BBC Daily Distortion 400

The BBC has appointed arch Tory Sarah Sands as editor of the flagship Radio 4 Today programme. She is best known to the public for a leaked policy memo she wrote while at the Telegraph, including memorably advocating

“Play on people’s fears… stop just short of distortion”.

The extraordinary thing is that if Sands does “stop just short of distortion” she will actually be improving the performance of BBC News. The BBC Trust has upheld a decision against Laura Kuenssberg for a most disgraceful piece of lying, a breach of every journalistic ethic. At the time of the Paris attacks, Kuenssberg had this interview with Jeremy Corbyn.

Kuenssberg “If you were prime minister, would you be happy to order people – police or military – to shoot to kill on Britain’s streets?”
Corbyn “I am not happy with a shoot to kill policy in general. I think that is quite dangerous and I think can often be counter-productive.”

Kuenssberg deliberately distorted this to make it appear a response to the Paris attacks, and what was broadcast was the following:

Kuenssberg “I asked Mr Corbyn if he were the resident here at number 10 whether he would be happy for British officers to pull the trigger in the event of a Paris-style attack.”
Corbyn “I am not happy with a shoot to kill policy in general. I think that is quite dangerous and I think can often be counter-productive.”

What makes the malice in Kuenssberg’s dealings still more evident is that she had in fact asked Corbyn a question specifically about Paris, and received a very different answer from Corbyn: “Of course you’d bring people onto the streets to prevent and ensure there is safety within our society.”

But she broadcast neither the actual question nor the actual answer about Paris.

The deceit, malice and deliberate bias could not be more obvious. The BBC Trust really had no choice in its finding, and it specifically noted that Kuenssberg “had not achieved due impartiality.” That is an extremely important word – it was not just a lapse in judgement, it was a clear indication that Kuenssberg is partial in her political affiliations.

That of course has been blindingly obvious to a great many people for a long time. You may recall the petition against Kuenssberg’s bias that was signed by 35,000 people before 38 Degrees took it down on the complete lie that it had attracted a significant number of sexist comments.

My personal favourite remains Kuenssberg’s frenetic anti-Corbyn broadcast of 28 June 2016 in which she prophesied that Corbyn’s confidence of winning a second leadership election was misplaced. I cannot imagine a more blatant example of gleeful bias. The piece is headlined “Jeremy Corbyn’s Support Begins to Show Signs of Fraying” and was, as a matter of provable fact, gloriously wrong about everything.

Being a completely biased charlatan will do no harm at all to Kuenssberg in the modern BBC. I leave you with the Head of BBC news, extreme Zionist James Harding, and his reaction to the decision of the BBC Trust, the body which “ensures” the BBC’s impartiality, about Kuenssberg’s blatant lack of impartiality. “We disagree with this finding” says Harding, adding that BBC News “formally notes it.” It could not be plainer said – the BBC no longer has any intention of not reflecting political bias. Mr Harding is no doubt delighted to welcome his new colleague, Sarah Sands, ex Daily Mail, ex Telegraph, and who as editor moved the Evening Standard way to the right.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

400 thoughts on “BBC Daily Distortion

1 2 3
  • michael norton

    Diane Abbott is protesting about The Scottish Donald.
    She is on J.C.’s front bench.
    Does anyone think that when Theresa May calls a snap election this year, that Labour stand a chance of not being wiped out?

    • RobG

      Although Corbyn is having difficulty stepping up to the plate, in a general election the tories will be slaughtered.

      It’s why Theresa *non-entity* May will do everything possible to avoid a general election until 2020.

      The power of nightmares, the power of the media, which is perhaps why people like you selectively choose to ignore the massive unrest and discontent at the moment, and blame totally incompetent governance on ‘immigrants’.

      • Habbabkuk

        “It’s why Theresa *non-entity* May will do everything possible to avoid a general election until 2020.”

        Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act the date of the next General Election IS 2020 anyway.

        Do keep up with developments in your native country.

        • Dynamo

          Maybe educate yourself a little bit better. Less chance of coming across as an uninformed…..person.

          The fixed term can be overridden by a 2/3 house majority. Easily achieved in today’s climate. Corbyn said Labour would support early elections.

          Do keep up with developments…………..

  • michael norton

    Politicians including shadow home secretary Dianne Abbot, shadow attorney general Shami Chakrabarti
    and former Labour leader Ed Miliband were also at the London march.

    Ms Abbott told the crowd she had come on behalf of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

    She said: ‘Donald Trump has been president for only a few days, and look at what he is doing.

    ‘We need to resist the Islamophobia and scapegoating of Muslims,
    we have got to resist it whether it is in the United States or here in the UK.’

    Sounds just like the next government of the United Kingdom

    • michael norton

      When Theresa May, Prime minister of the United Kingdom, calls a general election, to secure the people’s Brexit, the Liberal Democrats
      and the Labour Party will be swept into the dustbin of irrelevance.

    • RobG

      Ah, chocolate box England, where we just need to deport (or exterminate) all the immigrants to make Britain ‘great’ again.

      Whereas the reality is that my country is being raped and looted by a bunch of vermin privateers, all supported by the presstitutes who pump out a barrage of lies and propaganda.

      The amazing thing is, many egits fall for the lies and propaganda.

  • John Goss

    Most of those remote cameras and robots that they send down there never come back up. They are apparently trying to build a frozen surround to try and contain all the leaking radioactive fuel and contaminated water. It seems like a mammoth task with no guarantee of success and a lot of scepticism from its opponents. For the sake of the planet, and not wanting to be a prophet of doom, I hope it succeeds.

    • RobG

      John, I believe they abandoned the ice wall thing a few years back. It seems to be another propaganda stunt, much like the removal of fuel rods from the unit 4 spent fuel pool (which almost certainly went sky high in March 2011).

      I also don’t wish to be a doom and gloom merchant. I’ll just say, though, that we passed the fifth anniversary last year, and now the health effects will really start kicking in.

      As we all start dropping dead like flies, the psychos who rule us will no doubt blame it all on the immigrants and ISIS.

      God, what a world…

  • Tom

    Sadly, BBC news is now simply a mouthpiece of the government, which is in turn controlled by the US and Israel.

  • Dave

    There are prominent people in the BBC and news media who have their own agenda which shows how they can switch on and obsess and switch off and ignore certain news items and make trigger happy and false accusations of “ism” when other people complain, which is a mark of their arrogance, manipulation and racism.

    I mean its called the British BC and yet it acts to depose the opposition leader on behalf of a foreign power. Perhaps the solution is for this public body and senior posts to be subject to elections too?

    • michael norton

      I agree, the BBC are infected with Liberalism, partly this is engendered by the European Union.
      I doubt if Dave Cameron was that bothered about gay weddings but he had to toe the E.U. line, as he was an E.U. lackey.

      • michael norton

        Once the United Kingdom breaks the shackles that bind us to the drowning corpse of the European |Union,
        we can start to regain our culture, our heritage our freedom of knowledge and truth. We can start to get away from imposed truth.

        • D_Majestic

          We shall most likely get more of the same “Imposed Truth”. A Mosely-Lite version probably. Where’s King Arthur when we need him? Lol.

