Midweek Thread 20 October 2021

Politicians have entreated each other to be ‘kind’ in the aftermath of the murder of one of their own. They seem to think that has something to do with Islamic terrorism . Judging by their past behaviour and that of BBC journalists we can guess how much will change ..

Bookmark the permalink.

593 Responses to Midweek Thread 20 October 2021

  1. Loobyloo says:

    First? As Al Beeb successfully sweeps under the carpet the barbaric Islamic murder of one of our politicians, whilst banging the drum for more restrictions ‘online’ because there is so much hate. Never any discussion of why people might feel so angry – soon that will be outlawed because it’s too ‘hateful’. And still managing to ram climate change and Covid scare stories down our throats.
    All in all, feeling pretty positive! (Sarc)


    • StewGreen says:

      Catchup links to most recent posts on previous thread
      page 4 started 7:30 pm on Tuesday
      page 3 started 8am on Tuesday
      page 2


    • Simon Love says:

      And let us not forget the BBC/ITV repeatedly screening that documentary about the Stephen Lawrence murder, a murder that happened over 25 years ago!!! MP David Amess has only just been murdered and they say NOTHING…

      Why don’t we have a bit of balance? Since apparently black lives matter, why don’t we have a documentary about the hundreds of black youth killed every year in the UK by OTHER BLACK YOUTH???

      Oh is it because it’s BLACK on BLACK murder which we’re not supposed to know about??? I get it – So they have to go back over 25 years to find a WHITE on BLACK murder because they’re so rare. However BLACKS are killing/murdering other BLACKS every single day of the week!!!

      I’m so sick of this hypocritical BS!!!


      • Sick of it all says:


        It’s not that we should be unaware of the widespread black on black murders (a cursory internet search brings up dozens of historic news reports of same), but are required to simply ignore them, since they don’t serve any purpose within the narrative of non-whites being under perpetual oppression by whites. Unfortunately this is an imported problem – from the United States – which has undermined one of the United Kingdom’s great cultural victories of the past seven decades, that of the integration between indigenous whites and economic migrants from the Caribbean islands. One only has to compare media responses to the death of Tony Timpa with the jarringly similar demise of George Floyd, to understand how black communities are being used as mere fodder in a political chess game which has far wider implications than the deaths of a few fatherless boys on the streets of London.


        • JimS says:

          We now have more ‘blacks’ from Africa than the Caribbean, who also came here by choice unlike the stereotypical American ‘black’.

          Of course that doesn’t stop the BBC and others trying to create a false history in which ‘Britain Was Built By Blacks’ who were displaced or enslaved by the Anglo-Saxons.

          Just to help matters along they find successful ‘blacks’ to scold us on how our racism held them back!


      • NCBBC says:

        Auster’s First law
        The more destructive and backward an ethnic or religious group, the more BBC/MSM will show the contrary. The Corollary – the more worthy a group is, the more it will be vilified as violent, destructive and useless.

        Therefore Christians will be shown to be vengeful and violent and Muslims and Islam to be peaceful.

        Blacks portrayed as intelligent, educated and contributing to society. Whites shown as ignorant, uneducated and useless.


    • Doublethinker says:

      It isn’t just the BBC that employs the tactic of distraction when reporting on the murder of David Amess that is shameful, that is to be expected, nor even that the vast majority of the craven MSM does the same, it is the way our politicians grabbed on to the root cause being the visciousness of modern politics that is the great abrogation of responsibility.
      Yet again it gives them an excuse not to confront the fact that Islamic terrorism is flourishing in our midst, due entirely to the political classes immigration policiesover the past thirty or forty years.
      Only GBN on Farage, Brazier and Wootton , were brave enough to actually discuss why Amess was murdered and the implications for our country.
      I think that our politicians hope that somehow or other there will be ‘reformation’ within Islam and that a much more moderate form , that fits in better to the 21 st century West, of the religion emerges triumphant . But two Muslim guests on GBN , both moderates, were pessimistic and thought that the medievalists were winning the struggle for Islamic leadership.
      The politicians and MSM have their collective heads stuck in the sand right up to their necks. They will be the death of us.


  2. StewGreen says:

    Ha GBnews now : Should online anonymity be banned ?
    (.. cos this is a magic solution to trolling and hurty words on line )

    The pro-campaigner started by telling her, that a detective had tracked down her troll
    it turned out to be her old security guard trying to drum up more business.
    … Look that means her troll wasn’t a real troll, the banning of anonymous accounts wouldn’t have stopped her he would have found another way.


  3. tomo says:

    Order-Order has some more pertinent detail on the Leigh on Sea nastiness

    elsewhere, the coronavirus act extension was perfunctorily passed without a vote


    • StewGreen says:

      So media say ”
      “people wouldn’t say those things under THEIR OWN names
      …ban online anonymity !”

      And here we have the TERRORIST’S own father
      tweeting anti-British hate UNDER HIS OWN name
      …. not anonymously


  4. Zephir says:

    My PTSD complaint About border harrassment in asia and the ripped apart suitcases and theft and held up at borders for five hours whilst demanding cash,etc etc is going nowhwere get a little blackie on the bbc complainim about being housed in a four star hotekl and there we go


  5. Jeff says:

    Blimey, BBC4 are really treating us this evening…

    At the time of writing, just after 9.40, we’re being entertained by Lenny Henry :Young Gifted and Black. The comedian interviewed by Alan Yentob.

    Then at 10.15 it’s the first of a trilogy called, The One Lenny Henry. This is a comedy sketch show. Crikey, I’m almost wetting myself…

    Then, having entertained us for over two hours, we’re brought down to Earth with the second of another three parter; Stephen: The Murder that Changed a Nation.

    Guess what that’s about…


    • Simon Love says:

      And we all know why BBC/ITV/Channel 4 are bombarding us with this stuff – Because a young BLACK man, has just recently stabbed an old WHITE man death for no reason whatsoever!!!

      Therefore the marxist, common purpose extreme left wing media have to go into hyper-drive to remind us that ‘extreme racism’ is the real problem, NOT old white men getting stabbed to death for nothing!!!

      They make me puke!!!


      • JohnC says:

        I recently read one of them justify the current anti-white racism on TV as ‘compensation for past racism’.

        I’m absolutely convinced the root of it is that the far-Left ‘liberal elites’ at the BBC despise working class, right-wing whites. It’s all based on spite.


        • Sick of it all says:

          If that’s the case then we should request a timescale for this compensation. Once this timescale has been exhausted then every man jack of them can zip their lips, crawl back where they came from and never bore us with this imposition again.


        • NCBBC says:

          I suppose Britain needs to apologise for the inventing the Industrial revolution that is responsible for lifting 90% of humanity from slavery to the tiller and to a life worth living

          Britain also need t apologise for antibiotics and vaccintions.


      • Banania says:

        In this case the blackness of the culprit was not significant, but his religion was.


