The Significance of Theresa May’s Disgraceful Quote 306

Theresa May’s disgraceful quoting with approval at Prime Minister’s Questions an anti-Corbyn twitter user has been grossly under-reported – and that under-reporting is itself part of what makes this of enormous signficance. But first just consider this sample of the account from which the UK’s Prime Minister quoted:








Collins right wing laddism crosses the line into the grossly offensive and unacceptable. It is a puerile display of sexist, racist and anti-disabled hatred.

May’s folly in quoting Collins is extremely important for two reasons.

Firstly, if either Nicola Sturgeon or Jeremy Corbyn had done this they would be under simply colossal pressure from the mainstream media. Tarring by association has been the backbone of the mainstream media campaigns against both Corbyn and the SNP, and pages after page and headline after headline have been concocted around the slightest association of Corbyn, Sturgeon or Salmond with people a great deal less vile than Collins, over just single intemperate social media entries.

Will anybody attempt to deny it is true that if Corbyn or Sturgeon quoted a twitter account as offensive as this one it would be massive front page headlines?

Secondly, it is important because May’s tactic at Prime Minister’s Questions is to ignore the question asked, but reply with a pre-arranged jibe about Jeremy Corbyn. That is precisely what happened here. The “joke” quoting Lewis Collins by name was written by one of May’s political advisers – paid by the taxpayer – and then read out by her. May claimed that “Lewis’s” comment had been selected from replies to a Corbyn social media tweet canvassing public opinion. It seems to me massively improbable that this is true. Tory advisers are not sifting through tens of thousands of public social media replies to Jeremy Corbyn, and then happening to hit on this Tory commenter.

The truth is rather that Collins’ gross Tory laddism appeals to Tory professionals, and that May’s adviser who wrote the question is almost certainly a follower or fan of Lewis Collins’ output. And that seems to me to tell us something very significant indeed about this Tory government.

May needs not only to apologise profoundly for having quoted Collins, she needs to identify who wrote this answer for her. And sack them.

306 thoughts on “The Significance of Theresa May’s Disgraceful Quote

1 2 3
  • Demetrius

    What is truly surprising is that so many of all these highly paid allegedly expert advisers are blithering idiots who should not be trusted outside their padded cells.


    I agree. And were I not opposed to gambling on principle I would bet big that the ‘them’ in question was a ‘him’ or plural ‘hims’.

      • Salford Lad

        Jeremy Corbyns stated policy is not to engage in ad hominem attacks, but to engage with the real issues that effect the electorate.
        Unfortunately PMQ’s is a schoolyard bully pulpit and the Tory tactic of constant personal attacks seems to be a hit with the ill-informed masses.
        Would appear Theresa May is continuing Camerons despicable behaviour and avoiding the real issues, while deflecting attention from social concerns.
        Cobyns goes up in my estimation ,whenever these cheap tactics by the MSM or Tories are used against him.

  • Alan

    I think Twitter may have shut Collins down. Following a link from inews I got:

    Sorry, that page doesn’t exist!

    • craig Post author

      Indeed the feed seems to have vanished since I took those screenshots. Possibly quite sinister – are they covering up May’s blunder?

      • Alan

        It’s hit the Daily Mirror now:

        I like the quote from JC 🙂

        A spokesman for Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership campaign said: “Jeremy was raising a very serious question about the housing crisis in our country.

        “Theresa May chose to respond with a pre-written joke quoting someone who has used racist language on Twitter.

        “If this is the level of research she does for PMQs it’s no wonder the Tories had no plan for Brexit.”

          • Alan

            “So why did he not say something at the time?”

            Am I supposed to be able to read Jeremy Corbyn’s mind? In case you think this to be true, I can assure you that I do not posses such an ability. Have you perhaps considered emailing him directly instead of asking such stupid question in this blog?

      • Shatnersrug

        I have had many a scrape with that Lewis Collins character, his entire raison d’etre it to corner you into saying something that can be misquoted to make”Corbynistas” look like rabid lefties. Sometimes he works in tandem with other commentators. I got it out of him that he was in the armed services I can’t prove it but I’m fairly sure he’s paid or detailed to do what he does. I certainly wouldn’t touch one of his tweets if I wanted to look the least bit sane.

      • Relieved in Wigan

        Oh, thank God. We might all otherwise have died of vexation at the continued accessibility of such a horrendous manifestation of gross Tory Laddism.

        Of course, gross leftist-liberal coarseness, calling people you disagree with cunts, racists and misogynists, and general European male self-hatred, always welcome here, thank goodness.

  • Gulliver

    Given that this is the same PM who promoted Boris Johnson (Graduate of the Duke of Edinburgh School of Diplomacy) to the position of Foreign Secretary, this type of tactic can hardly come as a surprise.

    • fred

      If she hadn’t agreed to let him be Foreign Secretary there’s every chance he could be Prime Minister now.

