Tag Archives: reaction

Here in the UK, Israel/Gaza is a test of our national character – part one

There is a post on ‘X’ (formerly Twitter), saying that a UK citizen’s opinion of what is happening in Gaza is a litmus test of that person’s character.

Here it is…

… and it is absolutely right.

If enough people are voicing similar opinions – or they do it on the national media so they can influence others – is that not an indication of the national character that we are showing the world?

This Site seems to be suffering because of its coverage of the conflict (if you can even call it that; the current situation seems to be the two-million-strong population of Gaza cowering under relentless genocidal missile attacks from Israel); it seems that, if you say what you see instead of conforming to a fake “consensus reality” constructed in Whitehall and Broadcasting House, you will be suppressed.

But this too will pass and I have a duty to report what is happening – in this case, in the participants’ own words, as seen on the previously-mentioned ‘X’ site; it seems the most immediate source. We’ll start with the UK’s prime minister, Rishi Sunak.

Buy Cruel Britannia in print here. Buy the Cruel Britannia ebook here. Or just click on the image!

When word of the Hamas attack on southern Israel came through, early in the morning of October 7, Sunak posted this response:

We must be fair: while Hamas later stated that it attacked only military targets, the information available to us at the time was that civilians were attacked as well. And who willingly believes an organisation that is said to be terrorist by almost all our trusted media outlets?

The BBC – which is now under sustained criticism for not calling Hamas terrorists – provided much-needed context courtesy of Israeli journalist Gideon Levy, who pointed out that the people of Gaza have been effectively under siege for 70 years and that, in such a situation, it is perfectly natural for people to resist:

Here’s some more context, from Andrew Feinstein on Double Down News – showing that Israeli violence and murder of Palestinians has been a constant and continuing outrage that has gone ignored by western media and politicians who actually support it, including the leaders of both the UK government and its main opposition party.

He is also early in pointing out that resistance to Russia in Ukraine – that is supported by the west – is berated in Palestine:

Broadcaster Adil Ray chimed in early, with a balanced comment on the situation:

And then the right-wingers turned up to put the boot in. Here’s Mail on Sunday bovver boy Dan Hodges:

What’s not to believe about a claim that people who have been unjustly caged for decades might turn to violence in a desperate bid for freedom?

Ah, but those blasted lefties were putting out informative context that was undermining what people like Hodges were trying to say. For example, here’s a link to a Wall Street Journal article explaining how Israel helped in the creation of Hamas, which it saw as a Muslim opponent to the Palestine Liberation Organisation:

The PLO gave up its opposition to the existence of Israel, but Hamas has continued to deny that nation’s right to exist. Now, why would Israel support the creation of a group that wants to destroy it? Is it to give its people an enemy – a bogeyman to fear and hate? Is it to continue the aggression, despite other alternatives being available?

By the evening of October 7, anti-Palestinian sentiment was already being spread through the UK’s social media. Note: anti-Palestinian, not anti-Hamas. The aim was to link the innocent Palestinian people with the violent attackers:

Remember: Israel’s behaviour in bottling Palestinians up in Gaza and in supporting the creation of Hamas may very well have led to the violence it had suffered that day.

Adil Ray tweeted again that evening, putting his finger on the heart of the Israel/Palestine question:

Sadly, some supporters of Palestinian liberation in the UK chose to take to the streets and celebrate the Hamas attack on Israel that night – thereby playing into the hands of right-wing supporters of Israel.

Here’s a former aide to Margaret Thatcher, demanding that these UK citizens should be arrested and, if possible, deported. His claim that they may have direct links to organisations that threaten national security is plucked from the air. Racism?

On the morning of October 8, UK opposition leader Keir Starmer denied the history of Gaza by saying the Hamas attack had “no justification”. He ignored decades of suppression by Israel and said that country had “every right to defend itself”.

It is important to remember that Israel does indeed have a right to defend itself and its people. But how far should that defence go?

Meanwhile, more level heads were still trying to provide vital context:

This was that day that Benjamin Netanyahu announced his intended response to the attack on his country by a small group of armed militants: he said he would “smash Gaza to dust” and all people living there should leave – even though Israel had closed all its borders and so had Egypt:

Someone had previously made the point that Palestinians in Gaza have nowhere to go. Grace Blakeley provides just a couple of the response to it – made (I believe) before Netanyahu’s statement:

Evidence of pro-Israel propaganda (lies) was also starting to come out. So:

This was also the day we were reminded that…

Some might say this is just as much a piece of propaganda as Israel’s claim that a weekend rave was a peace festival. Who do you believe?

Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn wasn’t worried about conflicting stories from either side; his only concern was restoring peace. The response from a biased UK press and punditry was predictable:

“What kind of country has the UK become?”

More was to follow.

By this time, the world “unprovoked” was turning up in the comments of a large number of Israel supporters in what some interpreted as an attempt to create the “illusory truth effect”.

Here: see for yourself:

Now see this interview with a Palestinian politician based in the West Bank, who again states that the Hamas attack followed decades of occupation by Israel, did not target civilians, and took military personnel as hostages. Meanwhile, Israel could be seen to be bombing houses in Gaza.

He asked the crucial question of the current conflict: if Israel has a right to defend itself from Hamas’ aggression, does Palestine not have a right to defend itself from Israel?

He quoted the Israeli finance minister, who self-describes as a fascist homophobe, saying Palestinians have three choices: to emigrate, accept a life of subjugation to Israelis, or die.

He pointed out that, in counterpoint to the Israeli hostages taken by Hamas, more than 5,000 Palestinians are in Israeli jails, including more than 1,260 who do not even know why they are there.

And he made the point that any Palestinian acting in a way described by the United Nations as entirely permissible in order to free their nation is described as a terrorist. This was to become a hot topic.

More UK politicians were passing comment. David Lammy’s sympathy for a UK citizen who died while fighting for Israel stirred up a strong response:

Labour’s Wes Streeting appeared on television, supporting Israel’s right to defend itself against an attack that had ended more than 24 hours previously:

On, Monday, October 9, this happened:

There was no vote and the Irish government subsequently lodged a complaint about the absence of democracy or legality.

And on the ground in the UK, public opinion was swelling against Palestine:

The Israeli bombing of Gaza was now proven to be killing Palestinian civilians, including children:

Some of us drew the appropriate conclusion:

It is indeed a war crime, against article 33 of the Geneva Convention: non-combatants must not be punished in any way for the actions of combatants.

Israel announced that it was laying full siege to Gaza, meaning it would cut off food, water and power to the region:

This is also a war crime. The justification is that it is intended to flush out members of Hamas who are hiding behind Palestinian civilians – but this is doublespeak; it is the civilians who are being harmed.

Is this true? Well… people in the UK were starting to pipe up, as they perceived an apparent disparity between what they saw happening to Gaza and what supporters of Israel were saying about it:

Luciana Berger, the right-wing former Labour defector who tried to stand against the party while Jeremy Corbyn was leader and was subsequently accepted back with open arms by Keir Starmer, was put on national television to condemn his call for peace:

Here’s what we may consider Mr Corbyn’s response – limited to the social media:

It still drew a strong response – that was ridiculed for its falsehood:

Back to the mass media, and here’s Iain Dale on LBC, urging Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu “not to hold back” in his response; basically he was supporting genocide in Gaza.

I provide here his video clip, along with a response from Tom London, putting the opposing view:

Why was he taking sides at all?

A note on the BBC’s refusal to call Hamas terrorists: its own guidelines indicate that this is permissible, but journalists seem to be – rightly, in This Writer’s opinion – following the line taking by news agencies like Reuters: “Reuters may refer without attribution to terrorism and counterterrorism in general, but do not refer to specific events as terrorism. Nor does Reuters use the word terrorist without attribution to qualify specific individuals, groups or events.” This is to protect the editorial integrity of journalists.

On the streets, supporters of Palestine were still out in the evenings, doing their cause more harm than good, because it allowed other people to film them and post attack messages. There is a response, but hadn’t the damage been done?

The claim that Hamas had raped Israeli women is now hotly disputed, being only hearsay.

Back to national TV, and on Robert Peston’s show, former shadow chancellor John McDonnell said Netanyahu’s plan must be stopped before it “annihilates” Palestinians:

Back on the social media, Nile Gardiner repeated his call for anyone supporting Palestine to be arrested and deported as being pro-Hamas:

Labour’s David Lammy, who had already spoken in support of Israel, travelled from his party conference to London to attend a vigil for the Israeli people who had been killed in the Hamas attack:

He repeated the phrase that Israel has a right to defend itself, rescue hostages and protect its citizens. Taken at face value, these words are entirely accurate. Sadly, we were learning that, to many, Israel defending itself was about murdering Palestinians en masse.

On the streets again, pro-Israel supporters took video of a Palestine Solidarity Campaign demonstration outside the Israeli embassy. Tom Slater’s interpretation of the couplet, “From the river to the sea/Palestine will be free” is curious: it does not celebrate the murder of Jews or call for ethnic cleansing – it simply demands freedom from Israeli occupation.