        • Steph

          Could you be a little more specific please? What culture needs to be regained exactly? And surely ones ‘heritage’ is what it is, i.e. what happened in the past. You can’t ‘regain’ it, that’s like saying you want to regain your great grandmother.

          • michael norton

            It would be my extreme pleasure.
            Walk up my local town, almost nobody is speaking English, it is like the United Nations.
            We voted Brexit for several reasons but one of the reasons was to regain our country.
            Meaning far too many people have moved to the United Kingdom, who were not born here and have no connection with this land or the indigenous population, we are being replaced and we have had enough.
            We are fed up with being politically corrected by the hated European Union.
            We are fed up with our legitimate concerns being ignored by the main stream parties.
            We are fed up with being neutered.
            We are fed up with being taken for idiots.

            Is that any good for you Steph?

  • Jo

    While it is true that the BBC Trust upheld the complaint against the appalling Kuennsberg it went on, in its judgement, to praise her professionalism and commitment to her job and recognised how well she does it. That it could make such claims about a journalist who has so often disgraced her profession was pretty astonishing.

    • michael norton

      How much money does Laura squeeze out of the BBC, which is of course funded by us.

    • Habbabkuk


      Your comment is a good example of how commenters on here can be guilty of double-think and letting their personal bias or obsessions get in the way of logic and fair play.

      You appear to approve that the BBC Trust upheld the complaint against Ms Kuenssberg but to disapprove of the same BBC Trust praising her professionalism, etc in the same judgement.

      So you trust the BBC Trust and welcome its finding where it suits you and distrust it and criticise its finding where it suits you.

      And the “a jounalist who has so often disgraced her profession” is only your personal opinion and has no probative value. Who are you, after all, and what’s your agenda?

      • D_Majestic

        Well-here’s Jo and one doubtfully suspected of being a “Leftie”-whatever that stupidly pointless and ill-defined term may mean-who hold the same view. The BBC gives credence to the “Society” devoted to a certain “Senator for Boeing” and thinks this is permissible. As an organisation it is clearly nowhere nearly accountable enough to those who have been paying for it for the last 45 years. Or those who began paying for it only last week, for that matter. BTW-were you once Mr.Justice?

      • Jo

        @ Habba

        “Your comment is a good example of how commenters on here can be guilty of double-think and letting their personal bias or obsessions get in the way of logic and fair play.”

        I think, rather, your comment better describes your own contributions than my own.

        I have no agenda but I do expect a publicly funded news organisation to ensure impartiality in political matters. I see a clear contradiction between the Trust’s correct decision to uphold the complaint against Kuennsberg and the fact it then went on to describe her as an excellent journalist. She is no such thing. She cannot be guilty of failing to show impartiality and of deliberately filing an inaccurate statement by Corbyn in order to damage him and, at the same time, an excellent journalist! I see no logic whatsoever in the Trust’s position.

        It is not just my “personal opinion” that she frequently disgraces her profession through her behaviour. Anyone who frequently sees her infantile antics on the Daily Politics cannot fail to see her lack of professionalism.

        • Nick

          Excellent journalists don’t distort an interview by selective editting…that’s bias pushing their own viewpoint. What a strange world some commenters live in if they that is acceptable from a journalist paid by a publically funded body. I see zero contradication in your viewpoint jo

  • Njegos

    My family had a personal encounter with BBC distortion. My sister worked as a reporter for a Spanish TV station in Granada during the build-up to the Iraq war. Naturally she had contact with reporters from other media organisations including the BBC.

    One day a frustrated BBC reporter approached her and asked her if she would be willing to pretend, for the “sake of balance”, that she was in favour of attacking Iraq – the fellow was doing a survey of Spanish views and couldn’t find anyone who was in favour of the invasion.

    No wonder it was called Blair Bullshit Corporation.

  • Aubrey

    We already know that those days media can’t be trusted! Still a lot of people are reading and believing those media news! This is bad!

  • Paul Barbara

    OT, but when I tried to access Craig’s blog I got:

    Suspicious Web Page Blocked

    You attempted to access:

    For your protection, this web page has been blocked and submitted for review. Visit Symantec to learn more about phishing and internet security. 

    It is recommended that you do NOT visit this page, however if you know that this web page is safe, you may choose to visit this web page anyway. 

    Exit this site’

    I tried again and got the blog. This has happened at least once before.

        • Paul Barbara

          @ John January 31, 2017 at 13:00
          No; from home. I’m retired (but not from ‘spreading the truth’).
          !A La Continua! (the struggle continues, in Portuguese).

          • Muscleguy

            Well if you are sure you are not running any Symantec programs or plugins to your browsers then you need to have a good burrow in your ISP’s web pages and see if you can sign out of their net nanny software. I’ve done that here in the UK with Virgin. There are no children here any more and if there were I would not rely on something like that but something on their device which could be configured.

            At some point between your browser, your system and your ISP a Symantec net nanny program is at work. You need to find out where and if you can turn it off.

    • Shatnersrug

      Symantec is a troll organisation I do hope you don’t have any of it’s supposed “firewall” programs installed on your pc – same goes for Mcafee. Uninstall them.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Shatnersrug January 31, 2017 at 19:31
        Thanks for the info -however, I am not ‘techno-savvy’ – what security system would you advise?

        • LordSnooty

          Kuenssberg Total Distortion provides, I believe, excellent protection against anyone trying to monkey with your private parts.

    • fred

      If it’s only happened once or twice don’t worry about it, it’s just a glitch. When you access a https site there’s all sorts of handshaking to be done and certificates to be got and if there is a temporarily blip somewhere in the system while its happening, could be lightning hitting a power line thousands of miles away, it doesn’t work. I doubt there is anyone never gets a message like that from time to time.

    • giyane


      Are you talking about the Freak storm will bring 50 ft waves or the Amber Rudd tells monster whoppers story?
      Boris Johnson recently praised Al Qaida in parliament after its defeat in Aleppo for its work in ethnically cleansing 2/3rds of Syria for USUKIS. Al Qaida personnel are interchangeable with Daesh.
      The mind of the modern politician can always make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear by saying that it wasn’t Boris who giving IS a propaganda boost, it was the US president.

      Do they think up these fatuous comments lying on their backs thinking about England wishing it would finish, or is there actually a department of truth which thinks them up for them and they don’t get promotion unless they include their quota of utter bullshit in their honourable speech?

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Republicofscotland January 31, 2017 at 11:28
      Bit like the ‘War on Drugs’, in reality a war on any upstarts who threaten the CIA’s supremacy.

  • Republicofscotland

    Well according to the BBC, British PM Theresa May has put the Queen in an extremely difficult postion over the planned state visit of Donald Trump. Never mind a sharp rise in the Privy Purse, again will negate any discomfort.

    However is thought that the state visit won’t happen in the first year of Trump’s presidency, and by kicking the visit into the long grass, the hope is that all the fuss over Trumps ban on Muslims entering the US will just be distant memory.

    The media, also claims that the queen is apolitical, unless of course there’s a Scottish referendum, in which case she “purrs” when the union wins, well according to ex-PM David Cameron, she does.

  • Iain Stewart

    Thank you very much, Craig, for posting the “London calling” film, which I found chillingly informative. At times it reminded me of the old “I’m-a-Mac-I’m-a-PC” sketches with the relaxed cool guys on the one side and the buffoons on the other. Except that these were not amusing actors.