      • nevermind

        you are making out that the 1922 committee is even more stupid than Boris ‘its fine to sell more arms to the Wahhabi murderers’ Johnson.
        You must be the only one who wants this failure to become PM.

        • Habbabkuk

          I do not read Fred’s post as meaning that he wants Boris to become PM. Could you elucidate, Nevermind?

  • Tony_0pmoc

    Meanwhile…..Paul Craig Roberts names Craig Murray “the most honorable man in Great Britain”.


    “Washington Escalates Punishent Of Truth-Tellers”

    “Former British Ambassador Craig Murray, a truth-teller, has been banned from entering the United States of America.

    Washington is so afraid of truth that the most honorable man in Great Britain cannot be allowed into the USA….”

  • Old Mark

    There is certainly a double standard at work here, and Jeremy Corbyn quoting from an offensively far left twitterfeed would undoubtedly get more attention from the MSM.

    However my view is that all these twitterstorms should be acknowledged as here today, gone tomorrow ephemera- they aren’t worth getting worked up about.

    A more worrying event at PMQs yesterday was May uttering a clear porkie about housebuilding starts under the Tories- and JC letting it pass without comment. This is worrying for 2 reasons-
    1. It shows that TM has no compunction about landing below the belt blows on JC by such brazen dissembling
    2. It also shows a worrying failure on JC’s part to divert from the script when required- instead of calmly spouting his follow up question, he should have seized on May’s dissembling and pressed home with the truth, namely that the Tories’ record on new home starts is lamentable, and worse that that of the previous governments.

  • Tom

    May is little more than a ventriloquist’s dummy, just like Cameron was.
    The media aren’t going report May’s dishonesty, because they work for the the Tories and their establishment bosses.
    A little window-dressing every 20 years with a Tory plant in the Labour Party keeps most people from realising we live in a one-party state.

    • Bayard

      I always thought DC looked like he was reading from a script someone had given him. I don’t know about May. I have better things to do than watch her on TV, but I dare say she is the same.

  • Anon1

    Oh don’t be so po-faced. May didn’t quote any of those tweets. And you’re the one who gets upset when Corby is accused of “sharing a platfrom” with extremists.

  • Ba'al Zevul

    That’s the way PMQ’s works, unfortunately. Pointscoring is easier than answering genuine questions. It’s an opportunity for party drones (decent MP’s have immense procedural blocks in the way of getting serious issues debated outside the Partei diktat) to get headlines. IMO, May could do herself a great deal of good by ignoring her PR’s, spads and wonks, and get on with the dismaying task of running the country. As could any other senior politician.

    And the futility of drawing serious conclusions from the foaming of this or that wanker on Twitfacereunited/whatever is not mitigated by giving said wanker yet more publicity. Surely we have better things to get exercised about?

  • Andy Los Dos

    Hey Craig,

    I have two quick points to make.

    1 – Do you have any evidence of the claim “May’s adviser who wrote the question is almost certainly a follower or fan of Lewis Collins’ output” as it seems very unlikely to me. Rather I suspect the joke writer, short on time, didn’t have the chance to check all of Collins’ previous twitter posts. I suppose it depends on your level of cynicism.

    2 – I honestly don’t see why May needs to “apologise profoundly” for the quote. If the quote itself was offensive then so be it but it wasn’t. It was in fact a clumsily delivered joke. On the topic of his other tweets, then we are not in any position to say whether supports them or not. If you happen to show support for another person’s statement on twitter and they happen to have said or go on to say something different which is offensive are you in someway responsible for their outburst? I would claim not.

    Your point on whether the MSM would give greater coverage to such a story still stands of course. Thought provoking piece as ever.

  • Habbabkuk

    At the risk of trying your patience, Craig:

    what WAS the twitter comment Mrs May quoted?

    I can see lots of twitter comments from Mr Collins (who is clearly an unfunny vulgarian), I read lots of indignation about Mrs May quoting one of his twitter comments but I cannot see that twitter quote.

    • fred

      It went along the lines of “In a recent survey asking who would be the best Prime Minister ‘don’t know’ scored higher than Jeremy Corbyn.”.

      Not even funny.

      • Habbabkuk

        Well, there have been funnier and less funny quotes.

        But thank you for supplying the quotation at issue, Fred.

        I do not find it offensive at all – all part of the rough and tumble of political “discourse”, I’d say.

        I now understand why the quotation on which the whole of Craig’s post is based was not spelled out and why a number of offensive twitter messages were given instead.

        So, in conclusion : all Craig’s indignation (and his call for an adviser to resign) is over a non-answer given at PMQs by Mrs May, who quoted an inoffensive twitter message posted by someone who has been found to have posted a series of rather vulgar and unfunny messages on other occasions.

        Have I got that right?

