This is the story of some squalid little men (and women), but it is a vital insight into the nexus of the political and corporate media elite. The Guardian, New Statesman and Huffington Post today all run major stories around a “focus group” study in Nuneaton which revealed that voters think Corbyn is “scruffy” and “old-fashioned”. This is deemed front page news.
The publicity was obviously supposed to coincide with Labour losing Nuneaton council, its most marginal council surrounded by Tory territory, in the council elections on Thursday. However Labour held Nuneaton. That did not stop the New Statesman article, by “research” authors James Morris and Ian Warren, from going ahead with the immortal phrase “While today’s Labour party has no hope of representing Nuneaton”. Err, it is still in control of the Council.
The publication is also timed to coincide with a revolt by Labour MPs at this afternoon’s meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party. The idea is that the “research” would prove that election losses were Corbyn’s fault. That is toned down now after they beat the Tories outside Scotland, but I am told that Progress MPs are still briefed to flourish the Guardian and raise this “research” today. That is meant to get this “research” onto the evening news.
But when you look at the research very closely, you realise that it is absolute rubbish. James Morris and Ian Warren are total charlatans.
Firstly, the whole sample is 16 people. That is right, 16 people. They are supposed all to be ex-Labour, though there is little evidence of that in the transcripts. What is not in dispute is that they are all Tory voters.
So you have 16 Tory voters, in two groups male and female. But out of 16 people there is not one retired person. Not one young voter. Not one person unemployed. And every single one is in a nuclear heterosexual relationship with children. Every single one is a homeowner.
Furthermore their sources of information are (by order most mentioned) the Daily Mail, Sky, the BBC and the Sun. Only one out of 16 mentions the internet as a source of political information.
People who voted Tory constitute already just 24% of the general population. Exclude retired, tenants, single, childless, gay, young and internet savvy people as well, and you get down to a deliberately chosen 5% of the population from which to choose your sample. You then get these 16 carefully chosen, blinkered right wing bigots into a room. Nevertheless something still goes wrong for your research. Two of the 16 (in the female group) state a firm intention to vote Labour next time (while a larger number state they would consider it).
So what do you do if you are a charlatan like James Morris or Ian Warren? You leave that in the transcript, which no journalist will ever read, but you exclude the fact that 2 of the 16 will vote Labour next time from your findings! And you studiously lead the conversation with the group round to the idea that others who are considering voting Labour next time might be more likely to do so with a change of leader.
The idea that locking two carefully selected groups of totally unrepresentative right wingers into a room to self-reinforce their bigoted opinions, in any way constitutes real research, is utterly laughable. The only conclusion is that having carefully selected the people in all of the UK the most likely to dislike Jeremy Corbyn, they dislike Jeremy Corbyn. Next week, a group of young unemployed people from the Easter Road will give their views on David Cameron.
Needless to say the so called journalists who have published this nonsense did no investigation whatsoever of the farcical nature of the “research”. They just published the press release, as witnessed by the fact they all use exactly the same quotes from scores of pages of transcript.
An important question is who paid for this. Obviously it is a Blairite production, but where did the money come from? Greenberg Quinlan Rosner research are credited, and they are extremely expensive. I asked Ian Warren who funded it. First he replied “I did”, then when I asked him who funded Greenberg Quinlan Rosner he stated there was “something sinister” about the question. I asked again twice, but answer came there none. Astonishingly, “who paid for this” did not occur to the mainstream journalists who uncritically published Morris and Warren’s nonsense.
This is a deeply sinister story. Right wing Labour figures hope desperately their own party will lose in Nuneaton. So they commission (and presumably pay for) ludicrously skewed research to show Jeremy Corbyn caused the loss. This absolute non-news item, that a tiny selected group of completely unrepresentative right wingers do not like Jeremy Corbyn, is then plastered on front pages by their Blairite media contacts to coincide with a Parliamentary Labour Party meeting today, in order to further the slow motion coup against Corbyn.
It is actually quite sickening. All of those involved – including the Guardian and New Statesman editors – are very low people indeed.
Ba’al you were asking about Wind Rush? There is a BVI Wind Rush Services Ltd referenced on the data base but BVI registered 3 November 2006 and struck off 30 April 2012
https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/10122361
Of course these records have a limited meaning in themselves although they are interesting.
As I say such records have a limited meaning and could even be intentionally misleading or coincidental.
I suspect its coincidental as a quick google suggests that there are other wind rush commercial entities or brands not connected to Blair.