  • Republicofscotland


    But Craig has often brought up the actions of the HJS.

    It would appear that, (a Times investigation) the Henry Jackson Society is allegedly being paid by Japan to spread negative propaganda about China.

    “The Times’ investigation suggests the London-based HJS is paid £10,000 (US$12,500) per month to spread anti-Chinese propaganda, including through public figures like former British Foreign Secretary Malcolm Rifkind.”

    What does that say about Jim Murphy?

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Republicofscotland January 31, 2017 at 11:51
      I know nothing about Jim Murphy, but I do know the Chineswe Regime is a brutal one, imprisoning and torturing Falong Gong peaceful practitioners, and using political prisoners as a pool of people who can be executed when their organs are in demand for financial gain.
      I wish they would pull out of this sh*t, because they are doing a good job countering the excesses of the Yanks.
      Won’t happen, of course. ARMAGEDDON, here we come!

  • Nomatestype

    I first encountered this website about 3 years ago.
    I have been regularly reading it for regularly for 2, and have not been moved to comment before.

    Too many commenters exhibit a petulant demeanour that is tiresome to engage with.

    However Habbabkuk has gone way beyond what anybody should tolerate in obtuse mendacity and discourtesy here.

    They can claim not to understand the obvious dishonesty of Ms Kuenssburg asking a question , and then broadcasting the answer immediately after stating she had asked a different question (why not just broadcast the contemporaneous footage of the journalist asking the question and the politician’s immediate answer?)

    But if they do so they cannot simultaneously claim to have some increased wisdom or perception compared to all those other commenters they regularly denigrate.

    Habbabkuk on here is the the equivalent of an anti social drunk bringing silence to a pub as thye move in on other people’s conversations.
    They demean the experience of every other user of this website, not because they offer contrasting political opinions, but because the way they express themselves is so immature.

    I haven’t got time to engage in a protracted correspondence so knock yourself out with your pathological inability to allow the last word to another.

    • Habbabkuk

      Where have you suddenly popped up from? And why (except to express indignation which is as fake as it is uninteresting)?

      A regular reader for 2 years and this is your first comment?

      To mis-paraphrase the great George (Gorgeous) Galloway : I admire your endurance, your tenacity and your self-control, Sir!”

      • George

        If Nomatestype’s indignation was fake he wouldn’t have voiced it. And if you thought it was uninteresting you wouldn’t have commented on it.

        • Habbabkuk

          “If Nomatestype’s indignation was fake he wouldn’t have voiced it.”

          Dubious logic, George. It implies that it is enough to voice something for that something not to be fake. Or, to say it slightly differently : what is voiced is not/cannot be fake.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Habbabkuk January 31, 2017 at 13:30
        Just put your hands up, and dress in sack cloth and ashes.
        We’ll welcome you back aboard, after your contrition and penitence.

    • Burt (not bert)

      I concur. I hardly ever post here, but the behaviour of Habbakuk (among a few others) in continuous character assassination of other posters makes this blog more irritating than it should be. To me this is obvious trolling which adds nothing to the conversation and seems desgined to have the effect of devaluing the comments section y drawing it down blind alleys.

      I’ve got no objection to questioning other people’s statements and challenging their logic (which he does do sometimes), but more often than not he just drops personal comments about other posters. This is just my opinion – call it trolling if you like.

      • Habbabkuk

        You’re another long-term reader who’s posting for the first time.

        Just like “Nomatestype”.

        And both posting on the same subject.

        I do hope that both of you, having taken the plunge, will post on a wide variety of subjects from now on and particpate fully in this online community.

        • Dave Price

          Habbabkuk said:

          ? ?? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???, ?????? ????? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ?? ? ???? ??????? ?? ???????? ???? ??? ?? ??? ?????????? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ?????????.

          I think you spectacularly miss the point, Habbs. Burt is saying that your behaviour makes this blog irritating and seems designed to devalue the comments section; Nomatestype says your behaviour demeans the experience of every other user of this website. As such you are a hindrance to participation in an online community and if, as it is easy to suspect, this is your intention then it is of course outrageous that you should wrap a cloak of community welcome around your shoulders.

          I agree with Burt and Nomatestype. I think this is something Craig Murray should look into for the sake of his readership.

          • Habbabkuk

            ” I think this is something Craig Murray should look into for the sake of his readership.”

            I quite agree, Price.

            As you clearly feel very strongly about this and just in case Craig isn’t following all page 2 comments I suggest you should contact him directly and suggest that he ban me.

            You’ll find the contact button at the top of the page.

          • Dave Price


            I have nowhere suggested that you be banned. I hadn’t given much thought to what could be done as that will be up to Craig, but all I had in mind was further guidance as to acceptable and unacceptable behaviour.

            I’m sure the mods will inform Craig if they think it is important enough.

          • Habbabkuk


            But you obviously feel there’s a problem, don’t you – that is clear from your post.

            As you feel there is something for Craig to look into, surely you (or Burt or Nomatestype) should get in touch with him and express your preoccupation, especially as it is for the sake of the readership?

            After all, he is the blog’s owner and a direct approach would be more effective rather than trying to slough off the matter into the shoulders of the Mods?

          • Dave Price

            Let’s see how things go shall we? The nuclear option is always there should it be required.

        • Burt (not bert)

          This is not my first post (I only just started putting (not bert) because of bert), I’ve posted on a few subjects, but I’ve been reading here for years – I would post more but get put off by all the derailing.

          When you post criticising other posts for their content I’ve no problem with your posts (although I disagree with most of them – it’s healthy to have ideas/opinions challenged) – but it seems to me that many of your posts are content free and focussed on character assassination – eg in response to nomatestype, who you say you’ve never seen posting before, you immediately question his motivation: “And why (except to express indignation which is as fake as it is uninteresting)?”, while you complain when others do this to you based on years of experience of your posting. This is not argument and it demeans the blog (that’s not to say you’re the only one, but still).

          I’d like to take your approach in good faith (I’m just a hippy like that) because when you stick to content criticism your posts can be valuable, and obviously come from an intelligent person, but you make it difficult to maintain this when you waste so much time slagging people off (albeit in a aloof passive aggressive manner).

          Like I said I value debating with people with different views to me, so I wish this could happen here more (to be sure there’s guilt on all sides with this). I will argue in good faith with you if you like though.

          • Njegos

            Burt –

            The trick is to ignore Blahblahkook. He is an obnoxious loudmouth who suffers from lack of attention.

        • Paul Barbara

          @ Habbabkuk January 31, 2017 at 13:51
          Or ‘shamontary’, if you have your wicked way.

    • lysias

      I often wonder what the commenter that you complain of imagines he is accomplishing here. With that discourtesy and obtuseness, he does a very good job of discrediting the causes he ostensibly supports. I often wonder if that is precisely his intention.

      • bevin

        It seems quite evident to me that he is discrediting the bog deliberately. He has said before that Craig should not allow comments. He is opposed to public debate. He believes that political decisions are beyond the understanding of ordinary people.
        It will be pleasing to him to learn that he turns many people off. He would much rather that, instead of reading the blog and the comments, they listened to the BBC and did as Laura instructs them to do. As to what that should be, he has no idea, he is just following orders. Our blog’s little Corporal.

