Our blessed ‘Saviour of the Human race’…Lily the Pinko Limpet Allen….her ‘medicinal compound’? A concentration camp, a compound, for the Rich probably.
Is there any cause too fashionable for Lily ‘The Limpet’ Allen not to attach her name to? Refugees, wicked capitalists and now the victims of a towering inferno caused by neo-liberal greed and class discrimination. Guess her record sales are in decline….93 in the charts last time I heard. Yep….new career beckons….‘Voice of the Dispossessed’. Her bank balance will be depleted pretty quick if she keeps doling out the largesse for every trendy cause whilst her music career fades away.
Hmmm…does she in fact give any money to these causes or does she just grandstand on the Telly for effect…look at me…I’m Lily! I’m so good! Love me!
Maybe we should introduce a celebrity levy, you know in emergencies just like Corbyn wants to take-over houses that are unoccupied at present. Yeah….a celebrity tax on all those who posture and preen for the Media as they showcase their virtuous selves declaiming against society and the Rich [erm…themselves then]….if they don’t want to be rich let’s help them out and requisition their bank balances to help the victims…I’m sure they’d be much more appreciative of a cash handout rather than some self-serving sentiments from a B-list celebrity showboating on the Telly. Let’s face it most of the money Allen earns comes from the poorer end of society buying her records…time to give some back?
Just why does the BBC think we need to hear from the likes of Lily Allen? Why does the BBC think a soon to be washed up celebrity has more to say that is of interest or relevance than say, the leader of RBKC Council or indeed of anyone they could just pull off the streets? Why a self-promoting little rich-girl?
Newsnight only dumped Allen when they secured an interview with someone relevant…
Newsnight editor Ian Katz has said, however, that Allen was removed from the programme solely because prioritising an interview with Nick Paget-Brown, the leader of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea council, made more sense.
Why was she pencilled in at all? Not as if she is trying to calm things down and ensure accurate information gets out there…she is doing the exact opposite…seemingly trying to whip up anger, discontent and riots with conspiracy theory rantings about the number of deaths and a cover-up by Officialdom….the official confirmed figure for dead and missing is 58, so far. Allen has been promoting a figure of 150 and now goes further suggesting 580….
Why would the BBC ever contemplate giving her airtime when she has nothing to do with the fire, she is a Labour activist and is clearly intent on spreading dangerous and inflammatory misinformation?
After the Battle of Waterloo the thousands of bodies that littered the battlefield were variously stripped of their clothing, their possessions, their valuables and their dignity by the local civilians…even their teeth were pulled out.
How familiar would it seem for those present to witness Labour’s villainy as its vultures descend upon the victims of the Grenfell fire to feed upon their troubles and misery, the loot this time not gold but political advantage as the carpetbagger Corbyn stands upon the coffins of the dead and uses them as a soapbox to peddle his class-war rhetoric. Does the man who is happy to see British civilians blown to pieces or shot dead in the streets, the man who rages against the very security services that use shoot-to-kill in order to protect us, does such a man really have the slightest care for the people from Grenfell Tower? Are they not just a useful currency to be ‘spent’ as part of his anti-Tory warchest as he and his far-left stormtroopers try to hijack the disaster for their own political ends?
Shame the BBC isn’t asking questions as the mob moves in…..the mob that forced the local town hall to close due to its invasion, violence and vandalism…just how helpful is that as the centre of operations is forced to shut?
Latest update – Saturday 17 June – 6:50pm
Kensington Town Hall has unfortunately been closed due to yesterday’s (Friday) incident. However staff have been able to continue their work today from a number of other sites, including the Westway Sports Centre. Officers from other boroughs have also been helping staff. We hope the Town Hall to reopen on Monday.
The BBC has played down the thuggishness of these protests and the fact that they are by Corbyn’s own brand of far-left Brownshirts.
Just look at this ‘report’ from the BBC that is sensationalising the fact that no one is at the Town Hall….but wait…the windows are all boarded up due to Corbyn’s street thugs smashing them….the place is closed as said above due to the violent acts of Corbyn’s useful idiots…the reporter makes no mention as to why the place is in lockdown or that operations go on elsewhere instead….the BBC spreading fake news as usual….
There were piles of donations but no one official in sight at Kensington and Chelsea town hall on Saturday afternoon, as Laura Trant reports.
This is the BBC continuing to paint a picture of a Council that doesn’t care, is in chaos and is failing the victims…when that just isn’t true….who does the BBC think set up the emergency relief centres?
The Council's major emergency plan was activated earlier this morning for the fire at Grenfell Tower. (1/3)
Is the Far-Left violence and intimidation not a warning of what is to come if Corbyn gets anywhere near power as his street thugs and online activists threaten, bully and intimidate people and organisations who don’t comply with their world view? Just look at what the Shadow Chancellor of all people was inciting the other day…essentially revolution to topple the government…
And yet the BBC, so keen to issue us ‘A Warning from history’ about the march of the Far-Right, almost totally ignores such very real, far more real than the Far-Right’s, threats from the Left….not as if the Grenfell residents want to be hijacked by Corbyn….
The BBC isn’t really interested in the Grenfell residents though. Like Corbyn it would seem its reporters are only interested in making political hay whilst they can…hoping to topple May and undermine the capitalist system.
The BBC was giving a platform to all and any, so many of them obviously Far-Left activists out to smash ‘The System’ raging about austerity, neo-liberalism and greed…not to mention social cleansing….including it might be added a Labour MP…
Nicky Campbell shrugged off complaints that his programme was a political witch-hunt against May. He told us that it was not politicisng the disaster, when of course he was doing so, and that the BBC ‘has a duty to listen and give a platform to the angry voices that don’t normally get heard.’. Well first off these are the same old voices that always get heard on the BBC….voices of the far-left and if you’re musician, poet, writer or artist you’re an honoured guest whose phone number is on speed-dial. Second the BBC’s ‘duty’ to listen and give a platform to does not extend to the Right especially on subjects such as immigration, Islam and climate change…the BBC, if it does graciously extend an invitation, does so only with the view that you are the ‘enemy’ whose arguments are to be countered and opposed whereas the ‘angry’ Left are there to be explained and supported and consoled.
