Following on from an article This Site has literally just published, pointing out that calls to censor Russia Today as a state-sponsored propaganda unit make no sense when the BBC is unhindered, here’s Skwawkbox:
The BBC has been caught presenting video of a military parade fly-by as footage of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Full Fact confirmed that the video broadcast on the Breakfast programme yesterday as showing the invasion was in fact 2020 footage of a fly-past as part of a parade in May 2020.
The BBC claimed the footage was ‘used once briefly in error’ and that it had spoken to staff about the importance of checking what they are showing.
It’s very difficult to use old footage “in error” as it has to be specially ordered from the BBC archive.
Skwawkbox points out that the BBC was caught using this dodge before – swapping old footage of Boris Johnson laying a Remembrance Day wreath for current images in which he insulted veterans by laying it upside-down in 2019. The BBC did apologise for this – although it did not admit doing it to cover up the insult.
In a similar vein, the BBC has been running articles on false images purporting to be of the Russia-Ukraine conflict while in fact being archive footage or images from video games – here’s one – but there has been no article acknowledging its own use of such material (at the time of writing).
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
As figures in the Labour Party move to smear former leader Jeremy Corbyn and push him out, supporters need to be aware of more subtle attackers.
For example: the “Project for Peace and Justice” website at https://projectforpeaceandjustice.com that attempts to satirise Mr Corbyn’s new organisation with smears that are neither accurate nor amusing.
The current version of this page offers a foul-mouthed tribute (if you can call it that) to the late Peter Newbon, a leading light of the pressure group Labour Against Anti-Semitism who brought it into disrepute by publishing a doctored image showing Mr Corbyn apparently reading anti-Semitic hate book The Protocols of the Elders of Zion to schoolchildren. In fact he was reading Michael Rosen’s We’re Going on a Bear Hunt. Rosen’s entirely justified response to this abuse appears on the page, where he is described using a four-letter word beginning with ‘C’. Accurate? No. Amusing? No.
Another page attacks two campaigners who have demonstrated repeatedly that the current hysteria over anti-Semitism in the Labour Party is nothing more than a witch-hunt. It describes a fictional “Greenstein” award (named after Tony Greenstein) for services to anti-Semitism on social media being given to Simon Maginn for his #ItWasAScam campaign? Accurate? No. Amusing? No.
The indicia at the bottom of every page includes the message: “The Project for Peace and Justice does not adhere to the IHRA definition of antisemitism. I didn’t want to do this Laura made me” – an apparent claim that the site is operated by Mr Corbyn himself after his wife Laura demanded it. Accurate? No. Amusing? No.
Possibly the worst aspect of this is the call for donations that appears immediately whenever anybody visits the site. It doesn’t work – clicking to donate says it can’t be done – and this may put people who genuinely want to donate to the Corbyn Peace and Justice Project off doing so.
You can see this travesty yourself – if you’ve got the stomach for it – by visiting the website at the link above. But your time would be far better-used by visiting the genuine Peace and Justice Project site at https://thecorbynproject.com where you can learn about the four main projects: climate justice, economic security, democratic society and international justice – and may donate by using the proper system for doing so. This one does work.
Considering the hatred for Mr Corbyn and the concentration on fake accusations of anti-Semitism against people who have done nothing more than campaign for accuracy, This Writer wonders whether the fake site was set up by the former Labour leader’s critics on the right wing of that party.
It would seem reasonable, considering the fact that right-wingers like Steve Reed are now admitting their involvement in the creation of pressure groups like the Centre for Countering Digital Hate, that has been found also to be involved in spreading such hate against figures like Mr Corbyn, to question whether right-wing Labour members are also behind the fake “Peace and Justice” website.
If so, it makes a mockery of their claim to be crusading against fake news.
But while it is important to be aware of these fakers and their lies, the best thing to do is simply to ignore them.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Gordon Brown: this is apparently the only image of him in the Vox Political archive – and is about as clear as Martha Kearney’s perception of him.
Here’s more evidence that the BBC is heavily Tory-influenced – and now we can mark down Martha Kearney as a Tory/Establishment mouthpiece, if we hadn’t already done so.
