The Week in Westminster programme was a pro-EU fest with the New Statesman, the Huffington Post and the anti-Tory Isabel Hardman from the Spectator giving us their views.

We were told that Trump and Farage ‘manipulated’ the People to get them to vote for their views…..no, they acted as lightning rods for the well known views of the People that the BBC has ignored and tried to bury for years and looks like it will continue to dismiss as ‘myth’…yep the ignorant People were fooled and didn’t know what they were voting for.

We also heard that historians will conclude that Cameron was a reckless politician who took us out of the EU….so no bias there in that ‘prediction’.

Then we heard another criticism of Cameron, one that the BBC would really like to keep buried, as it did so well in the run up to the referendum….an inconvenient truth…that Cameron’s fabled EU reforms negotiated before the referendum and trumpeted as major concessions by the EU were in fact ‘nowhere near what he asked for…and….what he asked for was very modest’.

The Remain camp fought their campaign on a lie, that the reforms were enough to limit EU power over us and would control immigration.

The BBC were not interested in a genuine and rigorous examination of the so-called reforms, they merely reported them as pretty successful for Cameron despite even a casual look at them giving the lie to that.

The Now Show was similarly pro-EU with a stream of anti-Brexit ‘jokes’ that were in truth merely lazy, trite and unfunny material that the BBC has been peddling for months.

Then there was Dimbleby on Any Questions aggressively countering any pro-Brexit thoughts….apparently, according to him, we have to take the words of ardent Europhile Ivan Rogers ‘very seriously’ as he promotes the Remain camp agenda.  Also we hear that ‘thoughtful politicians think we should have a transition period’…really?  Meaning it is stupid and unthinkable to have a clean break?  Dimbleby also ramped up the rhetoric as the EU threatens us with a bill of £50billion…he raises it to maybe £60 billion…or maybe even £100 billion….just more scaremongering fake news from the supposedly trustworthy BBC.

Perhaps we should bill the EU for the destruction it has caused in our fishing industry, or for the thousands of EU criminals in our prisons, or for the wages lost to native workers, or for the schools, welfare, housing and NHS that we have to provide for EU migrants.  And the logic of this ‘bill’ fails me….we must pay it because we have signed a treaty…well OK…on that logic we have signed a treaty to become part of the Single Market….so even if we Brexit presumably we can opt to stay in without freedom of movement if we’re picking and choosing what treaties remain in force?

Personally I’d just say FO to the EU, we’re out of here…just as Iceland did with its bank debts.  Why on earth any politician would let the EU hold us hostage is beyond me…Thatcher would never have allowed it.  It’s just another perfect illustration of what is wrong with the EU…it is a thoroughly unpleasant, and not a little Fascistic, organisation that uses threats, blackmail and undemocratic means to maintain its power and grasp over countries.

“We’re in Europe against our will,” he said. “It’s a prison. It’s not a solution that will last.”

Odd then that it takes a supposed Fascist to point that out…..

We’re in Europe Against Our Will’: France Is E.U.’s Next Big Test

“In 2005, a majority voted against Europe, and we still find ourselves in Europe, by magic,” he said, “and I find it inadmissible.”

Today the European Union is wobbling under the weight of problems encouraged in part by that unchecked expansion — stagnant economies, the euro crisis, new pressures from Russia and deep strains over migration, especially from newer members in Central and Eastern Europe.

But a visit to Le Luc and other villages in southern France is a reminder that the European Union faces yet another serious problem long in the making — a crisis of legitimacy — that is fueling right-wing, nationalist politics even in the traditional core of the bloc.

What Ms. Le Pen wants is to lead France out of the euro currency and out of the bloc. She has said she would hold a popular referendum, à la Britain, on French membership in the European Union — a test of public will that mainstream French politicians, she says, are afraid to have.

Fascinating to hear what the problem with the UN is according, to Baroness Amos, as it leaves Syria to burn…that the self-interest of member countries stops them acting morally, altruistically, to defend the people of countries such as Syria.

