Author Archives: Alan

A couple of days ago ….Mickey Clark on Wake up to Money…‘We should remember how quick we were to forget just how big our economy is and that other countries will always want to trade with us.’

Yeah…funny how quick the BBC was to forget that….seems they’ve forgotten it all over again….

Another week and more doom and gloom from the BBC as it continues to gleefully report Brexit disaster just around the corner…

“You can either wage Jihad by the tongue and by the mouth – that is ideological jihad – or by the hand and the sword. Those are the official categories of jihad.”  BBC

Throughout the day the BBC has been referring to the Jihadist who murdered 84 men, women and children in Nice as an Islamic State ‘Soldier’.  As Victoria Derbyshire told us that British soldiers in Afghanistan whose actions against the Taliban resulted in the accidental death of civilians were ‘murderers’ I suppose it is only fair that an ISIS murderer is defined as a brave and honourable ‘soldier’.

However the BBC, presumably after many complaints, is now referring to the Muslim terrorist as a ‘follower’ of the Islamic State….

So-called Islamic State claimed one of its followers carried out the attack.

Whether a ‘soldier’ or a ‘follower’ the BBC is sure he had mental health issues or that his radicalisation was the result of alienation, discrimination and disaffection and all that….odd that so many white, non-Muslim people, in exactly the same situation don’t go on a ‘crusade’…..just what is it that makes so many Muslims join the Islamic State?  Who knows eh?  Another BBC ‘mystery’.

Once again France must contemplate an attack on its people, but what was the motivation and why was it not stopped?

Immigration has a long history here, integration does not.

There are large populations from France’s former colonies, places like Tunisia.

Some feel their religious beliefs are trampled by a secularism that is fiercely guarded. Some see little hope in a nation which denies them a chance of success.

The forgotten suburbs that house large numbers of immigrants have erupted into protest and violence in previous years.

They are policed by tough units that fail to reflect the communities they control. It is an unhappy mix that can open the way for a minority to be radicalised and moved to violent action.

One moment these terrorists aren’t real Muslim, they are mentally unstable, they are criminals looking for adventure and excitement, they are drunkards, drug takers and ignorant of the beauty of Islam’s true teachings and most of all, they are a very small minority, the vast, vast majority of genuine Muslims don’t agree with their beliefs nor their actions.

Then conversely we are told they are all Muslims and they really want to be free to practise their religion but are prevented from doing so by a fascist secular state which tramples on their beliefs, that whole communities are disaffected not just a tiny minority and they are ready to join ISIS, that they are the victims of a France that ignores and hates them.

Some might think it a shame that the BBC, as always, peddles exactly the same message that the terrorist recruiters do…it’s not as if the BBC doesn’t know this is the recruiter’s message as they report it here….

Imene Ouissi, a 22-year-old student who volunteers for a women’s group in the town of Vallauris, west of Nice, noticed in 2012 that local youths were becoming fascinated by slick recruitment videos produced by Islamic State.

‘You will never succeed here’

At the same time, self-styled preachers emerged with a message targeted at disaffected Muslim youths. Playing on widespread feelings of resentment about poverty and discrimination, they told their audience that they would always be treated as foreigners in France.

In Vallauris, one charismatic figure pitched up in a high-rise housing estate in 2010. People came from all over the region to hear him preach every Friday, until, after three years, the authorities dismantled his makeshift mosque.

“What he said really shook me,” Imene Ouissi recalls. “I had gone there because everyone was talking about it. He spoke the language of the kids, so they identified with him. His message was: you must not stay in a land of villains, you will never succeed here. You must go to a Muslim country.”

The BBC even dismantle its own narative that the terrorist is a petty criminal and therefore not a proper Muslim…here they report crime is preached as a way of attacking the Infidel…much as white, non-Muslim girls in the UK were seen a ‘white trash’ that could be used and abused without Allah being angry, it’s not ‘immoral’ to abuse non-Muslims…..Yazidi girls as well of course….

Kamel, a youth worker in the Nice area, says one of the reasons for the recent success of the Salafist ideology that has inspired jihad, is that it provides a ready and easy way of justifying the actions of petty criminals.

“The kids are told that they are in a land of unbelievers, so when they steal and attack people it is justifiable; the petty criminal is turned into a holy warrior, and is promised status, sexual gratification and eternal life.”

