It’s not JUST the BBC, but rather the overwhelmingly majority of the UK msm that has little connect to the hopes and fears of real people. A quick glance at the newspaper headlines this morning, a listen to the BBC, and it’s the same story – namely that David Davis has been selfish and misguided to take a political stand on the issue of the erosion of our liberty under this rotten Nulabour government, exemplified in the 42 Day detention bill. BBC Today even suggested Davis had crossed the line into madness. I wonder why it is that our intrepid media, including the BBC, are not even casually interested in finding out if the massive alleged public support for 42 days actually exists out there – or is it a political fiction? Surely Davis will be defeated by going against these widespread consensus, so proving Labour right? Or might it instead prove that the UK electorate ARE fed up with the sustained onslaught on our ancient liberties that Labour has directed over a decade? Why are Labour not challenged as to why they refuse to fight a seat that they could win if these assumptions about popular support for 42 days are true rather than fantasy? I feel sorry for Davis – his reputation has been shredded in 24 hours because he took a principled stand and THAT is not allowed in British politics these days. The BBC- and Nick Robinson in particular – have delighted in explaining why Gordon Brown is now a winner. The problem is we all lose.
THE POLITICAL ASSASSINATION OF DAVID DAVIS.
Bookmark the permalink.
Could someone explain to me, not that it really needs explaining, why the BBC is going into hyperdrive with the Labour position on this; mainly that the Tories are divided on the issue? The figures just don’t back it up – 1 Conservative rebel vs. 37 Labour rebels. More than 10% of the PLP rebelled in this vote, yet GB and his fellow trots are allowed to spin this nonsense that the Conservatives are divided without anyone mentioning that telling statistic…
David: Yes and many on the front bench of the Government are not happy with it despite voting for it.
Read this BBC headline
“Press gives Davis a hard time”
Then read the article. Perhaps the papers did, but from reading the BBC story you couldn’t say that.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7452108.stm
Did the BBC say Clare Short’s resignation was a stunt?
Go to Statewatch on the Web and see how far the British Government pushes EU Ministers into ever more surveillance like storing Emails and telephone data for years (and no doubt making us pay the cost for our ISPs)
“If David Davis was itching to quit, Lisbon would have been a better cause”
(Charles Moore).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/06/14/do1401.xml
Another post based on David Vance’s personal opinion, nothing to do with the BBC.
There is a significant strand of thought that says DD’s move is a stunt. The BBC is suppposed to reflect the political reality. It would be failing not to do so.
It seems unlikely Davis will be defeated or that the election will really be single issue. Apart from Kelvin McKenzie it seems unlikley there’ll be any opposition.
Besides, surely the BBC in its fanatical support of terroists would be against the 42 days detention as well. Unless the argument that this will be a recruiting tool for them is correct, thus why the BBC is in favour of it?…mmmmmm
joel: Rubbish. The BBC never reflects political reality. If it did every week we’d have a story about Nu Labour bribery, corruption and the like.
Peter Hain anyone?
Insted the BBC employ grubby unwashed cretins like Michael Prick on Newsnight to dig around on 10 year old stories about some Nanny that means nothing when you look at what the vile Government the BBC backs is doing to our freedoms.
It wasn’t a 10 year old story, it only came out last week.
joel: it is a 10 year old story. It was 10 years ago that this happened and she reported it at the time and was advised to split the roles. Which she did. Just how stupid are you?
Peter Hain anyone?
It was recently reported that Harold Macmillan put the financial benefits of cigarettes over the nation’s health, as revealed in government documents recently released.
Why did the ‘MSM’ report this 40 year old story?
Joel is a paid BBC apologist. The nulab cretin will looking for alternative work in few years. The BBC very predictably, try to attack the Tories with this, story,but it is they who are wildly out of touch the public opinion and merely making their demise all the more certain.
“Yes. Or rather, no. Remanding you in custody pending trial given the indisputable fact you had written down your threat of lethal violence would be a piece of cake for even the dimmest CPS lawyer.”
Hmm, no. You see merely stating that you would love to kill the PM is not a threat of any kind. People say such things all the time and are not accused of threatening behaviour. After all, consider the context – “I would dearly love to beat the PM to death with a baseball bat….. but the law and common decency preclude such an act”.
Unfortunately the Terrorism Act makes no such defence possible. You get 6 weeks in prison on the basis of any kind of suspicion that agents of the state might have that you are guilty of a potential crime against the state or one of its representatives (such as the PM). Saying nasty things about the PM is quite reason enough. Reminds me a bit of Kafka’s “The Trial”. Although in the novel the secret police never felt the need to keep “K” away from family friends and work and were therefore considerably less authoritarian than our current government.
However, I must apologise for my fisking of Nick Robinson. It was written for a posting somewhere else before I had read that Davis was standing as a Tory. Initial reports stated he would be standing as an independent. I cut and pasted it before checking the latest facts.
“If Davis has the support of the grassroots and Cameron and Davis are at loggerheads, analysts are entirely correct in pointing out deep divisions in the Conservative Party between Davis (and the grassroots) and the leadership”
If, if, if. Where are the facts? Where is the division? Within the parliamentray party? Between grassroots and MPs? No facts, just convenient supposition. Where is Davis taking on the leadership? Is he taking on the leadership? Is he challenging the leadership?
SOMEONE GIVE ME SOME FACTS! I ONLY WANT TO PAY FOR THE FACTS!! Opinions I can get for free.
Ryan:
merely stating that you would love to kill the PM is not a threat of any kind.
As I was saying to my probation officer only the other day.
People say such things all the time
Really? Just come with us, sir.
and are not accused of threatening behaviour.
You may make your phone call now, sir.
After all, consider the context – “I would dearly love to beat the PM to death with a baseball bat….. but the law and common decency preclude such an act”.
And you’re now saying that you verballed yourself by omitting the qualifying clause when you wrote down your, ahem, opinion at 12.31 pm on the 13th of June?
If you’ll just slip the boiler-suit on now, sir. And the shoe-laces, too. That will be all.
Ryan,
You currently already get 4 weeks in the circumstances you describe, why would 6 weeks the end of democracy and the world as we know it but 4 weeks as it already exists is no problem, and 2 weeks before it, all voted through by your beloved Conservatives that now say this is such a danger to society.
And if it was ID cards in addition to the 6 weeks how come Davis voted for them in 2004, weren’t they a ‘principle’ then, but they are a ‘principle’ now?
My bad – Correction should read 2005 not 2004, and he, and indeed the whole Conservative party abstained.
The point about ‘principle’ stands, it it was such an important principle he would undoubtedly have voted against, whip or no whip, and resigned the front bench to do so, even stood in a by-election…nope, none of those happened.