The BBC now is very interested in the ‘left-behind’ as represented by those in Grenfell Tower as it politicises the disaster and turns into into a morality play about the rich and the poor in line with Labour’s narrative. The so-called ‘left-behind’ who voted for Brexit or Trump were derided and mocked as the ignorant, racist ‘deplorables’, but these new ‘left-behinders’, the residents of Grenfell house and their ilk, mostly ethnic minority, Muslim and immigrant, are now the standard-bearers of the new crusade against the rich and privileged. This morning the Resolution Foundation took the opportunity to put out a report telling us how the rich have gotten richer and the poor not so much…the BBC of course reported this and then tagged on ‘Grenfell House’ telling us that this is what happens when the rich don’t care about the poor…never-mind £10 million that was just spent on the building and extensive consultations, contrary to what we are told, were held with the residents…
Theresa May is being pilloried for not going in amongst the people and meeting the victims of the Grenfell Tower blaze but why did she not pay such a public high profile visit?
We are told it was because she was advised not to go on security grounds….
On the BBC’s Question Time programme on Thursday, Conservative defence minister Tobias Ellwood, said there were “security reasons” why Mrs May had not met residents.
That may well be the case…let’s face it no terrorist is going to kill Corbyn…after all if he ever gets elected…..
But anyway why would there be a security risk? We know the terrorism risk is severe and that this area had a high proportion of immigrants, many Muslim and many from the Middle East, including Syria. Let’s say what the BBC thinks is unsayable…it is perfectly possible that one of those people may well have radical views and on coming into close contact with the Prime Minister of a country hated by the Jihadis might have a ‘sudden Jihad’ moment and decide to become a Shahid and martyr himself for the Cause.
Let’s be honest when you hear voices like this conspiracy theorist stirring up hate and anger you might think the threat may well be real, or become real as such people inflame the situation and mood and the irresponsible media, such as the BBC, sensationalise and blame by spreading false stories and information…..
So did May get security advice from the police or security services? Why doesn’t the BBC ask? And then ask why such advice would be deemed necessary.
“Right, you didn’t come here when people were telling you that the building was unsafe! That is not ‘newsworthy’.
“You come here when people die. Why?”
Not surprising really as you might well ask where have the media been all these years? You have to be pretty sure the residents of these flats, the resident’s association, contacted the media when they were trying to get work done…what response did they get? Only now after this massive fire do they get any attention…and somewhat an irony that the media, the BBC itself, keeps mentioning the fire at Lakanal House in 2009 and the subsequent inquest outcome in 2013 but where was any wideranging investigation into other potential death trap blocks of flats? It’s a bit late now raging at politicians for complacency when those who supposedly ‘hold power to account’ failed to do so themselves on the same issues.
The BBC is here to help it wants to assure the residents….better late than never…
So who comes out well in all of this? The emergency services of course, but also the locals and those who came from wider afield who rushed to help and volunteered themselves, their time and possessions to help the victims of the fire.
The politicians are decidedly also rans as they either, as in May’s case make a huge error in not visiting the victims firstly because it is the right thing to do and second because she must know that Corbyn will milk this for every drop of political advantage he can, he will, and has, visited the people with what may be sincere sentiments but the reality is that his visit is 90% political grandstanding for the TV cameras weaponising the deaths of people in the fire even before the building has stopped burning.
Labour has shamelessly exploited the deaths from the start well before even the initial cause of the fire is known let alone the reasons for the rapid spread of the fire. Ken Livingstone was on the BBC early Wednesday claiming the fire was the result of cutbacks to the fire service and he was rapidly followed by Harriet Harman who didn’t let good judgement, sentiment or respect for the dead get in the way of her immediate politicisation of the fire, appearing repeatedly on the BBC to blame cuts to council spending for the fire [which the council denies…having just spent £10 million on the building]. The BBC has been happy to provide endless opportunities for Labour to come on and make such political statements even knowing and encouraging them to do so as they did with David Lammy who was invited onto the Today show to talk about the fire and anyone he knew who might be caught up in it and then jumping deliberately to the political as they asked him for ‘political’ comment….which we got in a very intense angry set of remarks that those responsible should be locked up and its corporate manslaughter…obviously we do not need an inquiry into this fire…Lammy, and his Labour colleagues, have already decided what went wrong and who is to blame.
Corbyn presents himself as a new politician with a new approach to politics, an ethical politician. But he’s not. In fact he’s worse than the old lot precisely because he presents himself as ethical and sincere but is in fact just as dishonest and ‘political’ as they are. Look at how he lied about his beliefs about the EU. A long term critic of the EU he suddenly became a soft supporter or someone who wouldn’t commit either way in order to try and win both Leave and Remain votes by confusing them about Labour’s stance. Then there’s ‘terrorism’…a long term supporter of this approach to politics he suddenly discarded decades of cheerleading for the murderers when it was politically expedient to do so, not only abandoning lifelong principles for short term political gain but prepared to tell huge lies about the causes of terrorism and misleading the public on the government’s response. He s a man who blatantly lied on TV in an interview with Peston as he lied about his stance on shoot-to-kill claiming he had only said he opposed it in the 1980’s…that was a lie…he had stated quite clearly he opposed it in the present day even in the aftermath of the Paris attacks. Now he launches a highly political attack on the government in what is an indecently short time as the emergency services are still searching for bodies and the facts about the causes of the fire are very obviously still unknown..and yet he and his Labour colleagues are filling the airwaves with accusations and conclusions that are solely intended to portray this as the government’s fault…never mind that Labour ignored the issues themselves….from the Grenfell Action Group 2015…
It was incumbent on the Labour opposition to raise this issue with the Council and at least try to create some kind of stir. To our horror she responded:
“The Labour Group would need strong evidence to request a further investigation of the TMO, particularly given the stream of favourable monitoring reports that have gone to the Council on the TMO’s performance since Memoli (see latest attached). I am afraid largely anecdotal dissatisfaction on the Hornet would not be sufficient evidence.”
