Well, the BBC may not have cared for one Margaret in the form of Thatcher, but when it comes to Margaret Hodge, they have found someone to lionise. Here’s another attack on Government policy by Hodge and once again here she is portrayed as the champion of the disadvantaged and all round good egg. Let’s NOT talk about this…
THE BLESSED MARGARET HODGE…
Bookmark the permalink.
Let’s ignore that this report is published by a cross-party select committee whose Conservative members outnumber Labour members 8-5 (alongside one LibDem member).
No, let’s instead sneer at the fact that the report is talked about by the committee chair – as reports from any other committee would be. That’s far better than looking at the substance of the report, isn’t it.
Still, it’s Biased BBC, where sneering at individuals is encouraged, as long as it’s the usual clique members doing it. (The Biased BBC mantra: “We can do what we like, because the only standards we have are double ones”)
Don’t feed the disruptive pint-sized troll
Feed him? I just scroll past his blah and read on from the next valid comment.
Same here! sorry to say this but cannot we just loose the time waster now as his c£$$ is getting seriously boring !
Why don’t you answer Scott’s point?
I thought it was only the Left that ignored the point and attacked the man instead. That’s what people here constantly assert. Whoops.
What was his point? Do you mean the strawman in the first sentence.
The post is about the BBC and Hodge not about whatever she is reporting. She is one amongst an army of ex New Labour shysters lauded and never challenged who should be in gaol years ago.
The “Blessed Margaret”:-
http://old.minettemarrin.com/minettemarrin/2003/07/h_is_for_hypocr.html
Perhaps not!
Scott does actually make a very good point, although undermined as always with the usual antagonism derived from exasperation that a site exists that chronicles the Orwellian bias of his left wing friends at the BBC.
Whatever the merits or otherwise of DV’s post, TPO (TPO says: June 20, 2014 at 5:20 pm) says it better than anyone just why the Rt Hon Margarat Hodge MP is a morally repellent human being.
commendable TPO comment. Scott has no point other than to deflect from the original post.
Missed this risible comment before now:
“a site exists that chronicles the Orwellian bias of his left wing friends at the BBC.”
Where? I see a site that exaggerates and fabricates BBC issues in order to try and justify the writers’ own prejudices, populated by a group of hangers-on whose own appalling behaviour has all the air of an unsupervised crèche.
Ah, that explains why you feel so at home here!
Oh, and I see Scott you have nothing to say about Margaret Hodge’s role in the systematic sexual abuse of children in her care while leader of Islington Council.
Islington’s ‘positive discrimination’ in favour of ‘gays’ resulted in a huge number of paedophiles ‘caring’ for vulnerable children.
This is something that neither the BBC, or yourself, care to do a QED on.
I’m sure there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation.
Don’t feed the troll, please.
Bless. The number of people falsely claiming that I’m a troll – well, the number of aliases, which may not be the same thing – seems to be growing.
Partly because it’s so much easier than actually engaing with the point. Is Biased BBC’s line being criticised? Simply stamp your foot and say the critic is a troll. Job done. No engagement of mental faculty needed.
Scott:
I agree, you are not a troll as such. You just have the urge to engage with people who do not like you and will never agree with you. What that makes you, I don’t know.
What it makes him is a sad, lonely, attention seeking narcissist.
Who believes his warped delusional view of the world is somehow valid and must be propagated at every chance.
I used to read what he said once but got bored with the lies, contradictions and half truths.
It’s impossible to engage in any meaningful debate with someone as smug and self righteously certain of his own views as Scott so the easy thing to do is just ignore him in the hope that he finds a better use for his time one day.
I see. Disagreeing with David Vance and Biased BBC’s coterie of pseudonyms and aliases means my view is somehow “warped and twisted”.
But I’m the narcissistic one. Yeah, right.
And as for “lies, contradictions and half truths” – I didn’t notice you complaining all the multiplicity of times when Vance and Alan have misrepresented BBC reports in order to construct their own shaky straw man arguments. Or is it okay to lie if it’s in the name of reinforcing your own prejudice?
