Tuesday 14 August 2018

Not the only one thinking that

BBC Newsdesk and Planning editor Neil Henderson is getting it in the neck for mentioning the Corbyn/Netanyahu Twitter-storm in a newspaper roundup. Corbyn's supporters think the Daily Mail should be ignored altogether by the BBC.

I’m no fan of ‘no-platforming as a strategy, but how in God’s name did the BBC see fit to wheel in loudmouth Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi, notorious ‘asaJew’, agitator, and representative of next to no-one, to speak for comrade Corbyn in the absence of any proper Labour Party spokespersons. One assumes they were all, understandably, stumped for words. 

I have to say that the newly elected president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, Marie van der Zyl, sounds like a very nice person but she is a hopeless speaker. 

Does Jeremy Corbyn know anything about Islam, or about history?  His academic credentials are zilch and the reflexive way he resorts to making vague sweeping generalisations when confronted smacks of panic. His response to the latest revelation - you could see the cogs starting to grind into action - was to turn on the familiar eye-bulging outrage and then bluster unconvincingly about “peace”. The history of the Middle East with a visceral loathing of Israel is Seumas Milne's area of expertise. 

Today Programme at just after 6:30 am. I won’t transcribe the whole lot, but Martha Kearney introduces the item, bringing in “Our political correspondent Jonathan Blake………” who uses fistfuls of value-judgment-laden phrases from the get-go.
“…………..Which the Mail claims shows Mr Corbyn taking part in the laying of a wreath………”
A claim? The photograph clearly shows Corbyn holding the wretched wreath. He. was. present. holding. a. wreath.
“….but yesterday as you say Benjamin Netanyahu waded in to this row, tweeting that……”
Why use the term ‘waded in?” when the offending incident directly concerned a gross insult to his country, unlike some other foreign interventions we’re always hearing about. 
“………So quite an extraordinary intervention by a foreign leader in what is really a UK political row but Mr Corbyn’s…”
Jonathan Blake’s terminology elevates the status of Netanyahu’s barely controversial remarks to ‘an extraordinary intervention” and immediately diminishes the entire business of politicised antisemitism to “a UK political row”. 
If that’s impartial I’m another Dutchman.
“………Mr McDonnell has ridden to the defence of Jeremy Corbyn saying that he has devoted his life to promoting justice, sometimes that means meeting people who haven’t shared those ideals, and calling Mr Netanyahu’s intervention ‘feeding the media frenzy’ and said that it should be a line in the sand and that  ‘enough is enough’ when it comes to this row and he’s probably not the only one thinking that.

An extraordinary personal observation by a BBC spokesperson.  BBC groupthink. Obnoxious and increasingly obvious. 


  1. Now would be a good time for Boris to weigh in with some Trumpian observations on Jeremy and his anti-semitism problem.

  2. Where are all the virtue signalling, PC clerics from the Anglican and other churches when you need them - when a senior British politician is attending a wreath laying ceremony at a cemetery, in honour of murdering bigots who lie there? Nowhere to be seen...not addressing the topic on Thought for Today...not monopolising our screens...all on their hols.

    1. Where indeed? The BBC News outlets have been able to deflect and then bury the latest 'odious Corbyn' story using the same strategy as with the 'Agent Cob' equivalent -the BBC are continuing to shield Corbyn, by sitting on their hands for a day or two, and then, guess what? A bigger story comes along which diverts attention away.

    2. Yes, I was thinking just the same. And now an even bigger story had deflected from the terrorist story. So the two stories they really don’t want to be honest about can be demoted.

  3. Meanwhile we now discover Lord Dodgy, sorry Lord Sheikh, much beloved at the BBC was also in attendance at the anti-semitic tinged Tunis conference:


    An MP is calling for his behaviour to be investigated by the Conservative Party.

    Of course the BBC has nothing about this on their wipesite (better term for it than "website").

    1. I think you've started something there with 'wipesite'.

      Who has ever heard of Lord Dodgy before this? I hadn't. One thing this does is shine a light once more onto our Dodgy House of Lords. There aren't many in that place that I would want in my own house or my street or my town.