    • StewGreen says:

      Some biggies
      🟤 11pm Channel 5 :black actor David Harewood’s 1000 Years A Slave

      🟤 9pm ITV ‘Ashley Banjo: Britain in Black and White’

      Other Black issue progs on tonight’s TV
      9:15pm 🟤 BBC4 Lenny Henry *Young Gifted & Black *
      10:15pm 🟤 BBC4 Lenny Henry performs
      🟤 11pm BBC4 repeat yet again
      Stephen: The Murder That Changed a Nation 2/3

      10pm 🟤 Sky Arts : Romesh explores the life of Ritchie Pryor

      🟤 11pm Dave : Lenny Henry’s *Race*Through Comedy

      🟤 11:40pm ITV the black gameshow


      • Simon Love says:

        Well a nasty young BLACK MAN has just MURDERED an innocent, defenceless old WHITE MAN by stabbing him 17 times with a knife, so we must have some, ahem ‘balance’ restored mustn’t we…


  6. Jeff says:

    You know, one of these days perhaps the BBC will bring us a three part documentary entitled: Lee Rigby, The Murder That We Tried To Ignore.

    Maybe not…


    • JohnC says:

      A bit like Panorama but fact-based instead of opinion ?.

      Never in a million years.

      I was just reading the story about North Korea and it occurred to me that the BBC have seriously strung themselves up for many important stories now because in the past, their entire stance was determined by their hatred of Trump.

      God only knows how much damage they have done in the process.


    • Banania says:

      I am a Changing of the Guard addict [fortunately there are hundreds of videos on You Tube], and every time I see the drummers marching behind the band in their amazing uniforms I think of the picture in all the papers of Lee Rigby in his. His murder struck at the heart of this country’s history and institutions.
      [Incidentally, the videos cannot avoid showing the police, in sloppy uniforms festooned with weapons, presumably there to protect the guardsmen who cannot defend themselves.]


  7. StewGreen says:

    Green deal madness says Farage


    • Simon Love says:

      No way!!! He’s extreme left wing wife is a plant – We need a long, cold hard winter to help make stupid people’s minds up for them.

      When it suddenly becomes obvious to even stupid people that reliable, affordable gas & electric is FAR more important that some ridiculous fantasy about net zero as they site there like brass monkeys, THAT is when the letters of no confidence will start going into the 1922…

      Oh, I’m so, so, so incredibly sorry – I haven’t mentioned black people… There we are – sorted…


    • Fedup2 says:

      The government could suspend / end VAT on fuel now that we are out of the ReichEU . But not a chance …

      Come on Simon – you could have mentioned coloured folk / Muslims if you tried …

      ( I agree that a few black outs will concentrate political minds to dump this crap )


    • taffman says:

      Nigel Farage hits it on the Nail!
      We voted to control illegal immigration not for the idiotic Green Giants policy of destroying Great Britain.
      Do you Tory voters agree with me that we have an idiot running this nation ?


      • Seppers says:

        I think that as far as this country’s attempts at net zero targets go – it is directly related to immigration (population number in the land to be exact). The same being true re water and energy supply, air pollution, etc. Eg how will we generate enough renewable energy to power everyone’s cars if the population keeps rising? There must a finite ability to produce green electricity?
        So the two things are connected.
        The same re protection for wildlife and habitats. The more houses and infrastructure that’s needed, the fewer habitats are preserved.
        So I have the view that a sensible approach to immigration is essential for sustainability in terms of energy/infrastructure in the uk.


        • Yasser Dasmibehbi says:

          That is an excellent comment Seppers. It’s the sort of thing Green Party members used to say when I belonged back in the seventies.
          Before some sort of virus addled their brains.

          You have hit the nail on the head but how about posting in the live end of the thread instead of the dead end where only a few people revisit?


  8. vlad says:

    I believe Colin Brazier’s monologue on islamic terrorism has already been referred to, but here’s a link to the full text and video – well worth reading or watching; the man’s a hero. Calm, measured, but prepared to say the unfashionable – the unmentionable on the BBC.

    Caveat: There is some speculation that the killing of David Amess may have had a political dimension, involving the shady politics of Qatar and Somalia. That notwithstanding, Brazier’s comments hold true in general.

    Opening paras:

    “Response to terror has become wearily routine.

    Efforts to explain often sound like an excuse.

    From Nice to Nairobi, from Tunisia to Turkey, I’ve spent long hours standing – as close as decency or the police would permit – to the scene of the latest terrorist outrage.

    Others don’t have the luxury of standing at a safe distance. The armed officers who’ve usually finished their work by the time the media arrive, the medics who try to staunch the bleeding.

    Once first-responders have gone, once every bullet hole’s marked and every recoverable body-part recovered, in come the first-explainers. The reporters, the politicians, the community and faith leaders, the experts.I’ve seen this process evolve over the years. And it’s important to point out that everything which happens is usually guided by the very best human instincts. To be kind and sensitive, to avoid conflation or jumping to conclusions. And, sadly, since 9/11, Britain has endured enough atrocities, for a discernible pattern to have emerged. A modus operandi for how we deal with the aftermath of terror. There is no guiding mind behind this procedure. But nor is it wholly spontaneous any more. As the years have rolled by, and outrage has followed outrage, we have learned how to process events. What to say and, more importantly, what not to say…”



    • vlad says:

      P.S. The video comments are interesting too.

      There is a groundswell of approval – and anger.


    • Jeff says:

      I’m very impressed with GB News and Colin Brazier in particular.

      He’s given a regular spot to the historian David Starkey. All the other “woke” media outlets have turned their backs on him. They’d much rather have simpering Mary Beard boring the arse off us.

      Now that Brazier has grasped the nettle let’s see if he’ll go one step further…and interview Tommy Robinson.

      That I’d love to see…


      • vlad says:

        I’m guessing that would be a step too far for GB News.
        TR has been so demonised by the msm / BBC, who’ve portrayed him as a virtual fascist. GB News must constantly look over their shoulder to avoid the label themselves, from their many enemies and the ever looming Ofcom.


        • Rob in Cheshire says:

          I doubt Tommy would want to go on, even if asked.

          As far as I can see, he has given up and is living out of the spotlight. I cannot say I blame him. He is a family man, and sooner or later “they” would have killed him.


          • Jeff says:

            No, he was in court the other day and involved in a rather heated discussion with some demonstrators afterwards.

            He looked in good form.


          • Sick of it all says:

            I wouldn’t blame him either but I believe Robinson enjoys the drama and has shoulders broad enough to take it. He is known for his football hooligan associations and the ‘rush’ of these activities has been well documented by those involved.

            I view him as modern era Roger Cook, balancing fearlessness and recklessness in equal measure. The country needs people like Robinson.


  9. Guest Who says:

    Cosy is as cosy does.


  10. vlad says:

    Black month? More like Black Year.

    It never stops.


