...and any other matters that take our fancy
The Speaker: "The member for Morecambe, whose smiling countenance suggests he is somewhat pleased with his interventions at the expense of the chair and the likes of Sir Mark Easton, takes umbrage in great, some may say unnecessarily prodigious, quantities and curates his collection of umbrage with what is no doubt obsessive and wholly laudable diligence of a singularly rare degree of fastidiousness, but if he could forebear allowing his umbrage to spill out all over the chamber that would be a source of huge relief, indeed intense gratification, to the preponderance of honourable members gathered here today...Anna Soubry!!!"
The member for Morecambe is certainly prone to chuntering from a sedentary position.
John Simpson's insane bias against Brexit (despite it being supported by 17.4 million of his fellow citizens)is on full display again with no admonition from the BBC:https://twitter.com/JohnSimpsonNews/status/1110837868635832322?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1110837868635832322&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fbiasedbbc.org%2Fblog%2F2019%2F03%2F27%2Fmidweek-open-thread-27-march-2019%2Fcomment-page-3%2F%23commentsThe Tweet is bad enough but look at the comments underneath - none of which he takes issue with! So full of Remainer hate and bile. They want people who supported Brexit in public life to be imprisoned, fined, stripped of their assets, banned from office - possibly executed since Nuremberg trials are mentioned. These people - Simpson, Davis, Maitlis and Robinson included - are in the grip of a violently compulsive delusion. They are very, very dangerous. They are quite happy to sacrifice democracy, free speech, the rules of fair debate and our established constitution to see their delusion made real. I used to be somewhat dismissive of those who said Euroism was a kind of substitute religion. Now I am not so sure. The fervour, the imperviousness to reason, the visceral hatred of and projection of bad qualities on to non-believers, the faith in miracles (the EU will deliver peace and prosperity because we believe it will)...these are all characteristic of religious belief at its worst. It's quite frightening I would say.
Agreed - BBC staffers seem to be able to say what they like on Twitter without any consequences. Lineker is the same. So long as they tweet globalist left liberal views, the entire BBC hierarchy will be in agreement. Comments on their tweets are seen as nothing to do with them.
Gary Lineker was excused by the BBC because he doesn't work for BBC News and Current Affairs. There's no such get-out for the likes of John Simpson, Hugh Sykes, Anthony Zurcher, Jeremy Bowen & Co, even though they seem to think there is.
We no longer really need to look at twitter for overt bias as what I call "brazen bias" is now a regular feature of everyday broadcasting at the BBC from the likes of Jo Coburn the Barbarian, to Emily "Mad" Maitlis, Evan "Anxious" Davis, Nick "Ken Doll" Robinson, Mark "Anglophobe" Easton and Emma "Race Baiter" Barnett.
This made my day - BBC fake news can be penalised. However it’s s bittersweet victory because the fine is coming out of licence payers pockets. BBC pays damages to Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko over reporthttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47719166
I wonder who reported it first? The BBC clarifications and corrections report says;In our News at Ten bulletin and in an online article published on 23 May 2018 we incorrectly reported that Petro Poroshenko, the President of the Ukraine, had procured or authorised a corrupt payment of $400,000 to be made to Michael Cohen.
Our old friend, fanatical Trumpophobe, Paul Wood:https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/mar/28/bbc-pay-substantial-libel-ukraine-president-poroshenko-donald-trump"The original story, by the BBC world affairs correspondent Paul Wood, was attributed to “sources in Kiev close to those involved” and a “high-ranking Ukrainian intelligence officer”."The story was "backed up" by Stormy Daniels lawyer Michael Avenetti - currently under invesigation for serious extortion crimes in the USA.
I saw the BBC report about that during lunch at work and guessed it might be Paul Wood. Oh dear, he's not had a good week!
Interesting how the BBC are prepared to protect his reputation. Why? Because their institutional reputation depends on protecting their individual staff, so we don't conclude these are the sort of people that are easily swayed by tittle-tattle that suits their prejudices.
Appalling bias by Madly Maddening Maitlis on Newsnight. Jabbing-fingered, virtue-signalling abuse directed at Jacob Rees-Mogg. Then a soft ride for Sarah Wollaston and Stephen Kinnock - no abuse directed at them. Par for the case I guess. If I was there I'd be asking them why they want to overturn the people's vote of 2016. JRM looks like a broken man. Nothing to do with Maitlis's pathetic schoolgirl posturing. Just I think he realises he has destroyed his own reputation. Now we are on to Soft Chu with his "further bad news" about Brexit...what a surprise there. Maitlis looking like she can't follow all this complex trade stuff - completely switched off. :) Soft Chu confessed this wasn't his own research he got it from what he oddly called a "group" rather than a "leading independent and well respected think tank" (why didn't he use the usual BBC formula?). The UK Trade Policy observatory (UKTPO), is actually a partnership between the University
of Sussex and Chatham House. Chatham House is of course a completely Remainiac Institution, in fact I would go as far as saying actually anti-British, certainly non-British in character. Their Project Fear stories are so many and so variable in veracity that I would on principle ignore anything they wished to offer.
Zurcher the Beserker has become Zurcher the Deluded...https://twitter.com/awzurcher/status/1111411461597757442Zurcher actually believes the Quinnipiac polls which had Hillary 20 points ahead of Trump! lol I am currently watching the Trump rally in Grand Rapids. Believe me, whoever takes on Trump is going to have a mountain to climb.
Crocodile tears from the BBC...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-47740396They report with "concern" on the huge rise in anti-depressant prescriptions...And yet it was the BBC that deliberately decided to subject the UK to a wave of depressant programming in the wake of the Brexit vote. The programming was specifically designed to create personal anxiety and insecurity, to encourage a lack of confidence in one's own judgement, to encourage dependence on expert opinion about one's own life, to despair about increasing social and racial division, to fear "armageddon" style scenarios etc.It was I believe one of the worst ever exercises in cynical propaganda ever perpetrated on the public. Of course the BBC were directing this propaganda at the general population, in order to achieve a political purpose (reversal of the Brexit vote, about which Lord Hall was so ashamed, the BBC having not prevented it). But they must have known there would be huge collateral damage among the more vulnerable minority who would be plunged into real despair and depression. It seems like that has defintiely come to pass. Appalling. I noticed that this trend of the last couple of years has actually been abating in recent months - I never thought this would be a permanent policy. Clearly at some point in the narrative they had to let people begin to "hope" again, but of course the hope had to be to "cling closer to nurse for fear of something worse". They knew they had to change the mass psychology to "OK, we despair - give us familiar security". Of course, they are realists - they know they aren't going to change the view of 80% of the population who are robust and have a strong identity. But if they can unsettle 20% of the population, it's job done.
Take a look at this from 2:50https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7FzTS_vbm8The American Senator asks a v. reasonable question. Why have the MSM been so reluctant to track down Christopher Steele and ask him a few questions (e.g. about the Steele Dossier, who was paying him , how much he was getting paid, what are his official status within the UK, what are his contacts with Russian officials etc).
@MB notice how the TV bod just deflects after he makes his point about the media NOT seeking to interview Steele."So what do you think about the Mueller Report ?"..she replies
\\ Anti-Trump dossier creator Christopher Steele will face a London defamation trial later this year, one of two court cases in which he was forced to produce his first and only on-the-record statements on how he investigated and spread Democratic Party opposition research.A lawyer involved in a lawsuit told The Washington Times that the London trial will start this fall, //
BBCnews UK centre of Trumpophobia
Ultra Brexiteers - why is this now the standard name for anyone asking for a proper Brexit? The BBC use it all the time and on BBC Midlands Today they got the blame for losing today’s vote.It’s another BBC dirty word deliberately designed to be derogative and to damage those who are named this way. Like ‘ crashing out’ and ‘people didn’t vote to be poorer’ words and phrases in the lexicon of the left always have a malevolent, negative context.