        • J

          In general I wouldn’t single out contributors for criticism, ecology of ideas and plurality are valuable. I agree with most of the above primarily because he is so singularly disruptive and has yet to contribute a single substantive argument or positive idea since I’ve been reading the blog. The effect is that of a self obsessed and disruptive child in a class room, nobody can hear anyone else above the noise level he and his alter ego create. And that is almost certainly his purpose.

          • Hmmm

            Down the pub he’d be called thrush…
            He can introduce valid points, but fails to do so, or follow them up properly. I don’t want an echo chamber but his rabid refusal to accept certain truths makes my commitment even stronger.

          • Habbabkuk


            “..his rabid refusal to accept certain truths”

            There’s the nub of the problem, isn’t it: too many people believe that their opinions are “truths” and get very annoyed when their opinions (for that is what they mostly are) are contested.

        • Habbabkuk


          Your post of 17h25 merits a few comments.


          “It seems quite evident to me that he is discrediting the bog deliberately”

          Those who discredit the blog – and, by association, Craig Murray – are those who continually post to the effect that the UK is a fascist country, that various recent terror attacks never happened, that Israel is conducting genocide against the “Palestinians”, that former President Obama was the CIA’s Manchurian candidate…and so on.


          “He has said before that Craig should not allow comments.”

          I have suggested that – except when Craig specifically asks readers for help (which is rare) – the vast majority of comments add nothing to Craig’s posts as regards their veracity, their insight or their orientation. In the downside, they provide easy ammunition for those ( and they exist) who wish to portray him as an irredeemable nutter : this is the guilt by association point. To be noted in this connection that most of the blogs and websites so often referenced by commenters do not appear to have a comments facility.

          “He is opposed to public debate.”

          Nonsense – provided the debate does not simply consist in someone daring to contradict the Eminences being labelled a rascist/fascist/Mossad, CIA or MI5 agent..etc..

          “He believes that political decisions are beyond the understanding of ordinary people.”

          Nonsense. As far as this blog is concerned, that is a charge which would better be levelled against various commenters and even Craig himself (his comments about those who voted against Scotch independence or for Brexit refer).
          “It will be pleasing to him to learn that he turns many people off.”

          My comments do not appear to have turned off regular commenters (you are an example, are you not?) not do they appear to have stopped readership of this blog being on the up (as is frequently claimed).

          It is however true that some commenters comment no longer – eg Fedup, Passerby, the middle-aged Irish gentleman who liked to post as a teenage girl called Sophia. While I should say that the blog has only gained by their absence, I am far too modest to claim that they were turned off because of me.

          ” He would much rather that, instead of reading the blog and the comments, they listened to the BBC”

          That is an interesting theory but wrong. No problem with people reading what Craig has to say or with listening to the BBC. I have the contrary impression, namely that certain commenters – including you – would much rather that no one listened to the BBC or read other MSM. That is certainly the explicit or implicit wish of many commenters.

          “.. and did as Laura instructs them to do.”

          I was unaware that Ms Kuenssberg issues instructions to listeners or viewers.

          “As to what that should be, he has no idea, he is just following orders.”

          That is not an original view on here. The problem is that there seem to be as many views on whose orders I am following as there are days in the week.


          ” Our blog’s little Corporal.”

          Leaving aside the point that the blog is not yours – it is Craig’s – your concluding pleasantry illustrates rather nicely on of my previous points (above).

  • Paul Barbara

    @ RobG January 30, 2017 at 22:54
    ‘…France, which used to have an independent foreign policy, is now totally on-board with the American empire, following all these ‘terror attacks’…’
    France left NATO after 31 attempts on President Charles De Gaulle:
    ‘The Lessons of History: In 1966 President De Gaulle Said No to US-NATO’:

    When the US approached then President Megawati Sukarnoputri of Indonesia to request Indonesia join the ‘War on Terror, she declined, saying they had no terrorism in Indonesia.
    Shoortly after, the Bali Bombings ‘occurred’.
    Megawati agreed to join the ‘War on Terror.
    It’s an old trick, old as the hills; the Krays and Richardsons had it down pat.
    They’d send a ‘Rep’ round to a shop, pub or club, and ask if they would like to sign up for ‘protection’. If they declined, often saying ‘we don’t have any troubles round here’, they would later be visited by a gang of hooligans who would ‘stage’ a fight, and wreck the joint.
    The ‘Rep’ would return shortly after, and the proprietor would sign up for ‘protection’, or if he/she still declined, they would get personally beaten in another staged ‘occurrence’.
    Nothing new under the sun; if it ain’t bust, why fix it?
    Ditto ‘False Flags’; if the sheeple keep accepting them as genuine, the PTB will continue to use them…..

  • Paul Barbara

    @ Anon1 January 30, 2017 at 16:25
    ‘The Corbynistas and the Nat Scots really can’t stand Kuenssberg’s tough questioning. They can’t accept their views being challenged. It doesn’t matter that Kuenssberg gives the same treatment to everyone else, it’s still seen as a conspiracy against them.’

    You’re spot on, there, Anon1 – just exactly the same as any fool can see that the sting on Masot was clearly anti-Semitic in character, and had absolutely nothing to do with Masot clearly behaving reprehensibly – I don’t know why the pussies at the Embassy apologised – clearly Masot should have been given a medal and a big pay rise.

    • bevin

      “Masot should have been given a medal and a big pay rise…”
      No doubt he is in line for both, plus a Full Time Fellowship at the Henry Jackson Society or the Brookings Institution.

      • Njegos

        Masot is of no interest to the MSM, of course. The media wants to focus on invisible Russians who are undermining our democracy 24/7

      • Paul Barbara

        @ bevin January 31, 2017 at 17:27
        He won’t do bad, but not too good either; he’s broken the II th Commandment, as presented by my Maths teacher in a Catholic school – ‘Though shalt not get caught’.

  • Sharp Ears

    Njegos My post about Aznar in reply to yours about your sister’s experience in the Iraq war build up has been deleted. It consisted of a BBC link to Bush and Blair meeting Aznar in the Azores and another linking to Aznar’s Wikipedia entry, He now works for Murdoch on the News Corp board.

    • Njegos

      Sharp Ears –

      Aznar is a transatlantic skunk of the lowest ordure (forgive the bilingual pun). He even wanted to bring Israel into NATO. Hardly surprising that he has found a home with Murdoch and Co.

      • bevin

        And of course a devotee of Generalissimo Franco, Hitler’s friend, who supplied a Division to fight Communism on the eastern front and was responsible for massacring tens (hundreds) of thousands of Republicans in the aftermath of the Civil War.
        Small wonder that he worked so well with Blair and Bush.

        • Habbabkuk

          Would you care to provide chapter and verse for your claim that Mr Aznar is a “devotee” of the late General Franco?

          • Paul Barbara

            @ George January 31, 2017 at 20:09
            I think this might suffice:
            ‘And the devil led him (Jesus) into a high mountain, and shewed him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And he said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them. If thou therefore wilt adore before me, all shall be thine.’ Luke lV : 5-8

          • bevin

            Look at Wikpedia if you need to do so (most people can smell it): his father and grandfather both worked for Falange and the One Party State government, so did he.
            His grandfather was a Falange propagandist.
            As a teenager he joined the Falangist student organisation. Etc etc.
            The Popular Party was a successor organisation for the Francoists. Its members were largely recruited from the Francoist ranks. etc etc.
            Do you know him, perhaps through OD?