  11. Zephir says:

    “one of the most masterful chroniclers of America.”

    hmm have a look at the current president and keep your mouth shut, firmly shut about his son f@cking minors as you did whilst Clinton and his wife were fu@king minors


    • Fedup2 says:

      Sopel and his inability to spot dementia …or a stolen election …or the achievements of a real president . …..might have a long career in BBC


  12. Zephir says:

    Juanita Broaddrick
    Main article: Juanita Broaddrick § Allegations against Bill Clinton

    In a 1999 episode of Dateline NBC, former Bill Clinton volunteer Juanita Broaddrick alleged that, in the late 1970s, Clinton raped her in her hotel room. According to Broaddrick, she agreed to meet with Clinton for coffee in the lobby of her hotel, but Clinton asked if they could go to her room to avoid a crowd of reporters; she agreed. Broaddrick stated that once Clinton had isolated her in her hotel room, he raped her. Broaddrick stated Clinton injured her lip by biting it during the assault.[2][3] In 1999, Clinton denied Broaddrick’s allegations through his lawyer.

    Supporters of Clinton have questioned her account by noting that, when Broaddrick testified about her alleged encounter with Clinton under oath, she denied having been raped by him. In her NBC interview alleging rape, Broaddrick said that she had only denied being raped under oath to protect her privacy. Supporters of Clinton have also noted that she continued to support him, and appear at public events on his behalf, weeks after the alleged rape, and that Broaddrick said that she couldn’t remember the day or month the alleged incident occurred.[4] Broaddrick has stated that in 1978 she revealed the alleged assault to five intimates, and that they advised her not to cause trouble for herself by going public.
    Leslie Millwee

    In October 2016, Leslie Millwee accused Bill Clinton of sexually assaulting her three times in 1980. Millwee was then an employee at a now-defunct Arkansas based television station, and Clinton was then governor of Arkansas. Millwee told Breitbart News that on each of the three occasions, Clinton came up behind her and fondled her breasts, and on the second occasion, he rubbed his crotch against her and came to orgasm.[5]
    Paula Jones
    Main article: Paula Jones § Jones v. Clinton

    According to Paula Jones’ account, on May 8, 1991, she was escorted to Clinton’s hotel room in Little Rock, Arkansas,[6] where he propositioned and exposed himself to her. She claimed she kept quiet about the incident until 1994, when a David Brock story in the American Spectator magazine printed an account. In 1994, Jones and her attorneys, Joseph Cammarata and Gilbert Davis, filed a federal lawsuit against Clinton alleging sexual harassment.[7] In the discovery stage of the suit, Jones’ lawyers had the opportunity to question Clinton under oath about his sexual history; in the course of this testimony, Clinton denied having had a sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky, a denial that, after his affair with Lewinsky was subsequently exposed, eventually led to his impeachment for perjury and obstruction of justice.[8]

    Several witnesses disputed Jones’ account, including her sister and brother-in-law. These witnesses contended that she had described her encounter with Clinton as “happy” and “gentle”. In addition, Jones had claimed to friends that Clinton had a particular deformity on his penis, a claim that was revealed to be false by investigators.[9]

    In April 1998, the case was dismissed by judge Susan Webber Wright as lacking legal merit.[10] However, Jones appealed Webber Wright’s ruling, and her suit gained traction following Clinton’s admission to having an affair with Monica Lewinsky in August 1998.[11] This admission indicated that Clinton may have lied under oath when he testified in the Jones case that he had never had a sexual relationship with Lewinsky.

    On appeal, in the midst of his trial for impeachment based on his testimony in the Jones case, Clinton was faced with the prospect of having to go under oath again and testify more about his sexual history. Instead, Clinton agreed to an out-of-court settlement, paying Jones and her lawyers $850,000 to drop the suit; the vast majority of this money was used to pay Jones’ legal fees.[12] Clinton’s lawyer said that the president made the settlement only so he could end the lawsuit for good and move on with his life.[13]
    Kathleen Willey
    Main article: Kathleen Willey § Claims

    In 1998, Kathleen Willey alleged Clinton groped her without consent in the White House Oval Office in 1993.[14] Kenneth Starr granted her immunity for her testimony in his separate inquiry.[15][16]

    Linda Tripp, the Clinton Administration staffer who secretly taped her phone conversations with Monica Lewinsky in order to expose the latter’s affair with the president, testified under oath that Willey’s sexual contact with President Clinton in 1993 was consensual, that Willey had been flirting with the president, and that Willey was happy and excited following her 1993 encounter with Clinton.[17] Six other friends of Willey confirmed Tripp’s account in sworn testimony, stating that Willey had sought a sexual relationship with the president.[18] Ken Starr, who had deposed Willey in the course of investigating Clinton’s sexual history, determined that she had lied under oath repeatedly to his investigators. Starr and his team therefore concluded that there was insufficient evidence to pursue her allegations further.[citation needed] In 2007, Willey published a book about her experiences with the Clintons.[19]
    Other accusations

    In April 1998, Inside Edition reported that Cristy Zercher, a former flight attendant, had accused Clinton of groping and fondling her on a 1992 campaign flight while his wife Hillary was sleeping nearby. A release announcing the results of Zercher’s polygraph test stated that she had negative ratings for truthfulness on four questions asked the week prior.[20]

    In 1999, Eileen Wellstone, a former student at University of Oxford, accused Clinton of raping her in 1969 when he was a student at Oxford.[21][22] Wellstone filed a sexual assault complaint with the university at the time, but no charges were brought against Clinton.[22]

    A campaign staffer, Sandra Allen James, accused Clinton of sexually assaulting her in his hotel room in 1991. She claimed that he exposed himself to her and forced her to conduct oral sex on him while they were sitting on the couch.[21]

    A former professor from the University of Arkansas claimed Clinton had groped a female student and tried to trap her in his office when he was a professor. This would later be backed up by a piece written by Daniel Harris and Teresa Hampton, which alleged that students at the university confirmed that Clinton had tried to force himself on them when he was a professor.[23]


  13. Zephir says:

    but guess what Trump was accused of grabbing someones bum….and we have heard that over and over again,,, but NEVER the above

    wimmin protesting in the streets of London about this but NEVER about the above sex criminal


    • JohnC says:

      Don’t forget the accusation of Biden pushing a woman up against a wall and inserting his fingers inside her because someone had told him she liked him.

      Yet another breathtaking act of hypocrisy by the MSM and the BBC.

      The reason people move the the Right as they get older is because they realise the extent of the corruption and lies from the Left. Hence why the likes of the BBC are always aiming their agenda at the young.


  14. tomo says:

    Ambrose Evans Pritchard of The London Daily Telegraph is probably familiar to a few here.

    He wrote a book… about The Clintons….

    See The Secret Life of Bill Clinton

    One might think he’d have opined on Hilary’s run for POTUS and the malarkey that’s been going on around it all?