        • Gulliver

          I don’t believe, if taken in isolation, that anyone would claim the comment was particularly offensive or original or indeed all that funny. I do not believe it is the comment that is the issue, but who the comment is attributed to. As has been expressed, can you imagine the sort of indignation that would emanate from the MSM, and his own internal critics, had Corbyn used a comment from an individual with a similarly questionable twitter history as part of his own pre-written parliamentary rhetoric?

          The fact that this guy’s words are now written into immortality on the pages of Hansard must be a source of great amusement for him, not sure what it says about the current state of British political debate though.

          • Habbabkuk

            “.. not sure what it says about the current state of British political debate though.”

            That is a rather sane comment, actually, in that you express uncertainty. This episode says nothing about the current state of political debate, if only for the simple reason that events like PMQs are not representative of political debate are nor indeed are they intended to be (see my other post). Far too big a fuss is being made of this mini-storm in a demi-tasse.

        • Paul Barbara

          @ Wigan Maybe that is why the critter’s Twitter record was deleted – making JC smile? It.’s total negative stuff, keeping him ‘anxious and defensive’, otherwise it gets no coverage.
          Has Langley ‘terminated’ the poor silly ass? We should get the ‘Red Cross’ and ‘AI’ to investigate….

  • Habbabkuk

    “..May’s adviser who wrote the question is almost certainly a follower or fan of Lewis Collins’ output. And that seems to me to tell us something very significant indeed about this Tory government.”

    OK, so one adviser (out of the several she has) of one minister (out of a couple of dozen, although she is PM) is “almost certainly” (for which read “possibly”) a fan of Collins’s output (he might be aware of the output but not necessarily be a fan)……and that “tells us something very significiant indeed about this Tory government”

    What, exactly?

    • Shatnersrug

      It tells us that Craig took offence at the way PMQ has come to be treated by the incumbent PM as little more that a platform to practice her/his comic timing. PMQ not that it was every marvellous has become an outright joke and the blame for that must lie squarely on the shoulders of David Cameron who demeaned the office of prime Minister more than any other before him.

      And as this is Craig’s blog he’s entitled to express his views.

      • Habbabkuk


        In that case, Craig is thinner-skinned than I would have imagined.

        As Baal had pointed out, correctly, PMQs are a vehicle for parliamentary knockabout rather than for a serious holding to account (for the latter, serious MPs tend to put written questions to ministers) and there is nothing new whatsoever about that. Many continental legislatures do not have QT to ministers at all.

        So I suggest that the indignation shown on here is either based on ignorance or purely artificial. This is a storm in a teacup.

        Posts along the lines of the recent one on housing benefit are much more substantial and worthy of discussion.

      • Habbabkuk

        “And as this is Craig’s blog he’s entitled to express his views.”

        Straw man – did anyone say otherwise?

  • Sharp Ears

    ‘The Prime Minister
    Let me first say to Jenny that I fully understand and appreciate the concerns individuals have about wanting to be able to set up and have their own home. I fully recognise the difficulties some people face in doing that. I have to say to the right hon. Gentleman that he is wrong about the figures on council houses. We have delivered on the one-for-one replacement under right to buy.

    I noticed that the right hon. Gentleman had asked all his Twitter followers what questions he should ask me this week, so I thought I would look to see what sort of responses he had received. I have to say that the first one was quite good. In fact, he might want to ensure that he stays sitting down for this. Lewis writes, “Does she know that in a recent poll on who would make a better Prime Minister, ‘Don’t Know’ scored higher than Jeremy Corbyn?” What we do know is that, whoever wins the Labour party leadership, we are not going to let them anywhere near power again.’

    Video of the bag on

    Click on the heading. 12.16 from the bottom up.

    • Habbabkuk

      Sharp Ears

      Do you also have a sharp memory?

      If so, which quotation is more offensive in your opinion: the one from Mrs May or the one from Churchill, who reportedly say of Mr Atlee:

      “an empty taxi drew up and Mr Atlee stepped out”


      “a modest little man with a lot to be modest about” ?

      Lighten up, man!

      • glenn

        You asked someone to provide you with the precise quote just above, at 13:25 –

        H: “At the risk of trying your patience, Craig: what WAS the twitter comment Mrs May quoted? “

        Mr Ears above did precisely that for you (because you’re apparently not up to the job of searching for anything yourself), and this is your response – a mealy-mouthed question-cum-insult like that?

        Not much gratitude to be expected, if one helps you out with a direct request, is there?

    • Geoffrey

      So” Lewis Collins” was not mentioned by name. Did Lewis Collins write the twitter that she is accused of quoting ? ie that Dont Know better known than JC or whatever ?
      Seems very petty.

      • Bayard

        “So ”Lewis Collins” was not mentioned by name.”

        He wasn’t? who, then is “Lewis” in the following extract? “Lewis writes, “Does she know that in a recent poll on who would make a better Prime Minister, ‘Don’t Know’ scored higher than Jeremy Corbyn?”