Former New Labour prime minister Gordon Brown appeared on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme this morning (November 10), where he made the following statement:
Gordon Brown says using a public office for private gain "should be banned outright" He names 3 issues: – conflict of interests – appts to Lords – foreign money in UK politics
"All must be addressed … otherwise this will be a parliament increasingly identified with sleaze"
Here is the correct interpretation of that incident:
Martha Kearney making the mistake of accusing Gordon Brown of making moonlighting money when he was an MP. He gave the lot to charity. This is *not* balance it’s indiscriminate smearing.
Yes indeed; she was trying to smear an honest man – and (even though he wasn’t a proper socialist) a better prime minister than anybody we’ve had since.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Laura Kuenssberg: by publicising an apparent mistranslation of a letter by the French Prime Minister, she has caused a major international political row. Can she even read French?
The BBC’s political editor, Laura Kuenssberg, misrepresented a letter on the UK/EU fishing row by French Prime Minister Jean Castex – apparently to stoke international tensions on the eve of the G20 and COP26 summits.
The UK and France are sabre-rattling over rights to fish in each other’s waters, after the UK prohibited some French trawlers over a technicality.
Kuenssberg aggravated the row by publicising a letter from Castex to European Commission President Ursula van der Leyen, claiming it said the EU needed to demonstrate that there was “more damage to leaving the EU than remaining there”.
This is based on a translation publicised by Alex Wickham of Politico. In tweets, he claimed the letter said:
“It is indispensable to demonstrate to European public opinion that more damage is suffered by leaving the EU than by remaining.”
The implication is that the EU should actively punish the UK.
“The UK’s uncooperative stance today threatens to cause great harm not only to fishermen, especially the French, but also to them [European] Union as it sets a precedent for the future and challenges our credibility and our ability to enforce our rights in relation to the international commitments signed by the union.
“It therefore seems necessary for the European Union to show its full determination to achieve full respect for the Agreement by the United Kingdom and to exercise its rights in a firm, cohesive and proportionate manner using the levers at its disposal.
“It is important to make it clear to European public opinion that respect for commitment is non-negotiable and that leaving the union does more harm than staying there.
“If a satisfactory solution is not found in this context, the European Union must apply Article 506 of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement and take corrective measures proportionate to the economic and social damage that [violations] will cause.”
That makes it a little different, once it’s put into context!
It should be immediately clear from the above text that there is no active intent to punish the UK. All the French want to do is to highlight the problems that Brexit has been causing — they are not trying to inflict new ones on us.
And people know:
Jean Castex's letter was totally misrepresented. It was written to VDL to reaffirm old rules: 1.signed agreements must be respected & 2.being outside of EU can't be as advantageous as being out. Simples. His words were mistranslated, taken out of context & changed into propaganda
— V. #IWearAMask #InLimbo #LesMaitresdelOrage (@InlimboV) October 31, 2021
(He means “…can’t be as advantageous as being IN” of course.)
Robert Peston said in his tweet that Boris Johnson has swallowed the Wickham translation and is “visibly angry” about the letter. But is he?
Which Johnson knows full well, and his 'visible anger' is disingenuous.
If Johnson is as well-educated as he’s supposed to be (Eton and Oxford) then it is entirely possible that he can read French for himself and knows exactly what the letter said. If so, then he is simply trying to manipulate a situation created by reporters (who probably can’t – with apologies to Kuenssberg and Peston if they turn out to be fluent, but that just implies that they know they’re peddling falsehoods and don’t care either).
This Writer, as a journalist and editor of nearly 28 years’ standing, agrees with Marcus Chown, below:
What has happened to “journalistic standards”, to fact checking, to honest reporting? Why isn’t the National Union of Journalists shouting about this from the roooftops and doing something about it? https://t.co/G1bf2ECMZo
Indeed. Or indeed any journalist-training organisation such as the one that taught me (the National Council for the Training of Journalists). Where did Peston and Kuenssberg get their qualifications?
Actually, let’s check.
Kuenssberg, it seems, has no qualification as a journalist. She studied History at the University of Edinburgh, then spent a year studying (but the subject is not clarified) at Georgetown University in Washington DC, where she interned at the NBC News political programme. Returning to the UK, she eventually joined the BBC as a trainee journalist – but that doesn’t mean she was doing any training. ‘Trainee’ is just the name applied to a working reporter who hasn’t passed the test to become a Senior Reporter. If she was trained in the States, it was in an American standard of reporting.
