Author Archives: Alan

The Today show once again gave the prime-time slot to a Remainer, New Labour’s very own Little Finger, Peter Mandelson.  He came on and told the most blatant of lies, lies that have been exposed again and again…even on the BBC itself…and yet Justin Webb allowed him to make these totally false claims building a case for Parliament to take over the final decision on Brexit….the People were just too stupid and ignorant to make the decision for themselves the first time.  Odd that the BBC’s flagship current affairs programme and one of its top journos couldn’t see through Mandelson’s smoke and mirrors.

Lord Baelish is manipulative, untrustworthy, backstabbing, greedy, and possibly delusional.

 

Lord Mandelson on the other hand…..?

Mandelson told us that people were only now learning the harsh truth, ‘new facts that nobody could have known’, about what Brexit really meant and that one, the voters did not understand that we would have to pay a ‘divorce bill’ and two, that they did not understand we would have to leave the Single Market…..which is curious as Mandelson himself before the referendum told us that we would have to leave the Single Market…

Peter Mandelson, the former EU trade commissioner and ex-business secretary, said Schäuble’s comments “finally knocks on the head the leave campaign’s claim that we can leave the EU and still enjoy the benefits of the single market”.

And as for paying more money……it was always known we would pay a ‘divorce bill’ and that if we wanted preferential access to the Single Market we would have to pay……

Major intervention from Germany: UK would have to accept free movement and pay in to EU to continue to access trade https://t.co/jIAPPXM6hT

— George Osborne (@George_Osborne) June 10, 2016

‘Call me Peter’……coincidence?

You may have heard the BBC making sensationalist and alarmist claims that NHS performance had ‘crashed’.

No, no it hasn’t.  It’s nothing more than a statistical distortion.

Performance for treating patients in A&E have fallen below target…thus the BBC states the NHS has ‘crashed’.  Funny sort of crash when in fact the NHS is treating more patients than ever.  The problem is that there are more patients than ever and so the NHS, without expanding enormously, whilst struggling heroically to treat as many as possible, will fall below the percentage target figure whilst actually treating more patients.

The BBC making ‘facts’ show anything it wants them to show…as long as it’s bad for the Tories.

The BBC is always consistent….it doesn’t matter if it says one thing one day and the complete opposite the next or a combination of the two the day after, the narrative is the same, the message the same, the intent the same….to attack May and to attack Brexit.

During the election May wanted to run with Brexit as her main vote winner but this never happened…it was the economy, health, Corbyn ‘s vote buying student tuition fees porkies and of course security and terrorism that dominated the news.  The BBC however after the election declared that Brexit was history, or should be, the voters had spoken and had convincingly shown themselves to be against Brexit when patently that was not the case….remember for instance LibDem Sarah Olney in ‘Remain’ Richmond?  No, exactly…she’s gone.

It was the domestic agenda that dominated the election.

Curiously the BBC then flipped and decided that May was trying to stop us talking about Brexit and was going for the domestic agenda….incredible when the outcome of Brexit was vital for our economy!!!  This at a time when May was always in the news talking about Brexit.

Now we frequently hear that the domestic agenda is being ‘derailed by Brexit’ and that non-Brexit issues are being sidelined or forgotten as the government concentrates on Brexit.  This is of course a criticism from the BBC…never mind that we are constantly reminded by them that Brexit is the most important and significant event to happen to this country in many decades and that the whole future and prosperity of our economy rests upon a successful outcome…so you might think it worthwhile putting a little time and effort into getting it right.  On the other hand we are told the government has put no time into planning for Brexit and hasn’t a clue what it wants and is failing miserably at the negotiations.

The BBC picks and chooses the narrative it wants to give to us depending upon what it wants us to think…and regardless of the facts on the ground the news will always be twisted and distorted to make out that May is weak and has no control, we are failing in the negotiations and that Brexit will fail spectacularly and beggar us all or it will be sidelined by events and we will remain in the EU as the most sensible, reasonable and natural course of action.

It’s not news but propaganda.

Normally the BBC is the very compliant mouthpiece for the EU, whatever anyone from the EU says is reported with reverence and respect….the statements given weight, credibility and authority by the BBC and treated as if the only possible and reasonable way of looking at things.  Statements from the British government on the other hand are treated with contempt and disbelief.

