Wednesday 9 January 2019

New Year Open Thread

Happy New Year to you all! Welcome to the first open thread of 2019. Thank you for your comments and support. 


  1. Evan Davis interviews himself and Martin Moore on today's PM (1/1/19). Evan reveals his lament for the loss of narrative control in established media.

    Well worth a listen.

    Here's are the degrees of seperation not mentioned :

    Martin Moore works for Open Democracy.
    Open Democracy is funded by the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation among other organisations including the Open Society Foundation the National Endowment for Democracy, the Ford Foundation and Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.

    1. ...and the Open Society Foundation is funded by George Soros. So their claim to be free of financial dependency on billionaires is bogus.

      Having held my nose and spent some time on the Open Democracy website I think I can say without fear of contradictino it is clearly a Far Left, anti-democratic organisation dedicated to controlling or manipulating democratic expression and censoring many political opinions, while enforcing a rigid pro-PC, pro-migration pro-no borders ideology. They show absolutely no concern about so-called Antifa mobs closing down free speech or the rise of Sharia in the UK.

      I presume the egregious Evan did not take the OD spokeperson to task for any of that, and just had a good old Guardian style whinge about Trump, populism, Brexit and "what was written on that bus".

    2. The first few minutes is a head shaking, hand wringing diatribe. They try to 'look for positives' later.

      "Oh woe, if only the world was more sensible and looked upon itself as us sensible people do....."

      (Sensible people who frequently ignore half the story in the name of what I have come to assume is a sorry and mistaken attempt to keep various lids on things) etc.

      You know the drill.

    3. I think Open Democracy is quite sinister.

      Their opening claim on the Website is that "Open Democracy has worked for two years exposing the dark money driving Brexit." So they are immediately undermining the legitimacy of the greatest democratic vote ever held in this country.

      Even if there were "dark money" driving Brexit how is it different from Soros money being secretively passed from foundation to foundation till it gets into their grubby little hands? How is it different from "our money" - the licence fee - being used by the BBC (including during and before the Referendum) with absolutely no accountability whatsoever to stop Brexit and denigrate Trump?

      Then there is this article - which is pretty much calling for civil strife, people rising up against the army, to stop Brexit:

      These people are very, very dangerous.

    4. To be honest, I haven't got an issue with that article or any of the organisations funded by Soros really. He can do what he likes with his money.

      I have no idea what his real motives are, and I'll never know because the BBC will never document his influence, even though he is one of the most influential people on the planet.
      Yentob will never chew the arm of his spectacles to Soros' words.

      Where I have a problem is the hypocrictical silent defence of Soros' global influence by any means necessary, including his Jewish heritage.

      The 'criticism of Soros is antisemitic and that's the end of that' line was tired from day one.
      Black-hat, white-hat narratives are unnaceptable from publicly funded institutions like the BBC .
      It's not as if they can pretend they don't realise what they're doing either - they regularly ctiticise Orban for utilising Hungarian media in favour of his narrative.

      The 4th estate tacit denial that this man could be dangerous to democracy is ridiculous when they argue opposing claims of danger from, for instance, Russian troll farms.

      Soros' extraordinary wealth, his connections, and political influence on a world wide level is acceptable to them because he's 'on their side'. It's that blatant and hypocritical.

      If it wasn't for alt news sites (not right wing ones back in 2015 when his name started popping up) his name would never have become so internet prominent in the first place.
      Now he's a demon icon for some and a progressive's hero - still undermining democratic politics from the touch-line, but in a progressive manner.
      Wierd, blatantly hypocritical times.

    5. Quite Enough! You are making the mistake of applying standards objetively when this is really a naked power battle with precious little regard for principle! :)

      I do have a problem with the article because it is essentially saying: "unless we get our way on Brexit we will cause civil mayhem".

      I don't care much myself if Soros wants to spend billions on pro-EU propaganda. But this is a tricky area. Where does action cross a line from propaganda into subversion and manipulation? It's one thing for Radio Moscow or RT to pump out propaganda. It's quite another for the Russian state to covertly organise a campaign of disguised bots to influence debate. That is, if true, crossing a line in my opinion. I would say the same for Soros (and BTW my recollection is that there were plenty of pro-EU bots active during the Referendum campaign).

      Is external funding of an organisation like Black Lives Matters (seemingly intent on creating civil unrest) legitimate?

      Is it legitimate for a foreign billionaire to fund a campaign for a second, rigged referendum on our EU membership? I don't think so.


      Soros has just gifted his left-subversive organisation Open Society Foundation $18 billion!

    7. @MB quoted "Open Democracy has worked for two years exposing the dark money driving Brexit."
      ~MB what's the rule ?

      Ans : If libmob throw out an accusation , they are probably just PROJECTING their own flaws
      "exposing the dark money driving Brexit"
      = "being the dark money driving Anti-Brexit."

  2. The Manchester knife attack has been declared a terrorist investigation but you would be hard pressed to find any meaningful information from the BBC because they have sanitised the story completely. They have pixelated the attackers face to hide any attempt by viewers to glean clues to identity.. The don’t mention religion, race, sex or motive.

    And they certainly didn’t mention that the man was heard screaming the phrase "Allahu Akbar" and "long live the Caliphate".

    Fake news!

    1. Much to my surprise, the 6.30pm BBC 1 News DID show footage of the man shouting 'allahu akbar'. It was shown on Sky News too.

    2. Ok, that’s an improvement. I wonder if that was the one time only version so they can pull it out of the hat when viewers like me say they aren’t mentioning it.

    3. The BBC Website report is saying this though:

      Police were still trying to establish whether the suspect is a British national; and that "given how frenzied the attack was", they are also "obviously considering his mental health".

    4. Personally I find it difficult to distinguish between a crazed Jihadi and a crazy Jihadi. But the BBC clearly has superior analytical skills.

    5. The problem is the double standard
      - Most terrorists are mad thru brainwashing

      But Killer van man who rammed the islamic crowd
      and Cox Killer (if he was the real perp)
      Both had flipped they weren't like IRA planned terrorists
      ..Yet the establishment went with the big label "terrorist" instead of mad
      ..Most people on the street know that is ridiculous spin, but still it happened

    6. Interesting try googling Jo Cox killer conspiracy - I couldn’t find anything much dated after the Brexit vote that wasn’t MSM. Very odd there’s normally lots of Alt-views.

    7. Google is like you say but there are some conpiracy guys amongst the list
      There's the "Richard D Hall" video and tour, and that hasn't been censored off Youtube
      However the Bing search is less stacked with MSM

      Hmm.. Search Twitter and it yields just 4 tweets
      Broaden the term to : "Jo Cox" conspiracy and two subsets emerge
      #1 libmob complaining that ONE person at the Brexit Betrayal amrch had a "JC was a FalseFlag" placard
      #2 Libmob calling out Labour figures for also expressing opinions that the murder could have been a conspiracy.

      It's always worth thinking ..what difference JC's murder made to the vote.
      A lot of slippery libmob action backfires
      eg for me the way they cycnically "milked" the killing reinforced my thoughts against them.

    8. BTW a BBC news story itself does sound a bit conspiracy theory itself.
      Each BBC web article has 2 titles
      One is used for promotion and is hidden with the html coding and appears as the headline when someone tweets the page
      That hidden title here is: MP's murder was to be 'white jihad'
      ... It's about a mad guy's plan to knife Rosie Cooper MP
      The page asserts "what he termed "white jihad", a jury has heard."
      "the plan was foiled after a disenchanted former member of National Action reported the threat to Hope Not Hate"
      .. It's a bit strange that a disenchanted member would go to the Hatey No Hopers instead of the police.

    9. Arne, It would appear that once again The BBC has yet again concealed the ethnicity of the murder suspect in the Lee Pomeroy case, in which a Father was violently stabbed in front of his 14 yr old son on a day trip to London.

      Sky News revealed in a Police video that the 35 yr old suspect being held is a six foot tall Black man.
      So much for the BBC's so called fair and accurate news reporting.


  3. The 2nd paragraph in a prominent BBC article says:

    It will be the culmination of two years of resistance to President Donald Trump - primarily led by women - following his unexpected victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016.

    It is an article celebrating the success of women candidates for the 116th US congress.

    I’m not convinced that the resistance was led by women. I suspect it’s a relatively equal distribution of men and women who love or loathe Trump.

    But the BBC have to turn everything into a PC left-liberal agenda led campaign. Especially with gender issues.

    And I’m mightily fed up with their obsession with the US and how much of their output is devoted to it.

    1. The BBC pay lip service to Europe but are essentially Americocentric in their world view.

      I don't think the alleged servant of democracy, the BBC, should be using words like "resistance" in relation to a democratically elected leader. Could you ever imagine them using the word in relation to Obama or Clinton. No, then they would be referring to "threats to democracy" and "Far Right reaction".

    2. @MB Always ask : is it news or is it PR ?
      ..My granny doesn't need to know about the intricacies of feminism in US congress elections, the piece should in US libmob mags like Mother Jones
      .. It's not relevant to UK listeners , therefore its PR

    3. There isn't really a clear division between news, views, PR or whatever, whoever is doing the reporting. Very little that happens around the world is obviously relevant to the average UK person. I wouldn't want a news service dedicated only to things that directly affect the UK. What I object to with the BBC is that they report the world in a very biased way promoting a very narrow PC-ideological view (my resolution for 2019 is to reject the American 'liberal' tag because they are anything but liberal - they are anti-democratic, anti-education, anti-free speech, anti-free assembly, anti-individualism, pro-divisiveness, and pro-racialisation of politics).