Hmmm…OK…so roll back time to the vote on the Iraq war which the BBC tells us was illegal because the Russians, French and Germans voted against it at the UN.  Those countries voted against the war because they had massive self-interests in keeping Saddam in power…either geo-political or commercial.  They had no interest in the moral issues or human rights or in bringing freedom from oppression to the Iraqi people.  So their votes were a ‘problem’…they voted not on the actual issues of the war but in their own self-interest.  Their votes were therefore invalid making any declaration by the BBC that the war was illegal due to this vote a nonsense based upon a lie.  The BBC has never of course looked at the vote from that angle as it isn’t interested in genuine analysis merely in peddling an anti-Iraq War narrative which has helped ‘radicalise’, or given the excuse to, Muslims to attack Britain and the US.

Any other BBC bias that springs to mind?  Let’s hear it on the open thread…..

Obama not say anything about Saudi Arabia launching all out economic war against the US oil industry as it attempted to destroy the fracking industry and yet he is now complaining about a supposed Russian state hack of Clinton’s illicit email server which revealed some uncomfortable truths.  Can’t have the truth ‘corrupting’ an election can we?

Here’s a question for the BBC.  One they never asked today in their extensive coverage of Obama’s highly political claims about the election….

If the emails effected the outcome of the election why would that be?  What was in the emails that made voters think Clinton was not suitable to be President?

The BBC has never shown the slightest interest in investigating the emails and now only mentions them in passing as a link to the ‘corruption’ of the US election.  Maybe we should have a re-run…or just hand the Presidency to Clinton.  Civil war looms.  Obama is playing a dangerous game, as is the BBC and its Remainer collaborators who think they can magic away Brexit without any reaction.

The source of the emails is irrelevant….what is important is what they say and the fact that Clinton held highly sensitive information on an insecure, private server….an insecurity which allowed them to be hacked in the first place.  If her actions led to the election being ‘corrupted’ perhaps she should be jailed?

It is an odd way of looking at things though…the US elections ‘corrupted’ by the truth…how terrible…as said the source is irrelevant here, what is important is the content of those emails and how they came to be hacked…and by extension the judgement and trustworthyness of Clinton.  The BBC isn’t interested in that analysis.

The BBC continues to pump out Democrat propaganda.  Yet more fake news from our trusted news provider.

You’d never really know that Sir Ivan Rogers, EU ambassador, was anything more than just a civil servant doing his duty, if you listened to the BBC as it reports, trumpets loudly, that he has said Brexit will take 10 years to negotiate and may fail anyway.  No suggestion from the BBC that this is yet another ‘Remain’ piece of misinformation designed to scaremonger and intended to make voters reconsider their Leave vote or at least soften them up for a massive compromise on Brexit.

Rogers is after all an ardent Europhile who has been at the heart of the EU machine for decades….

For Eurosceptic Conservative MPs, David Cameron could barely have made a more provocative choice.

The Prime Minister has chosen Ivan Rogers – the former chief adviser to their pro-EU hate figure, Kenneth Clarke – to be the UK’s next ambassador to the EU in Brussels, with the task of renegotiating Britain’s place within the organisation.

Mr Rogers, currently the Prime Minister’s adviser on Europe, is expected to see his appointment confirmed within weeks. But some Tories will be alarmed by his apparently Europhile background.

Curiously no mention either, considering all the controversy about May not guaranteeing that EU nationals can stay in the UK, that it was Rogers who suggested that line for her…that EU nationals be used as ‘bargaining chips’…..

The biggest puzzle of Theresa May’s premiership so far is why someone who pioneered laws against modern slavery and was so tough on stop-and-search should take such an extreme and heartless position on EU migrants. Her declaration – that she’d use them as bargaining chips in Brexit talks – struck many who would otherwise support her as bizarre and repugnant. The Times reveals today that this idea was dummed up, as you’d expect, by the Whitehall machine.

Sir Ivan Rogers, Britain’s ambassador to the EU, advised all candidates for the Tory leadership to use Britain’s three million EU nationals as bargaining chips in Brexit talks because he thought it would be the only bargaining chip Britain had.

Rogers is spreading the EU’s black propaganda designed to undermine Brexit but the BBC analysis makes no mention of that and accepts his words as ‘fact’.  They know it is bunkum but pump it out in the hope that a repetitious drum-beat of lies, big and small, intended to sow doubt, confusion and fear about Brexit, will make voters demand a re-vote and turn them into Remainers.