    • Zephir says:

      The sickest thing about Hillary is her attacks upon the victims of her husband whilst whining about women as victims etc etc


  15. Zephir says:

    In April 1998, Inside Edition reported that Cristy Zercher, a former flight attendant, had accused Clinton of groping and fondling her on a 1992 campaign flight while his wife Hillary was sleeping nearby. A release announcing the results of Zercher’s polygraph test stated that she had negative ratings for truthfulness on four questions asked the week prior.[20]

    In 1999, Eileen Wellstone, a former student at University of Oxford, accused Clinton of raping her in 1969 when he was a student at Oxford.[21][22] Wellstone filed a sexual assault complaint with the university at the time, but no charges were brought against Clinton.[22]

    A campaign staffer, Sandra Allen James, accused Clinton of sexually assaulting her in his hotel room in 1991. She claimed that he exposed himself to her and forced her to conduct oral sex on him while they were sitting on the couch.[21]

    A former professor from the University of Arkansas claimed Clinton had groped a female student and tried to trap her in his office when he was a professor. This would later be backed up by a piece written by Daniel Harris and Teresa Hampton, which alleged that students at the university confirmed that Clinton had tried to force himself on them when he was a professor.[23]


  16. Zephir says:

    By Anna North Oct 15, 2018, 5:00pm EDT
    Share this story

    In a CBS interview on Sunday, correspondent Tony Dokoupil asked Clinton if she thought her husband should have resigned after his affair with Lewinsky, then a White House intern, became public.

    “Absolutely not,” Clinton said.


    Clinton also said the relationship wasn’t an abuse of power on the former president’s part. Lewinsky was “an adult,” she said, before changing the subject to talk about sexual harassment and assault allegations against President Donald Trump.

    Clinton’s history when it comes to sexual misconduct allegations against her husband — and others in her circle — is a complicated one. She’s never had a satisfying response to questions about the accusations against her husband, which include Juanita Broaddrick’s accusation that he raped her in 1978. On the other hand, she allowed an adviser to keep his job with her 2008 campaign despite allegations of sexual harassment — and when she addressed that decision this year, her comments left a lot to be desired.

    As a woman married to a powerful man accused of sexual misconduct, Hillary Clinton is in a difficult position, forced to answer for someone else’s alleged misdeeds. But Clinton is also powerful in her own right, and when it comes to preventing and punishing harassment, she may not always have used her power wisely. Her latest interview is another example of a core problem for her legacy: She does not seem to have fully reckoned with the seriousness of sexual harassment and assault, especially when it comes to the men closest to her.
    Bill Clinton has been accused of sexual misconduct multiple times

    Bill Clinton has faced a number of allegations of sexual harassment, assault, and other misconduct over the course of his long political career. Probably most famous was the revelation that he had a sexual relationship with Lewinsky while he was in office. After a now-famous denial — “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky” — he admitted to the relationship in 1998.

    As Vox’s Dylan Matthews has written, the affair, “while consensual in some sense, was nonetheless textbook sexual harassment of a subordinate of a kind that would (or perhaps more accurately, should) get many CEOs fired from their companies.” After all, Clinton was not only Lewinsky’s boss, but also the president of the United States.

    If Lewinsky had wanted to refuse an advance from Clinton, or break off their relationship, would she have felt free to do so? Or would she have felt trapped, knowing that the president had all the power over her future career?

    Questions like these are the reason that relationships between bosses and subordinates are sometimes banned by employer sexual harassment policies — given the power differential at play, it’s not clear that such a relationship can ever be truly, fully consensual. Since the rise of #MeToo, some high-profile men have lost their jobs as a result of allegations of relationships with subordinates — for instance, such allegations were among those that cost Lorin Stein his position as editor of the Paris Review.

    In an essay at Vanity Fair earlier this year, Lewinsky wrote that the question of whether her relationship with Clinton was consensual was “very, very complicated.”

    “I now see how problematic it was that the two of us even got to a place where there was a question of consent,” she wrote. “The road that led there was littered with inappropriate abuse of authority, station, and privilege.”

    For Bill Clinton, the road to the affair with Lewinsky was also dotted with other allegations of sexual misconduct. Paula Jones said that Clinton sexually harassed her when she worked for the Arkansas Industrial Development Commission in 1991; Kathleen Willey said he assaulted her when she was a volunteer at the White House in 1993. And Juanita Broaddrick says that Clinton raped her in a hotel room when she was volunteering for his Arkansas gubernatorial campaign in 1978. Clinton has denied all these allegations.
    Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and the #MeToo movement prompted many to revisit the allegations against Bill Clinton

    Bill Clinton’s history with women started to get renewed public attention in 2016, during Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Before the second presidential debate, Donald Trump recorded a Facebook Live appearance with Willey, Broaddrick, and Jones, all of whom said they were supporting him. The three then sat in the audience for the debate.

    Focusing on the allegations against Clinton was a way for the Trump campaign to divert attention from the Access Hollywood tape, on which Trump was heard bragging about his ability to grab women “by the pussy.” But Clinton’s candidacy, and the rise of the #MeToo movement, have also prompted a serious reexamination not just of the allegations against Bill Clinton, but of Hillary Clinton’s responses to them.

    As the #MeToo movement gained steam — and especially when Democratic Sen. Al Franken was accused of groping women — some argued that Bill Clinton should have resigned after his relationship with Lewinsky. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) said in November 2017, as the allegations against Franken were becoming public, that Clinton should have stepped down. She later walked her comments back to some degree, but they were notable given Gillibrand’s prominence and her close relationship with the Clintons.

    Others, too, called for a reexamination of the former president’s past. “Democrats and the center left are overdue for a real reckoning with the allegations” against Clinton, MSNBC host Chris Hayes tweeted in November.

    “In this #MeToo moment, when we’re reassessing decades of male misbehavior and turning open secrets into exposes, we should look clearly at the credible evidence that Juanita Broaddrick told the truth when she accused Clinton of raping her,” New York Times op-ed columnist Michelle Goldberg wrote the same month. “It’s fair to conclude that because of Broaddrick’s allegations, Bill Clinton no longer has a place in decent society.”

    And Vox’s Matt Yglesias wrote that Clinton’s failure to resign after his affair with Lewinsky set back the cause of preventing sexual harassment: “Had he resigned in shame, we all might have made a collective cultural and political decision that a person caught leveraging power over women in inappropriate ways ought to be fired. Instead, we lost nearly two decades.”

    While many now see the allegations against Bill Clinton as damning, Hillary Clinton’s role is less clear. At the second presidential debate, Trump said that Hillary Clinton had “viciously” attacked Willey, Broaddrick, and Jones after they came forward with allegations against her husband. That’s not really true. At least in public, Clinton mostly kept quiet about the allegations, as PolitiFact notes.

    Broaddrick has said that soon after Bill Clinton raped her, she saw Hillary Clinton at a rally. She said Clinton shook her hand and thanked her for what she had done for Bill, in a way that felt like a threat. But beyond that, there’s no evidence that Hillary Clinton ever intimidated or attacked Broaddrick. And Broaddrick admits she’s not completely sure of her interpretation of the encounter: “When you look back over almost 38 years, some of the anger fades, the fear fades, and you think, I hope she didn’t know,” she told BuzzFeed’s Katie J.M. Baker.

    Clinton did say that the allegations of an affair between her husband and Lewinsky were part of a “vast right-wing conspiracy” — but, as PolitiFact notes, at that time Lewinsky was still publicly denying the affair.

