Firstly, my thanks to Alan for putting up the Start the Week thread, I’ve had wifi problems this past few days so wasn’t able to post until now. I had the misfortune to listen to the Today programme this morning. It was a leftist fest, as ever. The BBC were ecstatic that the Front National had been ‘crushed” in the 2nd round of the French elections. (Little time spent considering the fact that the FN vote held strong but tactical voting by the establishment parties had gerrymandered the result.It seems the wishes of 25% of the electorate can be dismisses when they hold the wrong views according to the BBC) Then they moved on to their new poster boy, Shakar Aamer, who is being hailed as a true blue Brit. We’ve seen the BBC do this before over Moazzam Beggs so they have form. There was an item on the WRETCHED failure of Social workers to stop child abuse. The BBC line was this was because they are not paid enough and that the tax payer must splash more cash their way if they are to consider stopping industrial scale sex abuse of young girls. And so it went. Grim, relentless, biased.
BIASED TO THE CORE..
Bookmark the permalink.
Indeed. ‘crushed’, ‘routed’…I think it was 28% they got so almost as much as Labour in the UK! the other thing is that they fail to explain fully what was done: imagine Labour, Lib Dem etc WITHDRAWING candidates in some regions and the voters being told to vote for the Conservative candidate.
I’ve seen it written recently – can’t remember where, sorry – that the French have such a terrible folk-memory of their country having been invaded by fascists that they, or at least many of them, will automatically club together to defeat the Front National. Even if it means Socialists voting for Republicans and vice-versa.
This struck a chord with me and the anti-fascist knee-jerk perhaps explains why the bBBC tries to portray UKIP as fascists, and why Hilary Benn was able to swing a few Labour MPs’ votes by calling ISIS/ Daesh ‘fascists’. It doesn’t matter to the bBBC that the biggest mass-murderers in history have been socialists – Stalin and Mao – they have to keep on plugging the Hitler/ fascist story.
Their vote from the first round held up. Had the Left and Right stood as normal the result would have been totally different. The BBC must have breathed a huge sigh of relief. Made spinning the result so much easier.
Shakar Aamer: as far as I can gather was an asylum seeker from Saudia Arabia. Now as the law stands when he left the country with his family to live and work in Afghanistan (which he says he loved and was maligned) he forfeited his asylum status. Can someone explain, perhaps the BBC, how this man was entitled to consular help whilst interred in Gauntanamo and why he was repatriated to the UK on a apparently private jet at whose expense.
Tiger
Given you are correct ,and I have no reason to doubt you. One is is therefore assuming then that Shakar Aamer would be ineliegible to receive any legal aid from this country, along with the possibility of receiving (again from ourselves) the reported one million pounds in compensation! Would my assumption be correct?
Carolyn Quinn on Monday’s PM continued the child abuse story, this time with a British Association of Social Workers ‘expert’ to tell us that the crisis was all down to Austerity and Cuts.
Carolyn did at least suggest that the problems didn’t just start when the money ran out. I don’t suppose decades of encouraging teenage girls to get pregnant as a means of getting a house, salary and personal adviser or increasing the population by 20% in the last ten years with people who don’t understand the language or culture or risks of breeding with one’s first cousin had anything to do with it either.
Our ‘expert’ seemed to be unhappy that the media never reported a case of a social worker ‘doing good’ – what something like “social worker applies sticking plaster to society that they helped wound”?
Philip Johnston in todays DT,
” It is regularly stated that Mr Aamer is British, but he isn’t. He is a Saudi national. It is further said that he was a British resident, as indeed he was from 1996 to 2001. But he chose to go and live in Afghanistan when it was run by the Taliban. So he was really an Afghan resident.”
As to who are fascists; certainly not UKIP, the French FN, Pegida. Who are fascists; definitely ISIL. And if we define fascists as intolerant of dissent, hatred for those who do not share their views, violence, closing down of debates & discussions, then I would add the UAF, anti-capitalists (and all the affiliated rent-a-mob demonstrators, they are all the same people!), and lastly, some folk who think Corbyn is a good egg. Though I don’t think Corbyn himself as such, he is just a rather naive fellow still believing in his student politics.
I do not think fascism needs a geographical location somewhere right of the political centre-ground, for me Comunism & fascism are pretty much the same, they both are manifestations of collectivist hatred & intolerance mixed with unpleasant violence.
If I may add to my previous post; one merely has to subtract just one trait from the nasty ones of the fascists & comunists, namely ‘violence’, then substitute ‘hatred’ with the word ‘mockery’ then the BBC itself falls uncomfortably into the parameters of a despotic regime. Everything else seems to fit perfectly, cronyism, intolerance of an alternative viewpoint, propaganda for their beliefs, warping of language to fit these beliefs, education of the masses to fall into line with what they say, need I go on….?
Here is a copy of email sent to my MP. Perhaps others would do the same;
Dear Mr Stride,
Over the last few days our left wing media have been regaling us with the trials and tribulations of Aamer. No doubt, a forerunner to sue the Government (us) for millions.
I have some questions which perhaps the Home Secretary could/should answer.
1. Mr Aamer was resident in the UK 1996 – 2001. He is a Saudia Arabian national. Were he and his family granted asylum in the UK?
2. If he was granted asylum in the UK and he chose to leave to live and work in Afghanistan, surely he forfeited his right to asylum when he departed the UK as he left voluntarily? Note he states publicly that he loved life under the Taliban. The Taliban regime was no better than ISIS/ISIL. They were responsible for horrific acts of brutality and destruction little different to those being perpetrated by ISIS. Lets not forget that they allowed Al Quaeda training bases and free reign which led to the largest atrocity of modern times with the murder of 4000 people in the World Trade Centre. His desire to live under these fundamentalist Islamic conditions makes his status dubious.
3. If point 2 is correct then the UK Government had no further responsibility for Aamer. Why were legal and consular support provided to him at Gauntanamo?
4. Since he left UK protection of his own volition why was he repatriated back to the UK when released from Gauntanamo and not back to Afghanistan?
5. It is apparent that he was repatriated on a private jet from the USA to the UK. Who paid for the charter of this private jet and and on what grounds?
I wish you and yours and blessed and peaceful Christmas and the very best for your endeavours in 2016.
Yours sincerely,
Something tells me you won’t get a reply.
However, despite this, most definitely still onto something good.