It's a deliberate insult and signpost for thought control. Ultra is a term associated with violent football fans who often have (real) Far Right ties. From Wikipedia: "The actions of ultras groups are occasionally extreme and may be influenced by political ideologies such as conservatism or socialism, or views on racism, ranging from avowed nationalists to anti-fascist"This is a deliberate attempt by the BBC to associate True Brexit with violence and fascism. I'm not sure I've heard the term yet but it may be part of a new anti-UKIP strategy in the event we have to participate in EU elections (which the BBC's anti-Brexit strategy necessitates). They will be looking to associate UKIP with football violence and "Far Right" beliefs - with Tommy Robinson being a big obsession for them of course.
Letter from London: Interesting to hear Piers Morgan say that Blair and Campbell were desperately trying to get him to support the UK joining the Eurozone when Morgan was Mirror editor...now it all makes sense how Morgan was taken down (Iraq War bogus "torture pics") and abandoned. Makes you wonder: was it actually a set-up?Newsnight tonight was a fright! Always v. disturbing when low IQ anti-democrat super-virtue signaller Stella Creasy is on. I don't know much about George Freeman but the more I see of him the less I like. I wouldn't trust him a micrometre let alone an inch. I'd prefer to trim his annoying beard than trust his judgement. Did I hear the chink of champagne glasses from BBC staff when the clock struck 11? ("Job well done - guys and gals...but still lots to do before we can relax knowing we are staying in the EU...keep up the good work!"). Maybe I just imagined the party scene. :) Freeman was touting the Tommy Bogey Man...apparently there is a creature of the night that lurks on London's streets frightening good honest Remainer citizens... I hate the way they reference TR (oddly not referred to as Stephen Yaxley-Lennon tonight) as though he is somewhat to the right of Himmler and Goebbels when in fact his views are no different from those of ministers in several governments in their much-beloved EU (in places like Denmark, Germany, Austria, Italy, Poland and Hungary). The panel was pretty dreadful. Why is Nina Schick given a voice. This is here from a profile piece in the Times:"Though she grew up in Kathmandu, with German and Nepalese parents, she was educated at Cambridge and speaks with a cut-glass accent. Yet when Britain voted for Brexit, she realised her future lay elsewhere. “I came to London because it was international and open-minded,” she says. “I loved the UK. With Brexit, I was severely disillusioned.” "She clearly has no commitment to the UK, so why is she allowed on such a panel posing as though she does? Claire Fox wasn't bad. Ditto Toby Young. But they should push back at the BBC much harder. Why didn't they mention that Hugh Sykes tweet for instance? Then we had Ayesha Hazarika MBE lyingly pretending not to be a Revoker. I think it's time we renamed the Remainiacs "Revokers".
You should have seen the display of petulance and amateur theatrics from Stella Creasy on Politics Live the other day directed at Nadhim Zahawi. I found a clip on youtube. It starts at 27 mins in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKYMWaTB_-gShe was on This Week on Thursday night as well, sitting in the Alan Johnson seat with Portillo. And now you say on Newsnight too. My, she's in demand on the BBC. Can't think why.
MB: Re: 'revokers,' I find 'remaineers, gets them going too! Still in bandit country, but at least able to receive R4 - best avoided if driving on M'way, though!
Nina Schick, whom I'd never heard of before, was on Sky News press preview last night. I was trying to figure out where she was from and thought she sounded American.
The Daily Express reported yesterday on Friday....if you can believe this, that Bercow Berk has become some kind of hero in Europe, saying that he was 'revelling in continental adoration after being told that Europe has fallen in love with him over his Brexit grandstanding.'It seems that he was told by an Italian newspaper that he has legions of European admirers over his handling of Brexit. And that they loved his 'captivating English' described as a mixture of Shakespeare and Monty Python.Of course we all know that he is a Remainer. It's no secret.But I can never get over the strange Parliamentary system where he has to repeat and shout out every Commons Vote when the four Parliamentary tellers have already done the job.I wish the Berk would go. Unfortunately his Commons gown is made of teflon and nothing will move him away from his favourite stage.Re: the big Brexit demo yesterday I noticed that some of the demonstrators including Tommy and his team, were struggling to stream their live youtube videos from Parliament Square. They think it was the Police trying to put a spanner in the works. Typical! John.....N. London.
Yes Bercow is a leading Revoker seeking to overturn the democratic vote of the people as part of a co-ordinated elitist coup involving foreign powers and ex PMs (Blair and Major). He is also absurd. Re the techno-sabotage..it's happened before...several people here noted how all the live streams went down at the Panodrama event at more or less the same time just as it was about to be shown. And then there was the strange episode in the civil case in court (Peterborough) where TR's counsel was due to sum up - she had to confess to the judge that she had somehow "locked herself out of her laptop" but she would persevere from memory. Odd eh? And TR also reported the people trying to edit/render Panodrama kept experiencing techno probs of type they had never experienced before. I suspect Tommy and Iranian nuclear scientists have something in common when it comes to getting on with their everyday business
M.B. I thought that Bercow looked quite comical and almost Wurzel Gummidge like when the BBC chased him as he was making his way into the Parliamentary buildings earlier this week.Was it a disguise on Bercow's part. He looked an absolute mess in his Primark jumper.
Not the BBC but Channel 4's very own senile Jon Snow declaiming re a pro-Brexit protest that "he's never seen so many white people in one place"!!!!He's obviously never been to Scotland! I am truly flabbergasted - surely he can see that doesn't look good as a stand-alone comment! lol https://twitter.com/Insurance_Rich/status/1111752467946065923If Jon Snow were a known Far Right sympathiser as opposed to being a Far Left race baiter, the next day we would have Jeremy Vine, Victoria Derbyshire, Nicky Campbell, Emma Barnett and Adrian Chiles all in full-on anxiety mode about unacceptable race-based comments and what does that tell us about divided Britain..."We asked the Guardian for a comment but they declined..." Lots of tut-tutting and expert opinion to drive home the point that Snow is a rabid racist...But of course we know tomorrow there will be...nothing. Nada. Doesn't count if it's one of your lefty mates. Same with Dawn Butler's racist comments about white people not being allowed to prepare jerk chicken. Never mentioned again by the BBC.
I'm disappointed in Guido (again):https://order-order.com/2019/03/29/staff-told-leave-parliament-matter-caution/#disqus_threadThe message is clear - Leave supporters are likely to be white, far-right, potentially violent, and therefore pose a threat to parliamentary staff. The extension of this bias might suggest that pro-Brexit MPs represent a similar threat.
Guido went native a couple of years ago - a metropolitan PC conservative type who has very selective reporting and omission bias rather like the BBC. I’m afraid he is not essential reading any more.
Yep, I always had Guido Fawkes down as basically a gossip site, happily ensconced in the Westminster bubble. As long as he can be wined and dined at his favourite restaurants he doesn't give an eff about mass immigration running at 6 million per decade, population growth running at 5 million a decade, Sharia, the domination of our economy by the corrupt money laundering City, the desperate housing crisis, a meaningful Brexit or indeed anything else of import. No one has a monopoly on wisdom but at least Gerard Batten recognises what our country faces.
@Arthur No Guido was OK this tie he added no extra spin..But his cartoon after TR was wrongly convicted was absolutely appalling and was a turning point for me.