  4. And interesting article about the BBC licence fee by Gordon Brown in The Guardian.

    But there are other very good reasons why the pensioners’ free TV licence should not be abolished. A policy of “taxation without representation” sparked the US war of independence in the 1770s. Since then the convention has been that taxation can be imposed only by the elected representatives of the people.

    But if the BBC – an unelected body – becomes the taxing authority, it will decide who is to be taxed for the licence fee, and at what rate.

    1. Wasn't this yet another of Osborne's piss-poor decisions, to go along with the EU referendum (from his point of view), HS2, Hinkley Point and the additional runway for Heathrow? I suppose the precedent was set by the poor decision to hand over water rates to private companies.

  5. Here we go for US 2020. Ocasio-Cortez' political slaughter is on the cards. The Daily Wire discussed this a while ago and it seems to have escaped.......

    It'll take the BBC a year to get round to comprehending that she shot herself in the foot when she lied 6 months ago. Sanders' political progeny is done for. Trump would use this in any debate and beat her up with it.

    If Tulsi Gabbard runs and gets financial and media support, Trump will have a proper competition on his hands. She's clever, informed, politically experienced, ex military, runs on a genuine ticket of military non intervention, and she's lovely looking.
    This could be a lot of fun.

    1. The MSM will undoubtedly cover for her and the BBC will declare her the New Obama, only finally female, but it seems she was involved (and may still be) with a cult which - whoops - is, among other things anti-gay...oh dear. Spin that, BBC.

    2. wrong way around. Enough was on about Tulsi only in the last paragraph of the comment but on about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (who fits your first half of your first sentence only) the BBC are already covering her in a nothing story: you know they'll be full on soon enough

  6. Has anyone else tried reading David Sedgwick’s BBC: Brainwashing Britain?

    I feel that there is too much emphasis placed on pigeonholing Auntie into Cultural Marxism. I also got annoyed with the syntax and lack of (or badly done) proof-reading (because I’m like that).

    It would have been nice to see in depth an analysis of why the BBC are the way they are. What are the driving forces, and what do they get out of it?

    There is also a huge reliance on quoting from just 5 books by other people.

    Overall, I miss the analysis that MB and the others here bring on a daily basis.

    But I’d like to know what others think.

    1. Yes, I was disappointed. Hoped to pass it on to friends who still think the BBC is the same coporation it was 40 years ago but there's not enough hard evidence and too much polemic.... It's a shame he didn't take examples from M.B's list of 20 ways the BBC are biased. That was a work of art!

    2. Hate to blow my own trumpet, but in order to avoid a Fake Fact circulating I have to point out it was a full 50 ways, not just 20! lol

    3. John, just managed to accidentally delete a fairly lengthy reply (duh!) but to pararphrase, I think you are right that BBC Bias involves a lot more than just "cultural Marxism" although that is a strong strand. For instance, the BBC have definitely planted their colours with the anti-Trump alliance which means they end up lauding people like Bush and McCain (even Reagan! - Nick Bryant decided he liked him after all!!) who they previously campaigned against.

  7. The BBC are challenging Sajid Javid’s assertions that the English Channel migrant crossings are a major incident. It was the lead story on the main news tonight and Mark Easton said that these people are desperate, the numbers are minuscule and the effect on our country is marginal.

    By claiming that the government are wrong, the BBC have taken an overtly political position.

    It’s not impartial, we didn’t hear both side of the story and it wasn’t reporting the news.

    It was politically motivated campaigning and mischief making.

  8. Sue/Craig Re - Correspondents Look Ahead go & listen to 2017
    I just checked 2018's notice Katya's cunning trick at the start
    "well X you were the only one here last year so we;ll just mention what you said ..blah blah"
    ..and then she rushes onto to the brand new guests
    .. Hang on lady you can't just rush on past last years predictions
    ..I suspect something is up

    I double check : Yeh among the biggies
    #1 a full scale evacuation of Seaul due to Trump's warmongering
    #2 Great Failure of the Russian world come due to the far-right and soccer violence
    .. There's more, check for yourselves.

    1. Well spotted Stew! I heard that bit, and now you point it out, she did glide over that. Maybe that's why they gave her the Order of Canada - for services to obfuscation.

    2. Another point in the 2017 edition one said " Yes ISIS are finished I predict that a new Islamist force will arise"
      Yet just before the 2018 edition Trump said "ISIS are just about beaten" the same BBC mocked him and implied he's naive

    3. The BBC are pathetic. They even twisted the truth to imply Trump had told a 7 year old kid that Santa Claus doesn't exist when he did nothing of the sort. They are all deranged. I mean that quite literally. I think they can no longer discern objective reality. Remember - these BBC people have to lie to themselves and others 24/7 because that's their job, being in the middle of all that Fake News. If they didn't they'd be out of a job within a month. Just one wrong word can be career-ending.

      I'm just re-reading 1984 and I must say the parallels are rather disturbing. Of course Orwell worked for the BBC but back then he was probably more pissed about how they were just pumping out Imperialist Fake News (the natives love us, the monarch is universally popular, we never harm anyone etc). The only difference now is it's all PC-Globalist Fake News.

  9. I think I can see now why May was so keen to get her deal ratified by Parliament before Christmas, despite the dangers.

    As we are now in the New Year and so close to the Article 50 deadline, we can now see the reality of a no deal...and people are beginning to realise just how little relation it bears to the Project Fear Soubry-Blair-Campbell pronouncements of 2018. In fact things are looking distinctly rosy.

    First off we don't have to pay nearly £40billion. We'll probably have to pay £10 billion to cover legitimate liabilities like pensions and membership of various projects we would like to be part of, but the other £30 billion goes straight in our pockets.

    Even the BBC in its news reporting is having to admit the EU is NOT planning to stop planes flying from Heathrow to the Costa del Sol or wherever. They aren't planning to send back 1 million Brit expats. They aren't planning even to slow down trade with the UK. In fact the EU are desperately planning to avoid these eventualities. And we've heard from the Irish government that they have absolutely no intention of erecting a hard border if there is a no deal scenario.

    The closer we get to the deadline the more people of the UK will see that Project Fear Mark II was just another load of Remainiac lies and that May is our worst ever lying Prime Minister, as she was trying to get us to believe this latest version of Project Fear.

    Of course, the BBC - so keen to reference the £350 million on the bus as a lie - will never, ever refer to all these Remainiac lies (deliberate, knowing lies by people who claim to be of high repute with high moral standards) as lies.

    1. The real fear is that a majority of our Westminster MPs of both major parties will prevent a no deal Brexit by whatever means are necessary. A no deal Brexit would expose the flimsy nature of our membership of the EU over the last forty years - how the UK has never been close to the levers of power there, how successive governments have taken us step by step closer to the US of E, and most importantly, that our elected MPs have sought to act without reference to their own electorate, believing that 'they know best'.

    2. It was probably a good tactical move by Theresa May to delay the Meaningful Vote until January. MPs will return full of turkey, booze and well-being after the seasonal festivities thinking: 'Do I really want to sacrifice all of this (their cosmopolitan lifestyle, feeling important, mixing with other like-minded Troughers etc) at the altar of democracy?

      I suspect the vote will be carried in Theresa's favour by widespread abstentions from Labour MPs who themselves don't want to give up their own perks and who don't think for a minute that Corbyn could be trusted to form a Government.

    3. ... Labour MPs who themselves don't want to give up their own perks and who don't think for a minute that Corbyn could be trusted to form a Government....

      And, who are along for the ride, happy as Opposition, without any pretence that they might be called upon the govern.

    4. Much truth in what you say Arthur, but I think we can count on maybe 40 ERG members and 10 DUP to stay solid. Are there 50 to 60 -ish Labour members ready to invoke the wrath of either Momentum or Remainiacs by abstaining? I can't Corbyn rescuing May.

    5. Consider the many former Shadow Cabinet MPs who resigned at the time of Corbyn's reelection as party leader. They face almost certain deselection at the hands of Momentum. They might well abstain rather than help prompt a general election which would see an end to their tenure. May's Meaningful Vote if carried in her favour would see the above group remain in receipt of their salaries and perks for another three years give or take. If I were a Labour MP who was out of favour with Corbyn and Momentum, I'd abstain. So what if I fall foul of them - my days are numbered already.

    6. Yes, some logic in what you say. But most MPs are craven opportunists. I haven't seen any estimates that put potential abstentions (or pro May votes) above 30. That's not enough if 40 ERG and 10 DUP stand firm. If May had negotiated something better than an Abject Surrender. If the Conservatives can't muster 40 rebels against Abject Surrender, then the Conservative Party is finished and so, probably, is the country unless it causes a post-Tory populist party to emerge.

    7. ... unless it causes a post-Tory populist party to emerge....

      I would hope for this outcome too, but such a party would be strangled in its infancy by hostile Remain Conservatives, the BBC and the MSM. They would not be allowed to exist without labels of far-right privileged Toffs being attached to them. Gerard Patten has the necessary political acumen together with a strong regional identity free from traditional Conservative baggage to lead such a party. Could he be persuaded to work with Boris, JRM and the other ERG MPs. Otherwise, I fear he will get nowhere with UKIP - whose purpose was primarily to achieve Brexit.

    8. Think you mean Gerard Batten (glad he's not a Patten!).

      I think GB has shown much bravery and not a little political acumen in the way he has led UKIP. For one thing they have risen in the polls, for another he has essentially seen off For Britain.

      He clearly has a strategy of turning UKIP into an explicitly working class party, as opposed to the lower middle class party it started out as. Presumably he thinks this will make it a more credible alternative to Labour. Maybe.

