it's clear that the civil service haven't so much as broken step in their move towards closer alliance with the EU. I have always seen this as the problem: If the government allied with a majority of institutions, charities, academia, MSM (including the BBC), public sector bosses etc who are working towards a future where closer EU integration is the goal, then there is sufficient momentum in the direction of travel that a democratic vote for a 180 degree change direction can simply be ignored.
DeleteI agree with you MB, we are witnessing the death of democracy in this country. A shake-up of the the cosy Westminster love-in is required. Protests outside every constituency office (checking first of course that our MPs are there) might relay the strength of feeling.
DeleteI really now believe that unless democratic politicians call us out on the street to protest then we are lost.
ReplyDeleteMogg...I was going to write Mogg and...before I realised Mogg has got no one with him (except maybe Francois to be fair)...needs to grow some balls and just call on us to protest at this denial of democracy.
Soon as he does we will be out, I guarantee.
Do you remember the good old days back in the 80s and 90s when the BBC used to send intrepid reporters to tell us about how the vote of the people was being stolen by various aged left wing kleptocracies?
ReplyDeleteAnd now?
The BBC are waving through the left wing kleptocrats as they move to cancel a key democratic vote of the people...
that's how much things have changed.
Last month I saw a press release about a review of licence fee exemption for over-75 year olds. I think this is it, though it may have changed since:
ReplyDelete'This discussion paper by Frontier looks at the changing landscape around intergenerational fairness since free over-75s TV licences were introduced in 2000.'https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2018/concessionary-tv-licences#
Why would the BBC frame a review of licence fee arrangements in such a prejudicial way? And who promotes such a concept? The Resolution Foundation with its Intergenerational Fairness Commission and its vicar David Willetts, never off the BBC. The discussion paper is from Frontier Economics, run by none other than Gus O'Donnell an old Treasury boy from the Brown years.
Intro:
'There has been considerable debate in recent years around the idea of ‘intergenerational fairness’—a view that younger people have been hit hardest by recent economic events (such as the financial crisis and its aftermath) while older people have been relatively protected. The UK population is also ageing rapidly. In 1996, 15.9% of people were aged 65 or over, reaching 18% by 2016 and a projected to reach 20.5% by 2026.3
Together, these factors have provoked fears of a rupturing in the ‘intergenerational contract’ (House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee, 2016; Resolution Foundation 2018).'
Conclusions:
'Over the last two decades, older households have on average seen a marked improvement in their absolute and relative living standards. Incomes, wealth and life expectancy have improved significantly. Pensioners are now the least likely age group to live in poverty. And older households report higher well-being on a range of metrics.
These are changes for the better, but it has been argued that that they have come about at the expense of younger people through explicit policy choices. Part of this story has been the introduction and preservation of targeted benefits for older people, including the concessionary television licence.'
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/frontier-discussion-paper.pdf
There's nothing like setting out the result you want before you do the report. O'Donnell has now produced a 'proper' report 'REVIEW OF OVER-75S FUNDING' full of bar charts and so on, which I haven't read yet (do I need to?) and the BBC has introduced it in markedly different terms from the earlier press release:
'The BBC commissioned Frontier Economics to explore longer-term funding options relating to the over-75s TV licence concession, and asked Frontier to prepare a report that addresses the following questions:
What are the implications of reinstating the existing concession, and what are the key features of a case for reforming the concession?
Are there particular options for reform which Frontier Economics recommends that the BBC should be thinking further about?'...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2018/frontier-over-75s.
Could it be that if the demographics of the referendum are to be believed, the BBC no longer sees the over 75s as their target audience.
DeleteThe BBC like to keep tabs on everyone who watches TV either through the licence or through i-player registration. With increasing numbers of over 75s, we shouldn't be surprised that they are touting this change, because numbers are dropping below their radar.
DeleteThey were discussing the review on Feedback just now with James Purnell another old boy from the Blair era. Roger Bolton seemed quite exercised about the amount of money to be lost to making programmes. Purnell avowed that the BBC has no preferred option and is open minded. No mention of the ghastly term 'intergenerational fairness'. Hm...I wonder why it's been dropped. Have they had complaints about it? They did mention that AgeUK is opposed to the idea of withdrawing the concession.
DeleteOh, re target audience, I forgot to mention Roger Bolton said next week's Feedback will be discussing whether the BBC is obsessed with chasing a young audience. I'd say so.
DeleteThe over-75s still need a licence, they just don't pay for it. The 'young' either don't watch the BBC or if they they don't pay for it. Somewhere in the middle are a few people who watch and pay for the BBC.
DeleteI don't buy this demographics stuff - aging population etc. Life expectancy has stalled, (too many non-natives now?), and new schools are being built.
For an organisation that is 'short on money' the BBC does an awful lot of expanding into ever more divisive areas. Wouldn't 'community cohesion' be a lot better if we ALL were able to watch a cracking good family show on a Saturday night?
Gus the Spiv rejected 200 years of wise counsel and decided to throw his weight, as ex head of the civil service, firmly behind one side of a fiercely contested overtly political debate (ie the Brexit debate). It was unprecedented and of dubious constitutional propriety, just like Obama going out on the stump night after night as an ex President, something which had never before happened. The anti-democrats don't care about such things as long as the can press down on the scales and get the result they want.
ReplyDeleteThis graph puts the number of Conservative MPs who are "Pro-EU" at 10. Yes...10...out of 302. 10! As opposed to 65 ERG members. But that doesn't deter the BBC from having Woollaston, Clarke, Soubry, Grieve and Rudd on our screens and our radios pretty much on a 24/7 basis.
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/UKurbanite?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1065210803777875968&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fbiasedbbc.org%2Fblog%2F2018%2F11%2F22%2Flong-weekend-thread-23-november-2018%2F
What will happen if MPs reject Theresa May's deal?
ReplyDeleteThe photo of lightning striking Westminster suggests some sort of Armageddon scenario as far as the BBC ar concerned.
The article ends:
"Right now, it looks like the government's deal cannot get through the Commons.
But the mood in Westminster could shift quickly in the current pandemonium."
Pandemonium is an odd word to use...I think it reflects what is going on inside the heads of BBC-Guardian types. They don't like this uncertainty and can't really decide what course to back.
Odd indeed.
DeleteChambers: pandemonium noun 1 any very disorderly or noisy place or assembly. 2 noise, chaos and confusion. pandemonic adj.
ETYMOLOGY: 17c: John Milton's name for the capital of Hell in Paradise Lost, from Greek pan- all + daimon demon.
And if there was any of the above, I have a few ideas of who has been instrumental in causing or exacerbating it.
Astonishing Newsnight...after the "nightmare" section (loaded against Leave), they give Rory Stewart a free run at persuading a representative sample of the UK population in the studio. Actually only one in the sample supports May's deal - that was a surprise but I object on principle to the idea of inviting government ministers on to a BBC programme to attempt to persuade voters directly.
ReplyDeleteYes - total lack of balance. Rory Stewart is a a government minister. Not just any minister, but one who has, just recently been unscrupulous enough to invent the 'statistic' that 80% of voters support May's deal.
DeleteNot a single Leaver MP was present - why no Boris or Rees-Mogg to point out the failings of the deal spelled out in the ERG document?
Of the six voters three were described as Remainers and three as Brexiters but, hold hard, one of the Leavers is already a convert to May's sell-out, so the line-up is still more unbalanced.
Once again the BBC shows how stupid it feels the British public is!
Or, come to think of it, how desperate the Remain-fudge camp is getting!
Delete