A very poor attempt by Frank Gardner to conflate ISIS and the far-right. The BBC are going for equivalence with the ideologies but this piece of journalism is amateurish to say the least.But it does show where the BBC narrative is heading. We can expect much more of this. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47746271
Yes, they know if they are going to get their Revocation then they will have to have EU elections. They want to minimise the UKIP vote, which they see as a deadly threat to their project. So they will smear UKIP as "Far Right" and then big up the threat of "Far Right" terrorism and throw in a huge amount of HNH "Far Right" hate nonsense. By these means "Far Right" will be associated with UKIP and "Far Right" will mean anything from supporting Brexit to violent terrorism. Meanwhile the phrase "Far Left" will never pass the lips of a BBC reporter.
Extremely malicious #BiasedBBC headline,cos everyone knows "far right" is an Ad Hom used against anyone challenging metro-liberals.A title "similarities between actual Nazis & ISIS" would be OKFrank is in the news thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/8718259/bbc-security-correspondent-frank-gardner-kiss-brunette
Dimbleby J really went to town today. The man is insufferable. Any Questions? turned into 'The Dimbleby Show (With Alastair Campbell)'. What a pair of mutually admiring luvvies. Always prepared with an array of weapons, Dimbo started as he meant to go on, allowing Campbell to say his opening piece uninterrupted although he made some sweeping assertions and certainly challengeable accusations but when Gisela Stewart spoke, it seemed every time she was followed by questions, challenges and statements from the chairman. It didn't happen exclusively to her, though. Throughout most of the programme, we heard a great deal from what is supposed to be a chairman, allowing other people to do the talking. At one point he went on so long, I thought it was turning into the Dimbleby Lecture. After which we were treated to smarmy apology to Campbell (what about us, the mere listener?) and a further pulpit session from Campbell in which he proclaimed, among other things, that the referendum vote was as a result of lies and crimes. There wasn't a peep let alone one of his eager questions or challenges from Dimbo to that. Yet when someone cited Mervyn King, formerly of the Bank of England, saying something favourable about leaving, Dimbo was in quick as a flash to counter the point with something else that King said. Campbell the luvvie knew he was among friends and was careful to return the smarmy compliment with one of his own. If there aren't any complaints about this programme today, I will wonder if it's only me or if other people are inured to this kind of display from the BBC or just very tolerant.
The weekly Dimbleby Lecture - I like it! And you can just imagine him having a laugh and snigger with Jon Snow about that comment.
The BBC never stop going on about the alleged "lie on the bus" perpetrated by the Leave campaign. It was no more than a slight exaggeration. In substance it was correct. But what about the REALLY BIG LIE being told to us day in and day out by the BBC for the last 2 and half years in concert with the lying EU, lying Irish government and lying May. I am referring of course to the lie that a backstop is required to prevent the erection of a hard border in N. Ireland. For once (only once!) the BBC's Reality Check team are helpful in setting out what preparations have been taken by the EU countries re a possible no deal scenario: "Ireland passed no deal Brexit legislation in February, which covers a number of important issues such as allowing for pension and other benefits to be paid, for cross-border rail and bus services to continue and for citizens to access services across the border as they do now.But, the most important issue - the future of the land border with Northern Ireland - does not feature in the legislation.Ireland, the UK and the EU all say they want to avoid any physical infrastructure at the border. But an EU official said checks on goods would need to be done and the EU and Ireland were working on carrying them out away from the border." So the EU has absolutely no intention of erecting a hard border, and neither do we. So this whole backstop thing has been based on an outrageous lie. But a very useful lie for May, the EU and the Irish government to cripple a real Brexit.
Keep your spirits up... JHB on Talk Radio:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCg_Z24jz4EI think I said before how much I wished she was in government, maybe as the Minister for the Brexit negotiations. I recall prominent Trade Unionist Frank Cousins was a Cabinet Minister in Wilson's first government, initially without being an MP. There's no bar to that constitutionally. I suggest if we ever get a patriotic Leave government, JHB should be brought into government and sent to negotiate in Brussels with full powers (if she'll accept!).
Bias by exclamation, is that a new one?Andrew Marr today, "SIX HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND POUNDS!", over and over to Gisela Stuart, or 'just over half a million' or a penny per person.What price 24/7 BBC 'impartiality'for the last three years? Still waiting for that Benefits of Brexit programme!
And not the only form of bias evident on the Marr programme this morning, which was dire. Burley must be finding it hard to get anyone on. Is that because the poor dears had to turn up in the House on Friday or because the clocks have gone forward and it's all too much for them? And lo, he found conveniently arch- Remainer Major in the bottom of the barrel, along with Watson - him again! That exclaiming and declaiming was Marr putting on his moral indignation act or, as Craig put it about Feedback, acting as ventriloquist and vent for the angry crowd that Marr alluded to as he tried to force an apology from the Vote Leave campaign. Marr knows as well as anyone that the amount spent or even overspent by Vote Leave is a drop in the ocean compared with the spend on Remain, not least by the government itself with its millions on a leaflet alone. He also knows damn well where the Electoral Commission is coming from, which is why the best he could say about was that it is respected by some people. That's a very qualified sort of statement and I very much doubt a careless choice of wording.
The Electoral Commission is not just pro-Remain, it is a real threat to our democracy being able to slow down or deny registration to political parties it dislikes. This is of particular relevance given the febrile state of politics at the moment where you might get party splits and a snap general election. The job of Electoral Commission like that of Ofcom and the Equalities Commission is to support PC globalism at all times.
This is a list of the questions Andrew Marr put to Gisela Stuart this morning:- Gisela Stuart, first of all, you saw the anger outside parliament this week. Who do you blame for the fact that we are not outside the EU today?- Now, Dominic Cummings, who you worked with very closely during this campaign, blames in particular Tory Brexiteers in the ERG. He called them this week, ‘the narcissistic, delusional subset of the ERG. Useful idiots for Remain.’ Do you agree with him?- Vote Leave broke the law according to the Electoral Commission in a serious way. This week Vote Leave dropped its appeal against that decision. Why?- You didn’t try very hard because you overspent to the tune of £675,000, a huge amount of money, which the Electoral Commission thought was a very, very serious electoral offence.- You broke the law. It happened under your watch in this organisation. Will you apologise to people for that now?- Nevertheless, the Electoral Commission is trusted by many people. At the time of their original judgement Vote Leave said it was, ‘wholly inaccurate and contains false accusations that do not stand up to scrutiny.’ Do you stand by that statement?- You destroyed the data, the Electoral Commission were very upset that you did not cooperate more clearly with them at the time. Do you understand why many people in this country on the other side of the argument feel that this referendum in 2016 was corrupted and cannot be trusted because of the way Vote Leave behaved?- They say they did. - I’m not asking about the lie or what people thought, but we both know that in elections and referendums the amount of money spent really matters. That affects the number of adverts people see, things that come through their door, and therefore how they think and how they react. £675,000 is a huge amount of money to overspend, as it were, by accident. I ask you one more time, for all those people watching who are really upset by this, can you apologise to them for that either mistake or witting breaking of the law?
I watched some of this Marr interview with Gisela Stuart. It struck me as a desperate attempt to undermine the 2016 Referendum result and hence push forward one of the BBC's preferred options of the 'People's Vote' - a rerun, which with sufficient endeavour, and the likes of John Simpson 'explaining' to the ignorant Leave voters, might provide a Remain majority. That's the BBC's deluded hope...'£675,000 is a huge amount of money' .. commensurate with Marr's annual salary?