Still, you go on believing that you’re right, if you want. Go on believing that anyone who points out Vance’s bigotry, or Alan’s, or other Biased BBC regulars’, is a troll.
But anytime you want to join the real world, you may find that engaging with honesty instead of hypocrisy is more fruitful.
Don’t feed the ridiculous attention-seeking whiny troll
Ah, my inadequate stalker is back. Bless you, “John”, for thinking your repetitive contributions are somehow better than answering direct questions, such as “why do you ignore other people’s behaviour”?
You still haven’t answered that one. Why is it okay for people like F*** the Beeb and Pounce to call people, including myself, cunts – but somehow beyond the pale to suggest that Vance or Alan’s versions of events may not be completely accurate?
Feel free to just repeat your “don’t feed the troll” line as a shorthand for “because I don’t care about decency or standards, only protecting the right of Biased BBC regulars to be unpleasant little hypocrites”.
Please ignore the attention-seeking pint-sized troll who thinks the Times Square bomber is “hot”. The troll is simply disgusting – but whines away endlessly
Shorthand accepted.
Please ignore the unpleasant and insulting attention-seeking troll
A rough analysis of the story by paragraphs:
Editorial 43%
Hodge 30%
Government 13%
Opposition 6%
Agency 6%
So that is ‘anti-government’ 80%, pro-government 20%
Whatever the composition of the committee doesn’t matter because it isn’t mentioned apart from ‘cross-party’. Margaret Hodge gets all the kudos, including her photograph. She gets painted as a saint yet she can say what she likes behind the protection of parliamentary privilege while witnesses are subject to the laws relating to perjury.
At the end of the day she is just a critic, not a ‘doer’. That is why she appeals to the BBC, just state the ‘problem’ but never offer a solution.
They do offer a “solutions”.
These “solutions” generally involve redistributing power, cash, and privileges to the middle class Left.
One of the few things which unites inner city Labour voters and the middle class Labour MP’s they vote for is their bottomless sense of entitlement.
Take away the greed and hate from the Left and nothing remains except utter disinterest in anything or anybody other than themselves.
Hodge should have been subjected to the same sort of relentless hounding that Neil Hamilton and other Tories have suffered.
Strange that she hasn’t been. I can’t imagine why she has been treated so royally….
Speaking of Neil Hamilton, I don’t know very much about it but I have read some reports that he was set up by the guardian newspaper and Mr Fayed. I don’t suppose it’s worth the bbc’s time investigating whether there has been a miscarriage of justice? I have no axe to grind regarding Mr Hamilton, but the activities of a national newspaper in traducing an MP I would have thought was quite important; surely one of the bbc’s 5000 so-called journalists could show some curiosity on the matter.
Alistair Campbell admitted (Alastair Campbell, The Blair Years, Random House, London, 2007) that Martin Bell was a Labour stooge so …
We used to have a regular contributor to this blog – a journalist I seem to recall – who maintained that Hamilton was innocent that, indeed, he had been fitted up. He claimed to have reams of evidence, too and that there was a conspiracy to suppress the story.
He somewhat undermined his case by bring for Briitain on the subject – but that does not mean he was wrong. I have no idea what happened to him but I’m sure the subject can be googled.
He was/is Jonathan Boyd Hunt.
http://www.guardianlies.com/section%201/page23.html
If only he had called some police officers plebs…he’d have been ok…oh…..errrrr….hmmmmm.
Erm, surely not.
The fact of this, which seems to be completely ignored by all parties having swipes at each other is that disabled people have been made to suffer by this cruel and greedy government.
Other minority groups have received increased funding but the attack on the disabled has been ceaseless and merciless. What is not reported here is the fact that the governments other attack on the disabled – ESA using ATOS has managed the seeming impossible to reduce the benefits of those who need them reduce the numbers finding work, and yet costing the government more money because of the amount it is paying to ATOS !
It would have been better if they’d left the poor sods alone and carried on as we were !
ATOS has been thoroughly disreputable even managing to find the dead fit for work !
Sure, testing of the disabled should have continued, in a humane manner and weeding out of those who should not be claiming. The Tories & IDS have presided over a disaster !
They deserve every criticism coming to them.
