A Labour Plant On Question Time



Kebab time reveals this:

One Nation Plant

Did you see BBC Question Time Thursday night? if so you would have seen an exchange between an audience member and the UKIP candidate for Eastleigh Diane James .


View image on Twitter

This young lady is Amy Rutland and according to her twitter profile she works for the Labour party(  Regional Policy Co-ordinator ) .

But that is not all, KT can revel that before Question Time she had a chat with Stephen Twigg ( The Labour representative on the panel ) :



How many of those ‘phone ins’ on 5Live do you think we can trust not to be packed with those who have vested interests?

There will always be some who try it on…but the question is how many ‘ringers’ do the BBC turn a blind eye to?




Cheers to ‘Eric’ in the comments for supplying the clip…a lot more damning in the flesh…and no wonder she thanks ‘David’, very helpful wasn’t he?:






Bookmark the permalink.

117 Responses to A Labour Plant On Question Time

  1. bendybus says:

    Quelle surprise!

    QT has been stuffing its audiences with Labour and trade union activists for years.

    Then just to make sure things swing the right way we have Professor Dumblebum in the chair shutting up any opinions he doesn’t like.

    More farce than political discussion.


    • lojolondon says:

      I knew it!! Thanks for the evidence – I saw the ugly little monster, how Dangleberry gave her loads of time to clarify her point, and – very unusually – to enter a personal debate with Diane James, to re-make the same point. (When is the last time you saw that happen on QT?)
      Then when other people spoke, the camera lingered on her again…. PLANT!!


      • Dysgwr_Cymraeg says:

        Well, that plant will certainly be regretting making such a bad job of the open goal offered by dimblebore. Her performance was just a few pathetic sound-bites. She will get plenty of unpaid nuliebor party activist work. However she’s not going to find herself parachuted into a safe seat anytime soon. Even with dimblebore and the whole production team helping out she cocked up big time and gave our Mel a great opening to savage her! Da iawn Mel!


  2. uncle bup says:

    … seemed the camera kept going back to her and back to her and the fellow with the boom microphone kept it over her head (gob) for a jolly long time.

    They might as well have invited her onto the panel – though I suppose it’s only a matter of time.

    The double-chinned, boot-faced, half-witted, gobby, brain-dead, unemployed, unemployable, never to be employed, fat lump of lard.


  3. George R says:

    BBC-NUJ’s Question Time is usually a pro-Labour Party, pro Hamas,
    pro- ‘Greenpeace’ dictatorship not least in the biased political composition of ITS audiences.
    Last night’s example is yet another case in point.

    BBC-NUJ supports Labour Party in continuing an open door policy for mass immigration into Britain. The colonising of cities such as London, Birmingham, Leicester, etc , which the political ‘left’ campaigns for, is but a portent of the demographic mass immigration future.


    • Ron Thomas says:

      This left wing agenda is not confined to mainstream BBC,
      Applies to local evening news, Justin from West news is
      typical, makes my blood boil. ITV appear to be more balanced


  4. Colonel Blimp says:

    the extra guest on QT was also soi-disant “tax guru” Richard Murphy, a man capable of holding three contradictory opinions at the same time and who rarely puts anything on his blog without having it torn to shreds by people who, unlike him, understand tax and economics. A nasty little statist who has spotted the chance for a knighthood or even a peerage, who claims to welcome debate and then abuses and blocks anyone who even quite reasonably disagrees with him or proves him wrong. Naturally he’s a BBC regular and was described by Dimblebot as a “tax expert”.


  5. chrisH says:

    Richard `Murphy last night, and was it not wee Laura Penney doing the honours a few weeks back?
    Note the bit where the Labour pro-immigration union toady gets a few questions from Dimbleby as well as a few shots at Ukip gratis…and the quiet howling down of some woman who reckons Dover is overcrowded.
    Note too when Dimbleby counted three against the EU and only two for it…so Ken Clarke gor the extra supplementary question to reinforce his love of Europe.
    Transparent Common Purpose with the open minds of virtuous scientologists-that`s our BBC!


  6. George R says:

    Where’s the BBC-NUJ APOLOGY for knowingly using this Labour Party plant on ‘QT’?


    • George R says:

      Such is the BBC-NUJ prior political vetting of not only the composition of the ‘QT’audience to ensure predominantly ‘leftist’ views, but there is an even tighter political vetting of who is to be permitted to speak.