This changed, at least for a while, on Tuesday when the Today programme[08:10] actually recognised and admitted for the first time that it was the EU that was being awkward, being intransigent and intent on delaying negotiations.  You may also note that the BBC now grudgingly admits that a deal is essentially done on how to treat EU citizens in Britain [and of course Brits abroad] the only hold up being the EU’s demand for more money…so once again it’s the EU blocking that deal when  we are told it is vital that t is done as soon as possible…and previously we were told it was the UK government that was the guilty party in slowing things up….the BBC reporting the EU’s ‘opinion’ as fact.  Why is the money linked to this aspect of the negotiations?  No reason, just blackmail by the EU.

Does one programme signify a change in outlook overall from the BBC or will it revert to type?  After all it has spent the last year talking down the British negotiating team and their efforts…so why change?

We hear that the Brexiteers described by the BBC as ‘Ultras’...which is a term normally reserved for hard-core, violent activists, and indeed we were told that ‘some might say Brexit is an extreme right-wing policy’.  The BBC also happy to call Leave voters racists, bigots, uneducated and poor.

Brexit is always too difficult and complicated for any government to accomplish, May is weak and about to be unseated at any moment, the government is weak and dysfunctional, Brexit will damage science, ground aircraft, give us all cancer, poison us with chlorinated chickens, allow in terrorists and criminals en masse, Britain is failing to meet expectations and demands of the EU [Britain’s fault of course], there is a lack of trust in the British negotiators, it is up to Britain to make the gesture, Britain has to show it understands how serious this is [lol], populism is stalking Europe #duetoBrexit and it is only the EU that has kept the peace, May is toast the government ‘knackered’, Britain’s negotiations with the EU are ‘laughable’, no progress, May is not delivering, Brexit just creates uncertainty [thus stop it], Brexit is not going well….and of course the ever present question…‘have you changed you mind about Brexit?’.…‘you’ being Leave voters of course….the BBC keeping up the idea that a second referendum can and should happen.

All tosh of course and so often the EU’s own narrative parroted by the BBC collaborators trying to undermine and discredit Brexit.

The reality is that it is the EU that is intransigent and intent on making the negotiations as difficult and long drawn out as possible in the hope that either we will just abandon Brexit or that should we actually leave we get the worse possible deal that acts as a warning to others who might be thinking along the same lines.  Curious that the BBC doesn’t make parallels between Brexit and Catalonia….would that raise the possibility that there are many other regions or states that would similarly like to go independent?….this would destroy the EU grand project…which would be a good thing as it might lead to what the EU should be…a loose co-operative of like-minded nation states that act together on certain issues but are not otherwise linked, either politically, financially nor culturally and no freedom of movement.    The EU Commission and Parliament should be abolished and an infrastructure for mutual negotiations put in their place without the idea of an overarching European government or state being imposed.

The EU State raises more problems than it solves, and indeed creates the very problems that it seeks to solve, such as radical nationalism or financial instability, whereas sovereign states acting together in mutual interest in a loose federation would be far more flexible and agreeable to all…except to the EU panjandrums who, unelected, rule over us now.

But that’s a view that you don’t hear on the BBC…we never get to hear what a future ruled by the EU superstate would be like…never mind that that is a significant issue for those who voted for Brexit.

The BBC, Knights of the Long Knives.  Very adept at political and character assassination or they try to be.  Their heavy handed attacks on Trump and Farage failed miserably despite massive resources thrown at them, Tommy Robinson succumbed to the intense scrutiny and extremely hostile BBC reporting about him and quit the EDL but has since seen the light and bounced back.  Andrea Leadsom might be added to the list as she was beaten up badly over her statement about having children.   May was savaged during the election and Corbyn given a free ride….undoubtedly costing the Tories many votes.  Not forgetting Jacob Rees-Mogg, the DUP, Bush, Sarah Palin and of course Thatcher.  Any theme to those chosen?  All right-wing.  But what about Boris?  Like Trump and Farage he has been subjected to massive amounts of highly negative, if not malign, comment from the BBC and yet he still keeps on rolling.  Just why does the BBC target Boris in particular?