Peston’s degree at Oxford was Politics, Philosophy and Economics. He then studied at the Université libre de Bruxelles – but again, it’s not clear what the subject was. He entered journalism via another back door, writing for the Investors Chronicle after being a stockbroker.
Those details aren’t very reassuring!
But it shouldn’t be up to the Kuenssbergs, Pestons, or even the Johnsons of this world to sort out this row. It’s a matter for the French.
All Jean Castex has to do is come out and read the relevant part of his letter, along with a translation into English saying exactly what he intended it to say.
That should end any ambiguity. How about it?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Why do people bother to pay the licence fee when BBC News feeds them lies?
The current editor-approved attack line against socialists is that people who – rightly – heckled Keir Starmer’s speech to the Labour conference were mocking him for talking about his mother being in intensive care.
This is a lie.
See it in action in this clip in which Laura Pidcock was asked for her reaction:
"It was long, wasn't it? I didn't think that was his moment"
Note that the false implication about Starmer’s mother isn’t fanfared – it’s just slipped into the clip to take you by surprise.
Here’s the reality of the situation:
Are the BBC really going with the line “Keir was heckled over his mother being in intensive care”. This is an appalling reframing of what happened. Starmer wanted to talk up the importance of NHS nurses so he was heckled over his refusal to commit to a proper pay rise for them!
The correct news angle would have been to ask why Starmer doesn’t support a 15 per cent pay rise for nurses if he appreciates the work they did for (among others) his own mother. Isn’t it hypocritical and insensitive of him to use his own mother in such a way?
Starmer’s speech was full of similar howlers. Top of this list is his announcement of a new organisation, Labour Friends of the Police, on the day we heard how a police officer used his powers to arrest, kidnap, rape and murder a woman, and then burned the body.
If that is the kind of friend Keir Starmer wants, then he is no friend of yours.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
‘Demand better’: That’s what the sign says on the wall behind Vince Cable and that’s what you need to do – demand better than him.
Apparently certain people are making a fuss because former Liberal Democrat minister Vince Cable said the Uighurs haven’t suffered genocide under China.
He did this while having a pint with swivel-eyed goon Nigel Farage on GB News, after publishing an article in The Independent.
Who cares what Cable thinks?
He’s yesterday’s man. So is Farage.
The whole stunt looks like it was cooked up to boost ratings for a failing far-right fake-news channel.
I hope no Vox Political reader is weak-minded enough to let Cable, Farage or GB News lead them by the nose in such a cynical way.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
The Daily Brexit (otherwise known as the Express) has used concerns over planned training on how to spot anti-Semitism in the Labour Party to trot out the tripe that was used to attack Jeremy Corbyn – again.
“HARD Left supporters of Jeremy Corbyn have started a social media campaign to stop Labour members from carrying out antisemitism training,” the article begins – but nowhere does it provide examples to show that any of these people are Communists.
The reporting continues in a way that – although it avoids direct lies – may be considered dishonest.
“The course… has been recommended to members after the party became mired in an antisemitism scandal under Mr Corbyn’s leadership,” it states – failing to note that the majority of accusations were false. The entire campaign was an attempt to undermine Corbyn with lies.
“Among its objections to the training is that it is being run by an organisation which was vehemently critical for the former Labour leader.” Really?
Or would it be more accurate to say the objection to JLM is the fear that it will record members’ contributions, selectively edit them and then send them to media organisations like the Brexit as further proof of anti-Semitism?
“Several … cited the case of former Labour member Jackie Walker, who was expelled following comments she made during an antisemitism training session, in which she criticised Holocaust Memorial Day for only commemorating Jewish victims.” Ms Walker was the victim of this recording-selective-editing-and-release-to-the-media tactic, yet the Brexit skates over that fact without mentioning it.
“They are also furious that JLM successfully persuaded the party to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism which recognises that attacks on Israel are often antisemitic.”
More accurately: the IHRA working definition confuses anti-Semitism with legitimate criticism of the actions of the Israeli state, making it possible to accuse people of anti-Semitism when they are actually – and accurately – criticising Israeli persecution of Palestinians.
There’s no mention in the article of the fact that the man who wrote the IHRA definition has himself admitted it is not fit for purpose, for this very reason.
It seems likely that whoever wrote the story – David Maddox, political editor (I don’t know him either) – was simply quoting from a press release he had been sent, and hadn’t actually done a scrap of work to check the facts.