We were appalled by this dismissive response, not least because it misrepresented and minimised what we believe Cllr Blakeman and her colleagues already know to be widespread and deep dissatisfaction and distrust of the TMO among their constituents.
Ultimately one has to wonder why the Labour opposition would fear to challenge the utterly discredited and despised TMO. Even the dogs in the street know that the TMO is rotten to the core.
The BBC doesn’t come off so well either as it passes grand and very premature judgement upon all it surveys….as with Labour without knowing any of the facts. Almost immediately as news of the fire broke the BBC was trying to invent a narrative and cast blame, often having to be smacked down by guests who had to remind them that the facts were completely unknown and judgements could not be passed. The BBC gave Labour massive airtime whilst the government got almost nothing….was that the government’s fault or the BBC shutting them out?….I didn’t hear a word from May and the government on Wednesday at all….all we got was Harriet Harman moving from BBC studio to BBC studio spreading her lies and inflammatory comments as she went.
I heard Chris Warburton trying to whip up some anger amongst residents suggesting they were ignored because of their race and class. I thought this may be a slip in the heat of the moment but no, it’s a line the BBC seem to be taking…..
Again, as said many times, the BBC suddenly supports an issue that it normally scorns and dismisses when it suits its own narrative…in this case the poor and disadvantaged being ignored and put upon by the rich, powerful and elite.
Odd how the same BBC is happy to malign this same class of people as uneducated racists when they vote for Brexit….for years and years the BBC was more than happy them to ignore and dismiss their worries about immigration and the EU and to blame them for an almost mythical rise on ‘hate crime’ turning Britain into a ‘nastier and more racist place’….apparently.
Suddenly now though the BBC wants to hear their voices, to listen to their concerns and to fight on their behalf against the serried ranks of corporate, elitist and government vested interests that oppress and impoverish them.
Oh…maybe you didn’t know…the fire was a revenge attack by white supremacist Islamophobes on Muslims…blowback, a racist backlash against innocent Muslims…Reporter just nods and says ‘OK’…..
As Jeremy Bowen tells us of the charismatic, legendary, young revolutionary freedom fighter that was Arafat who took on the ominous might of the Israeli oppressors, becoming the father of the Palestinian nation that genuine peacemakers would miss upon his death [a death possibly, probably, due to Israeli poisoning]…quickly brushing over Munich and all that, we can thank our lucky stars to have such a trustworthy, accurate and impartial news broadcaster that fights the tidal wave of right-wing [and it is ony right-wing] fake news that engulfs us with its own brand of truth and real honest news. Thank God. However if you should spot any isolated occasions where the BBC lets slip its high standards please be good enough to identify them here…..all yours….
“The problem is that our naval history inevitably focuses on the wars we won and the great heroes who fought in them,” said historian Dr David Davies.
“By any criterion, it’s one of the worst British defeats of all time.
“Personally, I’d say it’s important to know about it in this country as an antidote to triumphalism – the idea that English, and then British, history has been a largely unbroken succession of victories.
“Nothing brings home that message more clearly than an attack which brought enemy ships right into the heart of the country’s main naval base, and which saw the fleet flagship towed away as a trophy.”
That’s pretty much the Left’s approach to Britain and British history…everything that Britain did is bad and if not, never mind, they’ll write it up as bad anyway. The BBC is a fellow traveller on this journey of historical revisionism and relativity. We can’t have any pride in Britain, no celebrating ‘Britishness’ [might offend, alienate or marginalise ‘the other’], no Union flags, no national identity or loyalty….poisonous concepts that need an antidote.
Of course Britain hasn’t contributed anything to the world, if you discount sport, science, engineering, exploration, knowledge of the world, Art, literature, culture, language, Monty Python, and of course the BBC…who could forget them eh?
As for triumphalism? What’s not to like…we thrashed the tyrant Napoleon and freed Europe from his ‘union’ [oh…that’s what they don’t like], the Kaiser’s grand plan for the EU stopped in its jackboots [oh sorry BBC] and Hitler’s blitzkrieg to unify Europe blasted [again…sorry BBC]. Not to mention the Japs nuked, the Boers and Zulus crushed, eventually and oh yes…slavery abolished in the enlightened West….and the biggest empire the world has ever seen, mostly harmless, benevolent and enriching [arguably]…and all accidental sort of. And of course we brought down the Soviet empire and its Berlin Wall…and kicked the Argies in the Junta so that they’re a democracy now.
There was a story in the Sunday Times this week about a film that reported on the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe and linked it to Muslim immigration [no way!] as well as neo-Nazism. The film has naturally been axed in Germany by the Public Broadcaster [much as the BBC binned its film on the 7/7 bombers as it told the truth]…as told to us by Is the BBC biased?.
The paradox? Merkel let in all these Muslim migrants because she was guilty about Germany’s anti-Semitic past and she wanted to make amends.
Odd way to do it…by increasing the very anti-Semitism that she was so guilty about, allegedly.
The road to Hell…should be a long procession of idiot politicians who destroy their own countries, and others with them, with their ‘good intentions’….or cowardice.
Merkel…the Russians’ most successful spy? They must be happy with her whatever…if she’s not a spy, just a useful idiot, at least that saves them a few roubles and the odd brown envelope. Putin loves Merkel not Trump.
Nick Robinson…clever chap eh? Apparently Corbynmania is ‘religious fervour’, the Followers believe in the ‘good book’… Labour’s manifesto [yeah…made up fantastical drivel…..feeding the 5000 with a few loaves and a couple of small fish…. water into wine…very Corbyn-like] Corbyn is taking them to the ‘promised land’ [is Robinson taking the piss…..a man accused of anti-Semitism and Robinson gives us a Jewish iconic theme to explain him?]…he then calls him ‘JC’ in a knowing, smartarse way….genius.