Boris is enormously popular with much of the Public.  This is a problem for the good liberal folk at the BBC who want to stay in the EU and definitely don’t want Boris as PM should he throw his hat into the ring as and when.  So two major issues for the BBC, a very popular politician who supports Brexit and who may lead the Tory Party to another stomping election victory….the BBC not wanting either of those things to happen they see Boris as a huge threat to their hegemony and liberal elitist club.

Consider how the BBC reports Hammond and Rudd.  Hammond has consistently tried to hijack the Brexit process in order to ensure we get the softest of Brexits, in other words no Brexit at all in effect.  He has made statements that go against government policy claiming we need to have the longest transition period possible which he knows would morph gradually into a permanent state of pseudo-non-membership of the EU, he lobbies for a Brexit that is about jobs and the economy, in other words stay in the Single Market, Customs Union and thus keep freedom of movement and rule by the ECJ…ie…stay in the EU, when he knows that the referendum was not won on the jobs and economy platform…it was about sovereignty and immigration, and he has refused to provide money to fund the necessary infrastructure to prepare for a ‘no deal’…or indeed for a Britain which wants to protect its own borders as it leaves the EU.  Then here is Amber Rudd who has campaigned vociferously for a soft Brexit and who just days ago said that a ‘no deal’ was ‘unthinkable’.

So both Hammond and Rudd, two very senior cabinet members, have come out in the Press against a key negotiating lever with the EU and May’s official policy…‘no deal is better than a bad deal’…if you aren’t prepared for a ‘no deal’ you are essentially then at the EU’s mercy with little leverage to make them compromise.

Hammond and Rudd have thrown a huge spanner in the works and yet hardly a peep out of the BBC, no shocked headlines, no claims that they have stabbed May in the back, no claims they are undermining May, no claims they are manoeuvring for the leadership, no legions of commentators wheeled in to heap abuse upon them for their shameless politicking.  Hammond and Rudd of course want to stay in the EU so why would the BBC criticise them?

How different is the BBC approach to Boris.

Boris as Foreign Secretary has a legitimate interest in Brexit negotiations and as the lead Brexit cheerleader we were told by the Remainders that he must now bear responsibility for the outcome of Brexit.  Odd then that when he speaks out, takes that responsibility, he gets  shouted down and loudly abused for having the temerity to do so….and the BBC is the chief cheerleader attacking him.

BBCers constantly asked why he hadn’t been sacked (and of course keep asking when May is going), we hear he’s disingenuous, a clever idiot, an egotist, lazy, self-centred and not fit or competent for Office, that he’s a populist with simple solutions but no positive vision for the Country or Party, a divisive, disloyal figure making life impossible for May, odd, difficult, eccentric, an international joke, self-indulgent and only thinking about himself when important world events are happening, an irresponsible revolutionary who is out of control [and should be sacked], that he’s undermining May, stabbing her in the back, he’s not interested in Brexit [a piece of misinformation that he said he only went with Brexit to annoy Cameron was given a lot of credence in passing by the BBC] and is only really positioning himself for the leadership…hmmm…as most Tory MP’s are Remainders how would that work?  Kuenssberg spent most of her time filing reports that he was intent on the leadership and Brexit was the means to that end…she later admitted that this ‘fact’ was based upon ‘vicious rumours at Westminster’…in other words poison dripped from his enemies….Kuenssberg’s reports seemed to be more about discrediting Boris in the eyes of possible Leave voters than in the truth.

I did think that the BBC had turned a corner way back earlier in the month when Nick Robinson said he was examining what Phillip Hammond [08:10] had been up to and why everyone was up in arms about him.  Would we get the dirt, would Hammond be called a backstabber who was trying to thwart Brexit?   Er no…what we got was a pro-EU Labour MP and someone, although a ‘Leaver’, who was actually employed by Hammond.  Nothing to see here then…Hammond doing a good job under enormous pressure.

Robinson’s introduction was interesting…..he sneeringly referenced the Mail as the ‘chief cheerleader for Brexit’ and their frontpage that shouted ‘Daggers Drawn….PM slaps treacherous chancellor down!’.  Now as just about every other media outlet was giving a similar impression of Hammond’s actions you have to wonder how the BBC could avoid mentioning it or coming to a similar conclusion about Hammond’s betrayal…but they did.  They ignored Hammond’s ‘treachery’ for a long time and finally when they did notice they wheeled in two yes men to blow smoke up our backsides.