Who would send such a press release? My bet is on the person quoted in the article – Euan Philipps of that famous hate group, Labour Against Anti-Semitism.
LAAS has submitted hundreds – maybe thousands – of spurious anti-Semitism accusations against party members, most of which failed to trigger an investigation. Because they were false?
It typically scrapes information from Labour members’ activities on the internet and then presents it as evidence of anti-Semitism – often with little or no justification. The Brexit‘s claim to have seen 300 WhatsApp messages supports LAAS involvement.
None of the comments quoted in the article demonstrate any evidence of anti-Semitism – although some will claim that the way Zionism is mentioned qualifies.
Zionism, in its simplest form, is the desire for Jewish people to be able to live within the historic borders of Israel.
But the ideology has been perverted to justify the forcible removal – including killing – of Palestinians who have lived on that land for many hundreds of years by the contradictorily-named Israeli Defence Force.
Criticism of such racist hate crimes is habitually dismissed as anti-Semitism, remember. You see how this accusation game works?
This Writer has already called for these “training” sessions to be ignored.
The Jewish Labour Movement is not an acceptable provider. Evidence supporting claims of its affiliation with a racist party in Israel, that it was revived specifically to undermine Corbyn, and that it supports the aggressive Zionism I have described above is demonstrable.
What a shame the zealots who launched – and perpetuate – this campaign against decent Labour Party members are supported in their aims by so-called news reporters who appear to be little more than typists.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Is she bothered? Some students have taken a photo print of her down from their common room wall. So what?
The ‘silly season’ has arrived early this year.
Those purveyors of hysterical (in both senses) tabloid stories at Guido Fawkes blog have got their knickers in a tizzy after graduate students at the Middle Common Room of Magdalen College, Oxford, agreed to take down a photo print of the Queen that has been up since 2013.
Presumably they wanted to use the space for something else – for a while, at least.
Guido seems to resent this display of democracy. “Stalin would be proud,” the article claimed – indicating that the author doesn’t have much understanding of the way the late Russian dictator worked. It would be more Stalinist to demand that the portrait remain up after the students voted to remove it.
So, it seems, does Education Secretary Gavin Williamson, who appears to have provided his opinion: “Oxford University students removing a picture of the Queen is simply absurd. She is the Head of State and a symbol of what is best about the United Kingdom. During her long reign she has worked tirelessly to promote British values of tolerance, inclusivity and respect around the world.”
That may be his opinion but it has nothing to do with the students’ decision.
Other examples of misdirection in the article (spotted by the much higher-quality Zelo Street) are:
The image that has been removed isn’t a portrait – it’s a print of a photograph. For all we know, it might have had to come down because, after eight years on the wall, it’s probably a bit tatty by now. Guido‘s claim that it may be auctioned therefore lacks credibility.
Guido states that the college had voted to “scrap” the Queen, and this is simply untrue. College authorities had nothing to do with the decision by graduate students. It follows that the college didn’t agree to anything.
Still, why should the newspapers let the facts get in the way of a good scandal? Both the Heil (Mail) and the Brexit (Express) took joy in regurgitating the claims.
Outrage as Oxford students vote to axe Queen, screamed the Heil; How dare they! Oxford students cancel our Queen, screeched the Brexit.
And very foolish they look too – now. Here are some more rational reactions:
Things our media should be covering:
✅ PPE scandal ✅ Track and trace scandal ✅ Institutional racism of police, media and political parties ✅ Catastrophically failed covid response by government
What our media is covering:
tHEY’rE cANcElinG oUr QUeen!
— Kerry-Anne Mendoza 🏳️🌈 (@TheMendozaWoman) June 9, 2021
An autonomous student organisation decided to put up a picture of the Queen a few years ago. They’ve now decided to take it down. It’s not that deep. pic.twitter.com/pSVvND7Ii2
Yes indeed – mention of the former Ms Markle raised a pertinent point:
If you are more upset by a picture of the queen being removed from a student common room than by racism directed at a new born baby; how sickening, how despicable, how shameful.
— Prof Gayle Letherby 💙 #PeaceAndJustice (@gletherby) June 9, 2021
Last word must be this little reminder:
Loving people claiming the Queen is being cancelled.
