You have to laugh at the hypocrisy of the BBC….so ready to blame Sykes-Picot and the ‘carving up’ of the Middle East regardless of ethnicity, culture and religion for the current state of affairs there…and yet so ready to encourage us, by hook or by crook, to accept the oppressive hand of the European Empire erasing our nation states regardless of ethnicity, culture and religion.
How long before an Anglo-Saxon ‘ISIS’ declares its own Jihad against ‘Europe’ and demands its land and culture back?
Wonder if the BBC would be as supportive of those ‘militants’ as they are of the real jihadists?
Radio Four yesterday was cheerleading for Europe with yet another example of its use of a ‘discussion’ as a subterfuge to promote Europe rather than engage in a genuine debate….asking ‘Would you be better off with Britain out of Europe?’
Remarkably, considering the weight of opinion against the European adventure, the BBC found difficulty in getting EU sceptics to call in…as it admitted during the programme.
Not only that but some of the ‘callers’ you had to suspect were somewhat more than the average man on the street…’Hazel’ from Aberdeen seemed more likely to have an office in the Scottish parliament building whilst ‘John Butcher from Surrey’ (10 mins 30 sec) would seem to be conservative councillor John Butcher, once a member of the Conservative Group for Europe…..but the BBC didn’t bother to tell us that and let him go on demanding the full costs of an ‘out of Europe’ vote be quantified whilst telling us that the approach to the referendum was fundamentally dishonest.
The presenter, Shari Vahl, gives the impression of being an enthusiastic EU supporter eagerly listing all the benefits of EU membership, as she sees them.
What isn’t gone into is the fact that the ‘European money’ that the EU so generously sends to us is in fact our own money once the EU has extracted a large wodge that they take to pay themselves a nice wage, to provide themselves with a generous expense account and to gild their pension pot…what’s left funds Spanish motorways and white elephant airports as well as some eventually finding its way back across the Channel to us.
We are told all that ‘European money’ will vanish, that businesses won’t invest here, that we won’t be doing any business with Europe, that all that useful legislation passed by the EU wouldn’t have happened if left to a national government, that ex-pats will be deported and should they be allowed to stay in their Spanish villas they won’t get health care anymore.
One of the few sceptical callers to get through took issue with all those points (about 12:36) ….and you could hear the sniggering from the studio….clearly they weren’t actually intending to have a genuine debate.
Another caller slipped through the net and said the majority of people wouldn’t think their lives would be effected in a beneficial way by membership of the EU...Shari Vahl countered with another caller saying he had a different point…clealry thnking he was a pro-EU caller…..the caller was an ex-fisherman who told us of the great fishing industry we used to have…Shari Vahl asked him what happened to that industry when we joined the EU…he said the industry was closed down.
Cue a rapid intervention from Shari Vahl demanding to know what would happen if we left the EU and then went back to the previous caller and said triumphantly ‘There you go, someone whose life has been effected by EU membership!’
Well yes, but not for the good….an industry was destroyed….hardly the beneficial effect the caller was actually talking about.
Shari Vahl was an impressively enthusiastic cheerleader for the EU becoming very animated with pro-EU callers, eagerly listing the apparent benefits of the EU that would either never have happened without the EU’s legisltaion or will be taken from us should we leave.
One of the things not discussed was what happens as the EU draws ever closer to becoming an actual federal state and not just a federation of sovereign nation states….Britain would then have to choose…it wouldn’t be possible to stay a fringe member of a such a state.
That is probably the most important and inevitable question as such a federal state is the intended end result of the European project.
The programme gave the impression of being a ‘debate’ with opposing pro and sceptic ‘experts’ and opposing callers, however the sceptics were few in number and treated with disdain or outright opposition and the whole programme gave the impression of being set up to promote the Dream as much as possible.
All part of the ‘education’ of the ignorant and foolish masses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qKhM1KslqhY
Something else you won’t see on the beeb. However it’s much funnier than HIGNIFY!
The BBC/liberal elite treats the peoples of the ME and the developing world with a great degree of patronisation. Nation states and ethnicity are ok for them but us sophisticated Europeans are above such things. Silly really but then liberals are silly. Silly and stupid but quite capable of inflicting great harm around the world. From neo con adventurism and the casual use of warfare to a form of sinister state enforced political correctness upon it’s own European citizens.
Smugness and a belief that they are the end product of history. Remake themselves in their own fantasy image. Remake old morality to suit themselves.
One thing about Isis. it is as hostile to the liberal world view as I am . Now I also know Isis is my enemy but the liberal?
Confused at best and quite unable to comprehend just how dangerous Isis will be.
I fear for our future. The liberal has all but destroyed our culture.
The BBC is trying desperately to portray terrorism, decapitations, FGM, and the recent al Qaeda threat to air travel, as having nothing to do with Islam. At the end of the piece, the presenters look straight at the camera with that “who you gonna believe, the trustworthy BBC or your lying eyes?”.
If the UK pulled out of the EU, the EU would be bust. Not so easy to get the figures but we are the third largest contributor after Germany and France, I believe.
Fred – you prompted me to see if I could find exact situation – it is difficult to get accurate figures:
I found Commentator article which ranges from £23m net daily – to £62m:
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4948/what_is_the_eu_s_true_cost
‘At €4.7bn, Britain was the third-biggest net contributor to the budget in 2011’ … ‘When you take into account additional revenues raised from customs duties, agricultural levies, VAT and even sugar contributions, Britain handed over a total of €13.825bn to Brussels last year.’ Lets leave Germany to pay the Bill we’ve all had enough now!.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/9643193/EU-budget-who-pays-what-and-how-it-is-spent.html
For the record Sykes-Picot was only a plan. The San Remo Convention 1920 attended by Britain, France, Italy and Japan (America was an observer) actually carved up the Middle East and was confirmed by the Leaugue of Nations 1922.