      Personally I prefer parties that don't emphasise class but rather citizen's rights such as free speech.

      My personal preference would be for the ERG plus Boris and a few others to separate from the Conservative Party and stand as a new party. They should then come to an electoral pact (very common in other countries) so UKIP get a run at more Labour seats, maybe 100 or so, while the new "Conservative" party (they'll have to ditch that toxic brand!) tackles the rest of the country. I wouldn't be surprised if the combined new party plus UKIP could out-perform the old Conservative Party led by some loser like Rudd or Hunt or Gove or Grayling or Leadsom. During all this turmoil the Conservatives might well also lose a few MPs like Grieve and Soubry to the Lib Dems.

  10. For those of you, like me, who despair on a daily basis...I am just thinking about how the hell we ended up with this PC madness ruling our country! But if you take a broader view, it's not the first time we've had this sort of ideological aberration and previous examples didn't last forever - so I suppose there's some solace and hope in that. (This isn't an argument for complacency and given all the tools of oppression at the service of a modern government I am not saying it will be that easy to get out of this one!)

    There are at least three eras when our country went more than slightly mad:

    1. In the 1530s in the reign of King Edward VI (the "boy king") we came under the grip of extreme Protestant ideas for the first time. It was an odd period when even the nobility took to dressing in black and feigning extreme piety. Thankfully, it didn't last too long.

    2. In the 1640s under Cromwell we saw the abolition of Christmas and hot cross buns. Once again piety was to the fore and fun to the rear. It was also an era when "end of the world" ideas were in vogue.

    3. The mid to late Victorian period saw an extreme denial of the sexual instinct with associated censorship, bogus religiosity and so on.

    Clearly we are now in another era marked by displays of extreme piety ("I'm not having children because I wouldn't want my kids growing up in world of carbon emissions"), bogus religiosity (every one from the head of Goldman Sachs to your local bobby virtue signalling for all they're worth), end of the worldism (thank you, David Attenborough - how did you get to all those exotic locations? - by canoe??), galloping denial of the sex instinct (Me Too, Uberfeminism, Transgender Ideology) and associated censorship in all areas of speech, work, public life and so on.

    We can only hope and pray that eventually this latest madness will burn itself out but I am not so sure...

    1. ہم سب مسلمان ہو جائیں گے.

    2. Not me anon. Don't want a beard, have a sense of humour and want to retain it, prefer secularism.
      I'm out, thanks anyway.

    3. One would hope that it is simply an aberration that will pass, but this new puritanism has infected most of the Western world. But it isn’t simply puritanism and attacks on free speech. There is also a rejection of science in favour of ideology. Thought crimes are now a reality. Have we learned nothing from history? The BBC regularly indulges contributors whose views, almost always unchallenged, are in line with those of the former Soviet Union. To object to this is to be “populist” or worst.

      Maybe I am being pessimistic and people have always felt this way at any point in time, but it seems that we are living through a period when our civilisation has lost confidence in itself.

    4. Terry,

      I think so. The thing that made us great - our ability to engage in self-criticism and critique ideas - has become a flesh-eating virus in the body politic. It's like we have to put ourselves in the wrong on everything.

      I don't hanker after empire but our empire was no worse than other empires - like the still existing Russian and Chinese Empires or the Ottoman Empire - and in many ways better.

      I think the two savage world wars with their millions of deaths probably robbed our European Classico-Christian civilisation of its sense of moral superiority. The historical accidents of the success of a Bolshevik Putsch in Russia and a virulently racist genocidal facist party coming to power in Germany further undermined confidence.

      Once academia (our modern version of the priesthood) fell to leftist political correctness we were pretty much doomed! The PC virus has spread out from academia debilitating every institution it infects.

    5. I think we will anon. They will rule the world within 50 years

  11. "Nancy Pelosi: The remarkable comeback of America's most powerful woman"

    This could have been written by a Democrat.

    In fact, it HAS been written by a Democrat! :)

    Young Zurcher the Berserker declares his undying love for near-octogenarian Pelosi.

  12. Oooh......... BBC bias risks public violence
    An artice on Comment Central -

  13. I heard on PM most of an interview with Ben Gummer (yes - who?, you may ask) - ex Cabinet Office minister, fortunately kicked out at the last election, thanks to May's disastrous campaigning.

    The Remainiacs are obviously panicking as Gummer was reaching for lie after lie after lie. All unchallenged of course, or challenged in a faux manner, that aided his arguments, such as they were. It was a textbook BBC-soft interview. It was also a very lengthy interview, given Gummer's nonentity status - more Blair and Ken Clarke length, than what you might expect from a failed and colourless politician.

    But the non sequitir lies just kept coming. He seemed to be suggesting that a no deal would lead us wrangling for years and years, whereas in reality it is the direct route to resolution. It is May's plan that will lead to years, perhaps decades, of wrangling over trade, Northern Ireland and all the rest.

    I'm not alone in being disgusted with the soft interviewing. Someone called Don Forester on Twitter comments:

    "Shocking Remain-biased piece where Gummer was never challenged on a host of unfounded things he claimed. Where are Brexiteers on @BBC? Almost none. This sort of propaganda will cost BBC its licence fee funding after Brexit. Can't be State Broadcaster & trash UK democracy."

    1. It would be nice to think Don Forester is right about the BBC losing its funding. At the very least, the DG , & the producers of the various News & current affairs programmes should be hauled before a select committee and confronted with the evidence for bias. Craig could supply facts and figures for this. The whole shabby crew could then be put through the wringer by Rees-Mogg & Co. to determine who gave the go-ahead for the Beeb's contribution to Project Fear. The tumbrils could then start rolling!

      That's part of my wish-list for 2019, anyway!

    2. The only way any of this will happen is if a populist party of some description gets significant representation in Parliament. UKIP failed to get over the crucial 20% mark (due to unprecedented media sabotage by the BBC, ITV, and Sky plus a lot of the press). But I think a breakaway Conservative faction led by people like Boris Johson, David Davis, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Priti Patel and others could actually break through that barrier.

      We face either a slow death by a thousand PC cuts (if we run with May's Abject Surrender Deal) or we roll the dice. If we roll the dice we face either a much quicker death under some sort of Corbynista-GDR style dictatorship or we might actually secure our salvation as a nation.

      It does come down to whether you have faith in the people. I do. I think if people are presented with a real democratic-populist alternative they will flock to it in millions with real enthusiasm.

    3. I'm for rolling the dice. According to today's Telegraph, the latest YouGov poll has found that 57% of Tory Party members favour a no-deal, or as some say, 'a WTO' Brexit - this, despite two years of BBC brainwashing If Boris & Co get their act together, just look what a new party could do to the Mayite Tories!

    4. Stop after 'Brainwashing'!

    5. I think that the light at the end of the tunnel is that The BBC are now doing themselves enormous harm. An increasing number of licence fee payers now see them for what they are. Biased Left wing PC supporting liberals and not just on news but on everything they do.

      You see anti BBC sentiment everywhere nowadays. (Everywhere except the liberal elite and establishment).

      As trust evaporates with the general public they will find it harder to gain support for the licence fee and for increases.

  14. BBC 1, 6pm News - Reeta Chakrabarti makes a valiant attempt to revive the embers of Project Fear, (Holidays Section) & a reporter explores the possibility that the holiday Pound, which has been up & down like a yo-yo, will be further hit by Brexit. Alas, the travel agent she consults doesn't feel that it will make much difference.

    Over to Chris Mason who doesn't have much to add, apart from reminding us that we will be leaving the EU in 12 weeks' time - this announcement is accompanied by what must be the world's longest ever Stan Laurel impression; you know, the face Stan pulls when he's just got Ollie into a fine mess & is about to cry.

    The Beeb really aren't trying very hard today - are they 'Brexited out' or has it finally dawned on them that we are leaving the EU?

    1. I saw that too, my feeling is they are just taking a breather before ramping up their next push to coincide with the upcoming parliamentary vote.

      We will then see whether they are backing May’s plan, a Corbyn government by way of a general election or a second referendum.

    2. Stan Laurel face! lol Did he scratch his head as well?

    3. I am sure Arne that similar to how the Imperial German Army attempted one more offensive in 1918, forces are being massed for one more go at Project Fear...who will they wheel out. No one believes what Carney says anymore. Perhaps they can get the Pope to say somethning. Or get Macron to threaten a war.

    4. He didn't scratch his head, but he did manage to make his lower lip go corrugated! For those not familiar with L & H, you just need to imagine a chap chewing a particularly sour lemon while learning that his new sports car has been struck by an asteroid!

  15. Ellen urges Kevin Hart to reconsider hosting the Oscars

    What a bizarre news story for the BBC to push across its network today.

    Ellen DeGeneres is urging Kevin Hart to reconsider presenting The Oscars. The BBC has even told everyone that an hour long interview is taking place tonight on NBC in the US.

    Why on earth the BBC consider this newsworthy in the UK is anyone’s guess. I would bet that a significant number of viewers/listeners/readers haven’t a clue who they are or care a fig about them.

    For me, those who decide what is news on the BBC and what features prominently day to day haven’t got the self awareness or common sense to understand that stories appealing to those wrapped up in the BBC media bubble are of little interest to the average licence payer.

    It’s another example of the BBC’s obsession with all things US and obscure US media events we can’t watch and have no desire to watch.

    1. Arne - Maybe they have noticed that viewers are switching off & they're trying to revive their fortunes by giving us more of what interests THEM - good luck with that one, Beeb!

    2. The BBC are more concerned that we have the appropriate politically correct interpretation of the news rather than providing us with the news.