        • spooky says:

          Interesting that one question is “Are you pro-EU or skeptical?”. Shouldn’t it be “Are you pro-EU or anti-EU?”


          • Span Ows says:

            Good spot: impartiality, it’s in their genes.


          • ROBERT BROWN says:

            Well, surely, the way to offset the left-wing bias on QT is to lie about your views and tell them what they want to hear, simple. Then ambush the debate and see how they react, could be fun. Fact is though, most decent people cannot be bothered to apply because they’d rather spend their time with their family and friends, or are working or cannot be bothered. The Left know this and is why they pack these debates, having nothing better or productive to do.


            • Rob says:

              That might work if QT were live, but it’s pre-recorded, so any thought crime will be sent down the memory hole prior to transmission.


        • bendybus says:

          Extraordinary isn’t it?

          Why would they need to ask these questions other than to ‘screen out’ what they perceive to be ‘undesirables’.

          What are they afraid of?

          What would happen if jurors had to complete such a survey before being allowed in court?


          • David Preiser (USA) says:

            They claim that the goal is to make the audience reflect the general political demography of the host area. According to polls, etc. But in the end it’s really down to the highly subjective judgment of the Beeboids doing the screening. They make the judgment about which figures to use as a baseline, they make the judgment about whether or not applicants qualify, they make the judgments on whether or not the questions required to be provided in advance suit the agenda news cycle of the day. There’s precious little ideological balance on the team, so this is the inevitable result, conspiracy or not.


          • Chop says:

            “What would happen if jurors had to complete such a survey before being allowed in court? ”

            I’d have saved myself 3 trips to Bolton magistrates before I hit the age of 35!


  7. Uncle Tim says:

    Don’t worry, if she is representative of the quality of people who work for the Labour Party, we have nothing to worry about. Semi-literate and ghastly!


    • Peter Grimes says:

      No, Al JaBeeBa have got their ZaNuLieBor propaganda out, and the dumb fucks who support them will use the ‘it was on the BBC’ argument to claim it as truth.


  8. George R says:

    “The Left are closing down the debate on immigration””

    By Jake Wallis Simons.



  9. Mice Height says:

    So when UKIP say what the vast majority of Brits are thinking, then this vile sow thinks it’s “disgusting”, but I bet she loves John O’Farrell’s pro IRA, anti Thatcher comments.


  10. Beness says:

    Must admit when i heard her tone and the continued bile she was spouting, i just knew she was not just an ordinary person from down the pub.


  11. A.D says:

    Amy Rutland is in plenty of Labour photos. She even had one taken with Cherie Blair.



  12. spooky says:

    What we always thought, these audiences are stacked with political stooges.


  13. Eric says:

    Here is a link to the clip.

    Maybe someone could link it so the clip plays on this page.


    • Rich Tee says:

      I’ve read a lot of online comments but that is the first time I’ve seen that clip.

      It is true – the UKIP lady does very well in the face of obvious hostility, particularly disgracefully from Dimbleby who is constantly trying to put her off and trip her up.

      What a god awful programme QT is.


  14. Chris says:

    It would help if the next right wing guest who appeared on QT would ask Dimblebore how many of the audience were paid Labour activists rather than members of the public as his answer to the first question asked.


  15. chrisH says:

    Witness the headlining twaddle about what Cameron says…as opposed to what the OBR says.
    HEADLINE news mark you…forget those silly things you civilians fuss over like energy prices, a Provo getting elected and the mid-Staffs stuff.
    No-whether “long term or short term” is in the rubric of the OBR report or whether Cameron read it right…we`ll be discussing nothing else this weekend!
    God-the BBC are so predictably evil and venal…as Jonathan Dimblebys endless pointless straining at gnats on “Any Questions” showed earlier.
    Wicked, wasterful w***ers…www.con alright!


  16. David Brims says:

    After seeing the clip of the chippy bolshy Labour party girl, regurgitating the learned Cultural Marxist script that was taught to her at college / University, like a good little Pavlovs dog.

    God help us if they get back into power in 2015.