  • Anon1

    Oh look I have my own little follower.

    I suppose none of it is any worse than Craig rejoicing at the “good news” of the death of the Duke of Westminster.

    But if you really believe my comment to have been offensive then you wouldn’t be following me around reposting it everywhere, would you?

  • glenn

    But calling for the deaths of someone you don’t like, for peaceful protest, is OK if you’re on the Reicht.

    Should a Corbyn supporter say anything of the kind, it’s OMG!!! A DEATH THREAT!!! Call the police at once! (But call a press conference first, naturally).

    Examples are so numerous it goes without raising any surprise these days. The reich-wing media will doubtless conclude that May is “handling” Corbyn so very well, really put him in his place, showed how out of his depth/ out of touch he is now, and so forth. Very possibly that nice Mr. Owen would be able to have a proper conversation with May on how we can agree to get things done going forward.

      • Habbabkuk

        There’s something that’s gone wrong with Glenn lately and I am quite concerned about him. Time was when he was a reasonably level headed sort of chappie who thought a little before reaching for the keyboard.

    • Loony

      Yep – the polling industry has fallen to the shock troops of fraud and corruption. Only this week a poll in the US was overtly manipulated so as to reduce the number of “white males without a college degree”

      This demographic is more likely to support Trump – so if you remove them from the Poll then it obviously follows that Clinton wins the election. Similarly bizarre things happened in the UK prior to the EU vote.

      Manipulating polls also has the side effect of manipulating betting odds – anyone that pays attention to the range and scope of polling manipulation materially increases their chances at the bookmakers.

    • Anon1

      Expect more of this manufactured outrage as it gradually dawns on the Corbynistas that their man hasn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of winning a GE.

        • Anon1

          He was supposed to be a leader with principles, the only leader with principles. But despite a lifetime of Euroscepticism, when it came to the crunch moment he bottled it. And found himself on the wrong side of history. It was at that moment I realised Jeremy will be a loser for the rest of his life.

      • Bayard

        “their man hasn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of winning a GE.”

        You have to agree that having your enemies believe that you haven’t a chance is always a bit of an advantage. Of course, in the echo chamber that is the internet, the Tories and their supporters may take some time to realise that it is only them that believe this particular piece of bullshit, by which time, God willing, it will be too late.

          • glenn

            What, you mean people go silent when you ask them a pointless question? Can’t say I’m altogether surprised, TBH.

          • Node

            And to answer Glenn’s objection, the fund-raising website that John uses allows you to donate with a nickname. The donation and nickname are then visible in a sidebar until they are scrolled off the screen by more recent ones.

            Donate …. quickly post the link here …. donation can be verified …. bet is settled.

          • glenn

            Node: “And to answer Glenn’s objection…”

            What objection? I think you’re providing a response to an objection that was not raised (at least, by myself).

          • Node

            Glenn What objection

            When Anon1’s asked Bayard “Are you a betting man/woman?” you called it a “pointless question.” I assumed you meant that there was no way two anonymous people could conduct a wager in a blog thread. If you didn’t mean that, what DID you mean?

          • Node

            Bayard What exactly are you betting on?

            You said (at 18:18) you hoped the Tories would realise too late that Corbyn DID have a chance of being elected. Anon1 offered to bet you £5 that he wouldn’t be. You refused the bet (“No, my luck is not good enough to warrant it”). I offered to take it.

          • Node

            Glenn and Bayard.

            I may as well mention that John Goss’s charity is pro-Palestinian and there was never any chance of Anon1 accepting my offer. and even if he DID it was win-win for Palestine. Anon1 was baiting Bayard. I was baiting Anon1.

      • Habbabkuk

        Manufactured outrage is le mot juste (or les mots justes, if you prefer). This whole thing is so de minimis that I’m astonished that so much hot air should be devoted to it on here.

        Or there again, perhaps I’m not.

        If that’s the worst that can be thrown at the Prime Minister then she’ll be home and dry at the next GE.

  • nevermind

    Whatever was in the bag is now out, regurgitated.
    Mrs May seems to have more important tweets to talk about at PMQ’s than her non existing plans for Brexit. It should be called how to bomb expectations, as it has done nothing but spread doom and gloom, uncertainty and falsehoods.

    Crickey Loyds want to leave the safety of the Corporation of London, it must be getting bad.
    Has anyone seen Japans 15 page wish list of what should be included in the Brexit negotiations by the UK? And will D. Davies take any note of it?

  • Richard S

    Difficult. Corbyn’s accused of being humourless. To respond with anything more than a dismissive shrug to a joke – albeit an unfunny one – at his expense might just stoke that fire.

    The real issue is that PMQs remain a farce and a disgrace to our democracy. They are – or at least, the bits that get media coverage are – one long farrago of evasion, non-sequitur, insults and puerile humour. The only people who appreciate it are the partisans on either side of the House. It’s scarcely surprising if some of them enjoy Lewis Collins style boorishness.

  • Loony

    @ Sharp Ears – You is one crazy geezer.

    If you genuinely believe that the comment you reference in full should have been deleted then you what is your purpose in restating it in its entirety? Are you some kind of anarchist or is there some other, more nefarious, explanation.

  • Habbabkuk

    O/T but important and surely of interest.

    Has Fatah nobbled the judiciary?

    It appears that a Palestinian court (yes, they exist) has ordered that a forthcoming election in the West Bank and Gaza should be put on hold following the presenting of a lawsuit by a private individual.

    Now it is no secret that that election would be a test of Mr Abbas’s popularity and the popularity of Fatah as against that of Hamas; and that leading elements in Fatah have made it known that they are opposed to holding of the said election. To be noted that the last election was in 2006 and that Mr Abbas and Fatah have clung on to power ever since…

    Is it beyond the realm of possibility that this lawsuit was a put up job by Fatah and that the court’s ruling has been “influenced” by Fatah?

    You wouldn’t find such shennanigans in Israel, where elctions take place (all too) regularly….

    • glenn

      Coming from someone who whines specifically about O/T posts relating to Israel, this has to be a joke. Of course, in this particular instance of an O/T post relating to Israel, it’s “important and surely of interest”. ‘Natch!

      About those Israeli elections – they’re not exactly democratic you know, unless you consider a race-based eligibility for voting to be the hallmarks of a democracy.

      All the same, I have to admire your high standards – even for a desperately beset people living under cruel occupation for generations.

      • Habbabkuk


        I wouldn’t normally devote time to helping you help yourself, but I’m feeling generous this evening.

        1/. My “whines”, as you’re pleased to call them, are not about people posting about Israel; they are about the fact that for some on here, all roads lead to Israel. In other words, no matter what the thread is about, no matter how tenuous the connection ( if there is a connection at all) many will always contrive to slip in (unfavorable) comments about Israel. Or, on a bad hair day, a whole mini-rant.

        2/. Re the vote in Israeli elections being race-based: you will be aware that all citizens of Israel, whether Jewish or Arab, have the vote. There are even Arab political parties.

        Hope that helps, Glenn.

    • bevin

      “You wouldn’t find such shennanigans in Israel, where elctions take place (all too) regularly….”

      Have you spotted any other differences between “Israel” and the Fatah administration in the West Bank?

      • Habbabkuk

        I have not really studied the question, Bev, but I could come up with the following two quite easily:

        – the Fatah administration is much more corrupt than the israeli one

        – the Israeli administration is more efficient than the Fatah one.

        • glenn

          Seriously – that’s it?

          After the last “conflict”, the Israelis were going about their nice lives, while Palestinians were wondering which bits were blown out what cemeteries. Hospitals had been bombed, white phosphorus had been deployed on heavily populated civilian areas. F16s and Apache attack helicopters were finishing off what drones had failed to do.

          Hamas were providing a serious threat of landing a bottle-rocket in the sand, only miles from where you lived, if you were an Israeli supposedly under threat.

          But it all comes down to corruption and efficiency in the administrations, as far as you’re concerned.

          Uh huh. Are you trying to win some stupid game of word-play to dismiss a massive human rights outrage, or honestly grappling with difficult moral issues here? Hmm. Tough one that. Particularly when we know you are very well informed, and not having even the excuse of mindlessly repeating talking-points. You are speaking for yourself; you choose to make it on the side of the powerful abuser, and against the weak and oppressed.

          Clearly such a stance is prone to no official disapproval – on the contrary. Not sure how one can personally feel at ease with the injustice that such work perpetuates, though.

  • Loony

    The referenced comments leave something to be desired and puerile seems as good a description as any. Claiming them to be full of hatred is a bit strong – they seem more designed to be contemptuous and dismissive.

    It is true that should comments of similar nature be referenced by Corbyn then a media firestorm would ensue. The good news is that people no longer care what the mainstream media writes. That is why the British voted to leave the EU, why Corbyn will be re-elected Labour Party Leader and why Trump will assume the mantle of POTUS.

    • glenn

      But not so contemptuous and dismissive for the state-employed lackeys of May, who found these comments well worth trawling through, to the extent they put them forward for public announcement.

      You sound enthusiastic about Trump – I wonder why? It is his racism, misogyny, general crookedness or astonishing ignorance that you find most appealing?

      • Loony

        I have no opinion on Trump as regard to racism or misogyny. Absent specific examples of Trump actively discriminating against named individuals on the grounds of race or sex then opinions ascribing him those characteristics remain qualitative in nature.

        In terms of general crookedness then he does not hold a candle to Clinton – who is one of the most corrupt figures ever to rise to high public office anywhere in the world at any time in history. That is an accusation that is objectively provable by reference to facts.