Panorama. As all too often it’s terrible.
Election 2017: What Just Happened?
And the answer? Brexit. It was all about the Brexit….despite the fact that many people in the film said it was mostly about the economy, paying for care, fuel allowance, pensions, austerity…oh and the great unmentioned, which is odd when the film concentrated on the young so much…the Great Tuition Fee Freebee.
Who did the BBC bring on to comment from the Tories? Osborne, zealous Remainer who boasted that his Standard headline on the care u-turn destroyed the Tory campaign, Soubry…fervent Remainer, Heseltine, Fanatical Remainer, Gavin Barwell…rabid Remainer. Are you getting the idea that the BBC invited in people who would spin a certain pro-Remain, anti-Brexit narrative…oh and not to mention Tory comms chief, Katie Perrior , who resigned when the election was announced, so likelihood is she was going to be critcial of May…though you could question her judgement having said this last year…
With Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader the threat to the Tories is minimal – there is no need for Boris The Saviour.
The BBC kept insisting Brexit was the real reason for the Corbyn ‘win’ and yet other than those Tory Remainders gave no concrete evidence of that, in fact doing the opposite as said above…Len McCluskey and Corbyn both think it was just people saying ‘enough of austerity’. Remain voters in a Labour seat voted for Labour…the BBC thinks this is proof the country wants to end Brexit.
Odd ain’t it….the referendum vote that specifically asked one question, the EU in or out?, is constantly said to be irrelevant and invalid because we are told people didn’t know what they were voting for…they did not have a box on the ballot to ask ‘out of the Single Market?’ [even Humphrys peddled this as fact in an interview with David Davis and had to be corrected]…except of course they did…because the Single Market is part of the EU and they voted, knowing full well it meant leaving the Single Market as both sides stated this uncategorically again and again, to leave the EU as a whole. If you wanted to play the ‘they didn’t know and therefore we can’t do this’ game then they didn’t know that voting ‘out’ in the referendum would then mean gradual backsliding, qualifications and ‘accommodations’…they thought Brexit meant Brexit..thus we must leave completely on Soubry et al’s logic.
But now…now the election, which was about a myriad of issues, mostly the economy and austerity and then majorly terrorism and police funding, is said to be a vote on Brexit….Robinson tells us that ‘the people were angry about Brexit’. Funny how the terms of engagement change when it suits. May certainly wanted it to be about Brexit but it just didn’t happen…Brexit was very much an also ran issue…tuition fees, care costs and oh yes, ‘hope’, were much, much bigger issues and vote winners or losers.
The BBC happily ignores the polls that tell us even Remain voters want to get on with it and get it settled….this Panorama is peddling the idea that there must be an alternative, a ‘soft Brexit’…ie no Brexit.
Uncle ‘Joe’: Listen kids…I’ll give you free tuition, pay off your debts, give you houses, great jobs and a super-model partner [colour of your choice] and all your dreams will come true…and the oldies will pay for it…do I get your vote guys?
Young Hopefuls: Yey!!!!!!
Did Corbyn have ‘youth on his side’ as he claims? The BBC certainly thinks so but you’d be hard pushed to get the reasons why…such as massive bribery….Panorama decided it was revenge for Brexit…before deciding that Corbyn ‘won’ because he offered hope, change, no more austerity [such as it isn’t]….curiously no mention of those massive bribes on tuition fees.
Brendan O’Neill spots what might be the problem for those young people angry at the DUP, could the same problem explain why Corbyn got their vote…they don’t actually know anything about him or his policies….maybe they should have Googled him or, God forbid, read the Mail or the Telegraph….
One protester’s comment summed up the flimsiness of the fury. ‘I didn’t know who the DUP were, I had to Google them,’ he said. From Googling a party to railing against it in the space of minutes: the modern mindset summed up.
Is this another example of those young who make their educated and informed decisions and vote for Corbyn based on blissful ignorance [Corbyn who? Yeah man you get my vote…now where’s the cash?]…protesting the EDl, who weren’t at the meet, and against Tommy Robinson…but not knowing who he is…
Similarly those who hate the DUP for their religious bigotry support Corbyn and his Muslim friends….Muslims who have even more extreme views on the same subjects as the DUP….
All those lower than a snake’s belly once were somebody politicians have slithered out to variously betray or besmirch May and her union with the DUP.
John Major and William Hague, not content with trying to derail Brexit, are now doing Sinn Fein’s work as they work the media with tales of terror and economic distaster in Northern Ireland should May join up with the DUP. Reprising the same old tune we heard at Brexit with an Irish lilt. [and what of those Tory Remain MPs trying to stitch up a secret backroom deal with Labour to block and defeat Brexit? Can’t see any mention of the plot on the BBC, even in this Kuenssberg report on the subject of Brexit negotiations…she mentions some Tories might like a cross party appearance but that’s it…why no mention of nefarious plots to stymie Brexit? Does’t look good as arrogant politicians stitch up democracy in their own interest…once again]
Then we had the oily Peter Hain giving a similar message telling us that ‘special deals’ will destabilise NI…does he mean like the secret little deals done by Blair with the Provo murderers not only getting them into the British Parliament but issuing secret ‘get out of jail free’ letters that let them off scot-free? I’m sure Hain would have no objection to Sinn Fein actually taking up their seats now and an ‘unofficial’ alliance with Labour to stop the Tories.
The BBC knows that Gordon Brown tried to form a pact with the evil DUP because they just mentioned it on 5Live….curiously not a mention in this main story in their frontpage despite copious quotes from critics of the deal.
That story came out in 2015…in, the, Hillary Clinton, Emails. LOL. Nooo wonder the BBC doesn’t want to discuss the actual content of those emails and why they damaged Clinton [not just the fact of their leaking….which is all the BBC were concerned about…whodunnit? Ze Russians…lock Trump up!!!]
LABOUR sought support from the DUP in a bid to form a government following the Westminster election in 2010.
Newly released emails to Hillary Clinton when she was US secretary of state show the Labour Party tried to win support from the Democratic Unionists.
In a previously confidential briefing paper, US officials said then Labour leader Gordon Brown “is doing whatever he can to hold on to power”.
They said Northern Ireland secretary Shaun Woodward was involved in attempts to build support for Labour following the election.
The email read: “Shaun, for his part, is working on an economic package for Northern Ireland to win support from the DUP and other parties for Labour – a package to be proposed in the Queen’s Speech.”
Why did the BBC not report this before as they trolled the DUP and the Tories? Must have known about it. Guess they didn’t want the facts to get in the way of good bad news story.
Any bets on when the first political book giving us the dirt on the election intrigues, betrayals and stupidity hits the shelves? Nick Robinson already working on his I’m guessing. Maybe Osborne will do an ‘autobiography’…‘My Part in May’s Downfall.’
Marr is absolutely hopeless isn’t he? Yet another interview with a Labour grandee, Corbyn, and it is red carpet treatment all the way with little in the way of demanding and probing questions…McDonnell was given a free ride and a very smug Corbyn couldn’t have got better treatment if he’d written the script himself.
Corbyn told us he’d had a ‘brilliant manifesto‘….no comment from Marr despite the fact that Corbyn’s manifesto was big, huge, on promises, but failed completely to provide genuine costings….the IFS saying Corbyn would have to impose the biggest tax burden on this country of any peace-time era. Nor did Marr challenge him on the fact that Corbyn was obviously bribing voters, buying their votes….for someone who presents himself as the ‘ethical’ politician, different from all the rest, that deserves some comment you might think.
Corbyn told us that his approach was ‘challenging an economic consensus that impoverished so many people’. Marr’s response? ‘It clearly was’.
What? Just look at the previous paragraph where it is clear Corbyn is just the same old ‘pork barrel’ politician of old…buying votes and corrupting the democratic process for short term electoral gain….‘challenging an economic consensus that impoverished so many people’ is the very last thing he is doing…he is in fact just entrenching that system. Marr didn’t notice.
Then we had no challenge to Corbyn’s statement that he wanted a tariff free trade deal…which means no Brexit. Surely a significant issue…not for Marr who just brushed it aside without comment.
No comment about Corbyn’s support for the IRA and Muslim terrorists despite the issue being of huge significance in the election and Corbyn doing a massive opportunistic u-turn on his support for terrorists.
Similarly Marr raises the subject of the ‘socially conservative’ DUP…but makes no reference to Corbyn’s close ties to Muslim conservatives or indeed his own extreme views.
Marr is well named. It suits his style of interviewing. Marred. Maybe a new verb…to be ‘Marred’…to be let off the hook in a half-arsed interview.
Why did the all-powerful BBC refuse to tell the truth about Mr Corbyn?
Theresa May surely has only herself to blame for the Tories’ appalling performance on Thursday. Even before the polls closed it was impossible to find a Conservative MP who thought she had run a good campaign.
But there is another group of people who certainly made a contribution to the outcome and should be hanging their heads in shame this morning. I am speaking of the BBC.
Our national broadcaster accounts for about 50 per cent of news output in this country via its multiple television, radio and web outlets. It is immeasurably more influential than any other news channel or newspaper. That is why it is so important it fulfils its sacred duty to invigilate politicians without fear or favour.
In the case of Jeremy Corbyn, it failed miserably over the past few weeks…..Auntie was laughably indulgent over the past few weeks.
Today, Britain goes to the polls. And frankly, I’m shocked that no one has stood up and said, unambiguously, how profoundly dangerous it would be for the nation if Jeremy Corbyn becomes Prime Minister. So let me be clear, the leader of the Labour Party is an old-fashioned international socialist who has forged links with those quite ready to use terror when they haven’t got their way: the IRA, Hizbollah, Hamas. As a result he is completely unfit to govern and Britain would be less safe with him in No 10.
Why has the BBC not made the slightest attempt to investigate that…in fact why has the BBC done the complete oppsosite and fed us the lie that Corbyn is the best man to defend us from terrorism?
Why did Corbyn do so well in the election? Having one of the most powerful and influential news broadcasters on-side might have helped. There is no doubt that the BBC corrupted annd undermined the democratic process and helped rig the election in Labour’s favour.
The Conservatives made an historically bad decision to hold a general election when they already had a majority, a slim one but a majority, and that, as they should have noted as a caution, had been won against all the odds and the punditry. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it. May of course had repeatedly stated that there was no need for another general election only to change her mind in what looked a very opportunistic way. They then made a catastrophic misjudgement in hammering their core vote…the householders who want to pass on their earnings to their children to help them in the future (On top of cutting fuel allowance and the triple lock for Tory voting pensioners). May had learnt nothing from the Tory voting ‘white van man’ national insurance fiasco and subsequent u-turn. She compounded the error by back-tracking on it and changing her mind, whilst refusing to admit she’d changed her mind. Two u-turns whilst proclaiming herself in her main battle-cry to be ‘Strong and Stable’…powerfully undermining her own campaign and the founding principle for her appeal to the electorate…that only a strong and stable leader could deal with the Brexit negotiations.
The other major influence on the outcome of the election were the terrorist attacks which suddenly brought in to play a whole new narrative about police numbers, funding and security. May, having been Home Secretary and having overseen cuts to the police was all too easily put in the frame for the blame…lack of funding led to the attacks was the simplistic message…a message that was all too effective especially as it met with little scrutiny and examination from the BBC despite clear evidence that police funding was not the issue when it comes to identifying and stopping these killers….after all the police actually already knew who these people were and what they were about.
May made one final ‘error’…one that made sense, but it only made sense if the BBC were neutral and took a non-partisan view…which naturally they didn’t and perhaps the Tories should have factored in the BBC’s hatred of them. [The BBC are back to calling them the ‘nasty party’ as they seek alliance with the ‘socially conservative’ DUP’…question…are Muslim conservatives ‘nasty’ then?] May decided not to take part in any of the debates between the leaders…having seen the TV debates and listened to some on the radio you’ll know they are total nonsense and a bearpit for loud voices chanting well rehearsed soundbites and attack lines…the audience learn nothing. The BBC however decided this was a good opportunity to attack May and its presenters constantly criticised her for not appearing in the leaders’ debates telling us she was scared….here’s the BBC’s US correspondent, James Cook, giving us his two penneth worth….