    3. Today's stories on BBC news on line included;
      US federal Govt shutdown ?
      US congresswoman criticized for dancing ??
      US celeb says something vacuous to another one ???


    Positive PMI data strangly absent forum the BBC website? I can find it. Bias by omission and hiding a story.

  17. The only pleasure I can take from the current political crisis is that the BBC are taking no pleasure from it. I saw on the Sky Press Preview that May is now going to put up an amendment to the Abject Surrender Deal saying something to the effect "A slave can always defy his master and suffer the awful consequences" or maybe it was "The UK is a sovereign country and may therefore abrogate the treaty."

    Anyway, poor old BBC Remainiacs will have to adopt all sorts of painful positions that their poor-posture left-liberal bodies will find difficult to maintain.

    They will have to simultaneously hold that:

    1. May's deal is valid.

    2. Her amendment adds something.

    3. Corbyn is a principled politician who opposes Brexit.

    4. Soubry is a serious politician.

    5. Ken Clarke had no qualms in standing on the 2017 manifesto.

    6. A second referendum would be a good idea.

    7. The issue of what the question for the second referendum is of no importance.

    8. Armageddon will follow us "crashing out" with no deal, despite all the indications being that the EU are desperately trying to avoid even a mini-armageddon.

    9. Yvette Cooper is a serious and principled politician.

    10. Tony Blair is not masterminding a campaign to stop Brexit with the backing of George Soros.

    Wow! That's going to hurt!!

    1. :-) It's only a matter of time until their heads begin to rotate through 360° and green slime starts to trickle from their mouths! I'm keeping a close eye on Tony Blair & Alibhai-Brown to see which is first to succumb to full-blown, tertiary, BDS.
      MB By the time the Chris Mason-Laurel news item reached the 10pm News, it had been edited; I'm pretty sure the iplayer version of the 6pm News had been cropped, too.

  18. Not on Twitter myself but loving this hashtag:

    Seems to be driving the Remainiacs even more crazy!

  19. Gary Lineker promotes Fake News (a fake NHS leaflet using the NHS typical font style)to put unnecessary fear into vulnerable sick people. Will the BBC, a supposedly fact-based news service with the highest standards, do anything about that? No. Will they moan about Trump all day? Yes.

    1. I haven't seen any evidence that the BBC discipline their 'stars' over broadcast material, or as in this case, promotion of a partisan political message. No. They do however discipline people who fail to adhere to the PC code internally - if their transgression has been directed towards other BBC hot-house lovelies. Carol Thatcher, Hardeep Singh Kohli and George Riley for instance.

  20. Put a mark in your diary everyone for the Channel 4 drama Brexit: The Uncivil War on Monday. The programme has been featured by the BBC using the Absorption form of bias. Prominently displayed, and for a time today the leading Full Story on the BBC News website is an article by our Will.

    ... 'Will Gompertz reviews Brexit: The Uncivil War starring Benedict Cumberbatch.' ...

    It receives four stars from Will. Right at the head of the article is a cartoon image of Will and Sherlock in front of the Brexit red bus. Predictably, Will tells us:

    ... 'Graham's work has a depth that goes beyond simply portraying British politics; he is questioning its foundations and structure. And so it is with Brexit: The Uncivil War, a TV movie that doesn't seek to retell a familiar story, but to ask an unfamiliar question: we know who won, but do we know how?' ....

    Further down the page is another photo of the red bus. How hard would it have been for Will to replace one of the images of the red bus with an image of the referendum voting form?

    ... 'Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?' ...

    The writer of the drama is James Graham. A quick search shows that he writes regularly for the Guardian, and most of his work has been for Channel 4. Perhaps, with this resounding endorsement from Will, the BBC are hoping to bring James Graham on board.

    1. I found it very surprising that Dominic Cummings actually co-operated in the production, spending time with Benedict Cumberbatch who was to portray him. What you might call a self-hatchet job.

      Cumberbatch is one of our most hypocritical lib-whingers of all time. He was the guy who gave little homilies post performance to audiences about the need to take in undocumented migrants from anywhere in the world, however many. He offered his own home to help house the migrants. When later challeneged about why no migrants were living in his home (or one of his homes, I guess we should say), he claimed that was impossible because he now had a baby with his partner.

      So why on Earth would you let Cumberbatch in your house given that track record? Like inviting a burglar in.

    2. Having read some of James Graham's Guardian stuff, the one point I agree with him over is his concern about the lack of open debate allowed by social media, and how quickly conversations degenerate into insults and barbed or sarcastic comments - and personal point-scoring - 'how thick you are'. I suspect however that his reasoning behind this point of view has more to do with the Left Liberal Elite being able to impose their point of view (especially over the outcome of the 2016 EU referendum) upon those poorly educated narrow-minded racist Leave voters.

  21. The BBC reports that China's population is set to start falling by mid century, according to a Chinese Academy.

    The sharp-eyed among you will note that the Chinese response is not "We have an ageing, diminishing population and therefore must admit hundreds of millions of migrants from the Philippines, India and Africa), give up on Han Chinese culture and become a multicultural society so we can resume exponential population growth".

    Nope, for some reason (and unlike the BBC), the Chinese don't seem to think that's a good idea.

  22. Several contributors to this blog disputed the figure of 700,000 participants claimed by the "People's Vote" rally. Today's Sunday Telegraph reports that the official estimate by the Greater London Authority was less than half that figure, at 250,000. No doubt this will be prominently reported on today's BBC News.

    1. I think the figure of 250,000 is an over-estimate. Probably includes at least 50,000 non-demonstrators caught up in the congestion on the wide pavements of London.

    2. It's interesting to think about which blue-ticks tweeted the 700K claim
      and if they used the word "rally"

      Guardian Tweet states
      \\ People's Vote march: '700,000' rally for new Brexit referendum – live //

      ‏@catherinemep tweeted 23 Oct 2018
      \\ A Tory MEP has written an internal email to the whole European Parliament contesting that 700k people went to the people’s vote march on Saturday.
      He has also written 170 books on ghosts, UFOs and paranormal activity. This is my life//

      AdamboultonSKY tweeted 22 Oct 2018
      \\ the qualitative aspect of the People’s vote March may prove more significant than the quantitative 700k, which is smaller than the Leave Referendum majority. //

    3. OK I made some further notes and links
      The most interesting thing is the BBC webpage and how it grows to a 700K tally thru an incredible 17 different edit stages.
      I posted them over at B-BBC here at 3:07pm

    4. Thanks for all of the info. Stew - nice to see so many people's suspicions confirmed!

  23. Radio 3's schedule for today looks very BBC. In tune with Radio 4, the drama content is more making of programmes about others' creations or lives than original creative or groundbreaking drama, cf recent plays like The Archers doing Chaucer. What's that about? Or plays based around Wilde or updating plays like Metamorphosis.

    There're a couple of interesting looking programmes I'll listen to, like the one about Keats on a walking tour oop north or what makes a song, but the drama I'll give a miss.

  24. SG - BBC edits are not corrections of course... simply 'evolutions' as the truth gets trickier to avoid.

  25. I know Cleverly is an Abject Surrender supporter but any kind of push-back against the PC Oppression is good. Cleverly gives the lamentable Lammy a good kicking...

  26. And there goes another 119,000 people..... shuffling away from the remarkable rise of hope in the form of AOC. What a dimwit. And what dimwits they take us for.

  27. See posting above re. Channel 4 drama Brexit: The Uncivil War. Jo Coburn on Politics Live today had as guests James Graham, writer of the docudrama, and a Remain 'Campaigner' who was at the heart of the Remain campaign. The Campaigner immediately brought into the discussion the Jo Cox murder as a factor affecting the outcome of the referendum.

    I found James Graham disingenuous when he said that he felt sympathy towards politicians. The gist of the interview (with reference to Brexit: The Uncivil War) was centred upon the belief that the quality of campaigning was THE critical factor which determined the outcome - not the democratic choice of the electorate. What arrogance! I remember John Simpson saying something similar at the time.

    More BBC bias by absorption of a Channel 4 programme. I bet the BBC wishes it had got there first.

    1. ... Remain campaigner Lucy Thomas, who is portrayed in the film...

  28. BBC pushing a call for police action to stop pro BRexit protestors calling Soubry and co nasty names as a top story:

    Have the Police ever done anything about left wing mobs calling Farage, Rees-Mogg and Johnson exactly the same names N-z-s and sc-m. No. Has the BBC ever pushed that as a stop story? No.

    1. Has Soubry been reported to the police for haranguing and intimidating law abiding pro-Brexit voters? Her language and demeanour have been scary on numerous occasions.
      Pot and kettle come to mind.

    2. Emily Maitlis on Newsnight got v. worked up when Ian Dale calmly noted that Nigel Farage had been subject to far worse abuse on the streets by the Far Left. She even claimed that the programme had featured the abuse directed at Rees Mogg and his family...maybe - but did they feature it as a potential Police matter?
      And was it a lead item on the BBC website?

  29. This Soubry business shows we do have a deep state in operation in the UK. We have all seen the Far Left demos, the Class War mobs and others shouting or screaming "scum" and all the rest at Farage, Johnson, Rees-Mogg (outside their homes, their offices and near Parliament) over many years, not to mention the offensive posters, the BBC love to zoom in on. Sometimes Farage has been unable to campaign during an election campaign despite that being his lawful right. The Police have done absolutely nothing about any of this. Moreoever, Robert Peston, Adam Boulton, Emily Maitlis and probably not even one MP has ever uttered a word of complaint about that behaviour.