    In general, Bill Clinton’s history has put Hillary Clinton in a difficult position. She can either call him to account publicly — and possibly leave him — or she can keep silent or defend him, knowing that in doing so, she discounts the experience of women who say he harmed them.

    In her 2017 book What Happened, Clinton criticizes Trump for bringing Willey, Broaddrick, and Jones to the debate, saying “he was just using them.” But she doesn’t offer any real insight into what she believes about the allegations against her husband, or how she squares her marriage with her commitment to promoting women’s rights — including the right to have one’s accounts of sexual harassment or assault taken seriously.

    Of her relationship with her husband, she only writes that “there were times that I was deeply unsure about whether our marriage could or should survive. But on those days, I asked myself the questions that mattered most to me: Do I still love him? And can I still be in this marriage without becoming unrecognizable to myself — twisted by anger, resentment, or remoteness? The answers were always yes. So I kept going.”
    Hillary Clinton made questionable decisions regarding sexual harassment within her 2008 campaign

    Bill Clinton isn’t the only man in Hillary Clinton’s sphere to be accused of sexual misconduct. Earlier this year, the New York Times reported that Burns Strider, Hillary Clinton’s faith adviser during her 2008 run for president, was accused of sexual harassment while working on the campaign. Instead of firing him, Clinton kept him on and reassigned the woman who had made the allegation. According to the Times, he later went on to work for Correct the Record, a group supporting Clinton’s 2016 run — and was fired for various issues, including allegations of sexual harassment.

    In January, Clinton issued a statement on the allegations against Strider in which she said she would have made a different decision if confronted with the situation today. However, she wrote, “I didn’t think firing him was the best solution to the problem. He needed to be punished, change his behavior, and understand why his actions were wrong. The young woman needed to be able to thrive and feel safe. I thought both could happen without him losing his job.”

    Clinton did not apologize for her decision, nor did she say whether she considered warning future employers of the 2008 allegations against Strider, potentially protecting his future co-workers. Her statement also included an irrelevant and unnecessary swipe at the New York Times for keeping on reporter Glenn Thrush after allegations of sexual misconduct by him were published by Vox.

    The statement as a whole left the impression that Clinton, while perhaps more thoughtful on the issue now than in 2008, had not fully reckoned with the problem of sexual harassment and an employer’s responsibility to address it. Her interview on Sunday only adds to that impression.

    By saying that Lewinsky was “an adult” when the affair took place, Clinton ignores the inequities between the president and an intern that Lewinsky made very clear in her Vanity Fair essay. And by insisting that then-President Clinton’s actions did not constitute an “abuse of power,” she denies one of the most obviously problematic aspects of her husband’s relationship with Lewinsky.

    You can argue that the affair was consensual — Lewinsky herself acknowledges this is a complicated issue. But it’s very hard to argue that Clinton didn’t abuse the power of the presidency when he had sex with an intern in the Oval Office. For Hillary Clinton to make this claim suggests that either she doesn’t understand how abuse of power works or that she’s simply blind to it where her husband is concerned.

    In general, it’s hard to know how Clinton should have responded, over the years, to allegations against her husband and the father of her child. To some degree, it’s understandable that she chose to remain largely silent for a long time. But since the rise of the #MeToo movement, she’s chosen to speak directly about the issue of sexual misconduct several times, and several times she has fallen short.

    Clinton’s feminist legacy has always been complicated. She undeniably blazed a trail for women in politics — really, for countless women trying to rise up in what remains a man’s world. In What Happened, Clinton poignantly recalls various struggles with sexism, including a linguistic expert who told her that she needed to make her voice softer and lower in speeches.

    “Other women will run for President,” Clinton writes, “and they will be women, and they will have women’s voices. Maybe that will be less unusual by then. Maybe my campaign will have helped make it that way, and other women will have an easier time. I hope so.”

    Clinton’s campaign may well make it easier for future women to run — at the very least, she’s given them a (mostly) clear-eyed account, in What Happened, of what it was like. But for women who, on their way to whatever career they strive for, are sexually harassed or assaulted, Clinton hasn’t made it easier to come forward. If anything, her comments and decisions have made it harder.

    As one of the most visible women in the world, Clinton has a rare opportunity to send a message of support to survivors everywhere. But by getting defensive about her former employee, and denying that her husband abused his power when Lewinsky has said that he did, she’s done the opposite. She’s become one of the many, many people showing survivors that, too often, people in power will be protected by their powerful friends.

    Hillary Clinton will always have a place in feminist history. But when the history of #MeToo is written, she may be remembered as someone who supported women — until their words hit too close to home.


  17. StewGreen says:

    Why are you talking about Bill Cinton now ?
    Why did BBC start a 10 part drama about the Bill Clinton & Monica Lewinsky TONIGHT

    .. and not at anytime between 2015 and 2021 ?

    Doh the BBC libmob establishment thought a drama then,
    would have been TOO DANGEROUS
    to Hillary/Biden and helpful to Trump
    Only now Trump have gone until 2025 is the drama aired


    • Zephir says:

      Maybe you dont listen I have talked about it before and my point NOW is all the feminists talking about their safety when their Clinton f’cking president was raping and sexually asssaulting whilst attacking Trump as a sexist


  18. Guest Who says:

    Envy of the world.


  19. Thoughtful says:

    A comment seen on a thread about a possible war with China / Russia seems to share my sentiments:

    “Wouldn’t matter if they won the war when it comes as we are living in a totalitarian regime now and have a media that promotes the government’s propaganda. The British forgot how to think for themselves about 18 months ago so I suppose we deserve what’s coming unless we ask the government for our 8@LLs back. “


    • Zephir says:

      Erm I could show you how the chinese deal with drug dealers, marched to a stadium, and publicly executed and you think we are living like that now

      The world’s leading executioner is estimated to kill about as many prisoners in three days as does the U.S., the world’s fifth-ranked, in a year
      china sep22 p.jpg
      A woman from the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou shouts before being taken to be executed / Reuters

      Wednesday night’s controversial execution in Georgia of Troy Davis has inspired much deliberation and soul-searching on the U.S. retention of the death penalty, which has been abandoned by the majority of the world’s nations. One particularly revealing, and often-cited, fact is that the U.S. ranks fifth in the world by number of prisoners executed annually. Fellow top-ten nations include Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and North Korea. But what about the world’s most frequent executioner, the country that in 2010 put more prisoners to death than the rest of the world combined? What is the state of the death penalty in China?

      Research by Amnesty International found that 23 countries used the death penalty in 2010. The U.S., ranked fifth, executed 46 prisoners. Iran, ranked second, executed at least 252. China, according to Amnesty International, executed “thousands.” The exact number is a state secret. The Dui Hua Foundation, a U.S.-based human rights non-profit that focuses on China, estimates China kills about 5,000 prisoners annually. In absolute terms, that would be about 14 executions daily, or in three days what the U.S. performs in an entire year. Most executions in China are reportedly carried out by lethal injection or a single gunshot to the head, although, as in the U.S., there does not appear to be a uniform national policy.