I'll tell you what voters don't like. Unnecessary elections. Especially when the leaders who call them refuse to engage in the campaigns.
Now that’s a complete lie isn’t it? May was out on the stump, she appeared in many interviews and did several audience question and answers as well as one-on-one with interviewers. She in no way ‘dodged the public’ nor rigorous interviews…and of course put herself up for election, the biggest ‘interview’ of all. So just a BBC lie….but one that was spread and encouraged throughout the campaign…naturally a Labour narrative.
BBC presenters relentlessly attacked May for appearing on the One Show telling us this was a soft interview and she was ‘dodging the public’, however when Corbyn did the same interview he was applauded, not a word of criticism from his fellow travellers at the BBC.
And therein lies the real problem. The BBC.
The Power and the Inglorious Bias
The BBC is extraordinarily powerful and yet unaccountable with politicians too afraid to tackle its blatant partisan support for Labour and its extreme liberal ideology that it propagates without fear of any genuine censure and retribution. The BBC is by far the most trusted and goto source for news relying as it does on past reputation, the audience’s innate attachment to it based upon years of ‘brainswashing’ as they grew up watching its programmes and ‘bonding’ with the BBC, putting aside any qualms about bias because they love Top Gear or Poldark or David Attenborough…and of course because the BBC pumps out relentless propaganda on its own behalf telling us how fantastic, how trustworthy, how accurate, how much better quality it is when compared to other news sources…and of course only it can be trusted to deliver the news in an era of ‘post-truth alternate facts’ and ‘fake news’…which is an irony because the BBC is the biggest peddler of fake news out there and is completely untrustworthy as we will show here in an account of how the BBC corrupted British democracy and rigged an election.
The Tories lost it but with a little help from their enemies
It wasn’t all the Tories’ failure but a highly successful campaign by Corbyn, or rather his team, which completely reframed how Corbyn and his fellow disasters-just-waiting-to-happen, Abbott and McDonnell, presented themselves, their policies and ideologies. From being actual terrorist supporting, far-left, Britain-hating extremists they had a complete make-over, new suits, new hairdos and new policies that were astonishing u-turns after decades of saying the complete opposite. However they got away with it because the BBC did not challenge them at all. May was pilloried and vilified for her u-turns, McDonnell was allowed by Marr to whitewash over his avowed Marxism despite clear evidence that he was a Marxist including an incriminating video, only Andrew Neil making any attempt to seriously challenge him, Abbott waffled about a change in hairstyle and Corbyn got away with murder as he dumped his career-long love of terrorists, denied his ambition to thwart all anti-terror legislation and to claim he had always supported shoot-to-kill, actually lying in an ITV interview with Peston about a Kuenssberg interview with him in which he claimed he only opposed shoot-to-kill in the 1980’s in NI…that was a total lie…one that the BBC itself challenged at the time when the BBC Trust ruled in Corbyn’s favour that Kuenssberg had misquoted him…she hadn’t…Corbyn had lied but now that the election was ongoing the BBC suddenly forgot that Corbyn had supported shoot-to-kill, and then lied on Peston, and were presenting him as a man who could be trusted to deal with a terrorist threat…also failing to register his long, long support for such terrorists…Muslim ones as well as IRA.
Putting the record straight by bending the truth
A classic example of the BBC’s highly partisan favouring of Corbyn and the whitewashing of his past is this interview with Boris by Mishal Husain ‘putting the record straight’ as she tells it, Husain insisting that Corbyn supports shoot-to-kill and has said so many times…she makes no note that this is a massive opportunistic u-turn on terror and shoot-to-kill by Corbyn preferring instead to make this strident defence of Corbyn against all the documented facts…
Note how Husain, whilst being very unwilling to talk about Corbyn’s voting record on terror laws, and indeed stopping Boris talking about that, tried to turn the tables by cherry-picking one example when Boris opposed a terror measure…the 90 days detention. This is highly selective and unbalanced…Corbyn just about voted down every anti-terror law he could, and boasted about it, Boris votes against one and this somehow absolves Corbyn for his career long pro-terror stance? I don’t remember Boris honouring IRA murderers or calling Islamic terrorists ‘friends’ and inviting them into parliament…I do however remember Corbyn doing that. Husain just ignored all the inconvenient facts that showed Corbyn to be the terrorist’s friend.
Those who control the past control the present
Quite extraordinary how the BBC can totally ignore Corbyn’s past, his celebrated steadfast refusal to change his ideology in 30 or more years and now his astonishingly convenient and well-timed change of heart on terrorism. Extraordinary when you compare it with how they absolutely slaughtered May for her u-turns and how they now conduct a relentlessly negative and critical ‘exposé’ of the DUP’s ideology, very definitely adopting a censorious tone towards them that is utterly at odds with the indulgent, see-no-evil tone used for Corbyn….the DUP’s sins are being climate sceptics(or ‘deniers’ as the BBC maligns them), opposition to abortion and to same-sex marriage….compare that with Corbyn’s unfaltering, until now, support for terrorists, his failure to tackle anti-Semitism in his party, his desire to abolish NATO, MI5, the Police and the Army and his ruinous economic policies and you wonder who is really the major threat to Britain, world peace and stability.
The BBC lionised him and covered over his extremism in this profile and highlighted his unchanging policies as a notable part of his career…
He has refused to cave in and now has a chance to fight a general election on his own terms – making the case for a different kind of government in line with the principles he has held, more or less unchanged, since he first entered politics more than 40 years ago.
Strange now that the BBC should make little to no comment about his astonishing make-over and revision of his policies just as an election came into sight.