  17. John Michaels says:

    It wasn’t just her, contemptible as though she was, clearly that Oaf Twigg was involved having spent that day of the recording with her as she stated on Twitter, no doubt polishing the lines. Time pressure was put on him to come clean and admit what they did was cheap, and wrong, and also against everything their leader has been saying recently, about debate on immigration being healthy and ok.


  18. ruport says:

    the power of people tracer.


  19. chrisH says:

    Doesn`t Twigg look like a simple Nick Griffin as drawn by the bloke who drew Topsy and Tim.
    He looked daggers at the likes of St Mel and Diane …that`s about as much opposition this hopeless eviscerated smiley slimie can muster.
    Save the horse-process a few of Labours spongiform brainless inverts….useless amoral toerags!


    • Dysgwr_Cymraeg says:

      Wonder he he got those scrapes on the end of his nose? Or are they permanent?


  20. Aerfen says:

    from Twitter:

    “Don’t miss out on Question Time tonight, you’ll see
    me rip into the disgusting UKIP woman! — Amy Rutland

    Clearly no shame at revealing herself as a misogynist then.

    For the champagne socialists and self acclaimed ‘liberals’ race and multikulti trumps every other professed concern.


    • barlicker says:

      So, her tweet clearly shows that she knew she was going to be ‘seen’ before the programme was broadcast.


      • Scott M says:

        Question Time is rarely broadcast live – it’s usually recorded earlier in the evening in a single take. So it’s not inconceivable that someone who was on the programme could have tweeted between recording and transmission.


        • Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says:

          I wondered about that but I believe her tweet was 3.33p.m. on Thursday and I think QT is recorded during the evening.
          The sensible deduction is that she knew that she was going to be allowed to rant during the programme although it had not yet taken place. I wonder how she knew that.


          • Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says:

            I should have put https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/309808968413372416 as the source for the 3.33 p.m. timing. This is the bBBC’s own twitter account about the programme. The bBBC knew during the afternoon that Rutland was going to rant about UKIP.


            • Dav9d says:

              For some reason the time stamp is wrong all the way through that BBC Question Time Twitter feed.
              That happens to a lot of people who use Twitter. It shows up as being 7 hours behind time every time I tweet.

              If you read through the bbcqt feed you’ll see it was done live when the programme was broadcast. The live questions to the extra guest are tweeted too as they happen.

              You can also see that from the MT tweet from DVATW (David Vance). The BBC Question Time Twitter feed shows it at 2.49pm – Mar 7, 2013. DV was tweeting live as he was watching the programme. His Twitter feed shows he sent it at 2:39 PM – Mar 7, 2013. So he has the same problem with the time stamp on his feed as I have, and as the BBC has.

              The programme was recorded in the evening. Rutters101 tweeted after the recording. Then the BBC Question Time Twitter feed started up just before the programme was broadcast and the public, including DV, then joined the debate and things started going badly wrong for Rutters101.


              • Scott M says:

                It’s maybe less to do with that feed, and either your own settings within Twitter or your own time zone on your PC (the former is more likely). The tweet linked above is showing up as having been sent at 11.33pm as far as I can see.


                • Dav9d says:

                  Thanks Scott. Technological incomprehension on my part there I think. Still, definitely not an afternoon tweetfest and definitely not Amy Rutland tweeting before her appearance on Question Time.


                  • Scott M says:

                    You’re welcome.

                    Just to confirm, I queried that tweet using Twitter’s API and the timestamp retrieved using that method was recorded as:

                    Thu Mar 07 23:33:08 +0000 2013

                    The +0000 is the offset from GMT – here verifying that the tweet was created at 11.33pm GMT.

                    If you’re logged in to Twitter, I’d suggest going to https://twitter.com/settings and checking the Time Zone setting is set to “London” (or as appropriate). This *should* also help account for switch to daylight savings time when the time comes as well.

                    For smartphone apps, they tend to rely on the systemwide clock, which can be found in the phone settings.


                    • Dav9d says:

                      Cheers Scott. I’ll try to get my head round that.


                    • Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says:

                      Sorry for the confusion but none of that explains why the bBBC’s own twitter summary (https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/309808968413372416) says 3.33 p.m..


                    • David Preiser (USA) says:

                      Wait: this doesn’t quite make sense. If Rutland tweeted at 11:33pm, isn’t that after the show aired? Why would she be telling people to be sure and catch it then? Seems a bit dopey.