Just dipping into my Sunday Times... Seems there has been a scandal going on of gigantic proportions. Apparently gangs of "British Asians" (no need to translate, we all know it doesn't mean naturalised Japanese Buddhists) have over decades defrauded the UK of billions of pounds through VAT and benefit scams. This has been known to HMRC. The Sunday Times can't tell us the details of the indiviudals and so on because of court orders dating back 10 years (how familiar - more gagging orders). The worst aspect is that HMRC has known about these gangs and let them operate for decades. The gangs have used some of their proceeds (estimated at £80 million) to fund Al Queda, extremist Madrassas and all the rest back in Pakistan. They failed to inform MI5 about the terrorist link. What's going on? This is a scandal of huge proportions. Has HMRC been compromised, by bribes or ideology, in the same way Police, local government and social services were compromised in the so called "grooming" scandals up and down our country? Nothing about this on the BBC News UK webpage yet...but they have got a prominent story about a female model with alopecia hoping to inspire others, so at least they have not lost sight of their priorities.
With our main political parties falling over themselves to court Asian or other minority groups, it's not hard to see how things can happen and nothing get done about them. It used to be Labour that did all this sucking up to Asian minority blocs (see Jack Straw) but I've seen it locally with the Conservatives too in recent years. In pursuit of minority approval they seem to go overboard and lose all capacity for judgment, which can lead to collusion and opportunity for forms of corruption.
It's a massive story.
At 12:12:Notice how Alistair Campbell does NOT deny his campaign is backed by "Soros millions". Have you ever heard Campbell challenged like this on the BBC? Of course you haven't but we've seen countless times Leavers subject to mocking challenge. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_3t0xCn0jw
The link doesn't work for me, as happens a fair few times with links posted here. I tried copy and paste but it's just a blank. Campbell was given a soapbox on Any Questions? this past weekend and typically when I see him on programmes like Politics Live he talks over, interrupts and tries to stop other people speaking or stating an opinion he doesn't like to hear. He's basically a dictator and a bully. It's obvious the BBC loves and indulges him because he's at home with them and the Labour former minister running Radio 4. He's never been elected to anything himself and was a mere civil servant but talks grandly of 'when we were in government' and thinks he's entitled to speak for the country. Since when do civil servants claim to have been in government? They don't. Has the BBC ever picked him up on statements like that or asked him whom he represents?
Peter Hitchens's complaint about pro-abortion bias / lack of balance in controversial matters on Call the Midwife rumbles on, with the BBC rambling, obfuscating, failing to address the actual issue but nonetheless declaring this dismissal will be their final finding - unless something else comes up... You couldn't make it up.He's also been turned down for the post of Controller Radio 4 by unsigned e-mail from Birmingham. You couldn't...https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
I'm not really anti-abortion or pro-abortion. I have my views. But I am definitely anti BBC pro-abortion bias. One of my problems with the BBC is that they proceed as though abortion is simply a medical procedure and yet they refuse to ever show a real late term abortion. We all know why - because there would be a natural visceral and negative reaction to seeing the reality.
The Abortion debate has always brought out some of the worst BBC bias. A report on the main BBC News by Reeta Chakrabarti in 2015 was shameful. I remember seeing it and being shocked by the overtly aggressive tone and one sided bias by the presenter.Rod Liddle wrote this. One, by Reeta Chakrabarti about protests outside abortion clinics. This was the most egregiously biased piece of reporting I have seen for a long while. It took, as a statement of unalterable fact, that these protests were vile. There was not a single voice raised in defence of the protests, or against abortion. It was propaganda, pure and simple.
A couple of weeks back, Hitchens posted a link to a doctor describing (not showing) how an abortion is performed and it was horrific.
The BBC like to think they are "fearless" in their broadcasting but they won't go anywhere near the reality of abortion whether it's in news, current affairs, soaps, dramas, chat shows or lifestyle programming. It's all Red Flag, dangerous explosives, do not enter territory.
BBC providing a platform for Far Right extremists to justify their involvement in despicably violent movement...sorry, scrub that - a plaform for Islamic extremists, to justify their involvement in despicably violent movement - so that's OK then. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-middle-east-47764792/is-defeat-british-fighters-emerge-after-fall-of-baghuz
As featured on Biased BBC...Katya Adler's sneaky tweet quoting with approval a Remainiac propaganda outfit's dodgy "economics" (made up propaganda).https://twitter.com/CER_EU/status/1111915972632420353The "Centre for European Reform" (there's a misnomer) - a big business lobby group including German-controlled Airbus - seems to have based their figures on the OECD which famously predicted we would be plunged into an immediate recession if we voted Leave. It didn't happen. So this is all BS.
The problem in the UK is that we have no one like Judge Jeanine...or Trump...or Hannity...Gowdy...or a lot of people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqCOSmaPWBsJeanine points the finger at John Brennan as the "snake at the head". That's long been my analysis. I hope Trump and co. do go after the traitors. As Jeanine states, if they don't it will happen again. Hopefully we will have an inquiry into the traitors in our country who have stopped Brexit and overturned a democratic vote of the people. MPs have a right to act on their conscience when they vote in Parliament. They don't have a right to conspire with foreign governments to undermine the democratic will of the people expressed in line with an Act of Parliament.
I can barely bring myself to turn on BBC radio these days let alone venture into the depths where podcasts lurk but I came across a review of five Brexit podcasts in Metro newspaper the other day, one of which is Brexitcast with Laura K and Adler, among others. It's described as 'impartial to the hilt' and a bit informal with giggling fits. There's another one called Brexit: a Love Story? hosted by Mark Mardell who 'acts a perfect measured guide.' But if you want 'a weekly dose of the facts and just the facts, RTE: Brexit Republic 'is just the ticket'. It's 'devoid of humour and bias...'https://www.metro.news/brexit-podcasts/1492126/
Metro - metropolitan elite views. It's not a bad rag given it's free if you can set the politics to one side but one thing I noticed is they deploy a lot of (free) user content. So "readers" submit reviews of programmes which they print or put online. Remainers are definitely more media-savvy than Leavers - I'll give them that and of course the Metro being a Remainiac rag is only too happy to receive contributions from Remainiacs. Hence all the stuff you are referencing I think.
I pick it up sometimes at the station but don't usually find a lot of reading in it. This item was an article by a journalist.
What do you mean by "a journalist". Who was the journalist? I used to think they had lots of journalists till I saw various references in the paper saying something like "We welcome your opinions/reviews, please send them to..." If the writer is a journalist we will be able to confirm that by the magic of the Internet! :)
By the magic of the byline shown in the link - below the photo of the demonstrators and above the line of links for twitter, facebook etc. - one Gareth May.I've never noticed readers' views other than the letters or paid any attention to who writes the articles as I tend to skim through. It's not exactly content rich.
David Wood's very good and correct analysis of where we are in the UK on Muslim opposition to equality education in primary schools...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8qWyxr_evgI said before the Left-Liberals will back down. That's his analysis. And that is what's happening.The only people who could really take them on are hardline Communists...people like McDonnell, Corbyn, Milne and Mason think they are cleverer than Imams and can take them on...eventually, much further down their line.I think they're deluded. That's what Marxists in Iran thought. They all ended up being exiled, imprisoned, executed or (if female) subjected to repeated "temporary marriage" with Iranian Revolutionary Guards for years on end.
BBC NEWS reports: "Theresa May has apologised to the nation for saying 'Brexit means Brexit'. She now admits that she agreed with Mrs Merkel that things would be arranged so that Brexit would never mean Brexit and would lead to the UK rejoining the EU within a few years!" APRIL FOOL'S!!! No - that can't be right! No... I meant APRIL TRUTH!!!!!