The BBC’s narrative is extremely one-sided and narrow, deliberately so.  They have chosen a particular line about discrimination and a religion ‘trampled’ upon by a brutal secular state because that suits their argument that Muslims, even the terrorists themselves, are always victims and cannot be blamed for their actions.  Certainly many immigrants are poor, though so are many indigenous French, but is that a result of discrimination or just the usual factors that are the inevitable result of being immigrants as in the UK where Muslims from certain Muslim areas of the world are less successful due to their own habit of ghettoising themselves and refusing to learn the language and engage with the full society?  Islam is of course completely incompatible with Western society but that isn’t the fault of the Western societies which is the line the BBC and the Jihadists promote.  The BBC blames the West for not totally changing its own culture and values to suit the Muslims. Why should the West change its values to suit those whose values are completely at odds with the West’s?  They choose to come here, they fit in.  They choose not to.

What it reveals is the unacknowledged creation of a nation within a nation, with its own geography, its own values and its own very separate future….Britain is nurturing communities with a complete set of alternate values.

Some of my journalist friends imagine that, with time, the Muslims will grow out of it.  They won’t….they really don’t want to adopt much of our decadent way of life.

Many of our elite political and media classes simply refuse to acknowledge the truth.

The BBC could acknowledge for a start that most Jihadists are in fact well educated and often come from good backgrounds and have jobs and are not discirminated against.  The BBC could also acknowledge that they are ‘integrated’ to a large degree and that there are many, many successful Muslims in France.  Why does the BBC not present that picture of France rather than the highly negative one that is the favoured one of the Islamists both violent and non-violent?  Why does the BBC not acknowledge that many, if not most, ‘Jihadists’ come from well-to-do backgrounds, are educated and are ‘integrated’ to a large extent?  Why does the BBC not acknowledge that the one defining characteristic of all Jihadis is that they are Muslim?  That is the really significant factor in radicalisation.

They tell us that the Nice killer was ‘suddenly radicalised’ over a very short period.  No, he wasn’t.  He has been fed Muslim beliefs and teachings all his life, they are the background noise to his life, the ever-present guide, however subconscious and ethereal, that is with him all the time.  They inform his thoughts and beliefs and values even if unconsciously.  Islam primed him for radicalisation, he identitifies strongly with Islam even if he doesn’t practise it devoutly.  On top of that is the narrative that the BBC and its ilk feeds him [see above], that he is a victim of discrimination, that Islam is under attack, that he should be able to practise his religion without restraint, that as a Muslim he will never be accepted as French [rather than the real narrative and reason for being ‘alienated’…. that many Muslims reject French beliefs and culture and so often isolate themselves] and that his only way out of his situation is to fight against the oppressor.

The Jihadi recruiters feed him exactly the same narrative and he either joins the group or his resentment festers and he becomes a malcontent back home who becomes ever more devout as  a Muslim and adopts the dress and language of a ‘believer’ as a political act of defiance…as so many Muslims did on 9/11…as was Bin Laden’s aim, 9/11 being his call to arms for Muslims across the world to unite and fight wherever they lived.  The newly devout believer becomes an activist and political actor using the media, the law and political pressure to spread the influence of Islam….the Jihad of the pen and word which is even more insidious and effective than the bomb…the two combined are devastating in their effectiveness in pressuring politicians scared of appearing ‘Islamophobic’ or racist into granting huge concessions to the Islamists….do you think Warsi would have become Chair of the Tory Party if she’d been a Sikh?

‘One lesson well understood in both Stalin’s Russia and Nazi Germany was that propaganda is most effective when it is backed by terror’

The Jihad of the tongue and mouth, the pen and the word, are in the end the most dangerous….you can see how the Muslim Brotherhood’s Tariq Ramadan has created a powerful and influential ‘moderate’ persona that he has invented to reassure the media and politicians that he is a genuine reformer of Islam and that Islam can indeed be reformed, that we can have a ‘European’ Islam that is compatible with secular, liberal, progressive Western states….and yet anyone who takes the trouble to really find out what he actually thinks and what Islam really means would know that that image of himself that he has created is a total fiction, a mask designed to win over those who have the power to promote Islam and to protect it, unwittingly, until it is powerful and strong enough to take over.