        The single most appealing feature about Trump is that he is, in my opinion, far less likely to initiate a major war which could easily spiral out of control and turn nuclear. Even if it were possible to prove that Trump has dedicated his entire life to the causes of racism and misogyny I would still prefer him to someone as manifestly dangerous and corrupt as Clinton.

        • glenn

          With Clinton, she’s the most guilty individual in history – case closed, no further discussion required. But when it comes to Trump, well… you don’t know of any _actual_ specific examples, and so on.

          Clearly, you’re not bothered by (or haven’t looked at) the blatant swindling of Trump’s suppliers and business partners, the exploitation of workers, the fraud of the “Trump University”, and all his astonishingly bigoted statements in his debates and rallies, Tweets and interviews just passed you by.

          Just try one specific example. He repeatedly asked military advisors why we can’t simply use nuclear weapons whenever there’s a conflict:

          Apparently he doesn’t understand that this isn’t a particularly good idea.

          Do you – Loony – think this all just fine and dandy, or didn’t you know about it?

          • Loony

            Comprehension does not appear your strong point. I wrote “Clinton is one of the most corrupt figures ever to rise to high public office anywhere in the world at any time in history” You transposed that statement into something different. Why might that be?

            By way of example consider that in 2010 there was an earthquake in Haiti – an earthquake that killed some 230,000 people and materially adversely effected some 3 million others. Consider that Haiti is one of the poorest countries in the world with an average per capita GDP of around $800 and the economic effects of the earthquake are estimated at around 120% of aggregate GDP.

            Now consider the role of the Clinton Foundation in Haiti. This article may provide guidance


            It is interesting that you appear to think that making “astonishingly bigoted statements” is any way comparable to the type of behavior that is documented with regard to Ckinton money grubbing on the back of a truly massive disaster in one of the poorest countries in the world.

            You want to know more. I can tell you. I can tell you for example why the US has about 3% of the world population but 25% of global prison population. Yes it’s Bill and Hillary that think slavery is a great idea. How is it that instituting a massive policy of slavery does not merit a mention but the “blatant swindling of Trump’s suppliers and business partners” is of such concern to you.

          • Loony

            Glenn – It occurs that you may be interested in more background on Mrs.. Clinton.

            Here is Colonel Ghaddafi prophesying a migrant “invasion” of Europe should his regime fall


            Here is Mrs. Clinton reacting to the death of Ghaddafi


            Here are some pictures of migrants in danger of drowning in the Mediterranean


            Who is responsible for all of this chaos and death? It is no good blaming the British and French for they are too weak and too spineless to have ever acted without the express approval of the US, Who was the Secretary of State intimately involved in the creation and execution of this “policy”? It was not Donald Trump

          • Habbabkuk


            “Comprehension does not appear your strong point” (about Glenn)



          • Loony

            Glenn – I wonder what you mean when you call Trump a racist? Who is he racist against? Perhaps you have black people in mind.

            Consider the Nation of Islam (a radical and controversial organization to be sure). However a stated aim of the Nation of Islam is “to improve the spiritual, mental, social and economic conditions of African Americans in the US and all of humanity” Surely these are laudable aims.

            How surprising then that an organization with such aims should publicly endorse Trump for President. Is the Nation of Islam racist against itself

          • glenn

            Selective comprehension, Loony, does definitely appear to be your strong point.

            If absolutely sticking to the letter of each others’ comments, let’s just take a look at yours, to see how silly it is.

            L: “In terms of general crookedness then he does not hold a candle to Clinton – who is one of the most corrupt figures ever to rise to high public office anywhere in the world at any time in history.

            Of course Trump wouldn’t score highly on that rating, since he’s never run for as much as dog catcher before! But I’d like to see your rankings for ” the most corrupt figures ever to rise to high public office anywhere in the world”, and demonstrate that Clinton is at the top of it.

            And you want to get all pedantic with me, after a sloppy performance like that?

            Let’s do one reply at a time, eh? Your blunderbuss approach is all very well – I asked you about *one specific thing* concerning Trump. You replied with three posts, containing about a dozen different unrelated items concerning Clinton. And I suppose you expect all of this to be responded to (doubtless assuming victory by default), yet when I suggest “Just try one specific example”, you pretend you didn’t even see it!

          • Loony

            Glenn If you level the charge that a person is one of the most corrupt figures ever to rise to high public office anywhere in the world at any time in history it is unlikely that one example will suffice to prove that point – for it is indeed a grave charge and hence carries a high burden of proof.

            I have provided you with evidence that Clinton has (i) sought to profit from one of the largest natural disasters of modern times (ii) Is supportive of modern slavery and has promoted legislation designed to expand the slave base and (iii) has promoted the destruction of Libya and is consequently responsible for the current refugee crisis that afflicts Europe. This opens up divisions within European societies and may well lead to widespread civil unrest. It enables ISIS to infiltrate Europe and elevates the risk of death for millions of migrants who undertake perilous seaborne journeys.