      • Habbabkuk

        ” He even wanted to bring Israel into NATO.”

        That sounds like a rather sensible idea to me – the Article 5 principle would make any neighbouring state which harboured aggressive intentions towards Israel (or sponsored non-state organisations with similar intentions) pause for thought and thus reinforce peace in the Middle East. It would also discourage Israel from starting a war in the region. In fact, a definite win-win!

        It might also be sensible – albeit possibly more difficult -for Israel to be admitted into the European Union. I wonder if former PM Aznar ever suggested anything like that?

    • RobG

      There haven’t been any opinion polls since Benoît Hamon became the Socialist Party presidential candidate at the weekend; not that a Socialist Party candidate has got a hope in hell.

      You might have noticed that Jean-Luc Mélenchon hardly ever gets mentioned in MSM reports about the forthcoming presidential election, even though Mélenchon is not standing under any political party and is fourth by a relatively small margin in the latest opinion polls (this amongst 12 presidential candidates).

      I wonder why they don’t mention him…

      • lysias

        The media rarely mentioned Bernie Sanders until he started winning primaries. The media almost never mentioned Jill Stein until after the election.

        Candidates they have conspicuously ignored in previous election: Ron Paul, Denis Kucinich, Mike Gravel.

        • RobG

          lysias, there’s a big difference, in that Mélenchon has a mass movement behind him. In this respect, although Mélenchon is on the complete opposite side of the political spectrum from Trump, there is a comparison between them.

  • michael norton

    Police Inquiry: More than 900,000 euros received in total by Penelope Fillon

    New revelations of the “Canard enchaîné” in its edition of Wednesday: According to the satirical newspaper, Penelope Fillon would have received a total of more than 900 000 euros gross as collaborator of her husband, his deputy and the Revue des Deux Mondes. Searches are underway in the National Assembly: investigators seek in particular to get their hands on the employment contracts of the candidate’s wife The Republicans in the presidential election.

    17:01: After evoking the sum of “500,000 euros gross” last week, Duck now amounts to 831,440 euros gross the amount received by Penelope Fillon as parliamentary assistant to her husband or substitute Marc Joulaud . Not only from 1998 to 2002, as written last week by the same source but also from 1988 to 1990. The wife of the candidate of the right in the presidential election of 2017 also received some 100,000 euros gross for one Employment within the “Revue des Deux Mondes”.

    16:48: Francois Fillon used two of his children in the Senate as parliamentary assistants for 84,000 euros gross, when he was senator of the Sarthe between 2005 and 2007, according to the weekly.

    16:47: More than 900,000 euros received by Penelope Fillon as parliamentary assistant and La Revue des Deux mondes, according to the publication.

    Bye Bye Les Republicans, you have just shit out.

  • michael norton


    The SNP is attempting to block the UK government’s bid to formally begin the process of leaving the European Union.

    • JOML

      Democracy, surely? There’s no point in having a parliament if everyone has to vote the same way. I know the result of the advisory referendum but surely the 16 million who voted remain should still be represented in this ongoing saga?

      • Chris Rogers


        All who voted in the Referendum will be represented with the Parliamentary Bill triggering Article 50 as long as Parliament actually triggers the gun – this is but the First Reading and amendments to the Bill can be added once the formal process begins as long as a majority of MPs vote to add them – a majority of MPs being against Brexit, but obviously our Tory friends have zero spine, but the fact remains nothing can be done until the first Reading is passed, hence why its daft numerous Rightist MPs are opposed to the Bill on the First Reading – of course, the Rightist stated this themselves on the first Reading of the Welfare Bill in June 2015, which Corbyn voted against at the First Reading – alas little was altered that time, but we live in hope on this occasion.

      • Anon1

        “…but surely the 16 million who voted remain should still be represented in this ongoing saga?”

        But….but…. No. We voted Out and we are leaving.

        • JOML

          So, in your but.. but…bubble, MPs in parliament should now only represent the 17 million leavers?

          • Michael McNulty

            Do you suppose the Tories rule in the interests of the majority who didn’t vote for them?

      • Paul Barbara

        @ JOML January 31, 2017 at 18:57
        We live in a (semi-) democracy; you guys and gals who wanted to remain slaves of the NWO EU were outvoted; sure, you’ve still got a role to play – accept the result!
        Or should we have more referendums till the PTB receive the result they require (as in other EU referendums in other European countries)?
        Heads, we win; Tails, you lose. ‘Cunning Plans’, eat your heart out.

    • Republicofscotland

      Not despicable, but an attempt to protect the Scottish economy which benefits greatly from EU grants.

      What’s truly despicable is Theresa May’s attempt to try and rush the Brexit bill through parliament, however several MP’s are aware of that plan, and like the SNP 56, they will try and stall or hinder the bill where possible, even if they’re ultimately unsuccessful at stopping it, in the long run.

      Incidently Norton, what do you make of the Christian terrorist attack on a Canadian mosque?

      Alexandre Bissonnette, the alleged terrorist, has a . Facebook page reportedly belonging to him included “likes” for Donald Trump and Marine Le Pen, the far-right French presidential candidate.

      Now I’m pretty sure you are all for Trump and Le Pen, do you agree that support for the likes of Le Pen can lead to violence on minorities such as Muslims? And that this attack backs up that stance.

      • bevin

        “Alexandre Bissonnette, the alleged terrorist, has a . Facebook page reportedly belonging to him included “likes” for Donald Trump and Marine Le Pen, the far-right French presidential candidate…”
        Yes, and he also has a ‘like’ for the New Democratic Party which is the Canadian (Blairite/Clintonite) version of the Social Democrats, allied with the Labour Party. Given that he cannot vote for either Trump of LePen-neither of whom campaign in Quebec or Canada- his preference for the NDP would seem to be of more relevance than you attribute to it.
        Is the omission of Bissonette’s liking of the federal NDP accidental or a tribute to Kuenssberg and the BBC?

        • bevin

          I might add that I would be surprised if Bisonnette was not also a supporter of the PQ and Quebec nationalism (Canada’s equivalent to the SNP). And that- and these other associations- would tell us precisely nothing.

      • Anon1

        “An attempt to protect the Scottish economy which benefits greatly from EU grants.”

        It’s the magic money tree again! In this instance the idea that money hosed on Scotland just spontaneously and magically appears from the munificence of the EU. That no one actually pays it out of their taxes.

        The UK is the EU’S second largest cash cow you dunce.

        • Ba'al Zevul

          I think you might take a look at the magic money forest which ensures that unimaginably rich speculators fill their boots with golden magic leaves while the real economy withers and dies around it.

          And even the FTSE is wobbling around 7100.

          So what? So, these are higher than they were just prior to the 2008 crash, and the underlying world economy is, despite the ingeniously faked growth figures, closer to recession than it was then.

          With so much funny money sloshing around the planet, and given the continuing eagerness of finance houses to create unsustainable debt (=’credit’), there is no objective reason why Scotland should not be given some.