Let’s be clear…Islam cannot be ‘reformed’.  There is only one ‘Islam’, one mosque, one faith, one God…hence the one finger that ISIS wags at us, hence the MCB insists that Ahmadis are not Muslim, hence Shias are not ‘Muslim’.  So when the BBC, and Nicky Campbell, insists that Islam is a faith with many different versions that’s simply not true.  Islam, the Koran, is unchangeable, one faith, one interpretation.  Only Allah can alter a single word of the Koran.  And importantly Muhammed was the Seal of the Prophets, the last prophet, there can be no more…hence there can be no more Korans, no more revelations, no changes, no reforms…unless Allah himself graces us with his presence here on earth and rewrites the Koran.

All that may seem a touch esoteric but it’s vital to understand what’s going on, what is really true and what is so much smoke and mirrors set up to deceive and fool us.

The motivations of the Muslim jihadists?  It’s not hard really is it?  A lifetime immersed in Islamic propaganda, a narrative about Islam under attack by the West, a narrative of Muslims discriminated against in the West and a narrative that the answer is more Islam, that the West must Islamise itself to make Muslims feel more at home and that Muslims must become more devout, more separate from their Western, immoral, neighbours.

In other words the terrorists get what they want either way….they force Islam upon the West by force of arms and conquest or, more likely, they force the West to adopt ever-more Islam friendly policies and cultures in order not to alienate their rapidly growing Muslim populations…so more Islam either way.  You can hear commentators and polticians suggest this every day on the BBC……We must do more to accomodate Muslim beliefs or Muslims will get angry and become radicalised.

They could of course just stand up for their own values and culture and say if Muslims want to live in a Muslim country go and do that….there are many to choose from.  Odd though how so many Muslims would be horrified to actually live in a Muslim country….that should tell those politicians and media collaborators all they need to know about Islam and its effect upon society, industry, science, the arts and free society.

Why bother reforming Islam?  That’s theologically impossible and impossible from a practical point of view…just look at the IRA….it’s been ‘reformed’ many times…and yet the bombs still go off.

Muslims who genuinely want to ‘reform’ should just adopt Christianity and be done with it.

Islam is not compatible with the West and it’s about time the BBC stopped pretending it is and stopped pushing the idea that all the West has to do is accept that Islam is compatible with it and will not compromise the liberal, democratic society that values free speech, free thought and individual identity.  That’s a complete fiction that will only result in mini but ever-growing ‘Pakistans’ within Western states and the inevitable trouble that then arises.

France’s security chief had issued a chilling warning just months before the Nice attack which killed at least 84 people, saying another terrorist incident could plunge France into a bloody civil war.

Patrick Calvar, the head of the General Directorate for Internal Security (DGSI) – France’s equivalent of MI5 – said growing tensions between “the extreme right and the Muslim world” were close to breaking point, and that a confrontation between the two appeared inevitable.

Listening to much of the BBC’s reporting on the attack in Nice you may have noticed a peculiar omission as they seek to investigate the attack, the methods used and the motivation…..

Before Nice, Palestinian terrorists used cars as lethal weapon

The BBC for some reason fails to mention that vehicles being used to attack pedestrians, Jews,  is a favoured method used by Palestinians.  Does the BBC not want to have comparisons made between their ‘heroic’ Islamist friends in Hamas and the ‘nasty’ Islamists of ISIS?

The BBC is otherwise pretty quick to ‘analyse’ the situation bringing us conclusive facts about the reasons for the terrorist’s radicalisation, his motivation and who to blame for it all.  The BBC’s very slick and practised emergency operation moved into gear as they sought to rapidly control the narrative and downplay the role Islam plays in this attack.

Straight-off the BBC thought that the mental health of the attacker may have played its part, an excuse the BBC always deploys when Islamists attack….this is the BBC that absolutely refused to mention that the killer of Jo Cox had well documented mental health issues and had sought help the night before he attacked Jo Cox.  The BBC wanted to use Jo Cox’s death to attack the Leave campaign by blaming their policies on immigration for generating hate, hence it dosn’t want to muddy the waters and provide an ‘excuse’ for the killer of Jo Cox and a get-out for Leave.  Clearly the BBC uses mental health as a weapon in its arsenal but one only used in the defence of their favoured terrorists.

Next up we had the standard BBC rhetoric….Nicky Campbell (who knows so much about Islam thanks to his guide and mentor the comical Mo Ansar) told us that this was all about alienation not religion and that was essentially the narrative throughout the day as Paul Rogers, a professor of peace studies no less (…from Bradford), told us this had definitely nothing to do with Islam and that we must surrender to the Islamists if we want to live in peace….and naturally we must fight anti-Muslim bigotry which can only lead to more Muslim alienation and disaffection.