      The statistics are less unflattering for China when view per capita. China has the largest population on Earth with 1.3 billion people; 5,000 executions would mean one in every 260,000 residents. In the U.S., the rate in 2010 was one in every 6.7 million. Iran and North Korea executed about one in every 300,000 and 460,000, respectively.

      Two of the factors apparently contributing to China’s frequent use of the death penalty are the troubled court system and a national policy that permits capital punishment for crimes that are not considered capital in most other countries. Corruption, embezzling, drug-related crimes, and even theft on a large enough scale can all get you killed in China. Last month, a Chinese telecommunications executive was sentenced to death for accepting bribes. In March, China sparked a diplomatic incident by executing three Filipino citizens on drug trafficking charges. Other non-violent crimes punished by death have included, for example, 43-year-old Du Yimin, killed in March 2008 after he borrowed $100 million for investment schemes that never panned out.


      • Zephir says:

        China is carrying out thousands of secret executions but refusing to report them, according to a report released this week by Amnesty International.

        Amnesty believes China executed several thousand people last year — more than all other countries put together — but its government won’t confirm any exact numbers


        • Zephir says:


          Use of organs from executed Chinese prisoners


          • Zephir says:

            “Wouldn’t matter if they won the war when it comes as we are living in a totalitarian regime now

            thimk again. maybe

            you could murder someone and get away with five years imprisonment with a good lawyer , not in China

            you could be caught selling drugs and get a couple of years inside, in China you will be shot in the head, in public in a stadium with the local population to watch


            • NCBBC says:

              you could be caught selling drugs and get a couple of years inside, in China you will be shot in the head, in public in a stadium with the local population to watch

              If the purpose of punishment is deterrence, then executions should be in public.


    • Fedup2 says:

      Yes fighting a war to ‘defence british freedoms ‘ rings pretty hollow these days . But maybe that was / is somebody’s plan …( I don’t think they’d make the effort )..


  20. StewGreen says:

    Lembit Opik is talking sense
    ..again now has he hounds GBnews Climate Alarmist woman

    How was Lembit ever a Liberal rather than a libertarian ?


    • taffman says:

      “How was Lembit ever a Liberal rather than a libertarian ?”
      How was Boris ever a Tory rather than a Green Giant ?
      Answer – career politicians with no common sense whatsoever also, Bo Jo got married .


  21. Zephir says:

    The liberal left

    sex criminals are acceptable, as above and the muslim gang rapists but
    Never ever some harmless teenager with a book about german history in his bedroom thats far right


  22. taffman says:

    What other party in Great Britain has better policies that these?
    Abolish the BBC Licence Fee.
    Abolish the House of Lords.
    Support Voting Reform.
    End Mass Immigration.
    Take Our Waters Back.
    Support Free Speech .
    Scrap Most Foreign Aid .
    Scrap HS2: Back Hyperloop.
    Save Britain.If you agree with the following …………
    Abolish the BBC Licence Fee.
    Abolish the House of Lords.
    Support Voting Reform.
    End Mass Immigration.
    Take Our Waters Back.
    Support Free Speech .
    Scrap Most Foreign Aid .
    Scrap HS2: Back Hyperloop.
    Save Britain.

    Any suggestions ?


  23. taffman says:

    “Manchester Arena Inquiry: Bomber’s brother leaves UK before hearing”
    Any posts about this one yet ?


    • Zephir says:

      I did wonder why those with a B ri ish paspot innit have the ability to wonder off back to their shithole countries at will


  24. taffman says:

    “Climate change: China does ‘not need UK actions to encourage’ it to be more ambitious in tackling crisis”
    Has Al Beeb covered this yet ?


  25. tomo says:

    d’ya reckon they’ll be honest about the viewing figures?


  26. Zephir says:

    Some countries say if you want to take our nationality then you dispense with all other nationalities

    fat chance of that in this stupid country


    • taffman says:

      I would add to that with : we would be a far better country if those that hated us and were living here, quietly left .


      • Zephir says:

        Tell that to the wife. the only problem would be about the quiet requirement


        • taffman says:

          Your wife or mine ?


          • Zephir says:

            My wife is chinese, loves this country and its culture, we are now on the 7th year of her immigration application (£1200 each time every two years) hetr last application was rejected because her english exam was from the wrong examination board so we were put back 5 years weven though the examination she took was of a higher grade. Sir Oliver Heald goit involved and he sasd they can do it so they will

            I am currently filling out the 78 page application form for the next one

            just as an aside for you our first application we were rquired to provide evidence qf our relationship, there was no guidance as to what evidencwe was acceptable i called tham and thay gave me no help BUT said a immigration adviser may help.. oh yes ha ha

            we consulted him (EX HOME OFFICE EMPLOYEE)(

            i said what evidence do we need to provide

            he said 6 emails and some photos thank you £700 please

            Now THATS what I call a scam


            • Zephir says:

              Can anyone tell me why we are importing endless islamists who hate our country, our religion, our culture whilst the authorities put us through this ?


            • taffman says:

              I know of similar cases eg all the Gurkhas that had a similar problem . All were very loyal to Great Britain and all hard workers.

              You should have told your wife to get to France and purchase a dinghy .


              • Zephir says:

                i appreciate your levity, apart from the 78 page application form am trying with two and a half years of bank statements, two and a half years of wage slips, (for both of us seperatley ) letters addressed to me and her seperately sepearated over three years and 34 other documents required

                No print outs acceptable all have to be original

                And why do we have to go through this ..because of the bloody immigarants who want to come here with hatred in their minds


                • Zephir says:

                  She went to school with Xi Pings wife. I just wish now she said something bad then there would be no problem


            • pugnazious says:

              Just claim asylum…they’ll give you a house.


              • Zephir says:

                Quite possibly, I need asylum after 10 years with her, where do I apply ?

                Will they de radicalise me ? a new house without cupboards full of the dried genitals and other parts of endangered species ?

                I quite enjoy the wildlife channels on TV she thinks its cooking programmes and provides me with a running commentary on how to prepare, marinate and stir fry, including snakes


  27. taffman says:

    Boris has another ‘Game Changing’ policy of giving us cheap electric cars?
    Where is all the money coming from ?


  28. Zephir says:

    How long does it take to fill a car with petrol, how long does it take to charge a car to travel 100 miles ffs

    whos doing the carbon emissions why do we suffer Cos of india and china


    • taffman says:

      More important, where is all the electricity coming from ?
      Has Boris got a top secret energy source ?


    • NCBBC says:

      CO2 is life sustaining gas. It leads to greater agricultural yields, thus reducing the cost of food, thus the poor can have meals they can afford. It means too that the poor have some leftover from essential items like cheaper and more abundant food, to send their children to school.

      Marginal increased of CO2 in absolute terms will not have the slightest effect on the average temperature of the planet.

      Those who advocate the reduction of CO2 don’t care much for the poor. Its not surprising these eco-worshippers come from rich countries, and can galivant around the planet in luxury.