Lads – her face is still on all the money and all the stamps. She's the head of state. She's a fucking billionaire. She lives above and beyond the law. She wears a hat literally covered in the mineral wealth of other nations.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
David Cameron: there are genuine concerns about his conduct on behalf of Greensill – so why is a columnist for a Tory rag trying to make trouble for the whistleblowers?
The trouble with Dan Hodges’ assertion that a Labour Party mole leaked embarrassing information about the Greensill scandal is that a falsehood can go around the world before the facts have got their boots on.
In this case, the refutations have come fast – and there have been a lot of them – but the implication that this huge scandal has been fabricated by Labour will undoubtedly be taken up by the Tory-supporting trolls for use in the future.
Here’s Hodges:
Ministers believe Labour's "Redthroat" mole is wreaking revenge for Cummings civil-service purge > Mail On Sunday > https://t.co/PHtm7Tkrme
‘It’s pretty clear we’ve got a Labour mole inside Government,’ a Minister tells me. ‘There were suspicions before the Greensill affair, but this has basically confirmed it. It’s the only explanation for where all this stuff is coming from.’
Alternatively…
The claim that “Labour supporting civil servants” leaked info about Cummings’ lockdown breach is nonsense – I will happily share my 225 page police submission which shows that ordinary members of the public made the disclosures In fact, I couldn’t get 1 civil servant to open up pic.twitter.com/QzTXA3HYdg
Tim Fenton, over on Zelo Street, has described the Tory frenzy to find Labour moles as “Amateur hour at the paranoia bar” and his article is well worth reading.
Even Gabriel Pogrund over at The Sunday Times, who seems to hate Labour so much that he published lies about This Writer (for which the paper later had to publish a humiliatingly-lengthy retraction), had to agree that Hodges is wrong here:
I wonder whether this is a thinly-veiled attempt to unmask the alleged moles, so the Tories can root them out of Whitehall.
If so, it is to be resisted.
Tory corruption is rampant and they are hardly likely to broadcast their misdeeds willingly.
We need whistleblowers in Whitehall to tell us what these people are really doing with our money.
We should not sit back and allow them to be punished for their honesty.
Of course, Hodges won’t take any punishment for publishing a falsehood.
Undoubtedly his article has boosted sales/reads of his rag, the Mail on Sunday.
As an ex-newspaper hack, This Writer can assure you that such a boost was all that its bosses wanted.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Think before speaking (or publishing): Boris Johnson should account for a Tory constituency association’s apparent demand for activists to tell LIES in order to sideline honest politicians from other parties.
Why have Tory Party members been sent an email urging them to use “dubious claims” to “crowd out genuine news” and sideline “honest” politicians?
The demands, in a Conservative Party email, indicate clear support for dishonest politicians and for fake news. Don’t they?
It seems Labour leader Keir Starmer has been mining a newsletter published to Tories on Peter Bone’s Wellingborough constituency. Bone now has some hard questions to answer!
Sadly, Starmer was unable to use the information in the newsletter to his best advantage during the last Prime Minister’s Questions of 2020 – because of his own poor track record.
After he asked whether the newsletter contained advice that Boris Johnson had taken – or had been written by Johnson, our failure of a prime minister was able to turn the tables simply by pointing out that the people of the UK would like to see any sign of an opinion at all from Starmer.
He said,
I think what the people of this country would love to hear from the right hon. and learned Gentleman in this season of good will is any kind of point of view at all on some of the key issues.
In the words of the song, “All I want for Christmas is” a view, and it would be wonderful if he could produce one.
It is a perfectly valid viewpoint about Starmer. But it does not excuse Wellingborough’s Conservatives or the contents of their newsletter.
Why did they write in praise of
Donald Trump’s use of “dubious claims”, “weaponising fake news” and using falsehoods to “crowd out” the truth.
Why did they say,
Fake news often makes headlines and crowds out genuine news. Honest politicians therefore find themselves pushed off the front pages
and then go on to urge Tories to
say the first thing that comes into your head. It’ll probably be nonsense but it knocks your opponent out of his stride and takes away his headline
in a clear exhortation for Tories to dishonestly create “fake news” stories?
And will Johnson ever be bothered to answer these questions?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
Following on from an article This Site has literally just published, pointing out that calls to censor Russia Today as a state-sponsored propaganda unit make no sense when the BBC is unhindered, here’s Skwawkbox:
