Please use this thread for off-topic, but preferably BBC related, comments. Please keep comments on other threads to the topic at hand. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments – our aim is to maintain order and clarity on the topic-specific threads. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog. Please scroll down to find new topic-specific posts.
Open thread – for comments of general Biased BBC interest:
Bookmark the permalink.
BBC web people visiting the Telegraph and the whole moderation / censrship debate http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technology/shanerichmond/mar07/visitfromthebbc.htm
Melanie Phillips has an excellent take on climate change, with a report of a New York debate:
“Reason fights back”
http://www.melaniephillips.com
You American haters, perhaps you would prefer the Taliban Democracy ?
“Two men, woman lynched in Pakistan for adultery”
“Karachi, Two men and a woman accused of adultery were stoned to death by hundreds of tribesmen and bullets pumped into their bodies on the direction of a pro-Taliban outfit in Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province”.
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/003200703151586.htm
Thanks Baggie, I think you and I are fellow travellers on these boards……
Archonix:
I think you have to remember that TB is in a party that rejects the idea of the private sector having a say in health, education or social problems. I really think that TB understood the lessons of Thatcher in sound economics (I think independence of the Bank of England sounds more like a “Blair” idea than a “Brown” one) and empowering the little guy, but tried to address the “softer” issues as well, as any good Government should.
I don’t like his ideas on devolution, the introduction of the Human Rights Act (in its current form), parliamentary reform but he has always broadly supported conservative policy. Look again at whom micro-manages Government policy and state intervention.
I think those like me see a subtle difference in what TB is saying and the mass ranks of the Labour Party. As far as I can see the TB has spent more time battling Labour rebels than the Tories, on PPFI, Iraq, NHS reforms, Education Reforms. The debacle over immigration or the Home Office is down to the inability to carry out the reforms and a mix of human failings and political infighting.
Remember although TB is PM, it is the Labour Party in Government.
Where TB has gone seriously wrong is he has “Americanized” the interface between the policymakers and people. Rather than having the strength of his argument see him through, he has allowed the media to dictate the agenda. This is no more illustrated than the lead up to Iraq when he crumbled to media (and Lib Dem) pressure and releases the two reports. I understand why he done it (I really do believe he wanted to engage the public and try and inform) BUT the subsequent policy and has been held to ransom because the intelligence report didn’t fit the narrative set by the Government.
Next time we go to war I expect there will be shouts to publish the JIC findings-a fatal thing in my book.
I believe this was the poison dart .I think that a large part of the subsequent planning issues that have come out of Iraq and Afghanistan is because the political leadership has to fight pitched battles within their own parties and the media to stay on message, rather than focus on the job in hand. I doubt very much if Mrs Thatcher would have allowed that.
So far Mr Cameron has shown none of the good qualities of leadership (or even conservative thinking), and in fact out of all the parties I can only think of Liam Fox and John Reid that has any empathy towards to problems and challenges that the UK faces.
I actually like to hear Ministers say: “Yeap It’s a bulls-up we must do better” and then engage people with ideas.
I like to hear an Opposition Defence spokesperson challenging us by saying we have woefully under spent on defence and look towards the next five-ten years in PARTNERSHIP with our US friends.
I like ordinary plan speaking people talking to me without a talking head leading me down the track.
At his best Blair had those qualities , I’ve always understood his thinking and his conviction. I even respect the guy for having the guys to go on TV and be treated like a stock hate figure by people who had actually nothing to say (Election 2005 TV debate).
I think this is what is worrying ordinary folk, we now have three leaders shuffling left of the cliff, policies that clearly come out of the editors room of the Independent and Guardian (who were always lukewarm to Blair) and no centre/centre right voice (which I think is the default position in British politics).
Where next Columbus?
The Fat Contractor | 15.03.07 – 8:00 pm,
I’m not knowledgeable on Northern Ireland but I take your point about the reluctance of the ordinary man to get involved and stand up to the terrorists.
Still, Islamic terrorism is a very different kettle of fish in that it is the sharp end of a colonising, conquering force, aiming at the worldwide domination of Islam over everyone and everything else. And many Muslims who are not actually blowing themselves up on infidel buses are working for the Caliphate in numerous other ways – like instilling hatred of the infidel into their children and testing the traditions and resolve of the Western host societies by making ridiculous claims such as being “insulted” by the presence of an ornamental pig in an office.
Only very rarely do we hear of other Muslims combatting these insidious attempts to subvert and subjugate Western societies.
Mr Boris, in Britain we use British law, we are not going to surrender and use Muslim Sharia law which is barbaric.
“Use Sharia law on bike thieves, says MP Boris”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=442641&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
In my days in the Middle East in the early 70s the term “inshallah” uttered by a local to an infidel really translated as “I couldn’t be bothered to get off my arse today. I might consider it tomorrrow”
>> In my days in the Middle East in the early 70s the term “inshallah” uttered by a local to an infidel really translated as “I couldn’t be bothered to get off my arse today. I might consider it tomorrrow”
That’s the nail on the head chaps
It seems that BORIS JOHNSON’s Turkish, Islamic-influenced background still shows itself in his casual remarks about a deadly serious Islamic institution: Sharia Law.
This is what Gregory M. Davis, Ph.D has to say about Sharia Law:
“..upon examination of the Islamic sources.., it is apparent that any meaningful application of Sharia is going to look very different from anything resembling a free or open society in the Western sense. The stoning of adulters” (watch out, Mr. Johnson) “execution of apostates and blasphemers, repression of other religions, and a mandatory hostility toward non-Islamic nations punctuated by regular warfare will be the norm. It seems fair then to classify Islam and its Sharia code as a form of totalitarianism.”
(from ‘Introducing Islam 101’)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/015638.php
IngSoc is Doublethink | 16.03.07 – 11:12 am
BaggieJonathan | 16.03.07 – 11:58 am
My wife & I make four us left thinking that TB is not all bad.
TB “gets” one of the major issues facing the country – the threat from Islamic extremism – & that’s one more thing than the other party leaders, who are as bad as him or worse on the other issues.
But the Labour party remains unchanged, as shown by a quote by my local MP
Mrs Riordan said: “By not supporting Trident, I am voting to save at least £20 billion and ensuring that money is better used elsewhere. I am voting for this country to abandon holding weapons of mass destruction and I am voting for Britain to set an example to the rest of the world by turning its back on the nuclear option.”
Her unilateralist stance is contrary to the 2005 election manifesto.
I have a feeling that her intentions for the saving of £20bn would not involve leaving the cash in the taxpayer’s pocket.
Correction: Read ‘ADULTERERS’ for
adulters. Sorry, Mr. Johnson. But are you sorry? Your turn for another apology?
What is Cameron thinking of?
Is he just pandering to the Al Beeber caucus again.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6458273.stm
Well the ‘policies’ seem to have been greeted with favour by Al Beeb but they mostly seem to be apeing the spin not substance of Labour.
Why release a part of the health proposals without other relevant parts, it just holds them up to ridicule.
Changing a name (from Health Secretary to Public Health Secretary) is going to acheive exactly what? It might be good enough for the PC but all it will do is cause a lot more new noticeboards and stationary. Costs for no reason. I suppose it might appease some BBC bureacrats.
What happens if the public health bosses dont keep to their budgets? Does this help or exacerbate the deficits issue for primary care trusts?
Actually I’m a bit surprised a New Dave spokesman hasn’t announced another spending commitment, after all they have already announced so many. Having said that they have also committed to cutting tax when possible so perhaps they have finally decided to put a gag on further expenditure increases.
The ‘Health’ section of BBC news continues to cuddle up to Dave but with little reasoning as to why.
will,
Good points, but unfortunately I can trump you.
My MP is one of the worst of all, Clare Short!
She is feted by al Beebzera but not her constituency.
It has been said in the past that a red stick would get in here.
However at the last election she recorded one of the very highest swings against her, the highest if you don’t included the seats with ‘special’ factors.
She has always treated manifesto commitments as something thats sacrosanct when she agrees with and worthless when she doesn’t.
The latter seemingly now in a majority as she is so left she has left Labour!
You do have to question why Labour did not expel her years ago.
Still she will always rentaquote in her hatred for Tony Blair and/or America and her support of a variety of terror associated causes is legendary.
Perhaps that reveals why she is the apple of Al Beebzera’s eye.
Are the BBC taking the mickey?
Or will any story be a runner as long as it mentions Cameron?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6453165.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6459283.stm
Baggie, rather depressingly for the state of political coverage in the British media see also the seismic news of Cameron’s hair in…
The Times (twice)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1511688.ece
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/men/article1521212.ece
Guardian – http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/peter_howarth/2007/03/parting_is_such_sweet_sorrow.html
Mirror – http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/tm_headline=cameron-switches-to-the-left&method=full&objectid=18754405&siteid=89520-name_page.html
The Sun – http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007120369,00.html
plus the Daily Mail – http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=442327&in_page_id=1770 – with possibly one of my favourite ever Daily Mail reader comments: “How nice that politicians take care of themselves. We need pretty people in power” – Loris, Milan
The Telegraph looks to standalone by not covering it – a quick search on their site revealed lots of spot-on griping about ‘green taxes’ not being a vote winner, but nothing on the crucial topic of the hair
(The Independent may or may not have published anything but I find their site search so abysmal I didn’t bother looking)
TPO
‘I agree with you about the need for journos to be circumspect about what’s fed to them by your former colleagues and sister/rival services. Particularly if -as you suggest – Le Carre wasn’t exaggerating the bureaucratic infighting.
John Reith | 15.03.07 – 5:30 pm | #
Quite!!!
A rare and welcome acknowledgement from you that all is not well with BBC journalism. It does however beggar the question about what else they need to be circumspect about when fed information from, lets say, Hamas or Mbeki’s henchmen or Chavez’s equivalent of the Ton Ton Macoute (I hear Chavez hasn’t that many political prisoners, which apparently makes him an OK sort of bloke in the eyes of the BBC).
The areas with which I was familiar were fairly limited, but rarely a week went by without seeing some form of media manipulation taking place, almost always with the BBC, sometimes with the Sunday Times (I don’t read the Guardian). I think it not unreasonable to take a further step and say that this form of manipulation of the BBC comes from a variety of interests outside of government, from lobby/single interest groups and from foreign governments and NGOs.
Swallowing it? Well some of it can be put down to basic human laziness on the part of the journalist, much of it to an appalling level of naivety.
With regard to Le Carre, well he did tend to downplay the infighting. The turf and budget protectionism that was conducted on a daily basis could be astounding. The main protagonists were the boys from Ceauşescu Towers and from the Doughnut, but they were beaten hands down by the Machiavellian plots of the bunch from Toad Hall. Surprising really when the really bright ones went to the first two and Toad Hall got the also rans.
Now back to BBC’s security correspondent Gordon Corera.
IngSoc is Doublethink provided some interesting background on him yet you imply that, because he was a Frank Knox Fellow at Harvard, he rises above all. I still think he falls into the same trap that Mangold and the insufferable Simpson do. But then again that’s an opinion.
One interesting point. Within a couple of hours of Corera pontificating on Mohammed’s ‘boastfulness’, clone news in the form of Classic FM touted the same line.
Astounding how quickly tosh can circulate as credence.
Anyway it’s good of you to take the time to respond to me. There’s times that I think that you must feel like the Third Reich, fighting losing battles on all fronts and deserted by your early surrendering Axis ally in the form of Andy Tedd who seems to have fled the field. Chin up mate, the bunker will fall soon and you’ll be able to tell it as it really is rather than the party line.
IngSoc, Baggie, Will
I think you can make that five. I feel that on an international level Tony Blair has proved himself a good statesman who can identify the challenges and stay the course. My instinct, though, has always been to dislike him, but when I examine the reasons that I hate his Labour party, few are directly attributable to Blair. I detest:
– Labour’s tax and spend and tax again to make up the deficit policy. However, I feel Brown is the driving force behind much of this.
– The erosion of free speech and free movement that has taken place under this government. The Big Brother State is upon us, but once again the driving forces behind this were the Home Secretaries. Blair is not blameless here.
– The Government’s need to control everything from the centre. Again this has Brown’s paw-prints all over it.
– The Government’s reliance on statistics and it’s tendency to bend the truth to suit their aims. That’s politics I guess.
– The Government abusing and overenjoying the trappings of power. Here Blair come out of it very badly – freebie holidays, his wife getting free shopping, Cash for Peerages, massive expenses, voting through massive pay rises for themselves, so on and so forth. Never has a British Government been so intoxicated by power as this one, and I have no defence for Blair on this.
– Messing about with the constitution, repeated use of the Parliament Act, reform of the House of Lords to become the House of Cronies without going to the electorate. Again, no defence for Blair here.
Overall, though, I don’t have a big problem with Blair himself, and he has probably been a better option than Major, Hague, Duncan-Smith and possibly Howard over the last ten years, and a better option than Call Me Dave now. His party though are pondlife, and the prospect of Brown as PM is quite frightening.
The new film ‘300’ is repressed homosexuality.
Plus it was made by Hollywood. It is, apparently, historicallly inaccurate. And White Supremacist Neo-Nazi propaganda. Released at the worst possible time.
I suspect a conspiracy in Hollywood. A CONSPIRACY.
Martin Belam,
Sadly I’m afraid the other quite abysmal coverage by the media you mention cannot condone the BBC doing likewise.
I say the BBC in particular because like the Times they have done articles about it twice in successive days.
Also I recall it was the BBC who went on and on about bald politicians in the past.
Before someone says it, no I don’t have a chip on my shoulder about it because I’m going bald, I’m not, in actual fact I still have all of my hair.
It is just a truly pathetic way to make stories or political ‘judgements’.
Just because the BBC have allowed so much of their prime time television schedule to be taken over by makeover programming they now seem to think they can force similar on politicians – woeful.
Baggie,your right,strangly quite from the Tory front bench?
I have a real question for the Conservative commentators on this blog and indirectly to the BBC.
Why have the Tory’s chosen Cameron over this man:
Liam Fox:
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=132628
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=133782
His contribution I think was one of the more considered speeches in the Trident debate (you have to page quite far down to read him):
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2007-03-14a.298.0
And reading back over his sales pitch for leadership I like more and more on what he has to say.
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=conference.2005.news.story.page&obj_id=125485&speeches=1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/10/21/dl2101.xml
I like it:
-He talks about energy security (the real issue that needs addressing)
-He talks about a proper military alliance within Europe.
-He talks about our long standing friend the United States in a positive and constructive way.
-He warns us of the dangers of European inertia.
-He points out the rising powers like China and India, and why the UK is loosing its scientific and commercial edge.
-He rightly mentions the spiritual poverty that is associated with multi-cultralism and the other damaging aspects of the PC state (to the extent that the Independent called him a racist).
-He is far more outward looking than the insular BBC village “Conservative” a la Johnston or Portillo.
-He keenly notes the failure of spin and the desperate need for substance and the need for the Conservatives to avoid the same trap.
-He warmly acknowledges Israel’s efforts when they withdrew from the Gaza Strip and has provided an interesting viewpoint on the ME.
-And I gather a very active campaigner for getting the right kit for UK troops who deserve much more support for the great job that they do.
I’m my book that is real world politics.
If there was a general election-and this man was leading the Conservative Party, I would have no hesitation in endorsing him. A clear honest vision that isn’t based on spin and PR but older tenants of the conservative thinking from the days of Churchill and Thatcher: liberty, fairness compassion and standing up for the weak and allowing them to be proud.
Sadly I don’t see enough of UK TV to know if he gets exposure, but I do notice a lack of profile on him when compared to other more “media friendly” chaps on the BBC. Obviously he is too busy going out to Afghanistan, Iraq and Israel to be running a TV production company, but I would certainly like to see a little more of him.
Any chance John Reith to have a little bit of the alternative viewpoint and are there more people like him Tory Bloggers?
This year’s Red Nose Day looks from the schedule to be one long free promo for BBC shows linked to a bit of fund raising.
You can watch Comic Relief Does the BBC show The Apprentice, Comic Relief Does the BBC show Fame Academy, and Comic Relief Does the BBC show Car Booty. Also you have special episodes of the BBC show Casualty, the BBC show Mr Bean, the BBC show Little Britain, and the BBC show the Vicar of Dibley.
” Girls chant ‘kill him’ as gang chases schoolboy then stabs him to death” (16 Mar.)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/crime
Apparently, this tragedy took place in an affluent part of Kensington, near to John Humphrys’ London home.
One sentence from ‘The Times’ report:
“The murder is the fifth involving black youths in London in the past few weeks.”
@Baggie – Sadly I’m afraid the other quite abysmal coverage by the media you mention cannot condone the BBC doing likewise.
Sorry I often need to make myself clearer – some of you seem so pre-judgemental of my comments that even when I am agreeing with you, you don’t see it – perhaps it is a kind of conspiratorial bias against me? I mean, I was even handing out praise for The Telegraph for standing aloof of the hair debate and criticising the concept of ‘green taxes’ being a vote winner for the Conservatives 🙂
So, perhaps I can be clearer – I found it depressing because the British press *including* the BBC deem this complete nonsense to be a ‘story’ at all.
And you know what is even more depressing? I can’t say anything for the other media outlets because they don’t have the same kind of display – but at the time of writing that story is the most read on the BBC News site.
Ultramoron
You really are retarded….lol.
Heron
Regarding the “trappings of power.”
When you look at Gladstone, Pitt or even Churchill you can’t help but noticing that we’ve have always had “patronage” and “perks”, be it from a union or business. Blair, very stupidly said that he was going to be “whiter than white” but if you look very carefully at the last six months, the interest from Al Beeb and the Guardian isn’t from a “public interest” point of view because if it was it wouldn’t just be the Labour and Tory leadership in the dock-(I’m sure the SNP have plenty of paws in the honey jar), but more to do with the inner struggles in the Labour Party.
To me the last days of Blair are the first days of the Foot legacy……regressive, reactionary and statist.
It reeks of a media backed “coup” to force a “change of direction” without the electorate being asked. The national agenda is being warped to fit some media driven lifestyle choice (remember your doing “good” buying Body Shop or a Radiohead CD) rather than engaging in debate.
And the stench comes from Broadcasting House and Co.
Unethical and Unaccountable.
At the end of review of Nick Cohen’s book, reviewer Oliver Kamm writes:
“Every time you hear the word ‘community’ in a BBC report try replacing it with ‘lobby’, and you’ll get some idea of the prominence of these demands.”
http://www.nickcohen.net (16 Mar.)
Alan:
Do you have a copy of Mr Cohn’s book….I think he feels like “recovering liberal”….
IngSoc is Doublethink
Yes, I’ve just finished it. It’s a long, discursive tome of 386 pages.
He certainly knows what was his ‘socialist left’. He particularly found this ‘left’ wanting when it came to the issue of support for the anti-Saddam Iraqi dissidents, of whom he knew a few well.
But his disquiet with the ‘left’ on its blanket anti-Americanism involved him finding broader flaws in the ‘left’ intolerant activism. In political stance, I suppose he’s somewhere near to Christopher Hitchens now.
Some non-Left commenters on this site may not see much political interest in Cohen’s political journey, but I think he is important for the ‘socialist left’. He has had to put up with some personal hostility for his stand; but, I know that several ‘left’ people realise that they have to take on his arguments, and that they will not convince with their dogmatic anti- US, anti-capitalism, while holding hands with Islamists, and not seeing THEM as the enemy.
The ‘Left’ has a massive ignorance and blind-spot about Islam still.
Sorry to all you Tony Blair fans who think he is such a great leader – but I think he has been one of the weakest leaders this country has ever had. Yes he may be OK to some on his foreign policy – but on this it is all self promotion – he wants to see himeself as a world leader and go down in the history books as a strong one. But this is a man who has sat on the sidelines while his ultra statist party has ruined the country. Either that or he has actually been the architect of the ruination of Britain (whichever way you look at he has been an unmitagated failure). I for one rue the day this smimy person was ever elected. With previous labour leaders you got what you saw – no pretence – everything was up front – people could agree with them or not (for then it was a free country).