Greed is good
Consider this…Corbyn is all for fairness, community and an equitable spreading of wealth…and yet one of his major vote catching policies, dumping student loans, is the exact opposite of that appealing as it does to the greed in people, the individual’s self-interest at the expense of the community. Rather than take responsibility for their own further education and career advancement Corbyn presented the young with a vote-winning proposition they couldn’t refuse whatever it cost society…free university places. Greed and self-interest is now good under Corbyn…everything that he is supposedly against. No comment from the BBC?
Safe in his hands
What of that narrative that if only we had more community police officers on the beat we’d gather more intelligence and be able to identify these terrorists? Complete nonsense. These people were already on the radar, the problem was that the police could not arrest them and charge them as it was not an offence to merely think certain thoughts, not even to have an ‘ISIS’ flag in your possession as the Muslim who walked freely through Westminster with one draped around his shoulders proved. One reason of course is the lack of legislation allowing stricter laws that cracked down on ‘thoughts’, legislation so often opposed by…Jeremy Corbyn. The BBC refuses to allow the salient facts about anti-terrorism to take hold in the public narrative that we have one of the most efficient and effective counter-terror forces in the world…we make arrests every day and have stopped 18 attacks in the last few years….whatever happened to the wise old words that the BBC used to trot out….the terrorists only have to get lucky once, we have to be lucky everyday? Oh hang on…after the Manchester attack they quote this…
“We used to say that a terrorist only has to be lucky once. We have to be lucky all the time.”
Funny though how that doesn’t seem to apply here for May….the attack isn’t just a terrorist getting ‘lucky’ it’s May’s fault for cutting police budgets….despite pumping in billions more into security and intelligence and the fact that there are 23,000 people ‘of interest’ on the radar…an impossible number to monitor effectively….but remarkable that they know of them all… no?
As Sir Richard Dearlove, a former head of MI6, noted in a piece in Thursday’s Daily Telegraph that Corbyn’s response was ‘nakedly political’.
Sir Richard — who is no Tory stooge — wrote that ‘if you ask professionals in the police, they would recognise that creating 10,000 jobs for community policing won’t have the slightest effect on the problem of Islamic terrorism’.
Remarkable that the BBC has ignored the fact that Labour in 2015 were proposing to cut the police budget by a further 10% above what the Tories had already cut. Consider that the police budget has not been cut since 2015 by the Tories and yet they get criticised for the level of funding and that Labour would have cut further…how is it possible that this is not worthy of comment from the BBC?
How is it not worthy of comment that Labour’s ex-shadow home secretary and now Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, and Corbyn, have both opposed the counter-terror Prevent programme?
Foreign Policy black propaganda…The Jihadist’s narrative
Corbyn came straight out after Manchester to blame foreign policy for radicalising Muslims…this has long been a BBC narrative as well…it is an utterly false and dangerous narrative, one that is embedded in the Muslim community as a whole and which feeds the Jihadi recruit conveyor belt…it is an entirely false line of propaganda.
The other incredibly dangerous and false narrative is that these terrorists are not driven by religious ideology, that they are somehow perverting the teachings of Islam. The fact is they are not, ISIS is living history, a revolution that is televised in full technicolour as the Islamic State re-enacts what Muhammed did 1400 years ago as he blitzed the Middle East with a tiny force and established what would become Muslim dominance of the area and beyond….and they are doing it in obedience to the teachings of the Koran and its commands to ‘defend Muslims’ who are under attack…the BBC has been telling Muslims they are under attack, that the West is at war with Islam, for over a decade now. Any wonder so many British Muslims believe that? Where is the counter narrative that tells the real story?
The BBC’s ‘flagship’ current affairs programme, Newsnight, broadcast a profile of Corbyn, a profile put together by a left-wing supporter from the New Statesman, Stephen Bush. This turned out to be a somewhat narrow, dishonest profile, more idolization, an acclamatory tribute, that airbrushed away any controversial aspects of the Corbyn ideology and turned him into a moderate, reasoned and statesman-like politician well respected by everyone. Newsnight then balanced that with a somewhat narrow, dishonest protrayal of May…but this time far from being a glowing, positive tribute as Corbyn received we had a snide, sniping, extremely negative attack from Tory wet, Matthew Parris…a fanatical Remain supporter who hates the fact May is actually going to carry out what the voters expect…Brexit.
The BBC had from the beginning of the campaign targeted May and her slogan ‘Strong and Stable’ relentlessly mocking and deriding it and its use making people embarrassed to use it such is the power of the BBC to intimidate and police what you can and cannot say in public, people now self-censoring themselves in case they get ridiculed by the BBC. The BBC had successfully undermined the Tory’s main theme…..and they couldn’t believe their luck when May did a u-turn on care. The BBC did not do a similar attack on Corbyn despite the fact that he used his ‘For the many not the few’ slogan again and again, naturally. Nor did the BBC bother to note he had stolen the slogan not just from Blair but that the LibDems had used it in 2010. The BBC knew Corbyn was seen as disorganised, weak and incoherent economically so they set out to destroy the Tory message that they represent the only alternative providing in contrast a strong and stable government…and when have you heard a serous attack on Corbyn’s economics….consider that the IFS has said he would impose a rate of tax not seen in peacetime Britain before and you have to ask how the BBC could avoid taking him to task over this.
When May made her speech reacting to the London Bridge attack Laura Kuenssberg claimed that this was an ‘intensely political speech’ hinting that it may be just campaign rhetoric..if you listen to the speech you will hear a perfectly measured speech from the Prime Minister that would be exactly what you might expect from any PM in such a crisis…this was not campaign rhetoric but reasoned comment that laid out how the government might respond, as any member of the public would want to know. Corbyn, who made a massively political and factually wrong statement after Manchester placing the blame on foreign policy and cuts to police budgets, escaped any negative comment and cirticism from the BBC…quite possibly, not only because they support him, but because they fully back that narrative as well…so far from being impartial they were promoting two of their favourite things…the Labour Party and the narrative that terrorism is just blowback from the West’s actions in the Muslim world…thus we must make amends and open our borders to all the refugees.