    But now some populist right wingers get in on the act, they are all up in arms about the "threat to democracy".

    It shows just how very interconnected the Remainer PC MSM and the Remainer PC politicians are. Peston. Maitlis and Boulton have all made very clear their devotion to the Remain cause (though Peston, I would accept, is less overtly biased in his broadcasting). Here they are lining up with Soubry and the Remainiacs.

    By the way, I do think the Police should intervene when people use words like "scum". BUt they should intervene whether it's left or right doing the chanting. The N-z- word is another matter. That is a matter of political opinion.

    1. Spot on MB. This level of criticism currently only applies to one side. That’s always the way with those on the left.

    2. The traditional socialist hatred of the 'Tories' and all that group stand for - landed gentry, privilege, wealth, political influence etc have been hijacked by the likes of Maitlis, Evans, Mason etc, when it has become an outdated concept. Privilege is partly held by those hurling the abuse.

    3. They do intervene when it is the left fascistic tendency making a racket and shouting abuse /shouting down: they target or even arrest Tommy Robinson.

    4. Guido has this story from Germany:

      Horrifying! But, where can we find the BBC's take on this? It is there on the World/Europe page of the BBC News website. It has a watered-down headline:

      ...' German far-right MP Frank Magnitz badly hurt in Bremen attack' ...

      ... 'German far-right politician Frank Magnitz has been beaten up and severely injured in an attack seen by police as politically motivated.

      The leader of Alternative for Germany (AfD) in Bremen was attacked by at least three masked men in the centre of the northern city on Monday.

      The attackers knocked him unconscious with a piece of wood and kicked him in the head, AfD officials said.' ...

      What's interesting is that the main photo accompanying the story is of a suited Frank Magnitz giving a speech. Further down is an edited version of Guido's photo which (imo) diminishes the seriousness of the injuries the MP received.

    5. They've got the Soubry nonsense as No. 1 story still! And the Speaker has joined in...again having had nothing to say about previous outrages committed against UKIP, DUP and non-left wing Conservatives. And let us never forget that the hypocrite Bercow was once an enthusiastic member of the cryptofascist Monday Club.

    6. Arthur - That BBC article has lots of "distancing tricks".

      A "Bremen attack" mentioned in the headline. Is a UK audience really interested in the location that much? A "political attack" would have been more to the point.

      A "Bremen attack" depersonalises in the same was as "a car (or lorry) attack" which they have also used in the past.

      "Badly hurt" is a phrase more often used in relation to accidents, not violent criminal attacks. Later we learn he was "severely injured", although the photo has been edited as you say to make it appear less severe (they could if that had wished explained why they edited the photo - because the injuries were so severe and graphic).

      Then there is the insulting repeated description of him personally as "Far Right". This can be seen as an invitation to justification. Can you imagine the BBC using the Far Left label in this way if it was a Far Left politician targeted ?

      A "gash" on the head? Hmmm...looking at the Guido photo I would describe it otherwise - a severe laceration, an open wound, a deep three inch gash...not just "a gash".

  30. The BBC described the Class War invasion of Rees-Mogg's home and taunting of his children and their nanny as a "stunt".

    Can you imagine them applying that word to the anti-Soubry episode?

  31. Not bias perhaps, but we can question whether this is a good way to spend BBC money.

    Unexpected Fluids - BBC podcast

    The BBC has launched a graphic new sex podcast for younger listeners full of swearing and explicit language.

    On the opening episode Alix explained: “We are talking about sex. But rather than the sexual, slinky, perfect side that the mainstream media so often talks about, we are talking about the squelchy, squidgy bits where it might go a little bit wrong.”

    Riyadh said: “This is fun for me because I’ve never had the opportunity to be in a radio studio in a professional media organisation and been told by my boss that I can say ‘f**k’, ‘w**k’, ‘s**t’ and ‘c**’ as much as I want.”

    His co-presenter added: “And those are the central themes of this programme.”

  32. A Crazy BBC News tonight which followed a politically correct left wing magazine format rather than a news bulletin.

    It led with a very sympathetic 10 minute defence of Anna Soubry with no real analysis of the freedom of speech issues.

    Followed by 5 minutes of sympathy with an Iranian asylum seeker who came across the channel after his asylum application was turned down by France.

    Followed by no sympathy whatsoever from Nick Bryant on Trump and the US shutdown.

    Followed by a sympathetic interview with blurred out black knife crime gang members about a 14 year old who was stabbed. (Ending with ‘we’ve failed these kids’).

    1. I've just been watching a Party Political Broadcast on Newsnight on behalf of the Remain Party. The presenter is a guy in a dog collar. No idea who he is. :) I think he's a member of some weird tiny minority religious sect called the "Church of England" or sometimes "Anglicans".

      Maitlis and Finkelstein lying about Farage and Rees-Mogg hate mobs being covered on Newsnight in the same way that the anti-Soubry hate has been covered. Complete and utter lie. The Farage and Rees-Mogg hate mobs were NOT covered censoriously or as matter requiring police intervention. My recollection is that the reports ranged from the objective, to the wry, to the downright mocking.

    2. Agreed, MB - the Beeb is clearly doing its best to use Soubry's 'ordeal' to smear the entire Leave movement. It just shows how afraid they are that we might end up with WTO by default.

      In my more paranoid moments, I'm wondering if perhaps Deep State agents-provocateurs were used to rabble-rouse the yobs who taunted Soubry.

    3. Yes I don't think it's any accident that this has been given such prominence. The metropolitan elites (to use shorthand) are obviously not seriously concerned that MPs were being intimidated - otherwise they would have previously gone into action when pro Brexit MPs have been threatened or actually assaulted.

      No I think the logic here is to frighten the masses of Brexit voters into silence. To ensure we don't see mass demonstrations of Brexit voters when the fix comes in. So it's important to anathematise all pro-Brexit protests as Far Right and violent.

      The Remainiac MSM are also going all out at the moment trying to tie Gerard Batten to the "Far Right" label. Again, this is stop people coming out to march behind Gerard Batten. I presume the elites think JRM and Boris will never lead a demo and they are probably right.

      So what shape will the fix take. I think firstly an extension of Article 50, maybe by three months. I am sure they would like it to be six months - but could they face the prospect of UKIP getting a landslide victory in the EU elections in May if it was extended further?

      To add to your paranoia: how do we know there aren't agents of the shadowy organisations funding by dodgy billionaires? We know they sometimes go under cover.

    4. The man in the dog collar - it wasn't a certain Mr Adonis by any chance?

    5. Nah - this one was really crazy. Claimed to have been an Archbishop once.

    6. Are you sure it wasn't Emily Maitlis's tame 'pastor' - you know, the actor they use as a fake vicar on Newsnight panels! :)

  33. Interesting video from Peter Whittle's New Culture Forum - interview with Robin Aitken (author of Noble Liar):

    I don't agree with everything said. For instance the idea that the BBC were "balanced" during the EU Referendum campaign is risible and disproven by a number of analyses that Craig undertook at the time.

  34. At least there's the cartoon in The Telegraph if nothing else worth looking at in the main media about the Parliament Square goings on.


  36. It's definitely part of a deliberate campaign. Pro-Remain Emma Barnett currently giving pro-Remain Nick Boles acres of space on Radio 5 Live in a soft as putty interview to amplify the message. They are now careful to pay lip service to previous hate against JRM and others...but of course fail to explain why it wasn't in the past important enough to break into programmes then but is now...

    Of course Boles is running interference for the Remain-May alliance - he's the guy proposing the Norway Plus option (ie continued membership of the EU but with no influence over the EU's deliberations).

    The subject of Emma Barnett's prog? it time to stop the clock on Brexit?

    It's funny when they do those question intros...I suppose James O'Brien perfected the technique... you start with what sounds like a question but it has so many subsidiary clauses that eventually it turns into a monologue revealing what you really think about the question because it is so heavily biased in its satirise Emma's message: "Is it time to stop the clock on Brexit, pause and reflect in a calm and rational manner or do you think it's better to rush headlong towards the cliff cheered on by Far Right hate mongers intent on plunging our society into violent civil war? What do you think? I'd really like to know..."

  37. @pugnazious January 8, 2019 at 6:07 pm
    Made a good long post about the travesty of Tuesday's Emma Barnett show

    (wait for the page to load and then look down the page about 5 posts to find his post)

  38. #questionasaheadline is a good hashtag to search on twitter. It will pick up mostly BBC 'headlines' that are in fact advocacy poorly disguised.

  39. Sisyphus -

    To further add to your paranoia - this is an interesting vid:

    1. V-e-r-y interesting - in a frightening sort of way! Could just have been special branch keeping an eye on the extreme Left (or Right), of course!

    2. Let's hope they are keeping an eye on Corbyn and McDonnell then as we are soon to be governed by them thanks to May the Loser, worst leader in this country since King "Lackland" John. She had one (very easy) job to do - and she screwed it up.

    3. Yes. Remember when her opponents, in various ways, eliminated themselves & commentators said, "Never mind, she'll be a safe pair of hands?" Oh dear, oh dear!

  40. Belfast Telegraph report:
    'TV Licensing has issued a scam warning to Northern Ireland residents after receiving around 2,500 reports of fraudulent emails.
    The suspect emails claim recipients are owed a refund or state their billing information is out of date in order to dupe unsuspecting customers.
    Customers are then linked through to 'copycat' TV Licensing websites which ask them to input their personal and financial details.'

  41. 'BBC Asian Network is forced to apologise amid backlash after asking listeners whether 18-year-old girl was right to flee Saudi Arabia when family threatened to kill her for leaving Islam'

    The world's broadcaster.