Calmed down now – rant over.
i got quite a few emails at work today from English colleagues and business clients wishing me a happy St Patricks Day for tommorow.
from looking at the front page of the bbc news site you’d never guess it was happening tommorow
http://news.bbc.co.uk/
maybe they’re just lost in their own London chatterati media bubble – completely disjointed from the normal English folks who sent those greetings to me today.
i think i’ll do a “st patricks day watch” on Al Beeb tommorow.
its a useful indicator of the scale of the BBC media class bubble.
” Jon | 16.03.07 – 7:55 pm” – i agree Jon. everything he has done has been in his interest, not the countries.
the man doesnt even understand the concept of duty to ones country.
Freedom of Speech Row as Talk on Islamic Extremists Is Banned
A leading university has been accused of “selling out” academic freedom of speech by scrapping a talk on links between the Nazis and Islamic anti-semitism after allegedly receiving emails from Muslims protesting about the event.
Matthias Küntzel, a German author and political scientist who specialises in the threat of Islamic fundamentalism, was told yesterday by the University of Leeds that a talk scheduled for yesterday evening, and a two-day workshop, on Hitler’s Legacy: Islamic Anti-semitism in the Middle East, had been cancelled because of security fears.
In a statement yesterday, two academics in the Leeds German department, which had organised the event, claimed the university had bowed “to Muslim protests”. Dr Küntzel said he had given similar addresses around the world and there had been no problems.
http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/3122
Not only are we now gearing up for holocaust denial in this country we must not now be told that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was taken on a personal tour of Auschwitz:
http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/husseini.html
You can see him here strutting around with the Nazis:
Did you know that he assisted with formation of Muslim Waffen SS units in the Balkans and that he was involved in plotting ‘The final solution’.
Testimony presented at the Nuremberg trials, however, accused the Mufti of not only having knowledge about the holocaust but of also actively encouraging the initiation of extermination programs against European Jews. Adolf Eichmann’s deputy Dieter Wisliceny testified during his war crimes trial in 1946 that … “The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan… He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chambers of Auschwitz.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Amin_al-Husayni
And who was his nephew?
Drum roll for Mohammed Abdel-Raouf Arafat al-Qudwa al-Husseini, a terrorist thug who once managed to slaughter a number of school children in a bus
Where does th BBC fit into all of this? Through ‘cry me a river’ Barbara Plett who wept when Mohammed Abdel-Raouf Arafat al-Qudwa al-Husseini, better known as Yasser Arafat died.
and we thought we’d defeated the Nazis in 1945. they just moved to the Middle East and encamped there.
Futher to the above, it seems that the BBC haven’t a clue as to who Matthias Kuntzel is. Well, if they have they’re certainly keeping Stumm about him and Leeds University’s disgaceful decision.
Calmed down now – rant over.
Jon | 16.03.07 – 7:55 pm |
Jon I’m with you on this, but for me the rant isn’t over.
Having been a Conservative voter all my life I voted for someone else (Not Labour)in 1997.
When Blair got in I actually breathed a sigh of relief that at last we’d got rid of Maggie’s assassins.
I agreed with Blair all throughout the mideast situations, (By the way Saddam Hussein did have WMD – they were just taken elsewhere) but everything else has been nothing but a shambles of soundbites.
‘Today we are going to cure cancer’
‘Tomorrow we are going to solve Africa’s drinking water problem’
‘And the day after we are going to ensure that we never have an ELE situation’ (Think Morgan freeman and meteor)
How naive of me.
Talkimg of the Holocaust, Kevin Marsh, editor of the BBC College of “Journalism”, has posted an article on the Lord Levy saga on The Editors blog:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/03/alert_to_the_arguments.html
Here’s one of the comments it attracted:
6. At 11:20 AM on 14 Mar 2007, Des Currie wrote:
The one thing the Jews are expert at is creating diversions for any member of the Jewish community. Levy could be as guilty as sin and after Judaic spin has come into play he will be being sold as whiter than white washing powder.
Next the holocaust will come into play, if it has not already.
Des Currie
Funny thing is, they’ve censored quite a few of my comments to The Editors though I didn’t break any rules I’m aware of. Maybe they’ll stop censoring me if I post anti-Semitic crap.