Why did Robinson raise the subject?  Not of course because he was in the slightest bit interested in actually holding Hammond to account but first because of course the right-leaning Mail is pretty influential and therefore needs to be discredited and its story attacking a pro-EU Chancellor pooh-poohed and second because the Mail in the same edition had drawn attention to the fact that Robinson had been wrong about Romanian and Bulgarian migration…

The ‘experts’ who rushed to judgement and got it wrong

‘Well, well, well. So much for those predictions of a flood of immigrants coming form Romania and Bulgaria once the door to the UK was opened’  Nick Robinson, BBC political editor May 2014

And the Mail gloated….naturally Robinson made no mention of his own appearance in the paper nor of the reason for it…..

STEPHEN GLOVER: How the Mail got it right on Romanian and Bulgarian migration and the BBC got it so wrong – and deceived Britain

We all know how, in 2004, the Labour government opened the door to immigration from Poland and seven other Eastern European states, while other countries such as Germany and France imposed restrictions. 

The Blair government forecast a relatively small annual influx — of between 5,000 and 13,000. Within five years, nearly a million had arrived.

Following that gigantic miscalculation, one might have expected a little more caution would be shown at the beginning of 2014 when immigration restrictions from Romania and Bulgaria were lifted by the Coalition government. 

The Mail warned that history would repeat itself. So did a small number of other organisations such as Migration Watch, a think-tank run by a respected former British ambassador.

This did not prevent many — most notably the BBC — from predicting that anxieties over the number of migrants would turn out to be misplaced. 

In fact, they were utterly justified. Yesterday, the Office for National Statistics estimated there are 413,000 Romanians and Bulgarians living in the United Kingdom, equivalent to the population of Bristol.

How misguided the BBC has been. In January 2014, it carried an uncritical interview with the then Romanian ambassador in London, Dr Ion Jinga.

He said the number of citizens coming from his country to the UK would be ‘fewer than in recent years’. It wasn’t.

But the Beeb was adamant that those expressing concern about a new wave of migration were guilty of scare tactics. 

Even before the gates were opened, BBC2’s Newsnight carried a report in April 2013 which suggested that only 1 per cent of Romanians and 4 per cent of Bulgarians were ‘actively considering work in the UK’.

Where are all the Romanian and Bulgarian immigrants, asked an item on the BBC’s website at the end of January 2014. It claimed ‘some parts of the UK have reported very few arrivals so far’.

This echoed a visit to Luton airport on January 1, 2014, by the publicity-seeking Labour MP Keith Vaz, which was celebrated by the BBC. 

In May 2014, after official figures suggested (wrongly) that very few Romanians and Bulgarians were coming here, the then BBC political editor, Nick Robinson, scoffed: ‘So much for those predictions of a flood of immigrants coming from Romania and Bulgaria once the door to the UK was opened’.

As late as December 2014, Mark Easton — the supposedly authoritative BBC home editor, who over the years has been relaxed about EU immigration — told Radio 4 listeners there were ‘probably 100,000’ Romanians and Bulgarians working in Britain. It took John Humphrys to point out that there were already 189,000.

In short, the all-powerful BBC has been spectacularly wrong. If more than 400,000 people from two countries come to live here in the space of a few years, that surely amounts to some sort of ‘flood’. 

We stand at a crossroads over Brexit, with reactionary forces in the government, led by Chancellor Philip Hammond, intent on ensuring that as little as possible changes.

But for the good of this country — its workers, its public services, its businesses, not to mention social cohesion — we have an opportunity to end wildly uncontrolled immigration, whether the BBC and the Establishment like it or not.

So pro-Brexit Boris gets attacked by the BBC, the pro-Brexit Daily Mail gets attacked by the BBC with the added motivation that the Mail had shown the BBC up to be, at best, incompetent, at worst, wilfully misleading, when reporting on issues like immigration.  The BBC has a long way to go.  Maybe it should just be closed down as it is completely out of control, unaccountable and beyond redemption.

Great shame…poor old Hillary couldn’t make it onto the fawning media circuit today as she had another fall….how would she have coped with the strains and stresses of being President?  She seems completely unable to cope with defeat and the reality of who is to blame…one Hillary Clinton.