            Those are just 3 examples – many more are available. I would have hoped that those examples alone, if not sufficient to prove my charge, would revolt and repulse any decent human being.

            Whatever Trump has or has not done surely it pales by comparison to global looting, the promotion of slavery and the economic and social destruction of entire continents.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Bayard September 8, 2016 at 20:43
            ‘Aw come on guys, they’re both as bad as each other. It a shame they can’t both lose.’

            Not so much a shame as an abomination.

          • glenn

            Loony: It is pointless discussing with you, since tackling the point at hand is not something you’re able to do.

            But it is worth saying that Clinton did not determine policy. That was down to Obama.

            Clinton did not organise the invasion and occupation of Iraq. That was down to Bush/Blair.

            Clinton did not orchestrate the attack on Libya, given she does not control NATO.


            Loony: Vote for Trump if you like fascism, there’s no discussing the point. You are clearly suffering from an advanced case of CDS (Clinton Derangement Syndrome). You’re in extremely poor company with this condition, and there are millions of binary thinkers out there just like you.

            They are goose-stepping their way to fascism. Join them if you like, there was no dissuading them in the 1930s either.

  • hugh wilde

    I put up a post this morning saying her behaviour was disgraceful and that her spin-doctors should be sacked. This quote used to cover up her inability to answer simple questions has hit a nerve with all fair-minded people. It is actually lower than some of the remarks made by her predecessor. She has proven very early into her tenure that she is grossly unfit to do her job.

    • michael norton

      Some have said J.C. was boring to ask all of his questions on housing.
      However it is also said that at least half of constituents questions to their M.P. are about housing.
      So quite relevant but maybe boring to those who already own large or several homes.

      • Hieroglyph

        The vast majority of Tories in the house only see housing through the prism of prices. So, if their house portfolio is doing well, there is no housing problem. If it’s not, why, there’s a housing problem. The concerns of their constituents, who have to live in poor-quality housing, for stupid rents, and who routinely get fleeced by the rentier classes, are simply not worthy of consideration.

        If anyone thinks I’m exaggerating, I’d just respond by pointing out the decades long policy of Western Governments, and the financial sector. Government investment in housing is laughable, everything is left to the market. Ever-increasing house prices are a ‘good’ outcome to the market. Not so good for almost everyone else though. This has all occurred alongside stagnation in wages. None of this ends well, for anyone.

        It’s also worth noting that when Corbyn asks a question about housing, a concern for many, he gets mocked. Pretty much every time, he gets mocked. Well, they won’t be mocking when the ponzi finally collapses, will they? No, they’ll be on their knees, begging for our mercy. And they won’t get it.

        Oh ok, got a bit Trotsky their. Nah, after the next collapse, they’ll just vote themselves more money, and call out the troops to quell the riots. All will be as before, like a bad sitcom.

    • lysias

      It is well known that Hillary was pushing for intervention in Syria when intervention was being opposed by the Defense Department and the armed services. Unfortunately, she persuaded Obama to intervene, something that Obama now calls the worst mistake of his administration, whereas Hillary continues to defend the intervention.

  • Republicofscotland

    I must agree that if Sturgeon had quoted from the likes of Collins, it would be front page news for weeks. The media however are less forthcoming over May’s antics.

    As for being evasive May personifies the tactic, years of weasel words have left her well armed. A prime example on PMQ’s was Angus Robertson looking for a straight yes or no answer, from May. Robertson asked twice but May squirmed her way out if the situation, to cheers and howls of approval from her backbenchers.

    • Amazed in Wigan

      Well if quoting Collins will get Sturgeon on the front page news for weeks, she’d be smart to get on with it, because there’s no other reason, surely, why anyone would want to see her on the front page for weeks.

    • Habbabkuk

      “A prime example on PMQ’s was Angus Robertson looking for a straight yes or no answer, from May. Robertson asked twice but May squirmed her way out if the situation,”

      In fact, a bit like you when I ask you a simple question, RoS.

  • michael norton

    O/T – BBC

    Two men have been charged in Austria in connection with last November’s Paris attacks which killed 130 people.

    The state prosecutor in Salzburg told the BBC that the men – Moroccan and Algerian nationals – were suspected of being accomplices of the attackers.

    Salah Abdeslam, the only known surviving member of the jihadist team, has appeared in a Paris court for a third time, but again refused to speak.

    The co-ordinated attacks were claimed by so-called Islamic State (IS).

    That will please Islamaphobic Theresa May

    • Paul Barbara

      @ michael norton September 8, 2016 at 18:24
      O/T – BBC
      ‘Two men have been charged in Austria in connection with last November’s Paris attacks which killed 130 people….’

      Correction: ‘Allegedly’ killed 130 people.

      • michael norton

        A policeman in France has been stabbed during an operation to arrest three women in connection with a car found with gas canisters near Paris’ famous Notre Dame cathedral last Sunday.