As I said. Windrush is a very common company name. Associated with both the MV Windrush – Caribbean migrants use it – and with the river in Oxfordshire. Also, Blair’s ‘charity and governance’ conglomerate is Windrush, not ‘wind rush’. ‘Firerush’ (commercial and finance) is a lot rarer. I wouldn’t expect to see either in the Panama Papers, really, as Bircham Dyson Bell, who set up his empire are a smaller, London version of Mossack Fonseca as far as I can tell. They don’t need help from Panama.
I note, with amazement, that the comment I made earlier today is, according to the blogtrotter Habbakkuk, “copied from some other source.”
Of course the books that the troleen has not read would fill a small planet, so it might well have been plagiarised.
Reliable as ever the Troleen’s own troleen, Anon 1, clueless but indominatable, chips in thus:
“Looks to be rehashed and reworded from various, erm, Guardian articles. Appears to contain seams of Will Hutton and Seumas Milne. At least he makes some basic effort to cover his tracks, unlike RoS.
“I might have to start paying more attention to Bevin’s long-winded diatribes.”
As to which, paying attention to the many sensible posts on this blog, would be a very good idea.
I would be flattered were it not that the only people who saw anything remotely notable in my post are the Trolling twins from Cheltenham.
I’ll bet you 100 shekels that you hawk your wares around more websites than just this one…..and that you probably have one of your own as well (which no one reads).
That would make you the “blogtrotter”, wouldn’t it. 🙂
The point has been made that the easiest people to brainwash are not the workers but the intellectuals.
There is a reason why it is the PPE graduates, the Guardian journalists, the political consultants and the cogs in the party machines who hate Corbyn the most. It is because if he is right, and there are clear indications that the tide is flowing that way, then everything that they ever learned at Oxbridge or at the Boss’s knee, all the degrees that they accumulated, and paid for in various ways including cold hard cash, is worthless.
They were conned, their tutors were charlatans, the books they read were wrong.
The world which the political class stands astride, does not exist.
Since Thatcher all the clever people have known that capitalism has been with us forever and will be eternal, that those in charge deserve to be and achieved their positions as a result of sheer merit. That the great mass of the population is stupid and incapable of initiative. That Socialism is dead. That England is Conservative. And that Leicester City never wins anything.
Pity the poor pundits they paid dearly to get where they are and now every time they open their mouths they talk nonsense. The laughter is beginning to drown out their spiels. They are reduced to tricks in Nuneaton., And that just makes people laugh more.
There was another piece in The Guardian today, criticising social media types for supporting Corbyn. I noticed the comments: the article was torn to pieces. The Guardian is self destructing.
The thing is that there is a field of common sense out there in which we measure new ideas and unfortunately for the media agendists mentioned, the consenual reality and experience that is represented there strips thise propagandist messages of their power.
Suggested parallel: The Guardian is trying to increase its readership by adopting a Right perspective of sorts to woo the centre ground. And it’s becoming ‘unelectable’. Blairites take heed. Blairites who could have saved some of their now-ex-councillors a bit of grief by standing behind the leadership rather than pulling every trick in the book to bring it down.
The guardian have fired all its non-elite educated staff, they’ve kicked out anyone from a different background – so there is no one there to bring in fresh or exciting ideas. In the early 2000s the guardian was the most cutting edge a mainstream daily could be – it left all the other musty papers behind – this of course attracted all the young posh kids who used connections to get jobs there. As they’ve grown up they’ve become conservative in their views and insecure about their position. The same has happened right across the arts and creative industries. Consequently no one is buying any of it. No one wants posh indie music, posh art, posh political comment, posh literature – it has nothing interesting to offer the world. As they detect that – the more fraught they get and the more angrily they cling on.
Superimpose that on the rebranding of ‘journalism’ to mean ‘cut and paste any old tosh someone well known sends you’, the primacy of thinkpieces over research, and the decline of getting the Council’s chief exec pissed at lunchtime to find out exactly what he’s up to…and I think we have it. It all went to hell when the blatts started taking girls from journo school IMO.
Ba’al Zevul,
Careful with them comments, Ms. Viner and Ms. Kuenssberg may engage in some kneecapping, or accuse you of misogyny. Whilst I’m not opposed to Hacks undertaking Post-Grad Journalism, the job itself in reality requires an ‘apprenticeship’, which is why those ‘old guard’ hacks still plying their trade usually adhere to sound Journalistic principles and ethics. I actually work closely with a former Manchester hack who landed up at The Daily Star under Derek Jameson, who’s language was somewhat flowery in the Editorial room, he knew his bloody stuff though, as did all those assembled by him to actually launch The Daily Star – today he’d be driven out of the industry by the likes of Viner and Kuenssberg, both of whom would not have lasted 10 seconds with him – not an Editor to mess with or come out with feminist tripe. The fact is they are crap at Journalism, but good at PR and Marketing, which is what journalism has become today, that and a propaganda exercise.
Sign this one.
https://www.change.org/p/bbc-we-demand-producer-of-daily-politics-along-with-andrew-neil-laura-kuenssberg-be-sacked
I note a certain aversion to Oxbridge in “Bevin”‘s posts.
Could it be that “Bevin” was an Oxbridge ‘reject’ who ended up at Bristol?
And why is that Oxford Greatsman (allegedly) “Lysias” not stepping in to defend his alma mater (allegedly)?
No it’s because for the last 20 years for the most part, Ex- Oxbridge politicians are for the most part, probably the most inept ill experience naive, easily corrupted, protofascist anti-democratic nincompoops, nincompoops that think climbing up a politicians arse is how to have a “career” in politics, which largely means passing whatever law your lobbyist mate tells you to, in the hope you will one day sit on a board of directors with your piss poor PPE grades.
I mean, we’re not talking about physicists, brain surgeons, computer scientists or anyone who can actually do anything. We’re talking about types that clearly have difficulty with basic thinking skills. Of course if theyre good at copying press releases they might even make “journalist” as well.
Far be it from me to defend PPE. I think it’s like economics and political so-called “science” here in the States, what careerist conformists choose to study.
What, precisely, is wrong with Bristol? Perfectly good university, hope Bevin did go there. Where did you get your degree? And in what? No, no. After you. Then I might.
Nothing wrong with it at all, Baal.
But you will know that it did enjoy – perhaps no longer? – the reputation of being the university people put down in the number 2 slot after Oxford or Cambridge on their UCCA (as was) forms.
To the extent that the rumour (surely malicious and unfounded?) had it that Bristol would itself reject anyone who put it down in the 2nd rather than the 1st slot (that was in the days when the order of your 6 university choices was visible to all 6 universities).
bevin, the answer is really quite simple. After forty years of complete Rightwing dominance in the West, after forty years of Reaganism, Thatcherism, Blairite treachery, Murdochism and ‘Free Market Fundamentalist’ triumphism, the Right has completely re-made Anglosphere societies (and increasingly other Western societies)in their image. And that image is that of the Rightwing Authoritarian Personality, ie the psychopath. Hence all the traits of the psychopath, ie great egotiism, utter unscrupulousness, insatiable greed and the complete absence of human empathy and compassion, have been not just normalised, but made compulsory. Every last redoubt of human activity has been purged of non-psychopaths, and in the UK their triumph is complete. with Cameron’s ‘landslide’ on 24% of the electorate’s vote. Then along comes Corbyn, archetypally NOT ‘one of Us’. The frantic, hysterical, hate-crazed reaction to his emergence could only have been expected, as, I fear, is his demise, one way or the other. The rulers WILL NEVER tolerate Corbyn getting within a country mile of power.
Spot on Bevin. Spot on.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QwTKdmMSK9w
Natalie Bennet with Jeremy Paxman interview in typical fashion condemning and ridiculing that we have become to accept as normal.
Imagine humanity as a relay race what are we handing to our children in the form of baton when We have the likes of kroneberg and Paxman marshalling the event.
Really enjoying all these posts about how “principled” Jeremy is. Just look at his “principled” stance on the EU. There he had a real chance to prove himself, and he flopped. Pathetic.
Why was staying out of an argument that would have led to more division in the Labour party, by which I mean given the Blairites yet another chance to attack him, “Pathetic”? A wise leader chooses when and why to go into battle and doesn’t allow his enemies dictate the terms, unlike Cameron, who flew into a panic when the Russians moved into Syria.
http://classics.mit.edu/Tzu/artwar.html
So you would like a Labour party with a dictator at the helm? Rather than one that reflects the views of it’s members. Corbyn is right to let the party carry him on this and keep a low profile. As you’ve shown, whatever Corbyn’s actions, he will be pilloried by the press and areas of the public, so far better to keep the PLP on board.
I’m love this! All the Tory/establishment trolls from the guardian are heading over here to say the same old crap they post there everyday! Except this isn’t the guardian, and the mods aren’t on their side!
And you know why they’re heading over here?! Because Craig has more legitimacy that the all new establishment guardian!
Chilcot – Bit too obvious to release the report on 7th July but hey let’s go along with the day before i.e. 6th July and push the terrrrror lever real hard to expunge the sleighride or wipe-out the critique….
Damned good points, Mark.
Good point Mark, they could have chosen the 4th. July out of reverence to their special relationship, but it amounts to the same endgame, terror in pursuit of the Russian heartlands and its resources.