          But hold on tight. We’re not done with paying the piper yet.

      • Habbabkuk

        “Not despicable, but an attempt to protect the Scottish economy which benefits greatly from EU grants.”

        I seem to remember posts from you claiming that the Scotch economy was more than viable and only needed to be freed of the shackles of Westminster to become another Celtic Tiger.

        So it is good to hear you say that the Scotch economy apparently benefits “greatly” on EU grants.

        (Actually, check out the figures on the distribution of EU Regional, Social and Agricultural Funds monies withing the EU 28 and you’ll see that the grants to Scotland are not that “great”).

        • Rob Royston

          The Scotch economy is doing really well according to recent reports. I believe that it pumped 6Bn into the UK economy from just whisky alone. When you also add all the petrodollars that are almost parity with the Brexit pounds one can see why you are clinging on to us so tightly.

          • J

            Scots might refer to people of Scotland while scotch can really only refer to a delicious alcoholic beverage (or “to put an end to something.”)

      • michael norton

        Well RoS as you might have guessed, I am completely against terror, whether it is Irish Terror, Basque Terror, German Terror, Russian Terror, Chinese Terror, Japanese Terror, Sudanese Terror or common and garden Roman Catholic Terror.
        the Roman Catholics did try to destroy Parliament, I suppose you would have been for that?

  • Sharp Ears

    Below the same Lord Peter Ricketts who has commented that a Trump state visit would be ‘difficult for the Queen’.

    Torture Supporter Peter Ricketts as National Security Adviser
    12 May, 2010
    Even worse news. Cameron’s much vaunted National Security Council will be headed by the FCO’s pro-torture Peter Ricketts, who is personally up to his ears in the policy of complicity in torture, and in its continued cover-up – including being personally involved in the censorship of this vital FOI release last week.

    Download file
    page 2
    Download file

    The appointment of Ricketts to what is touted as a key government position is a major blow to those like me who hoped that complicity in torture and attacks on civil rights will be rolled back.

    (Unfortunately the links to the downloads are dead)

    He is speaking to Adam Boulton on video within this link. 5mins

    He retired last year and Cameron gave him a leg up into the Lords. Nice.

    ‘In 2016 he took appointments as Strategic Adviser to Lockheed Martin UK and Non Executive Director of Engie’.,_Baron_Ricketts

    ‘Category 1: Directorships
    Non-executive Director, Groupe Engie (French-listed global energy services company)

    Category 2: Remunerated employment, office, profession etc.
    Strategic Adviser, Lockheed Martin UK (global security and aerospace company; Member gives strategic advice to company CEO)’

    Even lovelier.

    Category 10: Non-financial interests (c)
    Trustee, Royal Academy Development Trust
    Trustee, Leighton House Museum

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Sharp Ears January 31, 2017 at 20:07
      The anti-Trump State Visit petition is now pushing 1.8 million signatures, but do the government give a toss?
      Our job is to service the economy, and vote how we are told/influenced. And, of course, to dutifully pay our taxes.
      Oh, and to doff our caps, and die for the Flag.
      We mustn’t get uppity, like, and think we have rights, or we’re ‘nonviolent terrorists’, like folks who get their info from the web.
      ‘Ve haf vays of making you comply…’ (like Trump’s re-legitimised ‘Black Sites’).

  • Mark Golding

    BBC Distortion and lies: The date: 28 April 1944 – The Event: A D-Day rehearsal, codenamed Exercise Tiger: The Location: Slapton Sands Devon.

    The BBC reported a training exercises for D-Day was intercepted by German E-Boats firing torpedoes at landing craft killing more than a thousand British and American servicemen.


    Servicemen leaving the landing craft were ‘mown down like ninepins’. by our own people in a ‘friendly fire’ disaster that was hushed up for 60 years.

    The grand-mother of a close friend who was compulsorily ejected from her farm near Slapton village way before the exercise recalls her brother making coffin lids and the exhumation of a mass grave hastily dug to bury the bodies bought back from Slapton beach.

    The locals were sworn to secrecy and the E-boat story surfaced later to be assimilated into a couple of works convincing the lie. A Memorial Site was officially recognized by the US Congress and acknowledged by the addition of a bronze plaque, spangle or elaboration (delete as necessary).

    • Kempe

      ” The BBC reported a training exercises for D-Day was intercepted by German E-Boats firing torpedoes at landing craft killing more than a thousand British and American servicemen.

      LIES ”

      No. Historical fact. Unless you want to believe that the well documented wrecks that lies off the Sands were planted by the BBC too.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Kempe January 31, 2017 at 22:17
        So once again, in typical Kempe misguided fashion, he pops up to defend the ‘official narrative’.
        Missing the point that the deaths are universally accepted; yes, there would have been (and perhaps still are) wrecks – but what the f**k has that to do with your inane comment?
        The point is, WHO sunk the vessels and killed the troops? THAT is what is alleged, or hadn’t you noticed?

        • Kempe

          What is known from witnesses and log books is that E-Boats attacked the poorly defended convoy and sank two LSTs and a further two were damaged. To date any friendly fire incident(s) which may have happened in addition to the above remain unproven.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Kempe February 1, 2017 at 05:49
            I see; so in time of war, don’t you think that captains can be ordered to report something that didn’t happen, and ‘eye-witnesses’ found, to confirm the government’s narrative?
            ‘…The locals were sworn to secrecy and the E-boat story surfaced later to be assimilated into a couple of works convincing the lie….’
            The point of Mark Golding’s post is that the ‘evidence’ was provided to back up the lie.
            Just as after the ‘Hedgehog’ anti-submarine mortar was developed, scores were used to try to destroy the wreck of the Lusitania, to try (unsuccessfully) to destroy evidence the passenger ship had carried explosives and munitions.
            And like the RAF lied about their cloud seeding experiment in 1952, which caused thirty five deaths in one of the worst flash floods in Britain, at Lynmouth in Devon.
            ‘The truth is the first casualty of war’.

          • Mark Golding

            Personally I believe London fireman Maurice Lund, Royal Navy serviceman George Williams, a local woman Dorothy Seekings and Local author Ken Small who crucially told the truth before he passed that a ‘blue on blue’event took place on that fateful April 1944.

            US serviceman Harold McAulley, informs us of dragging dead soldiers off the Slapton sands and later helping to bury corpses – the faces black with oil and burning – in a mass inland grave lined with coffins.

            Essentially I believe the face to face recap from my close friend ( I love her) Sarah whose grand-mother revealed the dreadful, harrowing details kept dark by our MOD and the Pentagon for too long. Period.

          • Kempe

            The Hedgehog mortar contained a charge too small to cause any serious damage to a ship the size of the Lusitania anyway it wasn’t developed until WW2. The truth there is that the Irish Navy used the wreck as a target in training exercises post war.

            The Lynmouth floods must’ve been the most successful cloud seeding exercise in history! Again the truth is rather more mundane, heavy rain fell over the whole of the West Country and South Wales, and it was caused by a depression which had stagnated in the Southwest Approaches for two days. Similar depressions have triggered serious flooding in southwest England at regular intervals, and previous devastating floods hit Lynmouth in the 18th and 19th centuries.