  4. Evan Davis doing his impression of a fearless journalist taking to task the Corbynistas over wreathgate on Newsnight while interviewing Chris Williamson MP...

    Fearless up to a (not very impressive) point with his mate whom he referred to as "Chris"... It was more as if he was trying to help him.

    He did ask him whether he would have laid a wreath at the graves of Black September leaders.

    He didn't mention that one of the victims of the Munich massacre had been castrated...though he did call the whole thing an atrocity.

    He didn't employ his trick of summarising what the interviewee had said, even though he hadn't said it...He could have said "Well Mr Williamson, it's clear you would not criticise Mr Corbyn if it was found he had laid a wreath at the graves of Black September leaders..."

    Davis didn't ask why, if Corbyn is so interested in even-handed "peace" he doesn't lay wreaths at the graves of, say, infant victims of Palestinian terrorism.

    He didn't pick up on Mr Williamson's earlier interview on the BBC (useless Mardell in the chair) and ask him if he was comparing the PLO to Nelson Mandela, even though Williamson smuggled in the apartheid libel into his answers.

    I noticed that the sinister looking Dr. Evil-type Williamson managed to issue a veiled threat to the BBC and all who sail in her...indicating his "disappointment" etc...

    I have been predicting for some time now that if Corbyn and co - God forbid (but it could happen if we let May captain us on to the rocks) - should get their clenched fists on power, then they won't hang around in taking charge of what is the state's media arm. They'll do it by hook or by crook, by the book or not by the book...they'll use every trick in the book to gain full control for the hard left over the BBC. If all else fails, they'll simply use legislation to cancel the charter.

    Some of the more intelligent soggy-leftists may have picked up the message being sent.

    1. That scenario is not in the least far fetched. Among the soggy left there is certainly a fifth column of Corbynistas in the BBC who would welcome such a move. They wouldn’t even see it as state control.

      There is also the drift of the soggy left, in particular with regard to free speech. I can remember a particular occasion, perhaps a couple of decades ago, when Humphrys quite robustly asked an advocate of Sharia why he was in this country if he didn’t like our values. Can you imagine that happening now? No doubt the BBC would respond ruefully, “We were so racist back then”. I am yet to hear a single BBC voice, hard or soggy left even acknowledge the erosion of free speech in this country.

      The BBC’s once wholly admirable ambition to inform has descended into a patronising contempt for both the public and the truth. The framework is already there for a Communist style state controlled broadcaster.

    2. I think you're right Terry. There is already a hard left element at work within the BBC...there always have been Communists of course. But now in Corbyn there is a political focus for them and if they couch their demands in the language of PC, pro-diversity policies they are pretty much untouchable.

      As we know, the hard left like to make alliance with followers of Islam as well. We have the rather bizarre example of Mishal Husain aggressively questioning people about burka tolerance and Islamophobia - she was brought up in Saudi Arabia and knows full well it is not a free choice of women, but I have never heard her utter one word of complain about the Saudi regime or even admit she has some personal knowledge in that respect. The Corbynistas will seek to promote Islam as part of a "diversity" agenda. You might think it was impossible for the BBC to promote Islam any more than it is already...well prepare to be surprised.

      A Corbyn government would probably begin by working through Ofcom - weeding out the soggy leftists and putting their candidates into such positions of power. They might well use intelligence on individuals within the BBC they perceive as enemies to engineer their removal. The NUJ would be able to exert more pressure as well under a Corbyn government.

      There will be other inducements and threats - inducements could include a legal framework to ensure the BBC gets a bigger share of sports coverage and threats could include threats to revoke the charter.

      We all know the BBC is staffed largely by sheep...as soon as they see how the wind is changing, they'll be signing the Corbyn pledge.

      A Corbyn government would be a political disaster...but you wouldn't think it from the weak approach of May, and her fellow Conservatives.

    3. I caught a bit of that as I was scrolling past and stopped long enough to find out who is that oddly intense looking fellow with the hollow face and shaved head. I wondered if it was that Seumas I keep hearing about as the evil right-hand man of Corbyn. I didn't expect it would turn out to be an MP.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.