The following important post was made on The Guardian website by a stat’s specialist at 10:00AM, its seriously impairs comments made by Habbabkuk the Arbiter and Anon1, together with most MSM reporting on Labour’s fortunes in last Thursday’s vote. Indeed, the statistics seriously undermine the cause of the Labour Malcontents: Here’s the actual post, which no doubt will be culled by The Guardian Mods:
Jon Harvey 38m ago
I have done some number crunching of the PCC elections across England and Wales. Here are some conclusions I can draw:
In 2012, the Labour share of all the PCC (including London Mayor) votes was 33.92%. The Conservative share was 33.14%. Note the Conservative share was only slightly less that the Labour one. Perhaps in hindsight this was a portent to the general election result in 2015?
What about now? The Conservative share is down to 30.59%, a drop of over 2.5%. The Labour share on the other hand is up to 36.64%, a gain of over 2.5%. The gap between the two is now running at over 6%.
Interesting huh?
Perhaps Labour are doing rather better than the main stream media keep saying. My blog is based on factual data – not opinion or opinion polls – just real voting…
Full blog with link to spreadsheet here: http://ajustfuture.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/was-that-almost-general-election.html
You must stop obsessing about me, Mr “Rogers” and devote the time saved to improving the accuracy, reliability and style of your all too frequent posts.
Habbabkuk,
One rather likes a Melee, which I’m always up for.
That said, I make no claims personally of “putting tropes to rest”, leaving that boast for others. However, certain claims have been made that the stats from last Thursday don’t support, and obviously, as ever, I do think facts are important, hence my post, which was shared with all to make their own opinion should they delve deeper into these issues.
You keep posting Chris. Hab is a bonafide nincompoop. And a losing one at that
You are Openseas aren’t you?
Openseas, don’t make me cough, try RebeccaRiots on CIF – Habb actually sounds like Openseas, who I’ve tangled with previously. However, expecting a ‘Mod of death’ or ‘Ban’ soon again on CIF. On Off-Guardian, as here, post under real name, real name being banned on CIF a couple of years ago.
I meant Hab, he must be Openseas. I was banned as Shatnersrug a while back I tried slight changed but the trolls actually grassed me up!
I’m boycotting the guardian now, I’d recommend everyone do the same.
I see the “sack Laura Kuensburg” petition was taken down after the trolls filled it with deliberate sexist twaddle.
Very disappointing, but entirely predictable. The establishment has lost the plot. Just as to criticise Israel is antisemitism to critise the BBC is sexist.
Its a great shame about The Guardian and far too many of us have been ‘banned’ for actually detailing real facts that goes against what the anti-Corbyn cabal are saying – got ‘banned’ three times during the Corbyn struggle for leader, which is a bit of a record.
Alas, its a shame Off-Guardian cannot fill the space vacated by The Guardian, where many of us now go to comment without the censorship – but will not be closed down by The Guardian and outwit them using Tor, essentially they cannot trace your IP address, so use the web browser Tor and re-register under your original ‘user’ name but affix a 1 after it, same as I do with RebeccaRiots and ConDemVermin.
Fact remains I like posting under my real identity as a firm believer in Freedom of Speech, hence why I like it here on CM’s site, which is more of a ‘radical site’, than a politically motivated one – Bill Gladstone being accused of being a radical ‘firebrand’ by Queen Victoria, so nothing wrong with that in UK traditions.
I am not astonished in the slightest that people like you and “Shatnersrug”** have been banned from CiF and similar sites.
Why should they have to print the loads of garbage you no doubt send in their direction day in and day out?
Why should they provide a forum for your brand of public self-satisfaction***?
The only cause for astonishment is that you haven’t been banned from here as well.
Count yourself lucky that Craig’s a tolerant sort of geezer!
_________________________
** “Shatnersrug” still hasn’t fessed up about his precious handle(s), has he.
*** or “onanism” if you prefer plainer language.
Habbabkuk,
To be blunt you actually exhibit a multiple personality disorder, namely, you keep switching you user name to such a degree with inane crap. That you think its somehow clever just makes my flesh crawl.
And, your opinion of yourself is so high, it’s staggering – “I put that trope to sleep” or whatever. You are a bloody joke and yet cannot see it. Normally I’d feel pity, alas can’t feel pity for someone who seems immune to any critique.
So, keep up the good “ARBITER” work, which regrettably most here care little for I’m afraid.
Hahaha Hab, I can hear that brain cell of yours wobbling, better watch out or you might hurt yourself.
Now don’t worry I only have one handle at a time. But I’m done with the guardian. You people can have it.
Shatnersrug
Do keep up!
I am not saying you post under several names at any one time.