          • Kempe

            ” US serviceman Harold McAulley, informs us of dragging dead soldiers off the Slapton sands and later helping to bury corpses – the faces black with oil and burning ”

            As they would be if their ships had been torpedoed.

    • John Goss

      The official narrative is always the most suspect in my experience though I have no way of knowing whether this was a cover up without more corroborating reports. Nonetheless it seems strange that University Professor at Plymouth states:

      “News of what happened remained a secret for a matter of months – the Germans could not find out about it.”

      If the E-boats sank the US fleet how would they not know about it? There is certainly something strange here but as the ‘truth is the first victim of war’ and we have seen that through this so-called ‘war on terror’ it would need more investigation one way or the other or more corroboration for me to accept either account.

      • John Goss

        I made my comment before seeing Mark’s at 12:27 which does give further corroboration and I now lean strongly in favour of the ‘blue on blue’ statement of Small. So more lies from the BBC.

          • John Goss

            Yes thanks Kempe.

            “Even in this brief reference Scott gives the E Boats undue credit. The vast majority of American losses were from alleged friendly fire from their own forces on the beach! At the time of writing his book (1945) he must have known of the real reasons over 900 US servicemen met their deaths.”

            ” From Ray Holden: I saw a ITV documentary about Slapton, that is how I came to hear about it. Veterans of Slapton appeared on it, one of them was coxswain of an LST. These veterans openly cried when describing how they were pinned down on the beach by friendly fire. They even described from what direction the machine gun was firing. Dozens of men were killed and apparently were posted as being killed in action. In my own personal opinion this is where the cover up came in.”

            The above from your link.

            Wikipedia says the same.


            And from this site: “German E- boats had left Cherbourg on patrol the previous evening and did not encounter the Allied patrol lines either off Cherbourg or in the Channel; they spotted the Convoy [Convoy T4], eight LSTs carrying vehicles and combat engineers of the 1st Engineer Special Brigade with a single Corvette as escort, and then attacked LST-507 caught fire and was abandoned, LST-531 sank shortly after being torpedoed while LST-289 was set on fire but eventually made it back to shore, LST-511 was damaged by friendly fire. The remaining ships and their escort fired back and the E-boats made no more attacks. Now 749 servicemen were killed; 441 United States Army, and 197 United States Navy personnel [note: this adds up to only 638].

            Many servicemen drowned in the cold sea while waiting to be rescued, soldiers; unused to being at sea, panicked and put on their life belts incorrectly; this meant in some cases when they jumped into the water the weight of their combat packs flipped them onto their backs, dragging their heads underwater and drowning them. Dale Rodman who travelled on LST-507 commented “The worst memory I have is setting off in the lifeboat away from the sinking ship and watching bodies float by. As a result of official embarrassment and concerns over possible leeks prior to the real invasion, all survivors were sworn to secrecy by their superiors. Ten missing officers involved in the exercise had BIGOT-level Clearance for D-Day, meaning that they knew the invasion plans and could have compromised the invasion should they have been captured alive. Therefore as a result the invasion was nearly called off until the bodies of all ten victims were found. Little information about exactly how individual soldiers and sailors died; various eye witness accounts detail hasty treatment of casualties and unmarked mass graves in Devon fields.”


            A bit of ‘blue on blue’ on yourself there Kempe. At least they’ve not buried you in Slapton and no doubt you will continue to pop up from time to time to share your wisdom with us.

          • lysias

            Try again:

            The U.S. military pretended for quite some time that American football star Pat Tillman was killed by hostile fire — not friendly fire — in Afghanistan. I suspect that friendly fire incidents are often concealed in this way.

            Since there are good reasons for suspecting that Tillman was killed deliberately — murdered — because he had come to oppose the Afghanistan war and was too prominent for the media to ignore, concealing his death by friendly fire was particularly outrageous.

          • Kempe

            Two quotes from third parties.

            Are you supporting Mark Golding”s view that the whole story of the E-Boat attack is a lie?

          • John Goss

            If you are addressing me Kempe, Mark never said that the whole story of the E booat attack was a lie.

            “The BBC reported a training exercises for D-Day was intercepted by German E-Boats firing torpedoes at landing craft killing more than a thousand British and American servicemen.


            It was the killing of more than a thousand servicemen by the E-Boats that was the lie if I understand Mark correctly. Anyway it was a ‘friendly fire’ event even though friendly fire is such an oxymoronic term.

    • Bayard

      As far as I have always heard, the deaths at Slapton were indeed covered up, not because it was a “friendly fire” incident, but because the E-boat attack was a God-almighty cockup and TPTB then, as always, wanted to suppress news about it, plus it was seen as “bad for morale” if the news had got out. So that bears out your friends grandmother’s account, does it not, without any sort of proof of lying by the BBC.

      • Bayard

        Reading the Wikipedia account above in John Goss’s comment, gives an idea as to how the “friendly fire” story came about. It wasn’t exactly uncommon in the confusion of an sea-battle like that, for servicemen to be killed by there own side, but it seems clear that this happened as a part of the E-boat attack did not account for the totality of the deaths,, as Mark Golding would have us believe.

  • Sharp Ears

    On topic!

    The BBC’s latest appointment shows it’s moved from bias into pure propaganda
    January 30th, 2017

    On Monday 30 January, the BBC announced that Sarah Sands will be taking over from Jamie Angus as editor of Radio 4‘s flagship news and current affairs programme – Today. Sands has worked as Editor of The London Evening Standard for nearly five years, during which time the paper came out in support of Goldsmith’s mayoral bid.

    Zac Goldsmith is what…?

    Under Sands, The Evening Standard backed former Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith’s ‘racist‘ campaign for London Mayor. Before the election, the paper said in an editorial:
    …over the past few weeks Zac Goldsmith has come into his own, and emerged as a candidate with interesting and thoughtful views… [He] is not a combative politician and his wealthy background is a problem for some voters, but his vision for the future of London as a safe, beautiful and harmonious city is an attractive one. Of the two strong candidates, he has more compelling ideas on tackling pollution and congestion. That is why we support him.’

    Apologists for Israel take top posts at BBC
    April 2013

  • fwl

    Funny days. Zero Hedge used to be worth a read as an outsider, but now forget it – just a tedious diatribe. Watching Trump’s press guy on Reuters before the press today and my one observation is that the regime fundamentally lacks gravitas. Phoney Maloney and the wheels are gonna come off fast.

  • Dave

    Working on the precautionary principle its a false flag and carried out by the same network, until proven otherwise, what is the objective this time from the latest “right-wing” attack, which tellingly was in Canada not US?

    Many of the earlier attacks in US/UK/Europe were ‘by Muslims’ to incite anti-Muslim feeling to promote the pro-war narrative, but the tactics changed when the objective was to keep UK in EU when a “right-winger” was needed to ‘kill’ Jo to help Remain as a “Muslim” attacker would have helped the Leave vote.

    This time the Muslims are victims from a “right-winger” and this fits with an anti-Trump objective as his critics will blame him for the attack, whereas a Muslim attack would help him during the travel vetting row. And an anti-Trump objective would explain why it had to be staged in Quebec as presumably the organisers could not stage it in US now its under new management. And this in turn explains why it seems the MSM are more reluctant to run with these “events”!