The BBC has been glorifying her and promoting her as the great lost opportunity, the solution that a dangerous and uncertain world needed.  Jim Naughty continuing the good work this morning on the Today show as he presented her as a woman wronged, denied the presidency by dirty tricks and Russian lies.  The problem is of course that, just assuming it was the Russians who hacked the emails,  they weren’t lies, the very opposite in fact, the problem was that the emails revealed uncomfortable truths about Clinton and the Democrats….the BBC of course avoided any proper scrutiny of those emails preferring to concentrate on the fact they had been hacked….their content was of no interest to the BBC which only wanted to portray this as a dirty trick….similar hacks or thefts of information from those the BBC opposes are of course legitimate ‘leaks’…the source unimportant and indeed protected.

And why is it wrong for the Russians to interfere in American Democracy when the BBC itself has been involved in full-scale attempts to influence the US election?  The BBC ran a vicious anti-Trump campaign that portrayed him as a sex attacker, a racist, an Islamophobe and an all round illiterate, ignorant, unsophisticated, vulgar, egotistic bigot….and this continues post-election with smears, innuendos and half-truths and outright lies about his connections to the Russians as well as the usual contempt and mockery of the very superior types at the BBC.

Highly amused….The Today show announced this morning….

Having been released from his position of National Security Adviser, Sir Mark Lyall Grant is now warning about the complexity of setting up new defence and security arrangements with the EU after Brexit.

Just a shame the good Sir Mark didn’t get the memo and was going wildly off message telling us Brexit didn’t really pose any threat to security as we had far better intelligence and military services than the EU and they needed us…a deal would be done.  Sarah Montague seemed most put out as she kept on bashing away whilst Sir Mark kept being optimistic….there’d surely be a lack of information on security due to Brexit, no deal would surely be a very bad deal, wouldn’t information sharing just end, a hard border in NI due to Brexit would surely have huge security ramifications???????

In the end she got so exasperated that she berated him for sounding too upbeat.  Curiously we never hear the BBC tell Remainers that they are too downbeat and pessimistic.

Remarkable…prime time on the Today show and it’s another Remainder making his case to stop Brexit in its tracks…naturally he doesn’t want that, merely the right to properly oversee the process and uphold democracy.  Ken Clarke grabbed the 08:10 spot and was his usual contemptuous, patronising, louche self as he dispensed his wisdom and arrogantly laid down the law declaring that Parliament must have the ability to veto a Brexit ‘no deal’….which of course would mean May would have no big stick to threaten the EU with….as intended by Clarke and his cronies who want to see Brexit fail….what they don’t tell you is that if we were to go cap in hand back to the EU and demand our place back at the table the price would be enormous…for a start the Rebate would go as would many opt outs and veto powers…..making us poorer and powerless to influence anything.

Poll by @SkyData suggests 74% of people think no Brexit deal is better than a bad deal while 26% think any deal would be better than no deal

— Sky News Breaking (@SkyNewsBreak) October 11, 2017

Clarke announced that the ‘vast majority’ of the British people don’t want a no deal….Humphrys did not say anything despite that claim being untrue.  Oh few may actually want a ‘no deal’ as their preferred option but they are prepared to accept it rather than a bad deal…as a Sky poll showed…..74% in fact back May’s ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’ stance…guess 74% must be pretty much the ‘vast majority’…so Clarke is caught out in a complete lie…just not by the BBC…..and that Sky poll seems to be the norm…

Most Remain voters now back taking control of borders, leaving ECJ and paying no Brexit divorce bill

The majority of Remain voters now agree that Britain should take control of its borders after Brexit, end the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and pay little or nothing to leave the EU.

A major survey of more than 20,000 people revealed that an overwhelming majority of voters now prefer a so-called “hard Brexit” to a soft one.

Almost 70 per cent of people said they preferred a deal with the European Union which ended membership of the single market, ongoing payments and continued freedom of movement.

A similar percentage of people said they would prefer “no deal” to a “soft Brexit”.

Interesting also the issue Clarke raises….the Parliamentary veto over ‘no deal’.  Who first raised this?  Oh yes….Remainder Martin Donnelly in George Osborne’s Standard bearer for Remain.  Who then took on the message?  The BBC as it gave Donnelly that prime time 08:10 slot on the Today show to further press the message.  Then we have Labour, McDonnell letting slip he is working in cahoots with Remain Tories to thwart Brexit and he is talking about that issue….the Parliamentary veto…and then along comes Ken Clarke doing the same.  Any chance they are all colluding and plotting away together…along with Carney and Hammond…not forgetting Rudd and Morgan?