                      Either way, if she tweeted after the recording was done, she obviously didn’t think anything of what Phillips said to her, and was still quite proud of her own performance.

                      Something isn’t adding up here, or I’m simply missing a key detail.


                    • Scott M says:

                      David, you raised this in another post, but I’ll answer here too: the 11.33pm time is in reference to the @BBCQuestionTime tweet as linked to by Arthur, not to any tweet made by Rutland.


                    • David Preiser (USA) says:

                      Aha, thanks, Scott. I didn’t quite grasp that before. So I guess we can still say she tweeted after the recording, but in that brief period before it goes to air. No way for anyone to prep Diane James with this particular one.


                • Dav9d says:

                  Sir Arthur, the reply option seems to have gone but…Scott’s explanation (as far as my technophobic brain can get a handle on it) is that our Twitter settings are wrong. (I can believe that about myself).

                  So we are both seeing a 3.33pm time from the BBC and a 2.39pm time from DVATW responding to that night’s Question Time not because that was the actual time those tweets were tweeted but simply because our settings are wrong. Such is technology.


                  • stewart says:

                    Bottom line is then that we still dont know for sure when Ms.Rutland sent her ‘tweet’.
                    Scotts ‘It was between recording and transmition’ mitigation,which I have seen on other web sites, is pure speculation


    • Dante's Inferno says:

      …and tweeting led to her being exposed by Kebab Time as a Labour shill. She was undone by the info on her Twitter account, revealing exactly who she was. QT isn’t broadcast live, it’s recorded around 8PM; presumably she sent the tweet after recording the show but before it was broadcast.
      It just confirms that the QT audience is stuffed full of low grade apparatchiks, pressure group members and vested interests. A random sample of the British public it aint.


  21. scoobywho says:

    Let’s face it, Three Chins Ruttlidge never really managed to put forward a coherent argument against UKIP. Watching the clip, she clearly thought she was very clever up until the moment she opened her mouth, at which point she must have realised that maybe she wasn’t quite so smart after all.

    Ruttlidge just about managed to splutter out a couple of old cliches (usually reserved for the BNP) about how UKIP were targeting the vulnerable before she went on to sling a few rather weak insults by saying how disgusting UKIP are.

    What I saw when I watched the clip was a silly little girl giving the UKIP representative ample opportunity to explain why there is good reason for the British public to have serious concerns about the influx of Romanian immigrants. Poor old Three Chins couldn’t have been very happy with her performance the other night, she wouldn’t have won many brownie points from her fellow Labour party workers unless of course they were sympathy points.

    If there were any Beeboids in on this little charade it would appear to me that there little wheeze backfired.


    • Mice Height says:

      Yep, a sad product of Labour’s education system.
      You could see the anger and hatred in her eyes, and that sort of gurning, stuttering and squealing is common amongst the rapists and deviants of UAF when confronted with someone who has a different opinion to themselves.


    • Reed says:

      Yes – when you have no real argument to make against your opponents, call them ‘disgusting’, then witter on about ‘the most vulnerable members’ blah blah blah.

      This is the future of the Labour party. The bigger worry is that this might also be the future for us all. Christ on a bike, it’s terrifying.


  22. Reed says:

    Plenty of comment on this UKIP Facebook post, including links to BiasedBBC!

    …and here in the Telegraph comments…


    Everyone should put in a complaint to the BBC, followed by an e-mail to UKIP suggesting that they make a formal complaint. This woman(girl) was a deliberate plant by the Labour party, with the sole intention of disparaging a rival party by labelling them ‘disgusting’. This is not acceptable. Question Time audiences are supposed to be constituted of regular members of the public so that they may have their say, not paid activists of political parties whose sole purpose is to push their agenda and demonize their opponents.

    This will get worse! UKIP have them frightened – or rather, the public’s surge of support for UKIP have them frightened.
    You can malign a party, but you can’t prevent people from voting for it. The more the attacks come, the nastier they get, the more steadfast the support will become.


    • Reed says:

      It’s noticeable too, that this has been discovered not by journalists, but by vigilant and keen eyed commenters on various web sites.


      • bendybus says:

        A very important point that.

        So many mainstream journalists are happy to close their eyes and ears to the BBC’s blatant shenanigans.