    • Stu

      Surely a false flag is a lot less likely than the combination of alienation, mental illness, easily availability of weapons and media propaganda leading to increasing numbers of people wanting to commit mass murder?

      In the case of this shooting. Canada is full of racist idiots. Canada is full of guns. Occam’s Razor.

      • Dave

        No because following your logic there would be a flood of attacks. The fact is in practice there are few lone wolf’s because individuals may get very angry, but once they have calmed done they know there is little that they can do that will make a difference. And if they opt for revenge anyway why target defenceless civilians rather than worthy military targets? whereas organised groups need backing and are normally infiltrated and used by the secret services!

  • Sharp Ears

    Good news from the Celtic supporters for the Palestinians. They have raised £176,000 for them and have given two fingers to UEFA.

    Celtic supporters hand over £176,000 to Palestinian charities

    The Green Brigade launched the campaign after club were charged for the flying of Palestinian flags.

    The Green Brigade launched an online campaign in August last year after Celtic were charged by UEFA over the flying of Palestinian flags at a match.

    Celtic were handed an £8619 fine after supporters unveiled the flags in the first leg of their Champions League play-off against Israeli champions Hapoel Be’er Sheva.

    Fans of the club launched the Match the Fine for Palestine online fundraising campaign to donate cash to charities in Palestine.

    A gofundme page set up to raise the cash received almost £25,000 in donations just 20 hours after it was set up.

    By the following morning that had trebled to more than £75,000, and by the afternoon it had topped £105,000.

    In the following weeks the donations reached a total of £176,076.


    The cash from the Green Brigade campaign was handed over to the charities Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP) and the other half to the Lajee Centre, a Palestinian children’s centre in Aida Refugee Camp in Bethlehem.


    • Sharp Ears

      I cannot find any reference to this on the BBC website under any of these headings – BBC, BBC Scotland, Football, Celtic, Palestine etc etc. What a surprise!!

        • Sharp Ears

          I did and got that result which is DATED AUGUST 2016. Get it right.

          I am referring to the very recent reports, 2 days back now, which give detaiis of the Palestinian charities that will benefit from the £176,076. namely Medical Aid for Palestinians and the Palestinian NGO. the Lajee Centre in the AIDA refugee camp where 5,000 people are contained within a tiny area right up against the WALL overlooked by a watchtower and where children playing on balconies are shot at.

          You and others on here have no conception of the lives of the Palestinians under a cruel Occupation nor do want to.

          • Phil Ex-Frog

            Ah, yes so it is from last year. I definitely need to get my facts correct before I sneer so.

            Yet again you confuse my opposition to your drip drip of anti-semitism with not opposing Israeli oppression.

          • Alcyone

            “You and others on here have no conception of the lives of the Palestinians under a cruel Occupation nor do want to.”

            Are you trying to convince us, or yourself, that YOU are special?

            A not-so subtle (indeed weird) ego.

            Listen to Phil.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Sharp Ears February 1, 2017 at 08:07
      Here is the website of ‘Football Against Apartheid’, which may be of interest.
      I personally detest the ‘game’, but sometimes help them leaflet matches (but very rarely in winter; I’m ‘allergic’ to cold weather!).
      They always welcome assistance at matches.

    • Anon1

      If Scotland leaves the UK and then signs up to the EU just before its collapse I think I will die laughing.

      • Dave

        The first non-independence referendum was their moment and its passed. A second referendum would be an own goal and lost by a higher margin as UK prospers outside EU and Euro-currency and because mainstream Unionists will now be free to point out the SNP offer isn’t actual independence but a choice between devolution in UK or in EU and presumably the grants they receive from EU will dry up when UK no longer pays into the EU to pay for them!

      • michael norton

        That is why I think the “fuss” the S N P are causing, in reality, has almost nothing to do with being in the European Union ans all to do with not being in the United Kingdom. They are lying scum.

        • Anon1

          Indeed. The SNP was fiercely opposed to EC membership in 1975. They use any opportunity to oppose the government of the day.

          • Dave

            No I think the SNP has retreated from independence as it has progressed into office. That is to attract new voters to achieve office they trimmed the message and are no longer an independence party. The claim survives because many are fooled by the headline Leave UK and Remain EU as independence. The original nationalist SNP wanted to be outside UK and EU.

    • metanarrative

      michael norton

      Scotland would not be at the back of any EU membership queue. For the simple reason there is no queuing system. New EU members are admitted once their laws and administrative standards comply with EU membership requirements. In Scotland’s case that would be immediately since we have been in the EU for decades.

      This is supposing that Scotland would have to reapply for membership anyway. If Scotland votes to leave the UK before the UK leaves the EU then Scotland can be considered the UK successor state in European Union terms and senior EU officials have indicated that this would be the case.

      • fred

        Do these senior EU officials have names?

        Esteban Gonzalez Pons MEP is adamant Spain would oppose it.

        • metanarrative

          On the 24 June 2016 senior MEP and now Chief EU Brexit negotiator Guy Verhofstadt tweeted

          “It’s wrong that Scotland might be taken out of the EU, when it wants to stay.”

          On the 25 June 2016 Poland’s Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, former Vice-President of the European Parliament tweeted

          “Thank you Scotland! For being home to Polish soldiers during WW2 and Poles now. Welcome in EU!”

          These are far more senior EU figures than Esteban Gonzalez Pons. There have been numerous encouraging statements about Scotland’s EU status from senior EU and EU members states government figures since the Brexit vote. They never are reported by the BBC or The Guardian, The Telegraph, Express etc.

          • fred

            Those are people on twitter expressing their personal opinions.

            Pons is stating official Spanish government policy. Jorge Toledo, the Spanish Secretary of State and Mariano Rajoy, the Spanish Prime Minister, have said the same. They are adamant that Spain would oppose Scotland remaining a member of the EU if Britain leaves.

            Remember Scotland would need the backing of all member states, Spain would have to agree.

          • metanarrative


            The Spanish foreign minister from 2011 to 2016 Jose Manuel Margallo made it clear that Madrid would not oppose Scotland in the EU providing the Westminster government recognised independent Scotland. This is Madrid differentiating between the cases of Scotland and Catalonia. The Spanish government has always maintained that Catalonia has no constitutional right to independence and they concede that Scotland has that right providing it is done constitutionally and the UK recognises independent Scotland, which given the Edinburgh Agreement it would have to do.

            Senor Margallo’s successor is Alfonso Dastis who is very pro EU and will not be keen to rock the EU boat. Senor Dastis is apparently also a very enthusiastic golfer. That’s got to count in Scotland ‘s favour.

          • lysias

            Are the Spanish really saying that, even if the government in Madrid consented to a secession by Catalonia, Catalonia would still have no constitutional right to secede?

          • metanarrative


            As I understand it yes. I’m not agreeing with it. Catalunya has a right to self-determine same as Scotland.

          • metanarrative

            Scotland is the EU’s largest producer of oil.
            Scotland has a quarter of the EU’s wind and tidal energy potential.
            Scotland has voted to stay in the EU thereby giving the EU a confidence boost.

            Spain is a net beneficiary of EU funds.

            Brussels and Berlin will strongly discourage a veto of Scotland’s EU membership from Spain or anyone else should such a veto arise, which seems highly doubtful.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.