Can't find anywhere on the BBC's US-Canada website page any reference to the allegation from a female Democrat politician about Joe Biden's predatory hair-sniffing, head-kissing behaviour. Even more so, they don't reference the voluminous and corrobatory "Creepy Joe Biden" material on You Tube (look it up if you haven't). This is BBC Fake News. Zurcher and Sopel discuss Biden as though he is a respectable potential candidate... while averting their eyes from all this other stuff which they obviously know about but don't want to tell the licence fee payer in the UK about.
Message for the 'Anonymous' who posted on 31st March (Several Anonymice are now wondering, "Does he mean me? - See the problem?!) I mean the one who often has trouble opening links - are you using a tablet? If so, I may have the answer. Please re-post.
Re the link : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_3t0xCn0jwAndroid tablet : I select/copy and paste into the address bar ..it opens fineWindows PC : i select it, then rightclick and an option appears to "open http" it works If people wrote clickable links with(a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_3t0xCn0jw")link(/a)using less than , greater than brackets ..then it makes it easy for us all... link
There is only one space separating a & href (a href="")
Am that Anonymouse. Thanks for your messages Sisyphus and stewgreen. No I'm not on Android tablet - it's ye old laptop with Windows. Will try stew's fix. If people wrote the title or subject in their post that would be another way to get around it by doing a search.
Heard through StewGreen at BBBC:The Gisela Stuart story mentioned above as“Gisela Stuart has failed to apologise for Vote Leave overspending…”The actual BBC web story 2019-03-31 16:02:06 UTC is titled“Brexit fine: Ex-Vote Leave chairwoman does not apologise over spend”… Em what a weird title. It does not parse as proper English.It being a news story yes you, use the present tense to describe something that happened in the past.There are two states before you apologise and after you apologisedso the normal usage would be “refuses to apologise”, “declines to apologise etc.”The html includes title they use for linking to the story..and that also has weird English..”No spending apology from ex-Vote Leave chief”Secondly if we use Newssniffer to look the BBC story we can see that they added only one later editAccording to the Electoral Commission, the Remain campaign spent £19,309,588and the Leave campaign spent £13,332,569 on the EU referendum.I wonder why they left that out of the original story..when it completely undermines their narrative ??...The Newssniffer link:https://www.newssniffer.co.uk/articles/1760191/diff/0/1The archived story (with the comparative Leave/Remain spends):https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47766407Once again, the published version of a story from the BBC differs significantly to the archived version in order to suit their narrative - in this case Marr's.
Jo Coburn is on about this story again today on Politics Live - where she is surrounded by Remainers and Guardian Types. The underlying purpose is to damage Boris by linking his leadership of the Leave campaign. We were treated to a photo of the red bus - that image must be on speed-dial.
Aha! Now we know why Guido has gone all PC and mainstream. They have done a deal with the BBC for syndication. Staines is about money not politics and principles.https://order-order.com/2019/04/01/bbc-guido-syndication-deal-kicks-off-today/
It is the 1st of April after all.
Oh dear - I’m obviously very gullible !!
At the start of the main news, I’ve lost count of the number of times the BBC have shown that huge Theresa May caricature with a revoke article 50 banner whilst the newsreader voiceover announces the days Brexit headlines.
For example, it was shown twice in the first five minutes of tonight’s BBC news at ten.
Arne - yes, furthermore, Katya Adler has just said that nobody wants a no deal Brexit - ie neither the EU nor Remaineers want it! She didn't seem too pleased about the outcome of tonight's votes!
Who are the EU sources she keeps quoting? I suspect they are just her own ultra pro-EU opinions packaged as someone else’s.
Agreed - a variation on "(some) people are saying that..."
Re the BBC Brexit doc: when Laura K was piously intoning that "MPs on all sides had failed to deliver on Parliament's promise to Brexit" the footage showed only Brexiter Conservatives. Lovely counterpoint bias there!
Since the EU referendum was announced, the BBC have devoted a huge amount of airtime to the topic. So I have some questions regarding their Brexit output.Have they delivered on their remit to inform, educate and entertain?Have they used their position of power wisely in the national debate? Have they fostered social cohesion by reporting the facts accurately and used words carefully to avoid creating divisions? They hold this one dear on other sensitive subjects.
The BBC have relentlessly promoted the Remainer talking points and campaigns: Gina Campbell's legal challenge, the Lib Dem anti-Leave activity at the start of the 2017 election campaign (when they thought Corbyn would lose big), Second Referendum, anti-Leave demos, Letwin intervention, Boles amendment, Customs Union amendment. Remainiacs like Tony Blair, Ken Clarke and Alistair Campbell have enjoyed hundreds of hours of soft interviewing to put their view. They have failed to inform the public about the Leave perspective. They have failed for instance to highlight that the Treasury, OECD and others were wildly wrong in their prediction of a recession in the event of a VOTE to exit the EU (vote, not the actual leaving). They have failed to highlight the preparations made by the EU for no deal which will mean (contra all the Project Fear stories promoted by the BBC) life continues much as before. They have failed to identify that the "NI border issue" is a negotiation ploy not a genuine dilemma (as is clear now, the Republic of Ireland and the EU have no intention of imposing a hard border in the event of a no deal scenario - and neither do we). They have relentlessly promoted the idea that the Brexit vote has promoted social division, rise of the Far Right and increased hate crime (despite their being no evidence for those three assertions). The reality is that it is the Remainer Resistance to the Brexit vote that has created the social division, not the vote itself. The Far Right has been rising in mainland Europe not in the UK. The hate crime propaganda was bogus - we saw that with the appalling Sweeney report on the murder in Essex which it soon became clear had nothing to do with Brexit.
In one of his latest tweets Preston calls conservatives either Brexiter ultras or “soft” Tories.That’s exactly how the metropolitan liberal elites see the two camps. The monikers tell the story. One is good, one is bad.
That should read Peston
Sounds like a memo went round about not using hardline and so they have opted for "ultras" which as I pointed out before has long been associated with football violence and political extremism.
The other thing he says is that May’s decision today will make the party ‘one nation’ or ‘UKIPy’So there you have it, remain or very soft = one nation. That’s the very essence of London liberal left groupthink right there in his tweet.
So where are we now after "No! No! No! No!" as Mrs Thatcher might have put it...and what will the BBC policy be? In order to gull the public, it's essential to maintain the fiction (that we saw being retailed by Laura K in her Brexidoc) that the bulk of MPs are honourably striving to achieve Brexit. Simply not true. Hundreds want to derail Brexit. But it is important for the BBC to keep pumping out the propaganda that they, including Philip Hammond, are honourably doing so. Meanwhile it's important to show that it is the "extremist" ERG who preventing a deal being agreed. That will be another central plank of BBC propaganda. Then the BBC will continued to lie about the NI Border Backstop issue, failing to inform its news consumers that the EU and Ireland have absolutely no plans to put up a hard border in the event of a no deal and neither do we.They will also maintain the fiction that there is contemplation of the EU kicking us out with no deal. That would be a fantastic result, one I dearly wish for. But it is of course just EU lying propaganda. They will give us as long an extension as we like. Our membership is effectively meaningless now but we are continuing to pay full whack...what's not to like? So far,so good, but they are worried that, nevertheless we might slip out (my preferred verb phrase) of the EU inadvertently. So expect the BBC to be quite hysterical in their promotion of (a) the customs union proposal (b) any extension (preferably with some legal shenanigans to avoid an EU election in the UK but that might not be possible) and (c) the full horror of a no deal departure (aka life pretty much carrying on as now).
I've overdone the t.v. coverage for the last few days, but have a hazy memory from last night of some Tory heavyweight (a whip?) telling us that, in the event of another referendum, the choice would be between Remain & May's abject surrender doc. The interviewer didn't think it worthwhile examining the enormity of No Deal/WTO not being on offer.