  23. Reed says:

    Here’s a slightly longer clip which includes Melanie Philips’ passionate defense of the UKIP position, her scorn for Cameron’s Conservatives and her anger at the knee-jerk labeling of millions of people’s genuine concerns as ‘disgusting’ – as typified by the horrid, self-satisfied little Labour plant…


    • Reed says:

      If you can’t bear to watch the smug little git again, scroll to about 3mins 45 secs for Mel.


      • scoobywho says:

        It was quite fun watching Philips tear her a new one. All three chins could do was sit their and pull faces like a school girl about to burst into tears because her teacher is giving her a bollocking.


        • Reed says:

          You could see the petulance exuding from her every pore – “It’s not fair, she’s answering back!!!! Stop her!!”


          • Mice Height says:

            Shaking her head when Melanie Phillips says there has to be a limit on immigration!?
            Yes, come one, come all, join us in 100% employment, infinite-resource infinite-space Britain, with our shiny-new, barely-used infrastructure, limitless health provisions and school places. All paid for out of our legendary budget surplus!


      • Demon says:

        Mel’s on form there, wow. Thanks Reed for sharing that jewel.


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      While I can easily believe the BBC knowingly allowed this Labour apparatchik in to attack the enemy, I’m actually surprised that neither UKIP nor the Conservatives have anyone monitoring Twitter or other social media for QT mentions and missed the alert she gave away.

      How pathetic. If DB can bust dozens of Beeboids, surely a political party can hire some kid to watch out for this sort of thing. Imagine the result if Diane James (who didn’t seem very useful, to be honest) was prepped with a note and photo to watch out for this girl. She could have called her out and handed the proof to Dimbleby, whose head would have exploded. What a wasted opportunity.


      • Reed says:

        Yes – if only the UKIP representative was prepared and had said, “Before I answer these smears, could I ask the young woman in the audience to first declare her interest”.

        Being able to expose this kind of thing at the time is far more potent, but a lot more difficult than it is to do it after the fact.


        • stewart says:

          Ms Rutland was clearly an attempt to engineer an anti-ukip ‘bostan woman’ by the labour party and it would seem,by David Dimblebys behaviour, with the colusion of the BBC. On that count it clearly failed, as Ms Rutland hardly recieved a standing ovation.In fact Melanie Philips had at least as good audience response if not better.
          Hopefully UKIP,having more spine than the tories(or felling they have nothing to lose),will refuse to let this blatant peice of gerrymandreing go unchallenged.


      • Phil Ford says:

        Yes, David – absolutely agree. UKIP really need to up their game and become far more media-savvy to avoid (and/or pre-empt) this kind of spiteful hijacking and collusion by the BBC and any other media outlet.


      • Tommo says:

        Couldn’t agree more, David. It’s exactly what Labour would do if there were evidence of any Conservative or UKIP plants in any TV show audiences (not, of course, that there’s any chance of that on the BBC).

        All of that said, can we be sure that the leadership of the so-called Conservative Party would have taken steps to expose this little game even had they known of the true identity of the odious, socially-maladjusted Miss Rutland (wonder if she’s ever held a proper job, by the way)? Maybe it suits Mr Cameron to have some unsuspecting Labour stooge do the dirty work of publicly traducing UKIP (and in the process a large section of the public who, although not UKIP voters, hold perfectly rational, reasonable and lawful concerns about immigration) for him.

        Melanie Phillips’ savaging of the stupid little girl was outstanding, by the way.


        • london calling says:

          Mel I want your babies!
          Wonderful performance. Notice the camera went back again and again and again to capture the reaction shots of the gobby Labour paid activist. What direction are QT camera crew under? Who in the editing suite is “stage managing” the debate? Who the hell are these faceless technicians and who is excercising editorial control? Didn’t they just appoint a Russian marxist expert as Head of QT?


        • David Preiser (USA) says:

          Catching the BBC red-handed in front of an audience on air (generously and perhaps naively assuming it wouldn’t sent down the memory hole before broadcast) would be a big deal, more important than a momentary score for UKIP. After all, the BBC is in the middle of another round of mandatory Safeguarding Trust courses. A wasted opportunity indeed.

          If UKIP doesn’t learn this lesson, they don’t deserve to continue rising.


    • Joshaw says:

      I haven’t watched QT for some considerable time because I can’t sleep when I’m angry, but I enjoyed this clip.