But I am asking you what you handle on this blog was before you adopted “Shatnersrug” – because you are clearly not a newby here.
Are you Passerby, or Macky, by any chance? Or one of the others who dropped off this blog without warning? 🙂
Chris, there are lies, damned lies, statistics and the Rightwing on a mission from God, to destroy the Devil Corbyn.
Euh? So you don’t like the focus group methodology?
Well, thankfully the anti-Corbyn coup failed. Everything was set up to cash in on a supposed poor result for Labour in the local elections, but with the exception of Scotland, Labour did rather well – and the Scottish Labour failure had nothing to do with Corbyn. It really is amusing how the Guardian et al. account for every Labour success, e.g. Oldham, London, as due to the candidate and local circumstances, but every Labour failure is down to Corbyn.
And yes the phoney focus group was timed to come out at as Labour was supposed to lose Nuneaton, but that went wrong for the plotters when Labour retained control of the council.
And then there were those strange creatures, MPs who nominated Corbyn in the leadership election, but have now “seen sense” and want him to stand down on the basis that he is a nice chap but “not up to the job” Well their article to the Guardian achieved nothing.
But people need to remain vigilant: the Blairites won’t give up.
My twitter exchange with the focus group people:
Matt Usselmann @rad_econ 2h2 hours ago
@election_data What is reason three MPs are mentioned in the publication Rachel Reeves/Caroline Flint/Chris Leslie? Did they finance report?
@rad_econ no ffs
@election_data No reason to get tetchy. Serious question: Why were these 3 names brought up in the focus group session?
@rad_econ tbh we covered a lot of names, so a little odd you pick out three.
@election_data I think it is rather odd that you finish your focus group focusing on these three names, why throw those in the ring?
@rad_econ
@election_data There is hundred of MPs you could pick out, but you finish your focus group with those three? Three obscure MPs, why?
Whilst Turkish soldiers are apparently shooting at Syrian refugees over the border, here we are told by the BBC that another knife attack, committed by a drug dependent person with a psychological problem, was committed by a possible terror suspect shouting Allah u akbar.
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/grafing-messerattentaeter-hatte-offenbar-psychische-probleme-a-1091602.html
mind that sort of justification of being mad and unaccountable was used as an excuse for Zionist terrorists shooting up congregations.
Actually, we’re not being told that by the BBC. The BBC (Radio 4) is quoting the Bavarian Minister of the Interior as saying that the authorities are not seeing this as a terror-related act but as the act of someone who apparently has mental health problems and a drug addiction.
Are we listening to the same BBC or are you just confused or are you simply lying again?
Habb.
Yes you are correct, this time, though I’m rather surprised it’s not being spun as something else. The BBC have cried wolf so many times in the past, that one tends not to listen now.
However I wonder what slant the event mighten have taken had the Bavarian minister, not taken a clear and informed stance, one can only wonder.
I am correct 99% of the time, RoS.
Pay attention!
They blame him for the Election losses from 2012. He wasn’t even leader in 2012 He only came to be Leader three years after, he’s only been leader “YES LEADER” for 8 months . They are pathetic. Even if he was what they say. “Scruffy ” “Slimey” There is one thing he ISN’T .and that is CORRUPT like the Tories. He is a honest sincere man .That wants to make life good for all , Not just the 1%. Lets see with the panama paper’s why they didn’t want him to become the Leader. What he really knew about them. There is one thing that they won’t be doing, and that is putting there hands in the trough any more if he gets in ,and do you know what????? HE WILL YOU WATCH!!! and they know it. It’s the quiet ones you have to watch, Jeremy can sit back and watch from a far,While they tear each other to pieces, and do you know what. He WILL get to be the PM, You wait and see. Then see who’s Laughing then.
Reading through the transcripts, the phrase that kept coming into my head was “Judge, please tell the prosecution to stop leading the witnesses?”
It’s official:
The Guardian is reporting that attacks on the innocent Laura K, the BBC’s first ever female political editor and a feminist sensation, are entirely motivated by sexism of the VILEST kind!!!
Laura, it seems, has a perfect right to ‘report’ any prejudice that clits across the narrow surface of her tiny brain, because that is her job. That is what she is paid for.
Among the distressing epithets flung at the saintly and deep thinking first ever woman editor at Britain’s legendary public broadcaster (no pun intended) are some too disgusting to publish. So readers who find “whore” routine and “bitch” frankly offensive to canines, will have to trot over to twitter to find out for themselves why all “hate speech” directed at those in authority by temporarily non-violent extremists must be censored ASAP.
that she be “flits across the narrow surface of her brain.” Freud be damned.