Jon,
I really think those are welcome valid points.
But you have to unravel the soap opera and get to the “meat” of the politics.
Law and Order, Defence and Foreign Policy are at the heart of the debate.
With Blair, like the “old” Left of the days of ’45 understood what the JIC described as the “special hand that Britain has been dealt with” and our links between America and Europe. He has learnt from Kinnock, Smith (another fine example of the old Left) and Kauffman the bitter fruits of not having a balance foreign policy. Thatcher not Foot is his political model much to the disgust of Toynbee and Co.
You must also welcome the fact that the UK is going in the right direction with regards of the involvements of both the private and voluntary sectors in helping ease the ever grown demands on the NHS.
And I don’t think he was being weak when he backs the Security Services or the Police when dealing with Al Qaeda?
But to see that you must wade through the “chatter” of New Labour speak, the factions who squabble in the back ground.
Dr Fox, Mr Tebbitt and other more astute minds in the Conservative establishment have rightly pin-pointed that Blair’s weakness isn’t in his political judgement but his slavish adherence to be “liked”, and his attention to detail is woeful.
But he is soon to be history and instead on capitalising on those who DID vote for TB, instead the Tories have taken up an even more over-hyped, media craven fool with moonbat ideas from rock stars as a leader.
My question is why?
more news from the wonderful multicultural world that is the “diverse” city of London
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/story/0,,-6485309,00.html
A post-mortem examination found that Kodjo, of Portland Road, west London, died from a single stab wound to the heart. Schoolchildren gathered and chanted “kill him” as the teenager was attacked in Hammersmith Grove on Wednesday afternoon, witnesses said.
Seven young males, all black and aged between 13 and 21, have been arrested over the murder.
“My question is why?” – I think the answer is simple – These days there are no hustings – politicians are thought to be good if they can present themselves well on the BBC (thought good by the opportunists in the political hierchy that is). The ordinary voter does not matter anymore as they are fed wall to wall propaganda 24 hours a day by the MSm or Local Government “newsletters”.
The way to swing an election is only to get “middle England” on your side and that’s who they target. I live in the North east of England and here people will vote for Labour because they always have full stop. You could have Mother Theresa as leader of the Tories and it would make no difference whatsoever.
“You must also welcome the fact that the UK is going in the right direction with regards of the involvements of both the private and voluntary sectors in helping ease the ever grown demands on the NHS.”
The problem is that it doesn’t work because there is too much interference by the state. Vast amounts of money “invested” in the NHS and its still unable to cope. Its like everything in this country – no one is allowed just to get on with things. False targets are used to “measure” performance – statistical lies that help no one- you hear it every day by all politicians “we are meeting our targets..”, “there are 30% more policeman then there was 20 years ago..” It means absolutely nothing. It is not quantity but quality and good management that deliver. Now it is ,as the saying goes “never mind the quality feel the width”.
Big government and management do not deliver anything but state control of every aspect of people’s lives.
from a few years ago – apartheid housing in London
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-10450931-details/New+homes+block+is+for+%27Asians+only%27/article.do;jsessionid=20GxF7FJJjLZrlWwBLrR78ymLH7sl6xyDqzPJ5Jl212D9LLlwWR2!-1298167968!-1407319226!7001!-1
have a look at the excuse:
Sirajul Islam (well, he’s obviously a Jehovahs Witness), lead councillor for social services at Tower Hamlets, said: “We certainly do not advocate segregation in Tower Hamlets.”
and you know whats coming next. the Islamic BUT excuse
“But the ‘one size fits all’ approach to public services is no longer acceptable in 21st century Britain.”
“regards of the involvements of both the private and voluntary sectors”
you mean the hair brained PFI scheme that will end up with us taxpayers footing the bill for the next 20 years?
PFI has brought the worst of both worlds – incompetent authoritarian government married to corporate monopolistic greed.
its also pseudo-fascist in nature , in the Mussolini corporatist sense.
In my opinion Tony Blair is a loathsome prat and has been ever since he took office. When his voice is heard on the radio in our house even the youngest members of the family cannot bear to listen.
having had a think about, Blair is certainly the leader the Tories wished they had. And to a certain extent, since his father was a Conservative, i think that maybe he wishes he was as well.