Right-Wing online trickery
The BBC has targeted Social Media and blamed it for the rise of Trump and Brexit despite the fact that it is dominated by the Left. Facebook was pumping out left-leaning ‘news’ before it got caught and all the tech bosses are of the left and anti-Trump. It suits the BBC narrative however to portray Social Media as a place that ferments and promotes Right-Wing narratives and discontent, the BBC hoping to discredit what are its biggest rivals now for the attention of the young and the news agenda.
It has continued that false narrative into this election as it claims the Tories have conducted an aggressive and highly negative attack campaign online whilst on the other hand Labour have had a far less aggressive, far lower profile and far more positive campaign aimed at getting people to vote rather than using social media to attack the other side….this articel is almost all about the Tories…the Tories bad, Corbyn good…
The Conservatives seem to be targeting Facebook users in marginal constituencies with anti-Jeremy Corbyn attack adverts, designed to draw away the Labour faithful.
Labour are also using Facebook advertising, but their messages are not focused on leaders and their personalities.
The Conservatives are paying for numerous adverts that attack Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn or his close allies, particularly John McDonnell and Diane Abbott. They broadcast a broadly negative message – warning people about the perceived threats of a Corbyn-led government.
Negative political adverts are particularly widespread in the United States, where parties routinely attack the credibility of a candidate and try to alienate their natural supporters. Donald Trump’s election campaign, for example, directed anti-Clinton Facebook adverts at potential Clinton supporters, including African-Americans and young women.
Change of tone for how they describe Labour…
Labour and the Liberal Democrats have also been pushing adverts on social media, though with a different tone. Labour ads on Facebook focus on positive messages, often using the party’s election slogan: “For the many, not the few”.
Oh…and that’s it for the analysis of Labour’s use of Social Media…that’s despite the fact that Labour are using highly negative attack ads….I saw them every day on YouTube…and there’s stuff like this…an utter fabrication, faked news…
Such attack ads by Labour supporters drove the anti-Tory narrative aimed at young voters….
The post was one of many to swarm Facebook by groups in favour of Jeremy Corbyn.
An analysis of the site’s content suggests it may have cost the Tories their majority by driving young Labour supporters to the polls.
Millions used the social network to share articles praising Jeremy Corbyn and trashing the Tories and Theresa May.
These ‘posts’ are likely to have had a powerful effect on Facebook’s predominantly youthful users, who are increasingly reliant on social media as their main source of news.
Of the top 20 most popular political subjects talked about on Facebook, almost all of the discussion topics about Labour cast it in a positive light.
By contrast, six of the seven most popular topics about the Conservatives were deeply critical.
Is it not odd how the BBC could miss all that or indeed how they forget that it was the Left who dominated and originated the use of social media as a means to manipulate the vote…..the Facebook founder even helping Obama…
Army of helpers
With the help of Facebook founder Chris Hughes – who devised an innovative internet fundraising system – the campaign eventually attracted more than three million donors. They donated about $650m (£403m) – more than both presidential contenders in 2004 combined.
Mr Obama had the money for four times as many campaign offices as Mr McCain and a vast army of campaign staff and volunteers. They developed and exploited a vast database of information about potential donors and voters in every key state.
Everyone who visited the Obama website was asked to sign up to get more information. Everyone who did so was asked to contribute, or volunteer. If they did, they received several follow-up calls and messages asking for more money, or more assistance.
The 2008 Obama Presidential campaign made history. Not only was Obama the first African American to be elected president, but he was also the first presidential candidate to effectively use social media as a major campaign strategy. It’s easy to forget, given how ubiquitous social media is today, that in 2008 sending out voting reminders on Twitter and interacting with people on Facebook was a big deal.
Tory use of social media is being presented by the BBC as a rather scheming, underhand and dishonest way of tricking voters and manipulating the election…the same tactics by Obama and Labour are applauded with any negative issues airbrushed out of the story. Once again a very selective and partisan narrative from the BBC.
The BBC is always ready to police our language and will often refuse to use language that it claims is too negative or that presents only the narrative of one side. Famously of course ‘Terrorism’ is one word that it is reluctant to use despite the fact that it is easily defined and clear when something is a terrorist act…the BBC though has trouble when Muslims commit terrorist acts…then it becomes conflicted as it believes, as said above, that Muslims are only reacting in response to Western aggression and therefore theirs’ is the justifiable violence of Freedom Fighters and Resisters. The BBC series, ‘The Honourable Woman’, was based upon this theme, the evil Israelis forcing Palestinians to use terrorism as they had no other weapon to combat the all powerful IDF.
The BBC though are quite happy to adopt and use the language of one side when it suits, such as the ‘Bedroom Tax’, or the ‘Dementia Tax’, when such language is used in a derogatory fashion meant to malign and demonise a Tory policy.
How different when it came to Labour’s ‘Garden Tax’…not only would the BBC not use the term but actually refused to talk about the subject at all, John Humphrys dismissing it out of hand when raised on the Today show by a Tory MP, claiming that it wasn’t in the Labour manifesto…when of course it is in there.
And also, thanks to Toobiwan for reminding me, there is ‘Hard Brexit‘and ‘Soft Brexit’, two terms that the BBC is happy to use despite the fact that such things do not exist…as May says ‘Brexit means Brexit’...the purported ‘Soft Brexit’, ie Corbyn’s favoured approach of a tariff free trade deal with all that entails, ie, free movement, is not Brexit at all and is in fact just continued memebership of the EU…in other words a lie…a lie that the BBC is happy to peddle.
Finally, at least all that I can remember off the top of my head, there’s Nick Robinson’s and Dimbleby’s demand that Corbyn get a good Press. Bias? Just a bit.
The BBC has been involved in one of the most blatant attempts to steal an election that we will witness, an astonishing corruption of the democratic process, a rigging of the election that very nearly put a terrorist sympathiser in No10. Putin must be taking notes.