It would be antifeminist to suggest that you were right first time, and that that is where she keeps her brain. So I won’t.
The petition is gone.
https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/907
“Say it aint so, Joe!”
Bevin – boycott the guardian – you don’t need to beat it, it’s beaten itself.
JSD,
I find it strange that the Petition is now gone and the reasons cited by the Petitioner, if only based on the fact, at least when I signed, no evidence of gender-bias was applied. Indeed, we are invited to leave a ‘comment’ as to why we were signing the petition and most followed the line that the women had breeched any resemblance of ‘impartiality,’ indeed many quoted outright propaganda for the cause of concern. Who cares what gender the person is, if they are propagandising they are propagandising period – what has sex got to do with it may I ask?
Chris,
I guess the person who started it just wasn’t up for the hammering that Craig got on sky news.
Chris – if everyone had signed the one I posted this wouldn’t have happened
https://www.change.org/p/bbc-we-demand-producer-of-daily-politics-along-with-andrew-neil-laura-kuenssberg-be-sacked
Just signed it, although a bit late.
Rogers
It is never to late for you to be too late.
Habbabcrook thinks he’s Abba Eban.
It’s no good asking me, I did not take the petition down.
However, isn’t the Guardian report on this matter an exquisite example of anti-Corbyn bias?
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/may/10/laura-kuenssberg-petition-sexist-abuse-38-degrees-bbc
“Prior to the petition being taken down, former Independent on Sunday political editor Jane Merrick told the Guardian that Kuenssberg had faced an extra layer of sexist criticism. “She has been called a whore and a bitch on Twitter,” said Merrick. “Nick Robinson used to be accused of Tory bias but he never experienced this level of nastiness.”
“Of course, not all Corbyn supporters are sexist – far from it – but there is a core of hard-left misogyny that comes out against women when Corbyn is under pressure – such as the abuse against Stella Creasy and Jess Phillips.”
How, pray, does Merrick know – and how does the Guardian know – that the people making misogynistic comments on this petition have anything to do with the Left? It strikes me as at least as likely that a great many of them are pro-Kuenssberg people seeking to discredit the petition and have it taken down – as has, in fact, happened – or alternatively are opportunistic misogynist nutcases taking advantage of the petition to have a go at a prominent woman. Neither of these plausible alternatives is even considered by Merrick or the Guardian. And how many of these nasty and abusive comments were by men, and how many by women? Not even mentioned, let alone explored. Oh no, it’s all Corbyn’s fault, as usual.
@JSM,
Of course, adding insult to injury, we are not even allowed to actually comment on the Guardian article making all the Corbyn allegations as usual. Of course nothing to do with censorship and everything to do with defending poor, frail defenceless women put upon by evil men. Typical Guardian bollocks I’m afraid.
Er, she’s been insulted on Twitter, so the 38 Degrees petition’s taken down? Is there an obvious connection I’m missing? Shit, everyone,/i> gets insulted on Twitter. Even bitches and whores.
Keeps deleting my correction to my email addy and making me an orange Rorsach blot. Bringing back the inner lizard, hopefully.
John S-D, Merrick’s ‘elephantine’ logic is simply projection, that old favourite of Rightists everywhere, in action. To claim that misogyny is rife on the Left, and not on the Right that so slavers to destroy Corbyn that they are going mad with it, is an archetypal Big Lie.
Ironic, isn’t it – most of the time the right sneers at the left for being so concerned about gender, race, homophobia, and so on. All of a sudden the right views sexism, for example, with horror – when it’s politically advantageous to do so.
At least she isn’t Jewish or transgender, or the petition would have been anti-semitic and transphobic as well.
(I have no a priori knowledge of whether she’s Jewish or transgender, but I infer that she isn’t from the fact those accusations weren’t made. Tell me if I’m wrong.)
She doesn’t want you to know what she is right now:
https://en-gb.facebook.com/people/Laura_Kuenssberg/723663973
The link to the cached blog supporting this article is also down (this link still works, though):
http://www.dearunite.com/2016/01/bbc-orchestrated-resignation-of-labour.html
but Laura was in it up to the ears, evidently.
Entirely predictable. The same trolls that come here and on cif put up some sexists comments – the guardian orchestrate a sexism campaign – end of story.
Start another one and add that bigotry will not be tolerated
Good to see that Duterte, the Philippines version of Trump, won the election to be the Philippines next President.
Though you won’t see it in the headlines, he promised to sever ties with the USA and Australia if they criticized him.
Guess their SoDs will take him out when he refuses to go along with more boxing in of China.