Islam is absolutely not a threat to the West.  No, really.

Here’s a couple of questions someone might raise in the good professor’s tutorials….

Why is it that only Muslims get radicalised?

and..

Why is France so much under attack when it didn’t invade Iraq and in fact voted against the invasion?  Isn’t Iraq the cause of all this radicalisation?

The one question the BBC does have an answer for is is ‘who is to blame?‘  Naturally the killer is the victim here….the French government has failed to make him feel loved and at home in France…never mind he had a job, a wife (ex) and three kids…and he’d been allowed to come to France from Tunisia.  Might then seem a tad ungrateful to respond to that by going out and murdering so many French citizens on Bastille Day.

Terrorism is the French government’s fault.  The answer?  More Islam.  Muslims must be allowed to practise their religion freely and to its full extent in order to help them integrate.  Integrate by being totally separate and ghettoised.  Yes I see how that could work.

Perhaps the real problem is the fact that France allowed in so many immigants from North Africa without the jobs or social structure that could accomodate them…..just how do you accomodate people who have an entirely different culture, faith and political and social outlook on life?

That’s a question the BBC dodges and absolutely refuses to deal with seriously…a question that should be on everyone’s lips as millions of Muslims flood into Europe, thanks in large part due to the unilateral actions of Merkel…and with Turkey on the brink how many more will head this way?

Ironically it was on the World at One with the über wet, pro-Islam liberal Mark Mardell that we got a glimpse of what we should really be talking about as a French Republican was allowed to speak truth to power (26 mins 30 secs)..but is anyone listening?  This is a real war…we must understand who is the enemy and how to fight it…and immigration is the problem which produced millions of people who feel ‘not properly treated and want revenge’.  [But are they justified in feeling that way?]  He says we must control the borders. [Racist].  The horrors we see in the Middle East will come here due to immigration of people who bring their problems with them.

Note also that he says intelligence cooperation is a joke in the EU [which we already knew….so much for Remain’s argument].  There is a huge problem with coordination of information.

Schengen doesn’t work…we have a free circulation of terrorists due to EU immigration policies.

Bet Mardell was kicking himself for not having the chance to edit that one down to some anodyne soundbites about a ‘senseless tragedy’.

The BBC is part of the problem.

Operation ‘Get Boris’, a long term BBC mission, moved into top gear yesterday as the state broadcaster did its level best to undermine and vilify our new Foreign Secretary around the world at a time when it should be fairly apparent that such toxic rhetoric is the last thing this country needs as it tries to break away from the EU straitjacket and heads out to do business with the whole world.  It seems the BBC, our national broadcaster, the ‘gold standard’ for others to follow, puts its own politics first rather than the interests of the country.

The BBC is still trying to label Boris as a racist for his Sun column in which he mentioned Obama.  We’ve already looked at that in depth but it does no harm to keep countering the BBC’s continuous lies about this subject.  Boris was merely listing the reasons put forward by others for Obama possibly not wanting a ‘special relationship’ with Britain…and the comment about his Kenyan roots came from the Guardian….Could Obama’s dual colonial heritage spell the end of the special relationship?…...and indeed the BBC itself…..’His meteoric rise to political fame has propelled the name Barack Obama onto the lips of millions of Kenyans.  He has Kenyan blood coursing through his veins.’

I guess if you’re a Lefty mentioning Obama’s race is ‘celebrating diversity’ whereas if you’re a Righty it’s because you’re a fascist xenophobe.

And as the BBC lists all of Boris’ supposed faux pas they don’t mention one that I’m pretty certain they absolutely hate as he lays into Islam…the BBC can’t have you knowing that not everyone panders to the Islamist terrorists as does the BBC…..

To any non-Muslim reader of the Koran, Islamophobia – fear of Islam – seems a natural reaction, and, indeed, exactly what that text is intended to provoke. Judged purely on its scripture – to say nothing of what is preached in the mosques – it is the most viciously sectarian of all religions in its heartlessness towards unbelievers. As the killer of Theo Van Gogh told his victim’s mother this week in a Dutch courtroom, he could not care for her, could not sympathise, because she was not a Muslim.