    1. Why is the Turncoat Mail whingeing? They are full-on PC these days. They like Sharia and want more of it.

  42. Anyone know the legal age for riding a moped in Britain ?

    Just wondering...

  43. The Speaker ignored legal advice, and Parliamentary precedent, to allow a vote that gives Mrs May just three days to present a Plan B for Brexit if she loses the “meaningful vote” on her deal next Tuesday. Commentators warn that his unprecedented move will have constitutional consequences.

    The BBC are downplaying this part of today’s story on the governments vote defeat. I suspect that their delight on the outcome overrides any negative reporting on Bercow’s decision or any analysis on constitutional implications.

    1. Not just the BBC but also the allegedly "respected" and "impartial" Institute of Government (funded by Remainiac Lord Sainsbury).

  44. The first sentence from Huw Edwards on tonight’s main 10 o’clock BBC News ended with the words...”to prevent the UK from crashing out of the EU without a deal”.

    It is still a favourite BBC Brexit phrase, they know it’s imflammatory and emotive. It does make you wonder whether it’s deliberate use and repetition of a lie/untruth - classic Goebbels propaganda

    1. Appalling. The only good thing is that the public are being educated about the way this is working.

      And why do they never mention that Dominic Grieve was awarded a Legion d'Honneur by the French! lol If Farage had been given the Mother Russia Medal or whatever, we'd never hear the end of it!!

  45. Newsnight panel to discuss Brexit...what do you think? ALL Remainers. No Leavers.

  46. Raphael Hogarth on Newsnight...

    Who he? I wondered...

    Find out he is associated with the Institute for Government and writer for the Times. But unless I missed it, he wasn't introduced as such.

    So now we have "unannounced" opinion pieces masquerading as news.

    Newnsnight now featuring Chukka Umuna - Remainiac - after its All-Remainer panel.

    Yep, the BBC is now BRAZENLY biased.

    Only Remain voices and only soft questions.

  47. And finally, although we know there will be no problem with medicines even after a no deal, despicable Deborah Cohen is stirring up fear on the basis of fear and no facts at all.

    Then Newsnight finishes off with arch-Remainiac (and Trump-basher) Martin Wolf from Globalist Moutpiece AKA Financial Times.

  48. Coming to a Newsnight near you fairly soon....
    the pre-chewed story and set up for historical purposes :

    The link to the disgusting Daily Caller story which The Guardian hopes you don't click through to.... because it's the same story as The Guardian's.

  49. This story appeared briefly on the BBC News website Home page before being relegated to the comparative obscurity of the Politics pages:

    ... 'Brexit: Theresa May considering Labour MP's demands on workers rights'...

    In an earlier posting on this Open Thread above, we discussed the idea of a group of disenchanted Labour MPs abstaining in the Meaningful Vote. With these straightforward incentives being offered to the group by Theresa May in exchange for support, many Labour MPs who don't see their long-term future as secure with Corbyn and his backers might elect for another three years or so in the comfort of Westminster Bubble.

    1. I think any MP abstaining on that vote will be politically lynched.
      Nobody trusts a word that comes out of May's mouth, so 'considering' means nothing at all. They can't do anything other than 'consider' before the vote amyway as time is up. Anyway, the Unions have already said these measures are not enough.

      Corbyn is pretty much toast as is the current Tory government. It seems to me that a great deal of people really want a centre left socialist in charge.
      I think the only way to see how the Labour party is really leaning is to listen to Starmer who will be the next leader, and he'll take Labour to power.

    2. Yes, what she's offering them is yet another way she's found to tie us to the EU. Thanks a lot. It won't be enough to make them vote for her if they calculate their chances of having a general election are higher than the chances of getting enough votes in the Commons for her withdrawal.
      If a general election, they are sure to win, or at least stop the Conservatives getting a clean win or probably any sort of win, as the constituency boundaries haven't been updated (as far as I know), and there are too many sets of people who won't vote for the Conservatives and too many Conservatives of the fanatical remainer mould who will pay with their seats. There is no palatable prospect for leavers or non-Labour from an election.

    3. Enough - “people really want a centre left socialist in charge”.

      I’m not sure you are right but if you are, the BBC will be delighted and standing shoulder to shoulder with you.

    4. Enough,

      I am not convinced Corbyn is toast. Or if he is, that John McDonnell isn't next up. The Labour Party membership are generally quite hardline socialists who want the rich taxed, lots more public ownership. more workers rights, more welfare, more mass immigration, more political correctness and so on. They aren't going to vote in so called centrists like Keith Starmer and Yvette Cooper (actually both very dangerous extreme no border types) - well, not unless Corbyn suffers a massive election defeat or two.

    5. Hello Arne,

      I'm just saying what I see.
      If Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott were gone and a centre left party became a reality (which I think it will), millions will vote for it. Why ?

      The Tory party has nothing to offer, except continued protection of The City Of London. As soon as there is a viable alternative, I think that alternative will succeed.

      Much as I like Batten, he hasn't got a cat's chance in hell of making serious in-roads. His narrative is unpalatable to a great many people. Even Farage will undermine him whenever he gets the opportunity.

  50. BBC radio news at 2pm gave the reason for todays disappointing retail results as consumer behaviour caused by;
    “They’ve had about 18 months of their wages squeezed by inflation so a bit of thinking again about what they spend”

    Is that the real reason ? It sounds economically illiterate to me. Is it really an inflation squeeze causing the problem or is it just a BBC soundbite response with no substances by checking the facts?

    1. BBC, is that the same 18 months when wages were rising faster than inflation?

  51. I do detect a certain sense of panic of late. The existence of a world outside the BBC bubble that was not a grateful recipient of their message must have been a traumatic realisation. I predict that there will be two reactions. The more ardent supporters of the PC/Cultural Marxist agenda will try to push the message even harder - a kind of Pavlovian dog reaction to being attacked. But the more intelligent response would be to appear to listen and make changes, but continue with the bias in more subtle ways.

    1. We are definitely living in uncertain times!

      I don't disagree with what you say but would make these observations:

      - People are driven by fear and perceived opportunity (ie the hope of reward). The PC-cultural-Marxist-left-liberal leviathan delivers for a lot of people - a lot minorities and women have definitely been give incredible opportunities under this new dispensation. Of course there are losers. But the losers, certainly in the media world are cowed, knowing they will lose their jobs if they ever campaign. Imagine if Huw Edwards were to say "the BBC's insane policy of PC multiculturalism is disadvantaging young Welsh boys from the valleys - they can't hope for a job in TV unless it's in some SC4 ghetto". He'd never read the news again.

      - I don't think they can stop themselves. Everything is hurtling in the same direction. Even the few who might see that the linked policies of no borders, uncontrolled mass immigration, free trade, multiculturalism and political correctness, pursued by all the main political parties (including Conservatives of course) are destroying this country find it very difficult to give voice their concerns. Who is allowed to say such things? Where? Even they are - for how long?

      - My sense is that the elites they have wrestled back control. In the UK they have strong control over the political system through the combination of two main parties, a tame third, and the first past the post system. It's not like other countries in Europe or the USA with its presidential system where a new force can emerge in a matter of weeks. The elite have the media on side. Look at how they destroyed Farage and UKIP. We now know that the Conservatives illegally campaigned against Farage.

      All I see is increasingly brazen bias on the BBC - e.g. last night's ALL-REMAINER panel discussing latest Brexit developments.

      I am appalled by the anti-democratic forces unleashed by the Remainers. Everywhere you look the snakes are slithering through the grass intent on rendering Brexit insensate, to die a slow lingering death: Bercow, Grieve, Soubry, Starmer, Soames, Gove, Leadsom... a loathsome lot.

      I think we are now in praying territory. No real objectively good outcome on offer for our country. We just have to send up a prayer (whether we believe anyone is listening) and hope something emerges through the force of events or personality.

  52. I actually felt once that Corbyn was part of a cunning plan the BBC was part of, whereby the incumbent Tory is left to screw up royally, as Treezer kindly has exceeded by quantum leaps and, just when a few key noses are twitching that anything has to be better... Bam... Jez is booted and someone very appealing in relative terms is suddenly portrayed as the saviour of Labour, the UK and.... be vewwwy, vewwwy quiet, as a bonus... the BBC as the policy guide of the nation again.

    I had thought it was going to be Millionsband Major, but the recent gig does not look good and he seems keen on the wonga.

    Although not black, Yvette is a cute if nasty, two-faced pixie of front hole who is making BBC-approved noises and is not Fledermaus guano-mountain thick like our Diane.

  53. What era are we living in? I would call it the Age of Despondency...

    Unhappy island to be led by a figure so uninspiring as May!

    We are told the economy is growing but people feel no real increase in their personal income.

    We were told Brexit means Brexit but now we see it doesn't.

    Young people, though they may aspire to politically correct thought and action, are much depressed by the state of the housing market. Few houses and none affordable.

    We seem to be living under one of those gloomy cloud layers that never lifts.

    Oh for a ray of sunshine.

    1. OK, here's a little ray of sunshine...

      Bill Cash thinks that there is no way the "Reversers" with their amendments can undo Brexit.

      Hmmm...she's still leader of the Conservatives. She could get Labour to agree to a General Election and seek a mandate for her deal via the General Election...Either she wins or Corbyn does. If she wins, that might be an excuse for Labour to abstain. If Corbyn wins, Brexit probably won't happen.

      Don't underestimate the determination of the globalist elite to stop and then reverse Brexit. I fear Cash may be underestimating their determination.