In my real job, actually dealing with the Philippine election and it’s likely consequence/impact on foreign direct investment – but approve of plan to move Philippines to a Parliamentary democracy, not one based on US principles. The new man is also interested in far more regionalism, essentially he’s talking a Federal political entity with a parliament, similar to Australia, Canada and Germany.
The Marcos fellow, and yes despite being the son of the last Dictator, also shows some promise, although he’s close to the US.
Those who object to the Hasbarababble on this blog ought to spare a thought for the poor sods reduced to this sort of ‘work.’
As this essay at Club Orlov (published on Tuesdays) reminds us, it takes a lot of work to churn out conformists and followers, fans of Big Brother and Friends of Israel:
http://cluborlov.blogspot.ca/2016/05/bureaucratic-insanity-free-to-be-slaves.html#more
Anything you disagree with is Hasbarababbel and anyone who doesn’t accept everything you say unquestioningly is a troll.
That’s very good-old-days CPSU, wouldn’t you say? 🙂
Who is this Orlov person you link to?
His blog is remarkably silent on the matter.Whenever I see a blog which remains silent about its owner and where he’s coming from (unlike CM) the word “dubious” springs to mind.
Here’s a tip: scroll down Dmitry’s website and follow the links to discover who he is.
Here’s another: Orlov is a Russian, based in the US, who greatly disapproves of the old CPSU. As, as a matter of record, do I.
If you want to learn more contact him.
In future you might want to consider adopting the policy of looking for information before smearing.
On the other hand, as your every contribution to this blog has made very clear, smearing is what you do. It is pretty well all that you do.
Kindly leave the stage.
If he spends time looking up information, he will have less time for his odious posts. And it would appear that those posts are what he is paid for.
Dmitry Orlov is a very clever bloke, and his blog reveals almost everything that anyone would wish to know about him. So far as I can tell, he has only got one major thing wrong, and that is about the origins of oil. You should read it. Some of his essays are brilliant.
I was impressed by his books Reinventing Collapse: The Soviet Experience and American Prospects and The Five Stages of Collapse: Survivors’ Toolkit.
You are a troll that’s why.
The Chilcot report is a most expensive pilel of rubbish since it does not contain full exposure of Blair’s communications with GW which was the main concern of the inquiry.
I typed pile and it came out pilel!
So the long, long, long awaited Chilcot report will be published on 6th of July. Its expected to be 2.6 million words long.
http://www.thenational.scot/news/long-delayed-chilcot-report-into-iraq-war-will-finally-be-published-in-july.17323
Meanwhile the nasty party can’t seem to make their minds up, as David Cameron contradicts Ruth Davidson, his Scottish branch manager.
“A BREXIT could lead to the “disintegration” of the UK, David Cameron has warned, despite the Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson insisting that a vote to pull out of the EU would not trigger a fresh independence referendum.”
http://www.thenational.scot/politics/david-cameron-contradicts-ruth-davidson-by-warning-a-second-independence-referendum-could-follow-brexit.17337
In the BBC’s defence (I can’t quite believe I’ve said that). North Korea has expelled three BBC journalist’s ( I use the term very loosely) for insulting the “dignity” of the North Korean state. Rupert Wingfield-Hayes, and two colleagues are said to have distorted facts, and spoke ill of the NK system and leadership.
How dare the BBC speak badly of the utopian state that is NK (says I tongue in cheek) ?
No link found.
“A member of Israel’s Knesset (parliament) has revealed that Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud helped finance the election campaign of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2015.”
“Citing a massive leak of confidential documents dubbed the “Panama Papers,” Isaac Herzog, who is the chairman of the Israeli Labor party said, “In March 2015, King Salman has deposited eighty million dollars to support Netanyahu’s campaign via a Syrian-Spanish person named Mohamed Eyad Kayali.”
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2016/05/09/464706/Saudi-Arabia-King-Salman-Israel-Prime-Minister-Netanyahu-Isaac-Herzog-Panama-Papers
I suppose we really shouldn’t be surprised at all about this, afterall David Cameron constantly kowtows to Saudi royalty at every turn.
As do other EU leaders as well as US diplomats.
Who needs warfare when you can just bribe and purchase Western politicians – it’s the done thing and Hilary Clinton excels in vacuuming funds/donations/bribes in this manner, hence she is certainly not fit to be US President.
Chris
True, I suppose politicians by the very nature of politicking are at some stage or another duplicitous to the public. More so I’d imagine if they’re careerists, looking to to make a bundle of corporate cash, for their services to big business. The electorate interests comes a very distant second place.
Meanwhile in Syria.
Syrian people took to the streets in southeastern city of Hasakah on Friday and burned the US Flag.