Sis, that's one of the most maddening aspects of BBC and MSM in general coverage of the Rigged Referendum proposal. They have always seemed reluctant to examine what will be on the ballot paper. Even Farage, who you'd think would know better has said "No worries, we'll win again!" - no you won't because "Leave" won't be an option.
Am I right in think the Guido Fawkes website gets far, far fewer comments than it used to and also pumps out far less content and - also - that a lot of the content is unbelievably Westminster-centric (today despite all the momentous events occurring it seems a hike in Parliamentary bar prices is of greatest concern to Paul Staines and his mates). https://order-order.com/You would think comments would be running much higher at this point. I put it down to the site have been turned into a Mail-like Remainer Lite outfit.
Agreed, he always was fairly mainstream and a metro conservative but there used to be an edge to the reporting and he did get some good scoops by frequenting MP drinking holes. That’s all gone now, no real difference between his content and Osborne at The Standard.
Many contributors seem to have given up because of what they see as an over-intrusive moderation process. I wonder if it's being done by accident or design.
If I said to you "I know of 16 weather experts. Two years ago 15 of them predicted that there would be three months drought through the summer if I change my crop from barley to wheat. There predictions failed to come to pass. The same experts are now predicting that there will be three months of drought through the next summer if we don't change back to barley to wheat. Clearly this latest prediction is likely to come to pass because 15 our of the 16 are making the same prediction." - what would your think about my powers of reasoning? Possibly that I had none. But that seems to be the position of BBC's Chris Morris (speaking on Radio 5 Live to Emma "I'm a Remainer" Barnett). Although he has no more idea than you or I what the effects of a no deal Brexit will be economically he wants us to believe the predictions of those (Treasury, Goldman Sachs, IMF, OECD etc) who previously made completely erroneous predictions about what would happen immediatly (note - immediately) after a Referendum decision. It's as if rhe boy cried wolf 27 times and even then there was no wolf, but all the villagers agree we should believe him next time he cries wolf because they like the idea of there being a wolf in the vicinity.
Extension14 againstWilliamson, Fox, Mordaunt, Truss, Javid, Grayling, Wright, Leadsom, Hunt, Brokenshire, Evans, Barclay, Cairns, Lewis10 ForGauke, Hancock, Hammond, Clark, Hinds, Lidington, Perry, Gove, Rudd, CoxUndecidedBradley, Mundell
What a bunch of chancers.
May's performance tonight must surely mean the end of the Tory party. Not sure what rattled me most - May or Pienaar, trying not to look jubilant!
I have just been mulling things over. She appears to be saying she will compromise with Corbyn and/or accept the vote in the Commons. So it's unconditional surrender to follow on the abject surrender. This is just the beginning. There's no way all this will be sorted by the end of May - it'll be further extensions, then the EU dragging out negotiations...and finally the concession of a second (rigged) referendum. The Brexiters in the Cabinet have clearly become Remainers if they go along with this.
This is the BBC and here is an Partial Political Broadcast on behalf of the Boles Party...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47787899Complete puff piece - assessing the man by his own criteria. No tough questions about why he resigned from the party but kept the whip or why he won't resign his seat now or why he went against his clear manifesto commitment about not staying in the single market or customs union or whether he has had any dealings with agents of foreign governments. Nope, just a puff piece from a sypmathetic BBC.
Boles is currently getting the full Grieve treatment, the new BBC hero of the hour. Follwing May’s statement tonight the mood on BBC main news at ten is very upbeat. Pienaar, Adler and Kuenssberg all looking relaxed and displaying very positive body language whilst clearly enjoying opinionating on the latest events.
Boles' Légion d'Honneur is in the post.
I've commented before that many of our worst PC pro-mass immigration, pro-multiculturalism types come from families that benefited hugely from the days of Empire - perhaps they are motivated by guilt at being part of that global exploitation system. Boles' father was in the British Colonial Service. So add him to the list.
That’s it then Brexits over and the Tory party won’t be far behind. We don’t live in a democracy anymore.
Looks that way. The only encouraging think though is that there appears (according to the Telegraph) to be a majority in the Cabinet for no deal if Brexit isn't done by 22nd May. I personally think staying in the EU is better than May's appalling pig-in-the-poke Withdrawal Agreement, although of course I strongly favour leaving with no deal. May is either the worst ever negotiator and worst ever Prime Minister or else the most devious, mendacious and dissembling leader we have ever had.
But Nick Watt saying on Twitter the Telegraph claim is balls...https://twitter.com/nicholaswatt/status/1113204543393759232Nick Watt states that "Source suggests divisions in cabinet not 14-10, more like 17-4 in favour of seeking an extension of some description"That sounds more likely to me having regard to what a bunch of chancers, pusillanimous turncoats, deceivers and place seekers they are.
We need a new centre-right party free from the 'Tory' label. Sorry Boris and JRM - you're both tainted with the 'Tory' gene. I doubt this can be achieved without a General Election, or even a period of Labour mis-government. But, it would be worth it in the end. Brexit is a secondary consideration. It is best kicked down the road until we have a strong stable government which genuinely represents the views of the majority - otherwise we will end up as rule takers not makers.
Yes, it's very sad what has happened. Gove stabbing BJ in the back for absolutely no reason but personal advantage. Lazy David Davis being hoodwinked by May and agreeing to the absurd EU split on the negotiations timetable. Fox and Leadsom staying in government despite the abandonment of a meaningful Brexit. JRM and IDS deciding to vote for the abject surrender. It's not a pretty sight. There is I think some potential for a new party if the strong kernel of the ERG were to be at its heart with Steve Baker and Mark Francois given major roles. The problem I see is the idea that a Far Left Labour government once installed could ever be removed. You shouldn't make that assumption. What sort of measures would a Corbyn government enact (with the full agreement of its soft left Cooperite rump)?1. Votes for all 16 and 17 year olds - that's another million votes for Labour. 2. Illegal immigration amnesty. Another million votes for Labour. 3. Quick track naturalisation of legal migrants.4. Opening the floodgates to new migration from all around the world. 5. Maybe some sort of Alternative Vote system to reduce Conservative representation further. They will also use the powers of the state to go after their political enemies. I don't think there is any guarantee at all that that the first Corbyn government won't be the last democratically elected government in the UK. I agree a further delay might be helpful.I can see now why the EU have been insistent they don't want any unconditional postponement - they also see the threat-promise of a patriotic government reversing May's policy and going for a "free trade deal or no deal" approach.
The 150 or so Leave voters amongst the 650 Westminster MPs are mainly Conservative, and en-masse they might form the core of a new centre-right party. But, they must lose the 'Tory' tag otherwise they will be open to attack and ridicule as Boris and JRM have found.
Yes I'm in two minds about that. If they surrender the Conservative "brand" to the Mayites they could lose a lot of traction. On the other hand, I take the point that there is a lot of resistance in the centre and centre-left to voting "Tory". I suggested Democratic Conservative Party before now, to stress that they believe in democracy. Alternatively maybe get the word "citizens" in there. A Citizens Party starts off on the right foot for me - no suggestion of an ethnically based party, but equally the concept of citizenship is itself strongly opposed to encouraging "group identity" (Labour policy now adopted by the Mayites), rather insisting on the rights and duties of all citizens. A new party should focus on reclaiming sovereignty, getting a grip on mass immigration, discouraging welfare dependency (while improving the quality of welfare services), pushing back on Sharia, reinstating and embedding free speech rights, loosening the dominance of the City of London over economic policy and encouraging re-industrialisation of the UK, using state of the art robot technology.