  29. JohnC says:

    I see the Manchester bombers brother has left the UK so he didn’t have to attend the inquiry. Well done UK police. How many other terrorist related comings and goings are you absolutely unaware of ?. And how many boat people have they lost track of now ?.

    But you WILL get arrested and 28 days in jail if you use the word baboon on facebook when talking about someone black.

    This is where wokeness leads.


    • taffman says:

      The nation needs a new Prime Minister. Unfortunately, the Tory MPs are woke liberals who put their job first.


    • Thatcherrevolutionary says:

      How the f does he manage to get a flight?

      Presumably to some 3rd world shithole……..


    • NCBBC says:

      They are too busy investigating the tens of thousands of rapes of White girls by the RoP.


  30. Zephir says:

    funny how they all have br i sh passpot innit bruv
    but manage to fly away at will to the shit holes they belong to


  31. pugnazious says:

    Is the BBC partly responsible for the murder of Sir David Amess?

    A Mail headline…

    ‘How Prevent became ‘political correctness’ battleground: Anti-terror strategy’s resources have been diverted to tackling far-right extremism since Jo Cox murder’

    The BBC and its Islamist allies, such as Warsi[a frequent and celebrated guest on the BBC] campaigned long and hard to neuter Prevent…either by stopping it altogether or by forcing it to divert resources into tackling ‘Far-Right’ extremism….which the BBC is keen to tell us is the biggest threat…not true.

    Maybe if those resources had been properly directed and targeted more upon the real threats, the Islamists, Sir David Amess would still be alive today.

    The BBC…the most dangerous organisation in Britain.


    • Guest Who says:

      Frank is on it in the BME.


      Why the government Prevent scheme is so difficult

      The government is facing a difficult dilemma over its controversial counter-extremism programme called Prevent. News that the suspect held in custody over the killing of MP Sir David Amess had earlier been referred to this scheme has reinforced calls for it to be overhauled and made “more robust”. What is the point, some argue, in referring people to this £40m a year programme – which aims to stop people becoming terrorists or supporting them – if they may then go on to commit murder?

      But others argue that hardening it up with more involvement of police and MI5 officers will simply scare away the very people who currently agree to take part in its voluntary de-radicalisation course, the Channel scheme. Hugo Macpherson, who has worked in the prevention of terrorism in the UK and Europe for 13 years, says: “It is really important that it remains independent from law enforcement, that it operates in the pre-criminal space.”

      Read full article >

      Frank Gardner
      Security correspondent


      Wibble. All may say.


      • dhunter says:

        “What is the point, some argue, in referring people to this £40m a year programme – which aims to stop people becoming terrorists or supporting them – if they may then go on to commit murder?” – exactly, a waste of time & resources – time to give up on these nutters, they may say they change but I doubt it.


  32. pugnazious says:

    The BBC keeps warning us of the threat to democracy from a few tweets and comments on Facebook that they don’t like.

    Then there’s a government that, having already imposed the most draconian, illiberal and ruinous lockdowns upon us [with more in the pipeline], is preparing to impose the most onerous and ruinous green policies upon us at eye-watering and painful cost.

    All it seems done with no discussion, no debate, none of that famed democracy. We have a government that is ever more soviet by the day, an Opposition that merely exists to rubberstamp the dictatorship and a media that, far from holding power to account, not only goes along with the coup but actually cheerleads for more coercive measures….no questions about where the money comes from…far from it…the BBC is always, always suggesting the real problem is not enough money is being spent…and of course there is no questioning the imposition itself….no outrage here about ‘threats to democracy’ from a government drunk on its own power with a supine opposition and media.

    Lockdowns to ‘save the NHS’ and soon lockdowns to ‘save the planet’….rationing your food, your driving, your flying, your life.

    Any difference between this and 1917 or 1933 as a new regime, a new way of thinking, a new way of life is imposed upon the country without any opposition at all….the public forced to serve the new religions by a small cabal of crooks and charlattans?

    Little Boris is turning into Little Hitler before our eyes and Tim Davis is the new Goebbels, the BBC the State mouthpiece pumping out the government propaganda day after day.


  33. tomo says:

    Mostly peaceful etc.


  34. vlad says:

    The most popular President in the history of the Universe, yet whole stadium-fulls are chanting Let’s Go Brandon, or the less genteel F*** Joe Biden.

    Is the BBC reporting this popular outpouring? Of course not, just as it never reported the huge crowds at Trump rallies.

    A rap version has even hit no.1 on iTunes. Come on Beeb, you love gettin’ down with the kids, join the party, dudes.

    Sky Aus is reporting it.


  35. vlad says:

    Meanwhile, the BBC proudly announces that a Transgender official is sworn in as four-star admiral (US).

    Great, that’ll strike fear in the hearts of the Chinese, Iranians, Russians et al, who are already trembling at the LGBTQIA2S+ being targeted for recruitment in the woke military, and the Critical Race Theory being promoted by the useless General Milley who’s trying to understand his ‘white rage’.

    Thanks Joe, another fine mess.



    • BigBrotherCorporation says:

      Vlad, I don’t know about the ‘Chinese, Iranians, Russian et al.’, but looking at the picture there on the BBC he/she/shme(?) utterly terrifies me!

      I think it’s an individual of such clear mental instability being placed in charge of a fleet of warships which is most worrying.

      It has all been done before though, this article doesn’t dwell on his ‘eccentricities’ too much, but this British admiral infamous for wearing skirts, makeup, and pearl earrings:


  36. Zephir says:

    Well done wearing your wifes knickers, meanwhile:


    By the time you find out a SEAL team has hit you, they’re already gone. It takes a special kind of person to qualify for this role, and if you do, you’d better be ready to prove it with your smarts, strength and willingness to march head-on into impossible situations. Because your team is the one they’re going to call in for last-ditch reconnaissance missions and operations that “never happened.” One day you’ll be swimming out of a torpedo tube, and the next day you could be dropping into enemy territory out of a helicopter. It takes intense courage to be a Navy SEAL, and that’s what makes them the best of the best. If you have what it takes, then the Navy has a place for you among the ranks of the elite.

    Established by President John F. Kennedy in 1962, the Navy SEALs are a nimble, elite maritime military force suited for all aspects of unconventional warfare. In this role, you will provide immediate military relief in crises around the world. Your duties as a SEAL may include, but are not limited to:

    Conducting insertions and extractions by sea, air or land to accomplish covert, Special Warfare/Special Operations missions
    Capturing high-value enemy personnel and terrorists around the world
    Collecting information and intelligence through special reconnaissance missions
    Carrying out small-unit, direct-action missions against military targets
    Performing underwater reconnaissance and the demolition of natural or man-made obstacles prior to amphibious landings

    After the initial 7-9 week Recruit Training Command (also known as Boot Camp), this intensive training is designed to push you to your physical and mental limits. If you’re up to the task, you’ll emerge in incredible physical shape and possess the necessary confidence, determination and teamwork to succeed in any combat environment.