“People of Hasakah, who were angry with the arrival of 250 US soldiers to the Kurdish-controlled town of Rumeilan without Syrian government’s mandate, condemned “the US imperialism” and the “illegal presence” of US troops in the Hasakah province, Iraq-based Ara News reported.”
http://en.abna24.com/service/middle-east-west-asia/archive/2016/05/07/752708/story.html
For those of us who once considered The Guardian a friend and are concerned at its ability to propagandise and twist facts, here’s a link to CIF comments that are deleted in real time – essentially it allows us to see how censorious The Guardian has become: http://46.101.255.81
Thanks for the link Chris, I expect Habba the troleen is over there now, learning naughty words that nanny didn’t teach him.
Here’s a link in return
http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2016/05/10/464871/Clinton-Americans-Palestinian-rights
My God Bevin,
After reading Grossman’s interview I’m now held to be a ‘soft-Zionist’ for supporting the two state Israeli solution based on its 1967 borders prior to its further expansion that year – which, whilst in no ways offers actual justice, at least it would assist in lessening the economic hardships Palestinian’s face daily, never mind Israeli brutality.
Whatever our stances, seems we can’t win, but beats being accused of being an ‘anti-semite’ any day of the week.
Thanks for the link and much truth in what Grossman says, alas the Queen Borg will hear none of it.
This is really worrying. Definitely some skullduggery going on. Brilliant article.
Latest polling results in the U.S. presidential race, as reported in The Hill: Poll: Clinton leads Trump by 4 points nationwide:
Lysias,
Did not take Trump too long to close the gap on the Queen Borg and Sander’s commands a now impressive 11% lead that is solid, Clinton’s lead is not solid and not immune to Trump, despite a number of Republican neoliberal and neocons moving in her direction – seems many of the workers have had enough of the Repub/Dem neoliberal Duopoly and want change, if Sanders does not get the Democratic ticket, which is an insult, the DNC deserves to be impaled on Trump with Clinton. My money is on Trump.
Another very interesting report in The Hill today: State Dept.: Clinton IT aide’s email archive is lost:
He’s the guy who pled the Fifth Amendment to the investigators, but whom they then gave immunity to.
Greater Manchester Police have been holding a counter terrorism training exercise based at the Trafford Centre. They released film of the moment an actor playing a terrorist shouted “Allahu Akbar” several times before detonating a fake bomb. Predictably there were many complaints, so Assistant Chief Constable Garry Shewan issued a press release :
Right, sure ….. it never even occurred to GM police that anyone would be offended by such blatant linking of terrorism and Islam. It didn’t even occur to them while they were editing and approving the film prior to release. And it certainly hasn’t occurred to the BBC that by faithfully reporting GMP’s ‘blunder’ on every news bulletin, they are reinforcing this Islamophobic connection.
A dress rehearsal for a staged event? Who knows watch this space.
I just followed your discussion on twitter. There are 2 questions which I feel are not answered.
1) who paid for this ‘research’
2) When is the last time that a focus group discussion and outcomes were given such prominence in the media
To sum up, it seems to me that the ‘researchers’ chose the people the least likely to vote Corbyn and came to the conclusion that Corbyn is not electable in Nuneaton. It looks really shoddy.
And they were wrong – Labour retained the council.
Yes, that is the spanner in the works:)
But they still had to publish. Couldn’t let all that money invested go to waste.
Just discovered another amazing coincidence. On 6 May Norman Smith political correspondent of the BBC tweeted “Corbyn critics flag up swing in Middle England seat of Nuneaton” followed by “Result for Nuneaton worse for Labour than at a general election”. Out of the entire elections across the UK, the ONLY COUNCIL Smith tweeted about. The day before this research came out. And he specifically stated “Corbyn critics” directed him to it.
Amazing coincidence is it not?
Not only did Labour retain the council, this focus group research showed 2 of their Tory voters saying they will vote Labour next time. That is a 12.5% swing from the Tories to Labour. Perhaps someone with more immediate access to the figures and relevant tools can tell us what that would do to the Parliamentary seat?
Thank you Craig.
A politician like Corbyn is utterly anathema to an entirely neoliberalised media and political system whose rosseta stone spells out simply THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE. They will continue until they destroy him and replace him with a politician they can bullly more easily. If the current smear campaigns (he’s a terrorist, his supporters are misogynists, antisemites, witches, aliens – it’s like fucking Room 101) don’t work they will start throwing people out of helicopters and blowing up cars. There can be no opposition.
Isn’t there a libel law against these sort of slurs , if not there should be . This is a personal attack on a persons hygiene , surely this is wrong on a lot of levels . Personally I’d go round and hit them a kick in the arse .