      The smug, self righteous little fishwife was typical. The UKIP lady did well taking all factors into account, but I thought that Melanie Phillips was outstanding.


      • Dysgwr_Cymraeg says:

        Melanie Philips for PM i’d say! Ken clarkes ugly fat face was a picture to behold. Cameron still desn’t realise he’s walking his party to oblivion!


  24. Scrappydoo says:

    One very obvious thing in QT is the applause cheerleader who can always be heard ahead of the main audience clapping when pro labour points are being made.


  25. Llew says:

    Perhaps the first question next week should be ‘will all the party political plants in the audience please stand up and identify yourself’.

    Maybe DD should then ask for all union members and students to stand up. That should leave about half a dozen real members of the public seated!


  26. George R says:

    While BBC-NUJ does its propaganda best to act as PR for Romania, the evidence from Germany is different:-

    ‘Daily Mail’ –

    “My warning to Britain: Why the left-wing mayor of German town wants you to see what happened when Romanian migrants moved in.
    Gangs of migrants congregate around the town’s tower blocks in intimidating fashion
    400 Romanians and Bulgarians have moved into one tower block.
    Neighbourhood is now a hotspot for crime and anti-social behaviour.
    Duisburg council tell Britain to be on their guard as the migrants will move to take advantage of our benefits system.”




  27. chrisH says:

    Didn`t bother my arse about Dimbledays otherly-challenged little brother and his execrable “Any Questions”(R4 last night 8p.m)
    But did hear Tatchell get cheered to the rafters after just one introductory sentence as he opened the socialist sluices by way of an answer to a question sneering at Camerons economic competence…so unlike dear Gordon and Edward eh “gyze`ngals”?
    I made my excuses and left-cleaning the kittens litter tray seemed somehow more wholesome in comparison!


  28. Demon says:

    Is this thread a troll-free zone? Quick someone make a speling misteak (done) so that Dezi and Armpitz will join in the fun.


  29. George R says:

    Simon Heffer, in ‘Daily Mail’-

    (Scroll down) –

    “Yvette Cooper, the Shadow Home Secretary, has admitted the error of the Blair and Brown governments’ loss of control over immigration. But that was no accident: it was a cynical move to make the country more ‘multicultural’, to expand the bloated client state to win Labour more votes, and, as one official put it, to create something to ‘rub the noses’ of the middle classes in. It was a classic example of dishonest government. Do not think that, just because Labour has admitted its mistake, it can be trusted. I’m in no doubt, given the chance, it will pull the same disgraceful trick again.”



  30. jimbola says:

    As soon that swivel eyed munchkin had finished speaking on thursday I was waiting for Melanie to give her what for and she dutifully obliged much to my relief.

    She may have even laid into her a little better if she wasn’t so obviously angered (and rightly) by the comments.

    I’m so glad the little twerp has been outed as a stooge, she must feel, well, even smaller now.


    • johnnythefish says:

      Agreed – much better performer, more clinical when she stays calm but she was still bloody effective. And who can blame her for getting angry? Labour and its followers – including the BBC are dismantling our democracy brick by brick with the aim of making Britain a one-party socialist state and it seems only UKIP are prepared to stand up and fight the bastards.

      Also Dimbleby made no attempt to stop the torrent of abuse – thinly disguised as argument – the vacuous Labour kid was throwing at the UKIP woman. In fact, at one point, he joined her in a pincer movement with his own aggressive questioning. Shameful bias, but sadly par for the course.


  31. Pacific Rising says:

    Interesting that Labour are attacking ukip.
    Does it mean that the Tories are no longer seen as the main threat?


    • Dysgwr_Cymraeg says:

      Yes, that will be the reason that nuliebor have “discovered” suddenly they made mistakes in their immigration policy.


  32. london calling says:

    Shame is no-one in the Chair told Amy Rutland to shut the fk up – she had had her say but was allowed to interrupt and answer back again and again from the floor, while the camera followed her every expression. Dimblebey is a failed Chairman, who should be shown the door as he can’t “chair” to save his life. he just wants to be a panellist. Go away QT, rid, you horrible programme.


    • Beeboidal says:

      Dimblebey is a failed Chairman, who should be shown the door as he can’t “chair” to save his life.