    2. And then the clouds coalesced and all was gloom again as I watched Question Time...Fiona Bruce managed to be even more biased and irritating than Dimbleby - as well as mumbling into her script. Nish Kumar seemed to have a problem with Melanie Phillips - can't think what it was... :) Anyway she gave back as good as he gave. He called her disgusting and a bigot by the way. No intervention from the useless Bruce, who seems to think that sort of language is perfectly OK as long as it's directed by a BBC lefty luvvie at someone on the right.

      London voted 60-40 for Remain. I'd say the QT audience was 95-5 for Remain. Outrageous bias.

    3. And then was another ray of sunshine - H/T to Guest Who posting on Biased BBC

    4. She has obviously sat at Dimbleby's feet & learned. Turns out she's particularly good at asking a Tory MP (Cleverly) a question & then interrupting him every time he tries to answer it. You're quite right about the audience, MB - heavily stacked with Remainers.

    5. And here's the Fake News from the BBC: "Question Time: Praise for Fiona Bruce's first episode"

      Basically her friends in the media bigging her up. But ordinary people (as reported in the Daily Express) criticising her mumbling performance.

      Nothing about her bias, which was off the scale. He "fire", "sarcasm" (does the BBC think sarcasm is good in its presenters?) and "inquisitorial manner" were all directed in support of the Remain cause, in support of blaming the "Tories" for everything and suggesting public spending is the solution to everything. The Lib Dems got a completely free ride.


    Strangely absent from the BBC front page on the iPhone App. Haven’t checked the website.

    1. Other news not found on the BBC - the 2015 migration wave is going to cost nearly £80 billion over four years.

      That would be about £3000 per household.

      That's a huge figure...that is never reported by the BBC because it completely undermines their crap about Europe's ageing populations needing mass immigration.

    2. That's the cost in Germany, I mean.

    3. MB
      Ed Milliband was on Today earlier this week demanding “the Government “ (aka us taxpayers) spend umpteen billions on “social” housing.

      We really are being used by ruling class . Milked to pay off the bankers and now to pay for the costs of mass immigration.

      (Of course not mentioned by the BBC)

    4. And mention of the Miliband reminds me his mate, Torsten Bell, the genius behind that embarrassing absurdity, the Edstone, was on the BBC (Radio 4) this morning, offered up for our instruction as the fount of knowledge and wisdom on a worthy programme about social mobility.

  55. Yep not covered by the BBC yet - imagine if it was this country #despite Brexit

    1. To paraphrase Robin Aitken, it’s not their sort of story, not the sort of thing they want to publicise and doesn’t fit with the narrative.

    2. Now they have but it’s only a passing reference in the article about our own reduced growth figures. Is it me or is that presented to look worse than it is....

    3. Agreed, a totally negative report. Par for the course from the BBC. Good economic news is always caveated with cautionary tales of slower wage growth and the like. Any downturn or slowing however minor, is big news and made out to be an economic disaster. The story is then milked by the BBC for all it is worth to make politically motivated points.

  56. MB - Mandy Rice Davies is immortalised almost every time BBC Perfect Curve hits the screens.

  57. The BBC seem to have gone into overdrive today with Andy Murray. Along with Mo Farah, Lewis Hamilton and Serena Williams he is one of their favoured and and most revered sports stars.

    Unlike the others, I’m not sure which box he ticks, maybe because he is a Scot or maybe because he isn’t English (and has expressed his dislike for England).

    Either way he has been given the red carpet treatment today and championed as a role model for sports equality and the first male tennis star to have a female coach. (Really?).

    BBC choice of icons can be surprising and obvious at the same time.

    1. Yes - 11 minutes on BBC 1 News. Do they imagine we want to watch a grown man blubbering on tv? Maybe that's it: he's "in touch with his feminine side," so naturally the Beeb approves. Made me squirm.

  58. Dominic Grieve is the new BBC Brexit soothsayer it seems.

    The BBC are running three major stories about his pronouncements today.

    1.Delay Brexit if deal is rejected, Dominic Grieve tells Theresa May
    2. Dominic Grieve: No-deal Brexit would be national suicide
    3. Dominic Grieve: What May must do if she loses.

    The BBC are presenting his words not as opinions but as instructions and prophecies.

    He is an advocate of the BBCs preferred outcome and is being handsomely rewarded for his treachery.

    1. But why do they not give his full title - Legion d'Honneur? - awarded by France for his work on Franco-British relations. Is there some reason the BBC doesn't want the populace to know about this important and prestigous award he holds? I'm amazed no Brexiter ever mentions it either - when you're being kicked in the goolies, having your eye gouged out and being held to the ground by ten hands, then it's time to fight back with any weapon to hand.

  59. Marianne was asking about the legal age for moped riding earlier in the thread. That inconvenient truth, ignored by the BBC to support their narrative hasn't stopped the story unravelling.

    A tragic story but no excuse for the BBC to ignore the truth and hide the facts when it suits them.

    1. It's like BBC reporters never go on Facebook pages when these tragic cases arise, preferring to rely on school photos from 3 or 4 years previously.

    2. I had thought it strange that a 14 year old could seemingly own and ride a moped ? This was just accepted in the news reports, along with claims the victim had no connections with gangs or anything illegal...

    3. Also no connection made between Nottingham (violent gangs) - recent residence of the victim - and London (violent gangs) - residence at death.

      The BBC are prime movers in news suppression.

  60. What is the BBC's policy on Brexit? (We know the BBC has a policy on everything...from transgenderism to chopsticks.)

    I think it is pro-second referendum but only if the question on the ballot is May deal v Remain, and they will probably also agitate for a reduction in voting age to 16 on some spurious grounds.

    However they are alert to the dangers.

    Firstly, there has to be an extension of the Article 50 timeline in order to allow for planning for the rigged re-run. There probably isn't time for the government to renege on its promises and see through a rigged rerun (such things take time!).

    I don't think the BBC are desperate to see a Corbyn government. The BBC is not interested in Marxist adventurism in my view. It much prefers the slow Fabian approach to changing society and of course is much more interested in social change than is the hard Marxist left.

    So I think we will now see full focus by the BBC on the need to extend Article 50.

    1. Newsnight: Kirsty Wark has just interviewed Jenni Russell of 'The Times'. Ms Russell feels that May's deal has not gone down well with people because, "they were not ready for such a hard Brexit." For such a WHAT? How can a Times reporter be so hopelessly out of touch with reality? According to Russell there is nothing to suggest that leaving the customs union was what Brexit voters had in mind...That is precisely what they had in mind, which is why so many now prefer no deal to the May sell-out!

    2. You beat me to the Newsnight Review lol (see below).

      I had to take a call at that crucial point so thanks for filling in that detail.

      Jenni Russell on her last appearance on Newsnight (that I saw at least) stated explicitly that the second referendum must only offer them a choice between the May deal and Remain otherwise they might make "the wrong choice".

      Russell is one of worst commentators. But then who would you say was a good one? Rachel Sylvester? Complete Remainiac. No serious commentators from the populist movement are ever allowed on BBC channels - only the "Licensed Eccentrics" of the Right like Peter Hitchens.

  61. Newsnight Watch:

    1. Item 1. Bigging up Amber Rudd. This is clearly an important part of the Second Referendum project. Kirsty enthusiastic and smiling about her "bold" announcement. Bold = good in BBC Newspeak. Wants to go "further". Pushing the Treasury...Protector of the poor...Clearly necessary for Newsnight to put some rocket boosters on Rudd. So soft questioning. Nice lighting even. I don't know much about camera work but there's a v. sharp focus on her luminescent can't see the they do that for every interviewee? I don't think so.

    Think of Nick Watt as Sir Walter Raleigh and Amber as Queen Elizabeth. He's just laid his cloak, his breeches and his loin cloth over the muddy puddle so we can get a positive view of her.

    2. On to "limiting the possibility of a no deal Brexit". David Grossman. Yes we know that's part of the plan! No need to make it sound like a puzzle Dave!

    3. Discussion with ex UKIP now SDP (new one on me!) Patrick O' Flyn and Jenni Russell (Newsnight favourite). Seems like UKIP are virtually banned from Newsnight. Haven't seen them represented there for a long time. Editorial policy? Patrick, who I always respected, sounds very deflated. Seems to have lost his edge. Not at all confrontational, going with the flow. Jenni tells us Cabinet sources say May will say after she loses the vote "I get it"...more prep for a rigged re-run of the Referendum?

    4. Bit of Islington Dinner Party Charades from John Lanchester. I'm guessing he doesn't like Trump, or Brexit.
    Obama has a wall around his residence. So does the Pope. We built a wall around Calais while in the EU. Bit of Climate Change thrown in. Lol. "The others". Odd thing is that Islingtonians don't realise THEY are the other - a v. peculiar breed that recent incomers view with absolute disdain if not detestation. Yes on to Trump...He's got a Royal Flush: climate, Brexit and Trump. Is John Lanchester a climate scientist? Why doesn't she ask him?

    5. "Wrecking Brexit will let in Far Right" says Chris Grayling we are told. Amazing how the "Far Right" are such a bogeyman given their zero representation in any elected office anywhere in the country (in stark contrast to the rest of the EU).

    6. For some reason John Lanchester gets to do the press opinion review. Scot/Brit nonsense about Murray (living in England, the only time we didn't think of him as "Brit" was when he himself made clear how he felt more Scottish than British). Murray now officially "A really lovely man" - OK surly inability to empathise with anyone else now makes you "a really lovely man". Apparently tennis stars suffer great pain to even get of bed...can only be the $100 million in the bank that manages them to push back the duvet. :)

    I've been writing this and now I am suffering the Mary Beard Experience. Aarrrggh! At least Dreda was a Brexiteer. :) But the Islingtonians are getting embarrassed by her repeated declarations of enduring love for Luther Vandross.