A similar pattern happened when James Chapman and Sam Coates from the Remain supporting Times were brought together by the BBC and they set the ball running with alarmist scare-stories about the ECJ and Euratom…..which the BBC gave plenty of airtime in conjunction with Osborne’s Standard and other Remain politicians whom the BBC dragged in to further pad out the alarmist tales.  Very definitely an orchestrated narrative intended to make people fear Brexit would result in all kinds of disasters and this seems to be the BBC’s working model as it daily drip feeds us the next disaster that Brexit will bring to our shores.

Can’t help thinking this would be Ken Clarke in another era…..a passed over major sat comfortably in his leather chair, puffing on a cigar with brandy in hand at his club going on about the ‘wogs’……

Panic stations in Liberal ÜberAllesLand when Trump and Brexit happened and there seemed to be an unstoppable rising tide of Rightwingery across Europe.  But how they cheered when Wilders in Holland and Le Pen in France didn’t triumph….the tide had turned, the People had come to their senses and seen off the threat of a return to the Thirties that loomed large.  The Liberals could relax whilst they plotted to impeach Trump and thwart Brexit.

But what to make of the election in Austria where someone who touted a hardline on immigration has come out on top and will probably ally himself with what the BBC call the ‘Far Right’.  Why does the BBC always use that term for Right-wing parties it doesn’t like whilst it never uses the term ‘Far-Left’ as a default description of Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party?

The BBC seem to be playing down Sebastian Kurz’s victory, they even compared him to their latest heroes Macron and  Trudeau…

Nicknamed “Wunderwuzzi” (very roughly translated as wonder hotshot), he has been compared to the young leaders of France and Canada, Emmanuel Macron and Justin Trudeau.

No histrionics yet about a ‘return to the Thirties’ and the rise of Fascism across Europe….after all the BBC not long ago pronounced that threat dead and buried.  Wonder how they will react to this should the Mail’s prediction come true….

Eurosceptic party led by ‘the Czech Trump’ is clear favourite to thrash mainstream parties in general elections this week in latest blow to the EU

And what of this from the BBC?….

The stance proved popular with Austrian voters after a huge influx of undocumented migrants and refugees from the Middle East and North Africa.

It’s those mysterious ‘undocumented migrants’ making an appearance again.  Such a phrase is not neutral, it is a deliberate attempt to make illegal migrants more human and less ‘illegal’, less criminal, more ‘acceptable’…not illegal but just migrants without the right paperwork…it’s merely bad bureaucracy not a serious matter of social, economic and political concern.   ‘Illegal migrants’ describes them perfectly and validly whilst ‘undocumented migrants’ is subjective and intended to deceive.

The term is political and chosen for a reason…the BBC uses it for Mexicans illegally entering the US intending that actions against the ‘illegals’ will seem harsh, unfair and inhumane as they are merely trying to better themselves as are the millions of Muslims and Africans who are trying to invade Europe but which the BBC wants to let in regardless of the cost in treasure, blood and cultural destruction.

The BBC is very selective in who is granted the status of ‘undocumented migrant’.  For instance if you are a Jewish settler in the West Bank you are an illegal settler or occupier….why does the BBC not describe them as ‘undocumented migrants’?  There is no difference between what they do and what Mexicans, Muslims or Africans do….economic migration…..crossing a border illegally and colonising the land.

The BBC anti-Semitic?  Seems so.

Why are Mexican illegals who enter the US or illegal migrants who slip into the UK not described as illegal settlers or occupiers by the BBC?

One rule for some, another for Jews?

If you’ve been watching the news very carefully, well not carefully at all as it’s so blatant, you may have noticed there has been a certain narrative as a stream of high profile Remainders keep popping up as if on a schedule in that news making alarming and lurid claims about Brexit.   The Sun claimed that Marr was decidedly pro-Remain and the BBC hit back with a sneering dismissal….but the reality is there are vast numbers of Remain voices given a lot of airtime across the BBC as a whole and then their words and opinions are reported on the news bulletins as ‘fact’.  The BBC’s idea of balance is to have an obviously fanatical Remainer on and then ‘balance’ that with someone less fanatical but still a Remainer who will nuance their statements to mix in a bit of Leave-friendly tosh.  No mistaking the intentions of some recent Remain ‘Big Guns’ though who are working hard to stop Brexit in its tracks one way or another……and just why does the BBC keep bringing on pro-Remain Craig Oliver….he was media spinner for pro-EU Cameron not a politician or anyone of any consequence in the scheme of things?