      Of course, there is another possibility – that he chaired this particular segment in exactly the way he wanted to. Ability to chair in a manner that a reasonable viewer would consider to be fair doesn’t come into it.


    • Demon says:

      Why is she called “Rutland”? Is her bum the size of a small county?


  33. pedro says:

    shifty lefty girl with the wobbling head soon got shut up by melanie,,,,god how boring was lefty labour girl with her ranting….allah hu akbar !!!!


  34. Lurker says:

    We need to know the following. 1) Did Dumble – or whoever actually decides – know who to pick? 2) If apparently at random does that mean there were other ringers dotted about so that one of them would be picked.

    After all the more complicit the BBC is the less effort is needed to insert ringers. If you know your guy is going to get his (her) shot you need to waste effort importing anyone else.


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Dimbleby knows what they’re going to ask if it’s one of those pre-submitted questions, but there are times when people just raise their hands if they want to respond to something a panelist said, or add a comment to whatever discussion is going on. He deliberately picks the prepared questions for whatever moderator reasons he has in his head (sometimes stepping on panelists so he can move on if he doesn’t like where things are going), but if Rutland was just one of those random hands in the air, it’s hard to nail him for it.


      • Lurker says:

        Rutland was a hand-in-the-air random questioner not one of the pre-prepared. Thats what raises a question mark over her selection.


        • John Wood says:

          You are pretty naive if you think that because someone holds up their hand they are selected randomly.

          All it takes is foreknowledge of where they will be sitting or the clothes they’ll be wearing. The crowd doesn’t know that the person is a plant.

          (At Disney MGM Studios there’s a show “The Indiana Jones Stunt Spectacular”. Part of the show asks for audience participation where volunteers are called on to be extras. One person who is ‘selected’ is actually a professional stunt man, but the method of selection is such that the audience (unless having attended previously) don’t spot it.)

          May I suggest a course in audience manipulation?


          • David Preiser (USA) says:

            It’s ridiculous to believe that Dimbleby has some list of approved random punters with descriptions of their clothing and a seating chart. I’m sorry, but that’s just silly.

            I do believe that he chooses the pre-screened questions according to his mood, whatever that may be, and that should be questioned. That’s not to say there’s no malfeasance in Rutland being approved to attend at all. And the Labour MP knew. A proper journalist should be pressing him on it.


            • MD says:

              The director can also talk to him via his ear piece and so he could be nudged to pick a particular person.


  35. David Preiser (USA) says:

    The poor dear has protected her tweets now.

    Also, let’s not forget that, as Billy shows on his blog, the Labour MP on the panel met with her earlier in the day. So he knew she’d be there. If we pretend he didn’t, then he would certainly have recognized her once she started her rant. Somebody should go after Twigg on this as well.


  36. David Preiser (USA) says:

    I just asked Billy about it, and he’s pretty sure that she tweeted after the fact, so no chance for anyone to warn Diane James. However, obviously both UKIP and the Tories need somebody monitoring this stuff more, because they still could have caught her tweet about meeting with Twigg beforehand. There’s probably a lot of stuff there to catch.


  37. Alaz Adsk says:

    She is now known as “Rutter the Nutter” in Labour circles,,,, that’s her political career now already over. The one thing NuLabour does not tolerate is failure and Rutters loose lips on Twitter have done for her.



  38. I am very enjoyed for this blog. Its a good informative content. It assist me significantly to fix some longchamp 2013 http://sacs-longchamp-hobo-solde.webnode.fr/blog/


  39. Top submit. I expect reading further. Cheers longchamp 2013 http://sacs-longchamp-hobo-solde.webnode.fr/galerie-photos/


  40. Ha! Nope, these can be my then over-ear handsets, but pertaining to $150, not any $350 they are surely selling pertaining to new…. sac longchamp http://saclongchamppascher00.webnode.fr/galerie-photos%2


  41. Useful material. Hope to discover more wonderful posts in the future. isabel marant cheap http://isabel-marant-shoe-sneakers.webnode.com/blog/


  42. Demon says:

    It looks like spammers have joined in this thread as the Beeboids have virtually left it alone (except for some unusually pertinent posts from Scotty).


  43. Highly еnergеtic artіcle, I liked that a lot.
    Will there bе a part 2?

    my webpage :: time2walk.com