Yeah this is like the BBC claim that Multiculturalism makes a country strong, until it collapses like Iraq.
Multiculturalism is a policy that attempts to destroy the historic link between land and people. It does so, knowing that once achieved, there will be no unified and organised opposition to the dictat of a supranational governing elite. This is the EU’s main objective, and the open borders policy of the EU is its vehicle. The effect of the policy is that it divides a nation along tribal lines.
I cannot understand this penchant for integration of Muslims into our society. If successful, that would mean that our society is compatible with Islam – which it is not, or that our society would have been taken over by Islam. Its a lose-lose situation, and that is why Muslims are confident that Europe will become Islamic if the present political policies continue
The obvious (multicult) fallacy needs constant repitition . The ordinary Englishman knows this full well. Only our over educated but stupid liberal classes cannot grasp it.
Throughout history, it has always been the role of England and Russia to stop any one continental power gaining domination over Europe. Looks like history is repeating itself…………
There is no doubt that the BBC and the EU are one and the same when it comes to their unassailable smugness and self-belief. Their whole attitude is holier than thou, they will truck no argument and logic is beyond them. They do not respect democracy or the point of view of the silent patriotic majority, who they consider as uneducated or even racist in the new politically correct world of the unaccountable elite. And there is no doubt that the BBC would like to see Labour instated in the UK as the permanent party of control, no matter how incompetent, corrupt or war mongering. Every day without fail now Milligrommet can be found giving a lecture to the nation from his permanent perch at the BBC.
As for the EU, it is a quandary to me that the EU has a parliament at all. It was just a multibillion Pound farce to give a small semblance of democracy to the beleaguered Europeans after WW2. Though why they bother I don’t know as the Euro nations do not have a good history of fighting for democracy, having fallen under the vicious grip of dictatorships so many times. The European parliament was therefore just a bone to throw at the natives, but it had no meat on it and still doesn’t. The Commission has the control and, as Nigel said this week, they jump when Angela says so.
However, for those that think escape from the EU will be just a matter of voting for Nigel next year beware. The vast pots of gold that we have given the EU will be used against us. What happened in the Ukraine will happen here. The EU do not like to be cast aside and they will cause mayhem here in the UK. The great unwashed will be paid to cause unrest, camp out in our city centres for months on end and to riot when the police try to move them on. Remember the poll tax riots. Remember the riots and burning streets just last year when a criminal with a gun was shot by the police.
The battle to renegotiate with the EU is impossible and David Cameron knows it. The battle to get out will be bloody but does Nigel realise that? Is he the man to see it through if we vote for him?
Then remember who’s side the BBC will be on. And where the BBC goes the rest of the media follow.
It seems that the left/BBC has coined yet another playground insult – “Europhobic”. So, as Nigel Farrage says in the clip linked to above (Number 7) , if you oppose the EU that can only be because there’s something wrong with you. And, of course, just like all their other “phobias” it is an entirely meaningless word for something that doesn’t exist. I now have so many “phobias” I sometimes wonder how I ever dare go out and celebrate the enriching diversity that the EU and our political elite have bestowed on us.
–
“Empires of the Sand: The Struggle for Mastery in the Middle East, 1789-1923”
by Efraim Karsh and Inari Karsh.
Reviewed by Daniel Pipes-
Excerpt from review of book-
“Arabs routinely heap blame on the Sykes-Picot agreement of May 1916-a secret deal by Britain, France, and Russia to divide up the Middle East-for their still-festering border quarrels. In The Arab Awakening, a very influential study published in 1938, George Antonius denounced that agreement as ‘a shocking document’ and a ‘breach of faith’ by the great powers. Still today, the Assad regime ruling in Syria denounces the long-ago Sykes-Picot deal as the source of the ‘false borders’ that divide the Middle East and have caused so many problems. Most scholars echo this view. But the Karshes boldly present Sykes-Picot as honorable – an honest attempt by the British to reconcile their prior obligations to France with their new ones to the Arabs. In a statement bound to cause scholarly heartburn, they praise Sykes-Picot as the ‘first ever great-power recognition of the Arabs’ right to self-determination.'”
http://www.danielpipes.org/822/empires-of-the-sand-the-struggle-for-mastery-in-the-middle
Of course, in 1917, in First World War, Britain and France were in military opposition to Turkey and its extensive Ottoman Empire, which was allied to Germany. And Britain did assist Arab interests against the Turks in the Middle East.
It seems that Beeboids support Germany now on its plans to extend a federal E.U. (And BBC-NUJ campaigns for admission of 80 million Turks.)
Are Beeboids also on the side of Germany, Turkey, and opposed to Britain and France, re-WW1?
It is important to note that even if the Left say something which is true they do not say it because it is true, which is an important difference.
The Left (for example a Newsnight reporter) knows next to nothing about the Middle East. All they know about its their feelings.
Critics of the Sykes-Picot agreement may be correct, or they may be incorrect, but it matters not one jot to the Left, who already have their conclusions.
The Left will blame the Jews, the West, and Capitalism and Christianity. They will support anybody who is opposed to the West (and the Jews, Capitalism, and Christianity) and any resemblance to any reality is (and will always be) entirely coincidental.
Back in the late 80s I used to listen to Call Nick Ross on Tuesday mornings. Even back then the agenda was obvious. Frequently the topic of immigration would come up and any caller not ‘on message’ would be quickly closed down. I often used to look at the clock and try and guess how many more seconds they would have left. Never bothered with BBC ‘call ins’ since.