    SEAL training has been described as brutal, preparing you for the extreme physical and mental challenges of SEAL missions. Training consists of:

    12+ months of initial training that includes Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL BUD/S School, Parachute Jump School and SEAL Qualification Training (SQT)
    18 months of pre-deployment training and intensive specialized training

    Find out more about SEAL Training.

    Promotion opportunities are regularly available but competitive and based on performance.

    For those with further leadership aspirations and a college degree, Navy SEAL Officer roles are available, providing the opportunity to lead and train others.

    Post-Service Opportunities

    It’s also important to note that specialized training received and work experience gained in the course of service can lead to valuable credentialing and occupational opportunities in related fields.


  37. Zephir says:

    Which may include, but not limited to putting on womens clothing and lipstick and staggering around in size 12 stilleto shoes


  38. Up2snuff says:

    TOADY Watch #1 – carefully ignoring the evidence #1

    The NHS is screaming for Covid restrictions in England. “We want compulsory masks. We want compulsory masks!” chant NHS bosses. They have been proven not to work in containing Covid but NHS bosses are no good at checking statistical evidence, just spending taxpayers money while demanding to ‘be saved’ for the third winter in a row.

    The BBC are very happy to pass on the message from BBC bosses.

    I predict this one will run and run every winter now. It’s a strange thing but since face-masks have not been required in England, Covid infections have fallen and they have also increased. Pretty much just like last winter, when masks were required, infections increased and infections declined. Same with vaccinations, too. Vaccinations increase, Covid infections increase …. and decline. Not only do NHS Chiefs not know the correct figure for Covid patients under their care (7,000, not 6,000 as quoted …. but that could also be a BBC error) they obviously also do not know the death rates from Covid either. They have fallen dramatically …. on some days but increased on others. Pay attention, people!

    Perhaps what we really need is some Global Warming to chase the cold germs away?


    • Guest Who says:

      Lead in the BME too.

      Oh, and…

      ‘Health leader’ is nicely vague.


    • Fedup2 says:

      I heard big or Hugh pYm with that happy project fear twang in his voice which hasn’t been there for a while .

      Let’s repeat last year – tearful nurses on hours of overtime and 20% discounts – mandatory clapping – cameras in the ITU to frighten us into compliance – plod drones filming people outdoors walking their dogs – sigh – the good old days …


  39. Zephir says:

    How many months, years will it take for the country to recognise that there is a new disease that kills generally fat or elderly people and is acceptable as part of life, and gp surgeries to start doing what they are paid to do and stop acting as if the black death had come back ( they still go to petrol stations and supermarkets for some strange reason but try and approach them and what happens? get back get back dont touch anything)

    The general lack of customer service for services we pay for with anything nowadays has been given a wonderful opportunity for doing f@ck all how many times has anyone called a bank or anyone else and got the “due to Covid” recorded message ?

    A dream come true for local government

    And far be it for me to generalise but it seems the lefty bookshops and crystal shops are the only ones that INSIST you wear masks and also INSIST you sanitise your hands EVEN IF YOU WEAR GLOVES


  40. Fedup2 says:

    I was minding my business having breakfast (like a pauper not a king ) and listening to a BBC droid on ‘Today’ called Justin Rowlatt .
    He made me laugh out loud – he is some sort of environment type telling us that our carbon dioxide output is going to affect the planet for thousand of years ….

    Ha ha – remember that when your taxes are put up in the name of a false since in what has become a false time ….


  41. Dover Sentry says:

    Our BBC have two anti-Trump features on the front page of their news website.
    Their hatred of him even after a year is so weird…
    I think our BBC are scared that he might win again.




  42. Guest Who says:

    Bless. Just… bless.

    “We were impressed by your resume, but you’re not a cultural fit.”

    What does being a ‘cultural fit’ actually mean?



  43. Zephir says:

    Black and if you dont get the job..riot


  44. Peter Sausages says:

    I am looking forward to White History Month, and is it now the law that every advert has to have a Black Person on it?


  45. Fedup2 says:

    The Today programme has announced that the government of the UK has been transferred to the Green NHS Party .

    The Party is to be led by mr boris nutnut

    You will be told what you are required to do in due course .

    A state of emergency has been declared . All diversity managers have been mobilised .


  46. harry142857 says:

    As we are nearing the end of Black History Month, can anyone guide me towards the following BBC programmes.

    Top 10 greatest black inventions.
    Top 10 cities built by blacks.
    Top 10 modes of transport invented by blacks.
    Top 10 classical compositions by blacks.
    Top 10 masterpieces by black painters.
    Top 10 medical breakthroughs by black scientists.


  47. Zephir says:

    There maybe a fine balancing act to be considered, the bbc and others promote black people over and and above their demographic.

    If I was a young black person in the UK then, maybe I would like to see my culture or colour represented,

    The bass player in my band in the 70s was regularly arrested and taken miles to the furthest police station for no reason other than he was black, then had to walk home, we have to accept this happened

    but, there is over compensation what happened to my father or mother with racist abuserunning a pub in Argyll does not necessarily colour my opinion of scots in general

    Their choice of sausage and pie content is another matter


  48. Fedup2 says:

    I was comforted to hear that the majority of the big co2 producing countries are not bothering with the Glasgow thingy and thankfully it will fail .

    So no China – India – Russia – Brazil – come on guys – find another reason not to go . It’s Glasgow – it’s dangerous and cold – stay home … make Greta and her disciples cry . …

    …the spin to make it seem a success is gonna be something …


    • Doublethinker says:

      Even for those who are convinced of anthropological warming caused by the CO2 they must surely have a little scintilla of doubt about the point of COP. basically the producers of over half of the carbon dioxide emissions ain’t turning up. But the UK will show moral leadership and in doing so pauperise itself and the global CO2 emissions will continue to increase at much the same rate as before. Why are we doing this to ourselves.
      Anyway if the warmists want the most cost effective programme to save the world they should knit us all pullovers so we can turn the heating down three or four degrees. I reckon that for an outlay of less than £200 million , including the cost of needles, the whole country could be so equipped and CO2 emissions would reduce by half. No Evs , no heat pumps , no wind turbines , no anything, just good old pullovers!


  49. Dover Sentry says:

    Will there be Climate-change-aphobia legislation?

    Our BBC would certainly be a driving force behind it.


  50. Up2snuff says:

    TOADY Watch #2 – carefully ignoring the evidence #2

    Fossil fuels is bad, wickid, innit! And we (well, the rest of the world is) are going to burn more of them. Woe, woe and thrice woe, cry the BBC. “We will not keep Number Five alive (remember him?) or even ‘1.5’ from the Gay Paree alive.”

    Here’s a thought for you, BBC: why has Covid-19 thrived during the past year of autumn winter spring and summer and now autumn again in the Northern Hemisphere as well as during the same seasons but in the Southern Hemisphere? Could it be due to the fact that Global Warming, despite predictions that it is right here, right now, in fact it has just not turned up at all? Look at the evidence of your own thermometers and thermostats, not at the CET figures which Harrabin, McGrath and Shukman, will be adjusting to show the world has boiled over.