So, his only-thinking-about-himself attitude could be put down to a loathing for the Labour party rank and file and all they stand for.
Meanwhile, we now have a Tory leader who is the leader the Lib Dems wish they had.
it all seems so confusing, but , as i pointed out much much earlier in this thread (or maybe another) , it becomes clear if to recalibrate the traditional left/right divide to authoritarian statist on left, anarcho-capitalist on the right.
by that calibration , the current three leaders of the major parties are all squabbling over the LEFT of that spectrum (the “statists” is my term for term), with nobody even catering for the centre ground, yet alone the right wing libertarian “anti-statists” amongst us.
further to the above – minor parties excepted of course.
itn are leading on the death of sally clark – thats the woman who was wrongly convicted of killing her two babies and was imprisoned.
under English law, can her family sue the government – or at least the judges who put her in prison for three years?
there seems to be an awful lot of these kind of false imprisonment cases, which makes me err against the reintroduction of capital punishment – for if the judicary are incompetent, then we shouldnt reintroduce it until they are.
itn has “learned” that the Kodjo knife killing was part of a gang initiation ritual. ITN are also reporting that he was part of the “gangsta” rap scene.
seems like we have a LA style “blood v crips” problem in wonderful,diverse, “multicultural” London.
why Cornwall is seeing an influx of Londoners being homes there is suddenly starting to make a lot of sense. and isnt it curious that the Mayor of London, Red Ken, is noticably muted on these gang killings, despite the several hundred media advisors that he currently has on the taxpayer payroll.
he’s more interested in photo opps with the likes of Chavez.
the contrast to Rudy Gulliani of NYC could not be greater.
typo: “influx of londoners buying homes there”
cant blame them really. if your mayor is unwilling to crack down on crime, then the only option is to get the hell out of london.
>> “My question is why?” – I think the answer is simple – These days there are no hustings
I was still in the UK during the last general election, and went to a hustings meeting at a local church. It wasn’t well publicised though. I expected the unpleasantness to come from supporters of the (scare quotes on) “far right” party UKIP.
Actually turned out the passionate disruptions were from the religious types.
The Lib Dems were putting up a Muslim candidate who got an abusive rant in his face for betraying Islam by standing for the democratic process by some guys who made their point then left whilst I thought disrespectfully chanting Muslim slogans in a Christian church
(caveat I studied the Byzantine empire and mostly live in Greece now so maybe I’m a little over-sensitive about the whole Hagia Sophia thing…but I don’t think so)
Then there was a Catholic who berated all of the candidates for allowing abortion as ungodly, in a CofE church where I understand it to be considered less ungodly, which I thought was disrespectful too.
It was a pretty miserable experience actually….
I did though get to ask sitting frequent rebel Labour MP Neil Gerrard “Do you think your party’s policy on the war in Iraq will win you votes or lose you votes in Walthamstow?” which at least raised a laugh
For the record (I think this is the BBC bit where I provide balance by mentioning everybody else in the last paragraph), the UKIP candidate seemed a bit out of his depth, as did the candidate from the Socialist Party, whilst Jane Wright for the Conservatives was in a pretty-much unwinnable seat but fought her corner well.
>> there seems to be an awful lot of these kind of false imprisonment cases, which makes me err against the reintroduction of capital punishment – for if the judicary are incompetent, then we shouldnt reintroduce it until they are.
@Archduke – one of us, or possibly both us, need to have a lie down and take more of the pills, otherwise I think we agree on something.
No amount of money or the Home Sec issuing an official apology can give you back the time you spent in jail for wrongful imprisonment, but at least you still have the rest of your life left if a mistake has been made.
“But the ‘one size fits all’ approach to public services is no longer acceptable in 21st century Britain.”
It was never acceptable anyway. From a Libertarian point of view it leads only to infringement of the rights of the individual.
Such as forcing pupils to stay on at school until they are 18 – whether they want to or not – just to make them all conform to a statistical average.
TB says: In the new britain, all children are learning more and more sk33ls for longer and longer at comprehensive foundation yadda yadda schools.