        Police opened fire after the stabbing in Boussy-Saint-Antoine, south-east of Paris, wounding one of the women.

        Officials said the suspects were “radicalised” and appeared to have been preparing an immediate attack.

        In November, 130 people died in Paris in attacks by so-called Islamic State.

        A state of emergency has been in place in France since then.

        Paris bombings suspects extradited to France from Austria

        The more that I.S. is squeezed in Syria, the more of the terror will be happening in Europe.

  • Amused in Wigan

    What the twittering that Craig quotes proves is that provided they try, try and try again, even the most humorless twit will eventually twitter something slightly funny — probably by accident, on the millions monkeys typing principle. In fact Twitter is really the practical implementation of the A Million Monkeys Will Eventually Type the Complete Works of Shakespeare theorem.

  • Anon1

    The reason people like Lewis Collins exist is that the left in this country (and in most parts of the West today) have clamped down so hard on free speech that there is a gut reaction among some to write things purely to ‘offend’* those who have laid down the law on what may or may not be said.

    This country is among the most tolerant in the world, yet the expression of non-PC thought has become almost illegal in our society. If in any way you express an opinion that does not fit with the left-liberal consensus you are sure to be howled down as a racist, xenophobe, islamopohobe, homophobe, and so on. (Again, Craig is right on with that consensus – eg, “All concern about immigration is racist”.)

    I support people like Lewis Collins, Katie Hopkins, Old Holborn, whether they are tasteful, funny, or not. Because it is critical at this time more than ever before that we push back against the humourless, the professional offence-takers and those who would ban free speech because someone or some group is ‘offended’ by it. They must be ‘offended’ and ridiculed at every opportunity, because they have already largely succeeded in closing down free speech and will persist all the way if given the opportunity to do so.

    Craig laughed about the untimely death of the Duke of Westminster, calling it “good news”. Immediately after the birth of the Prince George he called the baby a little wanker. Many on the left openly looked forward to and then celebrated on the streets the death of Mrs Thatcher after a prolonged period of dementia.

    You have doubtless justified all this to yourselves on the basis that your targets are rich, priviliged, Tory, white, scum, and so on, and therefore deserving. I don’t agree but I defend your right to express your views. If I want to laugh at the idea of re-opening City Airport after some virtue-signalling, left-wing twits have chained themselves to the runway because “the climate crisis is a racist crisis”, then you have to respect that also.


    *I place ‘offend’ in inverted commas because you cannot give offence. You cannot be offensive. Offence can only be taken. If you don’t like someone’s tweets, don’t read them. If you are opposed to free speech, don’t use it. Or better still, go and live somewhere where it is banned. And leave the rest of us alone, you self-righteous little pricks!

    • Habbabkuk

      That is a truly excellent post.


      There are many on here who believe in free speech – for themselves.

    • RobG

      Anon1 says “the left in this country (and in most parts of the West today) have clamped down so hard on free speech”,

      Yet the fascists who are now in control in the West won’t bode any questioning of the official narrative of 9/11, etc, and these fascists are actually passing laws so that they can prosecute and imprison people for such free speech.

      Anon1 & Co certainly inhabit a very, very strange and dark world.

    • RobG

      Extremism Disruption Orders (EDOs) will restrict the activities of people the UK Government thinks are engaged in ‘extreme activities’ – even if they have not broken the law…

      Quote: “This is an area fraught with difficulties that could see non-violent political activists in all sorts of areas deemed to be “anti-democratic”. The Conservatives already say that the policy would catch neo-Nazis, raising questions about whether the EDL or the BNP would be banned under the measure. But the official definition of non-violent extremism is already wide-ranging and, as Big Brother Watch has pointed out, the national extremism database already includes the names of people who have done little more than organise meetings on environmental issues”.

      And if that’s not Orwellian enough for you, psycho May is now the prime minister

      • Habbabkuk

        ” But the official definition of non-violent extremism is already wide-ranging and, as Big Brother Watch has pointed out, the national extremism database already includes the names of people who have done little more than organise meetings on environmental issues”.”

        In which case quite a few of the regular commenters here must be on the database.


  • giyane

    USUKIS government policy, supported by the Gurus/imams of Deobandi, Muslim Brotherhood and Salafi UK Islam, has been to employ terrorists against Muslim populations wherever they are. The guru/imam behind my house invited me to send money to help the Syrian people his own jihadist group was bust terrorising out of their homes. Louts may be justifying the lamping of Poles, but guru/imams are expressly forbidden to drive the Muslims out of their homes in the Qur’an. They are gurus of hate, who persecute truth-tellers, not unlike their USUKIS state hate sponsors

    • giyane

      Is that zzZZZ about lamping Poles or zzzZZZ about Muslim/Hindu gurus working for USUKIS state terror against Muslims?

1 2 3

Comments are closed.