  62. 1. Rudd is clearly taking the leadership struggle very seriously - she's even got someone to teach her how to wash her hair!

    4. We had a wall around Calais from 1347 to 1558! :)

    5. It's a question of definition - to today's Beeboids, Peter Bone & Jacob Rees-Mogg are of the 'extreme right.'

    6. Mary Beard Experience: Quite - pulled the plug!

    1. 1. Lol! It's amazing what George Soros will pay for if it's in aid of the cause!! :)

      4. If Trump had been negotiating Brexit that would have been his opening gambit - that the EU return Calais to its rightful owners ie us. :)

      5. Indeed! I was being a bit polemical there. I think by "Far Right" they mean "UKIP or anything more outside our ken".

      I think Beeboids are genuninely frightened by anything beyond the metrobubble. It's not an act. They really don't understand/are frightened by populism, nationalism, patriotism, football, working class people, loud jokes, pubs, loud noises, crowds, hard drinking, sweat, factories...etc etc. Likewise anything that doesn't fit their very narrow political views, they find frightening.

      6. V. wise. I had it on for longer and it wasn't getting any better. In fact it became a lot worse but then as it got worse quite comical. There was an undercurrent of disdain for Dedra because she was being so determinedly proletarian with her Luther Van Dross comments. I quite like Dedra. I think sometimes she knows what she's doing and is just pushing the rest of them to the limit. I used to quite like Jeanette Winterson but then I think she came out as a full on Remainiac and I took ag'n her. She was throught faux modest...she must have mentioned 20 times that people were after her personal archive. Val MacDermid (spelling?) was trying to compete but we knew Jeanette's archive would be worth a lot more.

      Winterson seems also to have developed into a full on man-hater like her Ma. She was trying to claim it's only ever men who want to uncover the identity of nom de plume writers. Never heard anything so absurd in all my life! Everyone loves a good detective story and if you had to choose I would say it's women who can't live with something so vital as someone's true identity being left unknown.

      Beard is great at exactly the WRONG time. Just as the discussion did get vaguely interesting, she would pounce and send it off in another direction.

  63. Soubry's Hecklers: Some of us were wondering (8.1.19) if the abuse hurled at Soubry might not, in fact, have been orchestrated by Remain supporters, to discredit Leavers - we are not alone in this: See Conservative Woman, 12.1.19, article by Michael StGeorge, "A remarkably convenient confluence of 'coincidences' "

    1. Soubry's Hecklers: ... Sky News have been reporting that James Goddard has been arrested this morning for 'public order offences' prior to another much heralded protest march against austerity. Clearly it is approved of by the BBC - as their reporters were there to wave the marchers off from Broadcasting House.

      BBBC had a posting of the Soubry's Hecklers group with video showing one of the group leading the chanting, who slipped something into the pocket of Soubry's aide - an invoice perhaps?

    2. 'invoice' lol. That video appears in the Michael StGeorge article I mention above & MB linked to it on this site on 9th Jan.

  64. BBC News: Ministers consider ending jail terms of six months or less
    Does this mean that we will no longer go to jail for non-payment of the TV licence tax?

  65. Is this one on the list of BBC biases?

    Premature 'balanced' reporting: Where the BBC tells us that the government has announced a new policy then puts up two people to tell us why the government is wrong. It is like listening to a debate where the chairman poses the question and only the opposition gets to develop the case against.

  66. Hear is a beauty from Guido -

    1. And, as always, some of the comments are brilliant.

  67. On the BBC News website Politics page this morning, there were no fewer than fifteen Brexit related stories:

    1. Blocking Brexit 'may cause far-right surge'.
    2. Cocker - Let's have another referendum.
    3. Hunt - Speaker 'frustrating' Government.
    4. No deal Brexit 'would be national suicide'.
    5. 'What did Westminster elite expect to happen?'.
    6. Praise for Fiona Bruce's first Question Time.
    7. Grieve: delay Brexit if deal is rejected.
    8. UK faces Brexit 'paralysis', Hunt warns.
    9. As it happened: MPs Brexit debate.
    10. Police to boost Parliamentary security.
    11. How is Dublin preparing for a possible no deal Brexit.
    12. The top five Brexit questions answered.

    And then from the BBC People:

    13. LK "What could change the dynamics of Brexit vote?".
    14. JP Plotting and scheming afoot as PM's options narrow.
    15. MD'A Hold onto your hats - next week is going to be a momentous week in Parliament.

    Throughout these stories, there is nothing for Leave voters to take comfort from. It is all one way coverage - a mixture of project fear and anti Leave rhetoric.

    The BBC message is: a no deal outcome is to be avoided at al costs - but we, the electorate are expected by the BBC to support any of the other outcomes, Theresa May's Meaningful Vote being carried, another referendum (the People's Vote), or a general election. So, any outcome as long as it isn't Leave. The BBC are seeking to demonise the Leave voter.

    1. The BBC does not represent people's opinions. It is part of a movement to change people's opinions.

    2. Indeed. As posters on this blog have repeatedly pointed out, their agenda is now pretty transparent.

      However as they become ever more emboldened and blatant we must continue to record any evidence of their bias.

  68. "A very British coup"..."Conservative Party in danger of imploding".

    We are on the edge and this is very serious. But the BBC rather than be scrupilously neutral is weighing in on the side of the anti-democratic coup leaders (Blair, Campbell, Mandelson, Grieve, Soubry, Cooper, Umuna).

    Time for the ERG to form a separate party, and create a populist pact with UKIP based on a solemn pledge for us to leave the EU or any fake Brexit treaty.

  69. I think everyone here who loves liberty should be concerned about the persecution of James Goddard -

    He has done nothing more than 10,000 lefties have done in various demos, pickets, marches and sieges of MPs' homes and offices. But he alone is being prosecuted because of his actions and moreover it's pretty clear the real reason (as with Tommy Robinson) is to be able to impose draconian bail conditions to prevent further political activity.

    You can see a link on bBBC to a video where the Pro-EU Remainer College Green nutter calls an MP "scum" to his face but that person has NOT been prosecuted and never will be under the Great Khan's policing rules.

    We are gradually slipping into not just an unfree society but an actively totalitarian one and there isn't a single solitary MP prepared to stand up and fight for our liberty.

    1. And this is the guy demonised by the Mail and the rest of the Globalist media as a Far Right Racist, being interviewed by Raheem Kassam...

    2. In the parallel world of the BBC there is no longer any difference between being far-right and having voted Leave. Increasingly, there is no voice for the Leave voter. 'Brexit' has morphed into another entity - only concerned with how to Remain.

  70. MB, are you right ? Undoubtedly in my opinion.
    But any fool could see where this was going. So why choose the tactics that little group chose ?

    Why did that same group stumble into a lefty book shop and act like morons ?

    Were they massively lied about in the media at the time ? Yes.
    Did they thmeselves grease the path for the lies ? Absolutely.


    The 4th estate isn't going to spend time picking the few good bones out of these events. They're not going to trouble themselves with actually being journalists, and anybody with one eye open knows that. So why act like an idiot unless you're an idiot ?

    The media sees these people as an enchalada of badness which is so incompetent, tactless and, as far as they are concerned, politically if not literally illiterate that it becomes easy to beat.

    In a previous post, you mentioned the fear of all things working class that certain elements of the middle class have.
    I call it 'fear of the kebab queue'.
    It's real because it's real.

    Who won this conversation ? :

    It's a classic war of attrition.

    1. The principle of free speech applies to idiots and the ignoble as well as to the sage and saintly.

      The principle of equality before the law applies to everyone, not just those approved of by the Polly Toynbee, Mark Easton and Sadiq Khan.

      If we have abandoned those principles we have abandoned our democracy. It is literally no longer a democracy. I fear we have gone past the tipping point.

    2. "The principle of free speech applies to idiots and the ignoble as well as to the sage and saintly."

      Absolutely. And each suffers the consequences of excercising that right within the (manufactured or otherwise) zeitgeist of the era.

      In the zeitgeist of this era you have to learn how to argue with James O'brien and the BBC.
      Stats and facts are the only way to argue with feelz.

  71. So, we are in the middle of a coup. It is a coup, because with no debate - just a decision, or maybe we should call it an act of calculated caprice, of an ex Monday Club activist with fascist sympathies (yes, Bercow) - our settled constitution has been torn to shreds. Bercow's actions are more like those of some central African colonel taking control of a radio station and declaring himself President for life. No consultation, no public vote, no public debate. All decided behind closed doors over a glass of whisky with his co-conspirators.

    What else might Bercow invent while in the chair? Maybe he'll decide that only women can vote on women's issues or that for some votes there must be a 2/3 majority if he says you know, he's not bound by precedent.

    The traitor MPs, all (bar Lib Dems in on the plot) elected on manifestos commiting them to Brexit, now seek to reverse our democratic decision and ensure that we can never, ever leave the EU (don't worry, if they can plot to reverse Brexit, they can plot to ensure our membership is permanent and irreversible).

    It has to be realised these people are dangerous extremists.

    While they pretend they care about the country and don't want us walking off a "cliff edge", in reality they are quite prepared to inflict any amount of economic, political and social damage on the UK.

    We now have a situation where:

    1. The government can no longer govern because it cannot control the order paper.

    2. The Conservative Party has been destroyed as a political force, making the taking of power by the radical Venezualan-style Left more than a possibility, almost a certainty.

    3. Social divisiveness on a scale as yet unimagined.


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