Yes, it's not the 'Conservative and Unionist Party' that's the problem - it's the 'Tory' label with its connotations of wealth, oppression and privilege that must be dropped.
There's something distinctly odd about the way the MSM are reporting on the Edmonton knife attacks. I've noticed before the BBC uses the "hurt" word when it's trying to downplay things. Two of the four people injured in the initial attacks were reportedly in a critical condition. I'd call that seriously injured not "hurt" (more appropriate for a playground fall). https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47765914What's going on why is the reporting so brief and unilluminating? The latest report is a mere 300 words. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47783349London has more CCTV per square mile than probably anywhere else on the planet apart from Tianamen Square...have they really not been able to get a phot of the suspect? What's the issue? This is the problem when PC values infect the media and the Police: reporting becomes an exercise in political correctness and plenty of space is left over for rumour.
He's a Democrat so Katty comes down fully on Biden's side concluding he has a "touchy-feely" style not a woman-assaulting style (albeit not "appropriate" for the current age). Where's she been? Further allegations are coming out and making a nonsense of her special pleading for a Democrat friend. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47778527
Anthony's gnomic tweet may suggest he's ahead of Katty in understanding Biden can't be defended. https://twitter.com/awzurcher/status/1113163227263848449Wow! as Katty might say.
I've been smelling a rat with this one too right from the off, particularly from the BBC who cleansed their initial report of a description of the attacker in a later edit. Why?I also read a description of the victims as being from a 'variety' of backgrounds. When there's multiple ethnicity involved, the preferred modern term is 'diverse'.As you say, plenty of room for rumour on this one, and my assumption until proven otherwise is that all the victims are white, and there's likely to be racial aggravation involved.
The (London) Evening Standard - a big paper/news site in the capital (edited by our old mate George Osborne) has the story at no. 21 in its website headlines!!! If you wanted absolute confirmation that something fishy is going on, that's it. Five people seriously injured in random back-stabbing attacks on the capital's streets...multiple arrests...but virtually no speculation! This is easily a no. 1 story for a London newspaper -definitely top 3 and most definitely NOT the 21st headline in order.
Further confirmation - not even mentioned on the London region page of the BBC website today! WTF is going on?
Gah - was supposed to be a reply to MB's comment re: Edmonton knife attacks - 3 April 2019 at 00:16.
Is it just me who finds the BBC being hypocrites when you witness the BBCs horror and over-reaction about soldiers using Corbyn as a firing range target vs. The BBCs Paul Wood asking ‘Will Donald Trump be assassinated, ousted in a coup or just impeached?’.
The soldiers' actions are not justifiable. But neither are those incitements to assassination from lefty comedians, theatre groups and commentators. What about our own British would-be assassin who tried to pull a policeman's gun on Trump. We have never heard what media it was that radicalised him. BBC? Guardian? Buzzfeed? Vox? Socialist Worker?
Not justifiable, perhaps, but understandable, surely, given Corbyn's enthusiasm for prosecuting their colleagues for alleged war crimes in Ireland & his sympathetic attitude towards the IRA, & other enemies of the UK.
Oh yes, entirely understandable when Corbyn has stood in silent, solemn commemoration of IRA personnel who have killed British soldiers, with bombs, bullets and horrific torture (in contravention of all human rights norms) - sometimes in front of their children.That's something May should remind Parliament and the people of every time she responds to his questions. Instead she chooses to give him a leg-up to "statesmanship" status. But soldiers are soldiers, the servants of the people. They don't get to decide who are our enemies. Also they were being effing stupid thinking they could film it on phones and get away with it! 11th commandment and all that.
NISA on Biased BBC:"In interview with JRM this morning was Mishal Husain (Toady) lying when she claimed Naughtie was quoting someone else when he stated that ERG was like Front National?This clip from Guido would suggest she was, it sounds very much like his opinion.https://order-order.com/2019/03/22/erg-slam-bbc-presenters-outrageous-claim-front-national/"Great - hope someone of a complaining disposition will submit a complaint if she did make this lying claim.
Some further thoughts on my UK-DDR thesis which I think is increasingly relevant now we see crypto-Conservative May cosying up to hardline Marxist Corbyn. People who don't know a lot about the history of Communist East Germany (DDR to use its German initials) may be surprised to learn that a range of parties operated during the Communist era, including Christian Democrats, Liberal Democrats and even a quasi-fascist party (National Democratic Party). Here's a Wikipedia page about the parties...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Front_(East_Germany)They all started off as genuine, independent parties but gradually got drawn into the Communist orbit until they fully signed up to the Marxist project. When you think about it, we have already travelled quite a long way down this road. The Conservative Party is Conservative in name only now. It really does v. little to protect our traditional culture, the integrity or our nation (mass immigration is essentially deconstructing Britain), our established constitutional freedoms (free speech or freedom of belief), or our basic family values - all the things you would expect a party committed to conservative values to do. Our Liberal Democrats have completely abandoned its principles: they don't believe in economic liberalism, preferring statism; they don't believe any longer in liberal freedoms like free speech, preferring to act as enablers for Sharia; and they don't believe in democracy, preferring to overturn a massive democratic vote of the people. Seems to me we are long way down the DDR route here, when you add in other features I previously mentioned: the PC totalitarian ideology pervading every part of our lives, ubiquitous Marxist propaganda on the state broadcaster (the BBC), violent intimidation by Far Left hate mobs and mass surveillance, of a far more intrusive kind than the Communists in the DDR ever achieved. Of course our repeat of DDR history may end up more as farce, to follow Karl.
MB re: Far Left hate mobs, I watched the video of Mark François yesterday, addressing the Brexit demo. in London & it struck me what a decent bunch the Brexiters were - no evidence of fanaticism & the whole meeting characterised by gentle good humour. Compare & contrast with the likes of Geldof, Russell Brand, Owen Jones etc.
Absolutely but that gentle good humour can be abused. I think what is required is focussed use of people power. But no one has given the lead. So it's left to the underhand plotters - Hammond, Cooper, Letwin, Boles, Bercow, Blair and Campbell, to name a few - to derail and then reverse Brexit. We need people of spirit to take up the fight. We've been badly let down by leading Brexiters - Gove, Davis, Fox, Johnson, Raab, Leadsom and sadly even Mogg. The likely long extension provides an opportunity to depose May, consign her to history. A new Prime Minister could connect with the nation at large, say we need to get Brexit sorted, introduce a new Bill to Parliament to deliver on the Brexit vote (specifically allowing for no deal if the EU don't agree a Free Trade Deal) and, if it is rejected, as it surely will be by the pussilanimous Remainer rabble, then go to the country and seek a fresh mandate to pass the Bill. Incidentally, one point I noted is that our lazy media keep talking as if the Withdrawal Agreement is a "divorce" agreement and says nothing about our future arrangements with the EU. This is absolute balls. It's chock full of references to future (v. complex) customs arrangements. So any fresh Customs Union proposal as proposed by Labour will be incompatible with it and will require the EU to amend it, despite their having claimed it can never, ever, never be changed!
Mark François for PM? One of the few I would trust, anyway. Probably too unpolished to appeal to the Worcester housewife. Problem is that Cameron & Co. were a magnet for spineless, virtue-signalling clones of themselves so the choice is pretty limited. Owen Patterson is an exception to that, is strong on Brexit & takes an independent-minded view of climate change - a front runner for me.
Yes. Not PM material but someone you would want on board if you were serious about delivering Brexit.
Good speech from Batten*:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs-4UYKfSig&app=desktop* Presumably not featured on the BBC despite their claim to be interested in the "democratic" arm of the EU.
