Author Archives: TrueToo

Post created by Up2snuff

Had Theresa May had the nerve, the honesty, the decency to accept her Withdrawal Agreement was no good and had gone for a No Deal Brexit on 29 March, she would possibly by now be a hero instead of a villain. In addition, her Chancellor Philip Hammond would have probably been in a position to introduce some groundbreaking tax reforms at the Party Conference in September that not only would please the country but also cut the fiscal legs from under Labour. More perhaps on that another time.

If Prime Ministers are advised to do two things then they would be ‘Do not make promises that are not kept.’ and ‘Do not create Calendar dates that will remind the Opposition, the Media and the Voter of your failures.’.

Theresa May has fallen into both traps.

While a break from Parliament business may provide her with a pause to think, she might be wise to remember and re-read her leadership speech outside Downing Street after she had won the Party leadership. The manifest unfairness and divisiveness of pandering to a small minority of Remain voters, many in both Houses of Parliament or retired from there, will be remembered every time Europe and the EU and Brexit are mentioned. Then there is the phrase “Leave means leave.”

The media and the voter will have reminders when Parliament returns on 23 April, again on 2 May in Local Authority elections and on 22/23 May in Europe when the EU Parliament Elections take place, irrespective of whether the UK has to vote. After a brief pause, the media and the voter will have another reminder from the Conservative Party Conference and then again as the 31st October revised deadline for the UK’s departure from the EU, barring or perhaps because of the result of a ‘Peoples Vote’ Referendum.

I do not think the Prime Minister can possibly survive in post much beyond 31st October 2019. In an Age of Equality it would be proper to think of her as a ‘Dead Man Walking’ or a ‘Zombie PM’. Lame Duck seems wholly inadequate.

Should something remarkable happen if Theresa May hangs on and wins a Confidence Vote in December 2019 then the big Calendar reminders will still come around without fail, along with all the small ones, prompted by any news events from the EU, again next year and after that all while she remains as leader.

….and gets some heart-warming help from a Republican.

Some of my eminent colleagues here have watched clips of Candace Owens fighting back against the Democrats, including her powerful defence against a sly, PeeCee defamer named Lieu, during the hearing on hate crimes. Out of general interest and in order to hear more from Candace, I decided to plough through 3 hours of the hearing on YouTube.

An hour and 38 minutes in, Republican Representative Buck of Colorado broke through Democrat propaganda and questioned Candace with evident admiration. Here’s how he began:

Ms Owens, I’m going to address these questions to you, if I may. I don’t know if you’ve seen this, [holding up a file] but it’s a memorandum that the majority Democrats prepared for the committee members and in this memorandum they go through the various witnesses’ names and organisations that they represent, the Anti-Defamation League, the Equal Justice Society, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights under Law and then we get to you.

Oh my goodness. Candace Owens, Director of Communications at the conservative …. Nobody else is described as progressive or liberal but you are described as a conservative advocacy group for Turning Point USA and a conservative commentator and political activist known for her criticism of Black Lives Matter and the Democrat Party. I think you’ve caused my friends on the left to go to their safe spaces and I’d love to explore with you a little bit of the reasons for that…

Then Representative Buck asks Candace a number of questions which bring a smile to her face. Brought a smile to my face too as the back and forth between the two of them demonstrated the best of America when they cut through lefty PeeCee like the proverbial hot knife through butter.

I’m going to plough through the next two hours of the hearing on the lookout for another gem or two in between the propaganda onslaught from the Democrats.

Meanwhile, here’s Candace and Representative Buck.

Update:

Here’s the address to a UK audience by Candace and Charlie of Turning Point. It’s over an hour, but Representative lieu chose to play a half-minute clip of it during the hearing to try to smear Candace as an apologist for Hitler.

And here’s Lieu with his attempted smear. He has the gall to turn to other witnesses without even giving Candace a chance to respond. She gets the chance at 5:30 in, and demolishes him as well as Chairman Nadler, who tries to defend Lieu.

Update April 14:

Candace Owens reminds me of Diamond and Silk, two powerful black American women who also testified before Congress and who also refused to show the slightest respect for sly Democrats with no moral fibre who tried to bring them down.

….takes its name, of course, from Hilary Clinton’s backfiring attempt to denigrate Trump supporters.

Here’s what freedom looks and sounds like:

Proud to be Deplorable

Vote Republican song

No smokin’ gun

Brick by brick

Pro-life Song

And this guy John Morgan is so good I thought for a moment that Bush had taken up a new career:

George W Bush sings Hallelujah to Donald Trump

I realise this is all a touch off topic for this fine website, but I needed a break from the appalling Brexit betrayal and, of course, from the BBC’s delight in the betrayal.