Why would it take 10 years to negotiate Brexit when trade deals are already in place and exporters to the EU already comply with all EU regulations?  What’s to negotiate really?  We’re not starting from scratch as with countries outside the EU like Canada.  The ground work is already in place…it’s just a matter of tweaking it.

The BBC knows his comments are deliberately misleading and designed to deceive and yet reports them at face value…the BBC’s own analysis?…

The government is intent on persuading us Brexit can be done smoothly, and to time. So the suggestion that the UK’s most senior diplomat in Brussels has privately told the government that a final trade deal with the rest of the EU might not be done for 10 years, and might ultimately fail, may give rise to more nerves…. this is perhaps a reality check of just how hard these negotiations might prove. 

A ‘reality check’?  Only on planet BBC.  Fake News on tap.

“It is very clear tonight that, while the House has not passed a motion, it is clear to me that the British parliament, reflecting the views of the British people, does not want to see British military action. I get that and the government will act accordingly.”

Anna Soubry, a woman who is a complete stranger to the truth, who is the living embodiment of the old joke about politicians that you know when she is lying because her lips are moving.  Dishonest, treacherous and untrustworthy, corrupt.  A ‘Remainer’ of course.

A woman who tells us how she respects the outcome of the referendum vote but then goes on to denounce those who voted Leave as racist, nationalist, little englanders who were too stupid to know they were being conned by the Leave campaign as she declared that ‘We have ceded the field to the ill-informed, intolerant and often prejudiced.’ 

A woman who demands May gives her and her fellow Remain collaborators the details of the Brexit plan but then, as she headed in for a meeting with May along with those collaborators to try and strong arm May into backing a ‘soft-Brexit’, that is no Brexit at all, she was appalled to be asked what she would be talking about…apparently that is ‘private’ and the Public have no right to know what she and the Euro quislings are plotting in their backroom deals where the elite cook up their private little agreements to suit themselves, the very thing that the Public voted against. [Emma Barnett to be fair refused to be intimidated and bullied by Soubry who wanted to dodge the question and kept asking what Soubry was going to say in the meeting]

Soubry, on the same day, tried to insist that the vote on military action against Assad in 2013 was not really about that and yet you could have fooled me, the PM and every news outlet in the land……

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEV6ySlsAmk

From the BBC…

MPs have rejected possible UK military action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government to deter the use of chemical weapons.

David Cameron said he would respect the defeat of a government motion by 285-272, ruling out joining US-led strikes.

The US said it would “continue to consult” with the UK, “one of our closest allies and friends”.

France said the UK’s vote does not change its resolve on the need to act in Syria.

Russia – which has close ties with the Assad government – welcomed Britain’s rejection of a military strike.

From the Guardian….

Blow to Cameron’s authority as MPs rule out British assault on Syria

From the Mirror…

Syria: How did your MP vote in the Commons over military action?

Fairly clear that the vote was to establish the principle that the government could take military action against Syria.

Not a word that comes out of Soubry’s mouth can be trusted it would seem.  Post-Fact indeed.

The bias is endless and relentless…guess the BBC should just be shut down or its money be shared out with other news organisations…the money that is all too easily come by and taken for granted.  The BBC’s Nihal had a sneer at Amazon today as he told us that ‘The Man in the High Castle’ was Amazon’s top rating programme…then added ‘That’ll be 74 people then’.  Easy to sneer when you don’t have to work for your money and risk everything on a commercial venture with no guaranteed income.  Wonder how many views Top Gear 1, The Grand Tour, got?  Lot more than the BBC version I imagine.

Is ‘Islamo-Fascism’ on the rise in Europe?

4 hours ago

Tens of thousands dead, millions forced from their homes,  a terrorist state created on the borders of Europe and Europe destabilised and heading for religious war in the years to come.

Who to blame for this tragedy?

The BBC, the Guardian, Muslims backed by Corbyn and his treacherous Stop the War collaborators broke the will of the political establishment to engage in ‘muscular liberalism’, to protect human rights and to project power in order to enable repressed populations to take back their countries.