The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s medieval ass?

Is it not ironic that the Turkish army, in a Muslim country, knows better how to deal with Islamists who seek to destroy their own country than do Western politicians and BBC media types who supposedly are defenders of the liberal faith?

Endless BBC bias on display these days….fish in a barrrel or a turkey shoot?  The floor’s yours……..

After the BBC’s faux outrage at the killing of Jo Cox and its attempts to exploit her death by linking her murder to the Brexit campaign telling us that Leave’s rhetoric had whipped up a storm of hatred it seems odd that the BBC is now so silent about this…from the Telegraph…

Another Islamist attack in France and immediately you have the problem spelt out to you by those in charge….the problem is their own refusal to accept what the problem is…..

‘A tragic paradox’

Dylan Noble, white male, unarmed, shot by US police.  The BBC doesn’t seem to have reported it at all…it’s on every other news outlet as the police video is released…just not on the BBC.  The shooting is as controversial as any of the shootings of black men that the BBC fills the airwaves with.  The difference of course is that the victim is white and therefore doesn’t provide any evidence that the BBC looks for to ‘prove’ its accusation that white police officers are racist….and in fact goes a long way to proving that the problem is not racism but police tactics and response training.

Here’s the video…it is graphic and shows the shooting but it illustrates perfectly the way US police can respond to a threat situation…..

Curiously on Tuesday 5Live was giving much airtime to the girlfriend of a black man shot by police, Philando Castile, who videoed the immediate aftermath of his shooting…but not the actual shooting.

What is interesting is that the BBC did not say anything about ‘white police officers’ this time and only referred to this as a case where the problem is the way the police responded.  Why might the BBC be so coy when normally they are desperate, absolutely desperate, to portray every shooting as a racist murder?  Anyone listening to that report wouldn’t know because what the BBC fails to mention is that the police officer who shot Philando Castile was Chinese American and not white. Here we have one case where race isn’t mentioned and another where a white man being gunned down by police isn’t even reported as far as I can see.  The BBC being very economic with the truth when the truth dosn’t match its own prejudices.

We know that #Blacklivesmatter’ is a very problematic organisation, verging on terrorist as it encourages violence and cop killing, and you have to ask why the BBC has utterly failed to explore any of the issues raised around #BLM, the BBC preferring to take everything their spokesmen and women say at complete face value as credible and true.

Today I thought that might have changed…I should have known better.  BBC Trending, that rather extremist race hustling page on the BBC news site, brought us this…

The black cop who has a problem with ‘Black Lives Matter’

A promising bit of actual investigation you might think…you’d be wrong….it’s just an immediate BBC counter to something they don’t like…someone, a black cop, raising doubts about the truth of the #BLM’s claims.  The BBC try to pick it apart and rubbish everything he said.

The BBC tell us that the evidence shows that Blacks are more likely to be shot than whites given all the circumstances…but that’s not true…we’ve already looked at some of the stats and the New York Times just published a study that demonstrates that it isn’t true and at least provides evidence that should make the BBC take a far more measured and nuanced stance when reporting the apparent mass genocide of blacks by white cops that is the narrative the BBC prefers……

The result contradicts the image of police shootings that many Americans hold after the killings (some captured on video) of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo.; Tamir Rice in Cleveland; Walter Scott in South Carolina; Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, La.; and Philando Castile in Minnesota.

In shootings in 10 cities involving officers, officers were more likely to fire their weapons without having first been attacked when the suspects were white. Black and white civilians involved in police shootings were equally likely to have been carrying a weapon. Both results undercut the idea of racial bias in police use of lethal force.

A brick is sent flying through the window of the challenger to Corbyn’s marxist mob-rule and what?  Who’s to blame, why’d it happen?  Is it of any importance?