I hope my esteemed colleagues here enjoy the entertainment.

David Vance has appealed over the years to contributors to moderate their language, so I’m just echoing that appeal here. There’s nothing to be gained by competing with the comments section under many YouTube videos, and swearing probably drives some people away from the site who would otherwise contribute.

More disturbing are attacks on political figures which can be interpreted as promoting violence and even assassination. This blog is not a hate site, never was and I’m sure never will be.

We have to also consider the disturbing moves on the part of the ‘government’ towards a police state, where people can be hauled out of their homes, shoved before a kangaroo court without genuine legal aid and jailed for expressing the ‘wrong’ opinion.

Passionate argument against the foul BBC and its ilk is what we should be aiming at, so let’s try not to be diverted from that course.

I have always seen the Independent as a left-to far-left publication, not quite as an unhinged as the dreadful Guardian but still pickled in bias. So I was surprised to see the article, Coffee with Chuka Umunna is a step too far for Jeremy Corbyn, by one Flic Everett. She doesn’t seem to appreciate Corbyn much, with barbs like

….from the very beginning of the Brexit process, leader of the Opposition has behaved like a sulky teen forced to visit his nan

And

….Corbyn has fudged and dissembled, sniped and muttered, and divided his own party….

And

High principles that go unchallenged when you’re cycling round a few far-left meeting halls are not fit for purpose when you intend to run the country.

This made me recall that Dimbleby also doesn’t seem fond of Corbyn. He allowed questions quite critical of him on QT re anti-Semitism and refrained from jumping in and interrupting panelists who would also attack Corbyn.

As recently as the last QT, Fiona Bruce echoed Everett’s concerns by pointing out to the Labour guy that Corbyn had walked out of a meeting because Umunna was present.

This makes me wonder why Corbyn doesn’t get wholehearted support from these representatives of the left. Do they see him as the wrong leader to defeat the Tories because he is too far left?

What say you?

Update March 12: Ezra Levant is doing a fine job reporting from the trial on Twitter.

Yesterday, March 11th, Ezra Levant got an urgent request from his friend Tommy to hop over from Canada to London and then Peterborough to report on his suit against the police in civil court. It’s probably unnecessary since there are so many fair and impartial UK media people keen to report honestly on anything to do with Tommy Robinson. John Sweeney will most likely be the first one in court, representing that most-trusted broadcaster known as the BBC.

UK media will no doubt be appalled and outraged at the harassment of Tommy and his family by the Cambridgeshire police, and will therefore report on the trial in impeccable and comprehensive detail. But just to be sure, he wanted Ezra Levant with him for his input and support.

I suppose Ezra has already landed and has made his way to Peterborough for the beginning of proceedings at 10am. The exercise is costly and he has appealed for help. Info on developments can be found here and donations made for those able so to do.

Here’s Tommy from yesterday, discussing the issue.

Thanks to StewGreen and G.W.F. for providing links on the Open Thread.

Update March 11: I messed the links up on the initial post, but all links are fixed now

As a keen follower of Panodrama, I note you are suspected of being a bigot here and here, and a homophobe. I reserve judgement, because I think the remarks you made could be due simply to your rough Irish sense of humour rather than any real animosity towards these groups of people including your own. I also note that you strenuously denied these deficiencies of character and I’m inclined to believe you.

But you shouldn’t be surprised if people who are constantly judged and disparaged by the BBC simply for holding valid beliefs the BBC disapproves of should judge and disparage you after the unwitting revelations you made in Panodrama.

However, there are two extremely damaging revelations that cannot be debated or excused. The first is your hero-worship of the IRA’s Martin McGuinness and the second is the idea you came up with of sexualising a heated argument between Tommy Robinson and Lucy Brown, thereby potentially portraying Tommy as a sexual predator.

The working title of your Panorama is (or was) Tommy Takedown. It seems in order to facilitate this objective you worked closely with a violent, far-left outfit with the peculiar label of HopenotHate. Tommy Robinson confronted you several times with that allegation. You only responded near the end of the ‘interview’ with a partial admission that you have had some input from some people. Your ‘executive producer’ would also neither confirm nor deny the same allegation, saying only this is an ongoing documentary.

Apparently it is ongoing, since you were seen last week with far-left ‘activist’ Mike Stuchbery. Stuchbery was apparently responsible for sending a pack of five men (including a druggie, ‘journalists’ and a dog) to intimidate Tommy Robinson’s wife and children while he was out of the country.