The BBC et al’s anti-war drum-beat spooked and cowed the politicians and meant the only effective military action, full-scale, boots on the ground, intensive war, was off the agenda as ‘British foreign policy’ was put into full retreat…ironically due to a few ‘extremist’ Muslims whom the BBC told us weren’t really Muslim…and yet at the same time told us the war in Iraq had radicalised the whole Muslim community and terrorism was the inevitable result…cake and eat it….the BBC fully exploited the ‘Muslim issue’ in order to promote it’s own anti-war agenda.

Now where are we?…..George Osborne speaks….

‘We have come to a point where it is impossible to intervene anywhere, that we lack the political will as the West to intervene.

‘I have some hope out of this terrible tragedy in Syria: We are beginning to learn the price of not intervening.

‘We did not intervene in Syria. Tens of thousands of people have been killed as a result. Millions of refugees have been sent from their homes.

‘We have allowed a terrorist state to emerge in the form of ISIS.’

Mr Osborne said: ‘Russia for the first time since Henry Kissinger kicked them out of the Middle East in the 1970s is back as the decisive player in that region.

‘That is the price of not intervening.’

The Syrian tragedy and the failure to intervene was of course, in major part, the fault of Ed Miliband who betrayed the Syrian people in a brazen act of political cowardice and pious, opportunistic grandstanding……

The weakness of Obama is actually best illustrated with reference to what happened in Britain, in relation to Syria. In August 2013, David Cameron, then Prime Minister, sought parliamentary approval for action. The vote was lost in the Commons when Ed Miliband, then Labour leader, led the opposition and 30 Tory MPs and nine Lib Dem MPs rebelled.

President Obama took it as a cue to offer Congress an effective veto, although no vote was needed. The result was the scrapping of US plans for greater involvement aimed at preventing the Syrian regime using chemical weapons. The Russians, and their allies the Syrians, saw their opportunity in this weakness. America was not going to get involved – other than trying doomed peace initiatives and some later air strikes – and Russia and Assad had the field of battle against the rebels to themselves. That leads to the horrors of Aleppo today.

It’s a funny thing though….Miliband made one of the most crucial and strategic blunders of this century resulting in mass murder and a refugee crisis that will end with Europe on its knees and the BBC doesn’t mention his name, doesn’t even mention that he led the West into a deadly and disastrous trap as it reports Osborne’s comments….

Aleppo: George Osborne attacks ‘vacuum’ of Western leadership

Speaking in an emergency debate about the conflict in Aleppo, Mr Osborne – in one of his first Commons interventions since losing office – said Parliament must reflect on its own actions with regard to the five-year civil war in Syria.

‘Worst decision’

In August 2013, Parliament rejected the government’s case for possible intervention in response to the alleged use of chemical weapons by Syrian regime forces.

MPs voted 285-272 against the UK joining President Barack Obama’s plan for US air strikes – which never came to pass because of political opposition in the US.

Mr Osborne recalled speaking from the backbenches ahead of the 2003 Iraq War and said he feared now that “it is impossible to intervene anywhere”.

Extraordinary…how can the BBC miss out Miliband’s major role in turning the vote against intervention?  Not the first time of course, the BBC has a habit of not linking Miliband to Syria.  Protecting one of its own?  The BBC itself of course hid a video that it had of a Syrian school being bombed with chemical weapons until after the vote had taken place.  Why?  Surely that was relevant and crucial evidence that might influence votes……ah..of course…the BBC didn’t want us to go to war.

Well then, I am just back from a 10 day break in Miami and the media contrast could not be greater. Over there, I watched FOX News and shared in the sense of National excitement as President Elect Trump prepares to make America great again. The misery gut sore losers at CNN, ABC, MSNBC etc are all too busy having a temper tantrum and blaming the Russians for the catastrophic Clinton loss, not worth watching. Meanwhile Fox backed the winner and Fox is winning. Compare that to the UK. The BBC opposed Brexit and continues to do everything to push any arrangement that is NOT Brexit. Disturbingly, I think this suits Theresa May and her “transitional Brexit” sell out. The BBC drains the life out of Brexit, May acts as the undertaker, and the people are denied. The power of the BBC is so dangerous and this is best seen from afar.

Continue reading →