The BBC has decided that nobody knows who chucked the brick nor why.  Not a clue.  If it had been through the window of a Polish shop the BBC would know exactly who to blame, and why. Peter Allen just dismissed it utterly….he told us that it was just one brick…it wasn’t important.  Can’t imagine him saying that is it had gone through a mosque window….unless it was an Ahmadi ‘mosque’ of course. [Note how the BBC reported the final chapter in the killing of the Ahmadi shopkeeper, Asad Shah, in Glasgow by a Sunni Muslim…it was a ‘religiously motivated’ attack…but not because the victim was an Ahmadi and therefore the victim of a hate crime, but because the killer thought the shopkeeper had insulted Islam…so the victim was in fact the wrongdoer here…the killer the real victim.  Good old BBC]

Trump is facing death threats, Farage had death threats, his family were threatened, Leave voters suffer a barrage of intense hate, abuse and threats, Angela Eagle and many Labour MPs are under virtual attack with yet more death threats and threats of rape…and the BBC plays all that down or ignores it as much as possible…..however say you’ve been looked at in the street when wearing a headscarf and you’re frontpage news on the BBC.  Just why is the BBC so intent on covering up the huge amount of threatened violence and abuse that is targeted at those on the Right and those who oppose Corbyn?  Why does Corbyn’s hard left Marxism get a free pass on the BBC?  Why does his support for terrorist organisations hardly merit a mention?

The BBC is quick to blame Brexit for a supposed rise in hate crimes against immigrants (though the police who get interviewed always suggest there may be a rise but it may just be more awareness and people prepared to report it…or people who have an interest in reporting it and claiming it as due to Brexit) but not so keen to link other violence to the Left’s rhetoric…such as the attacks on Trump and Farage and the killings of police officers in the US.

The BBC isn’t so keen to challenge the laughable rhetoric of the SNP and Len McCluskey as they demand that ‘democracy’ be respected….that’ll be the SNP who completely refuse to accept the ‘once in a lifetime’ independence vote and McCluskey who told us that if democracy didn’t deliver him what he wanted he would have his troops on the streets using other means to get his way….and is now telling us how the challenge to Corbyn, far from being democracy in action, is a ‘sordid little fix that is alien to our traditions’. Yeah a traditional brick through the window is so much more democratic and decisive than a show of hands.

Personally I find Corbyn deeply sinister.  The BBC can’t find a bad word to say about him, and his partners in crime.

The BBC likes to use a Chinese curse, ‘May you live in interesting times’, to describe the effects of the allegedly lamentable Brexit vote…personally I’d prefer another Chinese proverb….‘Out of chaos comes opportunity’.

So far not much chaos other than in the Labour Party (if it still exists)…looks like the Brexiteers are getting some prime, influential, jobs….and what to make of May and Hammond?  Both sceptics who, reluctantly?, plumped for Remain….are they now going to be more ‘onside’ with the Brexit camp?  Fallon is very pro-Europe but sidelined a bit out of the mainstream politics going to Defence whilst David Davis is the Brexit champion and Liam Fox international trade minister, Boris Foreign Minister….all three jobs closely tied to Brexit negotiations.  There is of course pro-Remain Amber Rudd as Home Secretary…so involved in police, security and immigration.  All in all seems fairly balanced so far.

The BBC’s main concern for Cameron is his ‘legacy’, how he will be remembered?…naturally he will be remembered for his ‘disastrous’ decision to grant the plebs a vote on the EU. [The wrong decision taken for the wrong reasons, a colossal misjudgement, the BBC told us yesterday, comparing Brexit to the disasters of Iraq and Suez] Peter Allen told us all his good work [LOL…can’t remember the BBC reporting much of that] has been ‘washed away’ by the vote which has destroyed his reputation as those ignorant plebs have wasted the opportunity…as Peter Allen said…‘and look what they did with that chance’…..laughing and sneering.

He also told us that the Leave voters didn’t vote for something only against…but that’s Allen’s, and the BBC’s, own negative narrative that wants to say there is no plan and Leave voters have no idea of what they want…what does Brexit mean? the BBC keeps asking, aiming to create confusion and chaos and ‘lose’ Brexit in a dizzying whirl of ifs and buts and whatabouterys….hoping to re-invent the meaning of ‘Brexit’ along the lines Remain wants.

Trouble is the vote was for something…controlling immigration and exiting the political, social, economic and judicial dominance of the EU, just as Norway has kept out of so much of that [ plus no free movement of course]….they want a free market with friendly relations and cooperation on things of mutual interest…such as travel, health and security.

Does there need to be a plan?  Not a detailed plan as the BBC and Remain insist…..how can there be a plan when it is so dependent on negotiations with the EU?  Any plan is just so much fodder for the media to generate as much news headlines about ‘crisis’ and failure as possible.  Any plan would be forensically gone over by the BBC and presented as a hopeless failure with endless problems and would be an utter waste of time as no ‘plan’ survives contact with the enemy…or reality.  The only plan needed is a general idea of what you want, such as trade deals and controlling immigration…it is only when the negotiations begin that any details can begin to crystallize along the lines of the possible when you hear what the other side really thinks and wants itself, and is prepared to give way on when not posturing, trash-talking, in the run-up to the ‘fight’ over negotiations.