It is unclear to me what kind of ‘Panorama’ you now intend to produce, or will be able to produce on Tommy Robinson. What would you call it – Post-Panodrama butt-covering exercise? Well over 10 000 people saw Panodrama on a giant screen outside BBC studios on February 23rd. And in just over two weeks, Panodrama has now been viewed on the Internet by millions of people in the UK and worldwide. Your reputation, along with that of the BBC, has been seriously damaged, perhaps irreversibly. Productions of Panorama will now be viewed by many with skepticism and a Panorama on Tommy Robinson will be regarded with raised eyebrows at best and ridicule of the BBC at worst.

However, there are steps you can take to regain some credibility. The first, and most obvious, is to tear Tommy Takedown up and throw it in the bin where it belongs. The second is to apologise unreservedly for the intended sexual slur against Tommy Robinson – a fraudulent claim which, as he said, could have ruined him. The third is to scout around for stories of interest to the general public – and not just the BBC elite and your fellow-travelers – and to tell them honestly and impartially. Don’t decide beforehand that you are going to take someone down and then scout around for ‘evidence’ to back your biased intention.

Here’s an idea: Facebook has banned Tommy Robinson, with no justification and out of narrow, left-wing spite and fear of Tommy’s numerous enemies. At the same time, Facebook allows terrorist organisations such as Hamas to incite murder against Jews on its platform, but immediately removed an account inciting murder against Palestinians. That account was created to test mark Zuckerberg’s alleged commitment to fair play. The Israel Law Centre, Shurat Hadin, sued Facebook (unsuccessfully) in 2016 in a New York court and is now suing Facebook again for a billion dollars.

This is a huge and complex story and worthy of the attention of a diligent investigative journalist such as John Ware, who unfortunately no longer does Panorama. Mr. Sweeney, I doubt you could as good a job as him but you could certainly try.

Oh, and one more thing: BBC, I realize this would be a drastic omission for you, but please stop plastering ‘Yaxley-Lennon’ over every story on Tommy Robinson. Everybody knows by now who he is and despite your efforts he will always be regarded as Tommy Robinson and admired and respected around the world for his courage and commitment in the face of evil.

…will make the BBC paranoid.

Update 26/02:
Here’s the good-quality original Panodrama from Tommy Robinson’s YouTube channel with added subtitles.

Update 27/02:
From a comment by theisland below:

Donations and sign up for free updates from Tommy Robinson is still working:

here or here

(on-off problems with the first link, but the second is working fine.)

Update 27/02:
So they’ve banned Tommy Robinson from Facebook – not through any wrongdoing, but simply for opposing the elite with their slick agenda against Western civilisation. I find it hard to express my disgust with Mark Zuckerberg and company.

Update 27/02:
And now Amazon has banned Mohammed’s Koran, co-written by Peter McLoughlin and Tommy Robinson. The elite really are circling the wagons against the truth.

Original post:
Been scouting to find a good video of Panodrama and have struggled through about half of this one.

I can see the difficulty of getting a good reproduction of Panodrama (great title, by the way) by filming the big screen and live-streaming the result on Youtube. Still, it seems the quality of the original is also poor. Pity that Tommy Robinson evidently couldn’t get a pro to assist with its creation.

I’m no techie, but it seems evident that there should have been transcripts alongside interviews and phone conversations – some of which are really hard to hear.

But I’m not complaining. Tommy Robinson, a little guy, has giant courage and he’s held up a powerful middle finger to the BBC here.

It’s possible that he might even have shamed them into scrapping their ‘Panorama’ about him.

I was impressed by this passionate speech before the film by Richard someone at 20min 30sec in on this clip.

It’s rumoured that uploaded videos are being taken down. If true, could be that the BBC has enough power and influence to get YouTube to do so. Of course, YouTube could decide itself to delete them.

Well, whatever the case, Panodrama is now all over the Internet, a blow has been struck against the vile establishment and, boy, does it do my heart good to see it!

Update 25/02:
Found another Panodrama video of the event with much better audio. It was too far from the screen to clearly see the actors in this drama, but since necessity is the mother of invention it can be downloaded and then played together with the first link on this post with that poor audio muted.

(Well, I’m going to try that now.)

Hopefully the masters of the Internet at silicon valley will allow Tommy’s video with subtitles to be posted across all relevant media.

….spent watching Question Time

I think people here who believe that the BBC reads this blog are correct. I think Fiona Bruce has come across comments on her lack of clarity of speech and has decided not to take criticism from right-wing Neanderthals at Biased BBC. Indeed, she appears to have doubled down on her diction and is now swallowing every sixth or seventh word.