The Remainers are in the ascendant for the moment. Never understimate their power. But, equally, don't overestimate it either. Even if traitor Cooper can get her bill through there is something they can't control and that is the thoughts of Conservative Party members. The indications are they are still committed to Leave. Cooper and Co can't achieve an overnight coup. It will take time...postponement. But the postponement will give the patriots in the Conservative Party time to (a) overthrow May and (b) institute a fresh Brexit strategy.
Edmonton stabbings: BBC News website still using the euphemism 'hurt' to describe the condition of the victims - two are critically ill and one other has potentially life-changing injuries; why didn't they just describe them as being, "a bit poorly," to avoid anyone thinking this is a very serious series of attacks? AS YOU WERE! I cannot now find this article on BBC News site - what is going on? The one I was reading suggested that the stabber may have 'mental health issues' - now, what does that usually tell us?
Yes, unless you knew (as we know) the motivations of reporters at the BBC and in the UK MSM more generally you'd be extremely puzzled by such an adjective being used in this context. Also, they are completely playing down the level of panic in the locality. I did hear a live report on LBC radio, where the young journalist (perhaps not realising her brief which presumably was to deliver "people are carrying on as normal" style reportage) did communicate the pervasive sense of dread. It would be extremely unnerving, especially if you had children - and of course the attacks come behind. I can't even find any reference on the London page on the BBC News Website! But to be fair there are about 50 other stabbings in London they've had to cover...
May & Rudd - what a splendidly effective pair of Home Secretaries they were!
Politicians and campaigners should take care not to "inflame" tensions in the UK caused by Brexit, a senior police chief has warned.Aside from the sinister tone of Police now telling us to be careful how we speak - surely an infringement of freedom of speech. My nomination for the biggest inflamer is not a politician but the national campaigner ‘par excellence’ - The BBC.
I hope they arrest David Lammy then after his performance on QT. He seemed to be doing his best to start a class war with violent, hateful rhetoric directed at Charles Moore and (the absent) Jacob Rees-Mogg. He is very thick isn't he?, as people say. He went through a long list of the terrible problems of poverty, crime, social exclusion and poor educational outcomes in his constituency and cited them as a reason to stay in the EU, without seeming to acknowledge that these problems exist while we are in the EU! Hardly an advert for the wonderful effects of being in the EU...
Absolutely!Dominic Grieve given a lengthy interview this a.m. by Joanna Gosling on BBC 2. Staggering arrogance: his problems are not of his own making; it's all the fault of entryists. He, the great Dom. finds the idea of honouring the manifesto commitments which got his party elected, totally unacceptable. (Not his exact words, but that's what it boiled down to.) He was keen to point out that a no confidence vote had NOT been brought against him; FRIENDS of his had brought a vote of confidence in him and it was defeated. Right, and the difference is?...At no point did Gosling ask what he had done to lose the confidence of his local association.May will no doubt prevent his re-election but what she cannot do is force his local association to work for him or his constituents to vote for him. I, myself, cannot wait to show what I think of my Remainiac MP at the next election - but while I'm waiting for that, the local elections will do.
Sorry, I meant de-selection, NOT re-election!
Was the matter of the Legion d'honneur brought up?
MB I don't think it was, but may not have caught the whole thing.
This is new on the BBC website Brexit anxiety - who is affected?A survey of more than 2,000 people carried out in March by research company Britain Thinks suggested that:64% of people feel anxiety relating to Brexit is negatively affecting Britons' mental healthI’m annoyed with what is going on but it isn’t affecting my mental health. I’m very sceptical of surveys like these but it’s the BBC and MSM tabloid like reporting and opinion that causes much of the febrile atmosphere. (To quote a copper.)It’s a cop out and disingenuous to for them to say ‘all we do is report the news, we don’t make it.They set the agenda and tone and wield enormous influence - and they know it. That have a lot to answer for with Brexit and many of our other nations debates.
I have previously claimed - judging purely on the basis of personal listening and viewing - that the BBC deliberately went out of its way to create anxiety and undermine people's confidence in their own judgement. There was a whole slew of programming about anxiety, sleep issues, insomnia, the importance of expert opinion, conspiracy theories, unreliability of social media news, social division, interfence in democratic politics by the Russians etc etc, that followed on the great Brexit-Trump victories of 2016. These themes were also reflected in drama, soaps and documentaries. I believe it was a deliberate attempt to unsettle people, to create a mood of anxiety which would give the Remainers in the UK (similar strategies were under way in the USA) traction on public opinion. I think it was one of the most sustained mass propaganda projects since WW2 and I think it has in large part succeeded - in combination with political subterfuge, semi-treasonous dealings with foreign powers by certain politicians and Project Fear Mark II.
This comment has been removed by the author.
A very positive report from our Laura. What the sudden and immediate change of tone from them all? Is it the effect of the Unsworth memo or just wholehearted BBC approval for a customs union vs no deal?Laura Kuenssberg twitter feed
The BBC policy is: 1. Avert no deal. 2. Get a crappy "deal" in place. 3. Achieve a Rigged Rerun of the first referendum but this time with the choice being Abject Surrender deal v Remain. You can tell it's their policy because all their questioning leads down this path. The so called "deal" (not really a deal at all, simply an Abject Surrender, whereby the final capitulations on things like free movement and our fisheries will be entered into at an unspecified later date). Even people like Portillo seem to fail to understand that May's "deal" will NOT guarantee an end to free movement. A deal on free movement has simply been postponed to the next stage, along with our surrender of control of fisheries. Macron made the latter absolutely clear.
You know the Old people voted leave meme? What sample size is it based on? genuine question? I’d like to know how it’s become “Fact”.
I am always reminded of the tale of the Western journalist visiting the Soviet Union around 1980. He asks to visit a Church. His Soviet minder arranges the visit and points out to him: "Look at how old the congregation is. This shows that religion is dying out." The journalist does a quick mental calculation - most of these people will have gone to Soviet schools, received Soviet ideological education in the workplace, joined Soviet Trade Unions, and fought in the Great Partiotic War under Soviet leadership...and yet, despite persecution of believers, they still go to Church. It is at the point the journalist realises the Soviet system is doomed. The point is that as people get older and have more experience, become perhaps less idealistic, certainly less gullible, they naturally become more suspicious of a project like the EU. The pool of Euroscepticism is constantly being refreshed as people mature and form considered judgements.
Buttigieg - the new Obama. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsUaW5jxfPQThe BBC have yet to declare who they love the most...obviously they will love which ever Democrat gets selected, but they don't want to get ahead of themselves. Some are easier to love than most. Mr Unpronounceable gets a big tick for being gay and a big tick for having a communist father. But being male and pale are two black/white marks against him. I think the ideal candidate for the BBC would be a leftist lesbian Latina convert to Islam from a poor background. AOC is nearly there but she's too young to stand.
You forgot to add, "with a wooden leg." :)
The BBC isn't very disability aware when it comes to Presidential candidates. They mocked Trump for his congenitally deformed (small) hands.
QT - Charles Moor managed, eventually & despite a stream of interruptions from Fiona Bruce, to complain that he was the only Leave-supporting panel member present. Bruce denied this, but admitted that he was perhaps the only one who had voted Leave at the Referendum. When Moore pointed out that the imbalance had happened nearly every week since the Referendum, Bruce bulldozed him. It was clear from the applause he received that the audience was heavily weighted in favour of Remain.
Sorry - hadn't spotted Craig's piece on this. I also robbed Mr Moore of an 'e'!
Watched the by-election result last night with sub-titles on. As Neil Hamilton's vote was announced, instead of showing 'UKIP: Make Brexit Happen' the sub-titles rather amusingly showed "You can't make Brexit happen". Someone rubbing it in perchance?