Any coincidence that Carney suddenly made the headlines with claims that the financial industry will go into meltdown due to some suddenly discovered problem?  After over a year since the referendum Carney has only just discovered this appalling and disastrous consequence of Brexit that will be utterly disastrous for our economy?  Really?

Then we had Hammond come out and claim that the day we leave the EU all aircraft will be grounded, naturally this is highly unlikely to happen he assures us but he had to mention it anyway…..I’m sure the Spanish tourist industry will welcome that.

Then we had Sir Martin Donnelly on Today (08:10) spinning a dystopian tale of job losses, investors fleeing Britain and factories being mothballed…far from going back to tthe Thirties it seems we are going pre-industrial, feudalism, horses, small boys up chimneys and the Church will be the new reality.  Any coincidence that this same message appeared a few days earlier in George Osborne’s Standard, any coincidence that Hammond was seen dining with Osborne just before making his sensationalist claims or that Carney owes his job to Osborne?

Mishal Husain seemed somewhat irrelevant to the proceedings, merely there to feed Donnelly questions in the right order so that he could keep to his script as he was allowed to freely give voice to his anti-brexit propaganda completely unchallenged.

A select few of those questions…

• Do you think it is possible we will remain in the EU?
• What do you think of ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’?
• Would a ‘no deal’ really be so bad?
• Did you leave Whitehall frustrated and anxious about our economic future?
• Should we pay the bill that the EU is asking for?
• Should we be prepared to compromise on membership of the ECJ?
• Isn’t this though about sovereignty?

No challenge to his answers as he managed to tick off each one from his list.

Husain was friendly and easy-going and Donnelly was given the prime spot of 08:10.  The Leave voice, John Mills, got a rather cooler reception at the less than prime time of 08:55 and was curtly shut down as they’d run out of time…no such problem for Donnelly who seemed to have all the time oin the world to expand on his views.

Guess whose views the BBC broadcast on each news bulletin thereafter?  Donnelly’s doom-mongering got prominent announcements whilst Mills got nothing….probably because the BBC didn’t have time as they also had to squeeze in Hillary Clinton’s thoughts on Brexit….you’re all doomed!!!…and it’s Trump’s fault!  When Mills mentioned Donnelly was a Remainer Husain smacked him down and said he was there as an ‘expert’, independent and an important, knowledgeable voice….but of course he is a Remainer….as he told us himself...

‘It was a major shock to the system to get the referendum result’

The Remain crew really are mounting a campaign aren’t they as Nicky Morgan appeared on Peston after undoubtedly having been told to get on there by Amber Rudd to say May must not sack the saboteur Hammond…clearly Rudd couldn’t do the dirty work herself so she got a fellow Remain minion to do it and provide a bit of distance…just a shame Morgan cocked up and dumped the bossy one in it….and, as Guido notes, it is highly hypocritical for Morgan to say those asking for Hammond’s head are self-indulgent and undermining Brexit when she demandeed Boris be sacked herself…

Remarkable hypocrisy from NiMo. Two weeks ago she said Boris “has to go” if he can’t keep quiet on Brexit. Last week she was widely implicated in the plot against the PM. Today Morgan says “it’s not helpful for anybody to have ministers being attacked, whether it’s the Chancellor or the Foreign Secretary” and criticises “self-indulgent” colleagues doing so.

The BBC’s reaction to all this is very telling…it dismisses attacks on Hammond and defends him, in contrast they mounted a vicious campaign against Boris and accused him of all sorts of double-dealing, backing stabbing, undermining and betrayal….oddly it is Boris who is actually backing May and Brexit whilst Hammond is the one undermining them…but the BBC doesn’t do facts any more.

There is clearly a huge plot by Remainers to stop Brexit in its tracks…..will the BBC notice and if it does will it report it in depth?  Judging by its reporting on Hammond that’s not likely.  Lord Hall Hall can safely go back on the dinner circuit without his indigestion tablets.