And whoever is responsible for selecting the panel almost certainly read a comment about panel selection being a touch more fair than it was during Dimbleby’s tenure. Four dogmatic Remainers to one leaver supports the supposition that the BBC is grimly determined to spurn constructive criticism from this blog.

Still, QT is sometimes worth watching. Five minutes out of the hour yesterday were quite instructive. Pro-Brexit Conservative Michael Forsyth held his wicket well against a determined attack from Brexit-hater and journalist Hugo Rifkind.

34:12 minutes in:

Rifkind: Speaking of being wrong consistently, I was reading today the vote leave manifesto – I believe you’re on the board of vote leave …. and not once in there was the Irish border mentioned, not once in there were the words customs union mentioned. All the problems that have come up with Brexit were not foreseen by you….by your movement….

Forsyth: Sorry, on the customs union…

Rifkind: The words customs union are not in there.

Forsyth: Well of course they are not in there because we were wanting to leave the European Union, which means leaving the customs union….

Rifkind: You didn’t happen to mention that that was part of what you were leaving. It’s possible perhaps you hadn’t heard of it at the time.

[Appreciative audience laughter at Rifkind’s snide comment]

Forsyth: Well it’s possible you haven’t read …

[More laughter and some applause]

….It’s possible you haven’t read….

[More of same]

….It’s possible, Hugo, I’m surprised [inaudible] it’s possible that you have not read the Conservative Party manifesto, which gives a commitment – every single Tory MP was elected on a manifesto that said we will be leaving the Customs Union and we will be leaving the single market and…

Rifkind: This was after the referendum….

Forsyth: …and that is what people have voted for and I did a number of…

Bruce: Why is the border not mentioned in there?

Forsyth: Because it’s not an issue.

[More laughter and some cries from audience members wanting to interject]

Rifkind: Seems to be a bit of an issue.

Forsyth: It’s an issue by those people trying to reverse the result of the referendum. The EU said….

Bruce: What do you think of the response from the audience when you say that Michael. People are just laughing.

Forsyth: I, no, well I think they, it’s because they’ve been listening to the BBC, who’s made this an issue when it’s not an issue.

Bruce: Ohh, it’s our fault.

[You have that one right, Fiona. Jeering and applause from the audience; jeering no doubt directed at Forsythe]

Forsyth: I mean, the EU….

Bruce: How could I have not realised – it’s the BBC’s fault.

[Now she’s really milking this, to audience laughter]

Forsyth: Well I can help you. The EU….

Bruce: I might pass on that.

[What makes me think she doesn’t want to hear what the eminent Forsyth has to say about the EU]

Forsyth: The EU have said they don’t want a hard border, the Irish government have said they don’t want a hard border and the British government have said they don’t want a hard border so who exactly is going to put this hard border in place?

At this point Fiona Bruce decided to move on to another issue. Can’t dwell on a statement by a Conservative that makes a strong case for Brexit.

And the only border the EU believes in is one that keeps its dictatorial clique safe in its ivory tower in Brussels. The British government doesn’t seem to worry much about borders either – except when it’s denying entry to activists whose politics conflict with those of the PeeCee elite or, to its eternal shame, denying asylum to Pakistani Christians at risk of death at the hands of their Muslim compatriots.

And the BBC? Not much for borders either but a great fan of employment barriers to any political journalists who are not to the left of the political spectrum – and the further left, the better.

I noted on a recent thread that my esteemed colleagues here were less than complimentary about Emily Maitlis. So when her name cropped up while I was Googling Intelligence Squared debates, I thought I’d plonk the debate above the line.

This was the proposition:

The world should recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital

Ehud Olmert and Jack Straw were among the debaters. I’m sure I don’t need to state which side Jack Straw was on.

There was an extraordinary moment after the Palestinian speaker had spouted the customary fallacious nonsense against Israel and was challenged by Maitlis over her exaggeration of Gaza fatalities in the confrontation with the IDF on the border. It might have to go down as the first time the BBC ever bluntly told a Palestinian she was being economical with the truth.

If that wasn’t enough to make me fall off my chair there was an even stronger challenge from Maitlis after Olmert’s partner, a UK barrister, pointed out that the Palestinian debater is not prepared to recognize Israel within any boundaries at all.

Having recovered from the fall off the chair I watched the rest of the debate with increased interest. Maitlis also strongly challenged the Israeli side and I have to conclude that overall she didn’t do a bad job at all as chair.

I haven’t been able to find out where the debate was held but the audience was evidently slanted – surprise, surprise – in favour of the Palestinians. Still, there was considerable support for the proposition and I came away from the debate with the impression that the UK tide might finally be turning against the Arab side of the Israeli-Arab conflict.

But perhaps that is unduly optimistic.