The BBC has taken the Remain narrative all the way here, the Brexit vote was an unnecessary disaster that nobody really wanted, that there needs to be a detailed plan [that they can trash] and the SNP is justified in claiming it has the democratic mandate to stay in the EU when the reality is this was not a national or party political vote but a vote across Britain and it is irrelevant how any single part of Britain voted.

The BBC tells us that Britain is divided as never before….so in a general election when millions voted for several different parties Britain was somehow more united than in a vote in which 75% of the electorate voted and was split just two ways?  How is that  ‘more divided’ than ever?  Brexit didn’t give us Devolution…that was IRA terrorism, Scottish National Socialist anti-English bigotry and the Labour party.  Yet again, a very selective narrative, of a divided Britain is one used to attack Brexit.

We were also told that the Tories were in turmoil….and yet this was just the usual leadership election…one carried out within three weeks at a  time of intense pressure and political disruption.  May is in office and is setting about creating a new government at warp speed…hardly the mark of a Party in turmoil.  Again just a BBC narrative that suits its own agenda.

With that brief introduction to the midweek open thread I give ground…the floor’s all yours…….

A plea to the Tory Party….Please, please, please don’t release news of a highly significant and important nature at a time when the BBC’s main anchor on the radio is Adrian Chiles.  This is the podcast of his reaction and analysis on hearing Andrea Leadsom quit the leadership race……..

What’s that Adrian?  It’s so, sooo unfair that we don’t have a say in who is going to be PM….it’s just plain wrong that there will be no general election….gosh, where did you hear that?

Corbynista Jon Trickett says:

“It is crucial,  given the instability caused by the Brexit vote,  that the country has a democratically elected Prime Minister. I am now putting the whole of the party on a General Election footing. It is time for the Labour Party to unite and ensure the millions of people in the country left behind by the Tories’ failed economic policies, have the opportunity to elect a Labour government.”

Blimey mavis…have some more gripe water son.

Adrian’s teddy no doubt went in the corner as he was missing Sponge Bob Square pants coz old Leadsomwhatserface was interrupting his happy time….still we got plenty of gurgling analysis from him and a couple of baby sitters were allowed to give their two penneth worth…hardcore Remainer and Tory ‘Peter Mandelson’, Matthew Parris [Who Chiles thinks is a sound bloke…Really?], John Rentoul also told us we must have a general election and Rachel Sylvester  (who did the hatchet job on Leadsom) gave Leadsom a bit more of a spanking as Chiles burbled along in agreement.  Did seem like a bit of a BBC fanclub all saying very agreeable things.

What were the babyfaced Chiles’ thoughts?  Leadsom went purely because of the ‘motherhood’ comments…never mind that she had little support amongst Tory Party MP’s…she may or may not have won the support of the ‘grassroots’ but she wouldn’t get the support of the MP’s.  On a day when Labour’s Angela Eagle announced she was challenging Corbyn for leadership, who the ‘grassroots’ support whilst the MPs do not, you might have thought that that was a relevant comparison and a major reason why Leadsom ducked out of the race…..it would have been exactly the same situation for her, had she won, as Corbyn is in now. She said what we need now is a strong and well supported PM…which we wouldn’t have with her.   No such link from Chiles.

When a caller suggested there wasn’t good, informative media reporting during the referendum Chiles made a strong statement about the press coverage…it was brilliant and informative….Really?  Then all the chatter at the BBC about the evil right-wing press having fooled and beguiled the simple folk with their bigoted, racist lies is all wrong then?  Or is that only when it suits?

And what of that general election?  What about all that uncertainty?  Wouldn’t business just go into a tail spin?  What would happen?  Would Corbyn, the marxist wrecker, get in and destroy the economy?  Would there be another EU referendum, would the last one just be shelved?  Blimey Adrian, that’s a tough one.  Funny how the line ‘business hates uncertainty’ isn’t being wheeled out by those who want a general election.

So let’s be clear…the press were brilliant and informative, a general election would bring a positive creative chaos and it’s time for Adrian to have his nappy changed.

Night night all.