No doubt I’ll be hearing ‘my money’ etc etc. Yet more of ‘your money’ is being spent as a result and while the disabled suffer Cameron has increased the amount of our money he wastes on overseas causes.
If we can’t support the disabled then we can’t support anyone.
My wife knew Hodge’s brother in law, a very talented and successful captain of industry. He was always in despair of his loony left brother and his second wife, Margaret and thought of them as being out of touch with reality and away with the fairies.
But leave that aside for the moment and look at the ghastly woman’s tax affairs, to wit, Stemcor and her family’s holdings in the company.
“Margaret Hodge’s family company pays just 0.01pc tax on £2.1bn of business generated in the UK”
“Margaret Hodge, chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, is facing embarrassing revelations over the tax affairs of her family company just days before she is due to lead the grilling of US companies over controversial tax arrangements.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/businesslatestnews/9668396/Margaret-Hodges-family-company-pays-just-0.01pc-tax-on-2.1bn-of-business-generated-in-the-UK.html
But lets leave that aside too and look at what this vile woman was up to during her tenure as leader of Islington Council between 1982 and 1992.
Known as Margaret “Enver” Hodge for her propensity to fly the communist red flag from Islington Town Hall and display a bust of Lenin in its hallway.
Here is that superb columnist Minette Marrin on the vile woman:
http://old.minettemarrin.com/minettemarrin/2003/07/h_is_for_hypocr.html
When journalists exposed the widespread and systematic sexual abuse of children in Islington care homes, what was The vile Hodge’s reaction?
“Readers may remember the story. Margaret “Enver” Hodge, nicknamed after the dictator of Albania, was where the buck stopped in Islington in 1992. In October of that year the Evening Standard published a painstaking exposure of one of Britain’s very worst paedophile scandals, among children in care in Islington.
The abuse was persistent, widespread and, in parts, organised – and it involved council employees, among others. Yet far from setting up a full inquiry, at once, Hodge denounced the newspaper for “sensationalist”, “gutter” journalism and complained to the Press Complaints Commission. Five official inquiries then vindicated the stories and the journalists, those low-minded reptiles of the gutter, later won prizes for defending the defenceless.
Hodge admitted she had made a mistake about the Standard’s reports. But she has never, ever apologised to the children of Islington. An even halfway decent person would certainly have apologised wholeheartedly to the victims, at the very least.”
Lets now forward to 2003 when this excrement became Minister for Children and one of the victims of child abuse under her tenure as leader of the council went public. His name was Demetrious Panton.
What did Hodge do? She called on her friends in the BBC to set about smearing Mr. Panton, describing him as an “extremely disturbed person”, a narrative that the BBC were only too willing to run with.
Well that finished up in the High Court with an abject apology and a substantial payout.
How apt that this vile excuse for a human being is the MP for Barking.
How disgusting that the BBC were only too ready to side with her until the truth was forced out.
Excellent comment, TPO!
And that snivelling twerp, Scott, rushes to the defence of the BBC’s refusal to hold this vile piece of work to account!
Don’t fall into the lefty trap (as did the Telegraph who issued a very limited apology in respect of its reporting on Stemcor/Hodge) of critcising a company because it pays a tiny percentage of its sales in corporation tax. CT is a tax on profits. Lady Hodge is contemptible, not because her family company makes small profits on huge turnover, but because she benefits from what she would describe in other circumstances as her father’s tax “dodge” in setting up a trust in part to avoid estate duty.
However – as TPO writes – that hypocrisy pales into insignificance beside her conduct at Islington and as Children’s Minister. Her husband was involved with NCCL/”Liberty” at the time it was sponsoring PIE. Lady Hodge – as TPO describes – went on to create a family tradition of enabling child abuse.
She is, simply, vile: a more appropriate heroine for the BBC it would be difficult to find.
Olé señor!
Gracias señor
Can’t be the same Margaret Hodge who had to resign as Children Minister because she ran Islington care homes as chicken houses for paedos.
She didn’t resign, she continued in her post, but good point nonetheless.
Ghastly woman. Simply vile. No wonder the country’s in the state it is with entities like her running it.