But the post puts the words “ethnic cleansing” into people’s minds and associates them with the desires of Palestinians:

Nigel Farage – who is hugely influential, love him or hate him – posted up a video of a masked pro-Palestinian demonstrator who was hugely mistaken in his reading of the situation.

But then, look at what Farage wrote in response to it, which is no less mistaken in what it claims. Deliberately?

On October 10, Labour suspended a councillor for referring to Netanyahu’s plan for Gaza as a “final solution” – because he repeated words used by the Nazis about what they were doing to Jews during World War II, that are therefore considered anti-Semitic.

The problem is, his description of the plan – not including those words – was accurate, and many may question why the reference to words used to describe a genocide in the past is not appropriate to a genocide now:

Back to national TV, where Foreign Secretary James Cleverly, asked for an opinion on Israel’s decision to deprive 2.2 million people in Gaza of food, water and energy, said that the response to a terrorist attack could in no way be compared with the attack itself. This was not an answer to the question, but was absolutely right; what Israel was planning was several orders of magnitude more deadly.

His justification for the expected huge loss of life was that it would help Israel prevent Hamas from committing more terrorist acts:

On the social media, it was the turn of Tory Chairman Greg Hands to misrepresent the activities of his political opponents:

He was deliberately conflating Hamas with Palestine; supporting the Palestine Solidarity Campaign is not supporting Hamas.

And Israel is an apartheid state, of course. It has walled off occupied Palestine from the territories it has taken for itself; that is why it is easy to cut supplies of food, water and power to Gaza.

Back to national TV, and the BBC’s Newsnight interviewed Husam Zumlot, head of the Palestinian mission to the UK, who lost six family members in a carpet-bombing attack on Gaza by Israel.

Asked by Kirsty Wark if he condones the killing of Israeli civilians, he pointed out that the government of which he is a representative has opposed any activity other than peace for 30 years:

Here’s a forlorn hope from David Aaronovitch:

Release of hostages is unlikely to prevent Netanyahu from continuing with his plan to raze Gaza to the ground.

A prospective Tory Parliamentary candidate repeats unsubstantiated claims that Hamas raped Israeli women:

On Piers Morgan’s digital TV show, Grace Blakeley responds to his claim that the deaths of (at the time) hundreds of Israelis is ISIS-level terrorism by pointing out that 6,400 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli troops since 2008:

Tory minister Robert Jenrick reinforces the use of the word “terrorist” to describe Hamas. Again, this creates the spectre of false association – that Palestinians could all be described as terrorists:

Ash Sarkar of Novara Media raises a significant concern:

James Cleverly backs Israel’s war crimes:

Social media commentators point out that UK media organisations have ignored Israeli brutality over many years – and this is now prejudicing their coverage of the current crisis:

A supporter of Israel claims that that country’s forces have never committed the kind of atrocities claimed of Hamas… and is put in his place:

Supporters of Israel are caught calling for genocide:

Information showing that Israel is committing war crimes is published… on the social media.

David Lammy redeemed himself a little by attending an event for Palestinians…

and was vilified for it:

Emily Hewertson, there, apparently believing that all Palestinians are members of Hamas. Job done, Robert Jenrick?

And then the lie that Hamas beheaded babies broke.

Jewish Chronicle editor Jake Wallis Simons was the first to embrace this falsehood:

And then the deluge:

I responded to this one:

Journalist Owen Jones tried to present the balancing view in a debate with Labour’s Margaret Hodge on Sky News – but she used the manufactured outrage over the “beheaded babies” lie to overtalk his concern about children being killed by Israel’s response. An edited version of the interview was released by Sky which omitted his own comments on the Hamas attack and reinforced Hodge’s attitude, so Jones released the full interview. You can tell that he was deeply distressed by the misrepresentation:

A fellow Guardian journalist (he says), Benjamin Butterworth, almost immediately attacked Jones online, as follows: “Jones exposed as the deeply condescending, arrogant and heartless individual he is. Unable to authentically sympathise with the people of Israel for the obsession with his own sense of intellectual superiority. He has always brought shame to the left.”

Andrew Neil, that pillar of the UK journalistic establishment, posted the claim on ‘X’, making it clear that he supported it. He was to be roundly contradicted, and this response was only one of many:

Here’s another:

Former (?) BBC journalist Jon Sopel chimed in to repeat Neil’s assertions and attack the BBC for refusing to describe Hamas as terrorists. I refer you to my comments on this subject above, but see also my reply to him:

The front pages of the national newspapers the following day were dominated by the story – which nobody had bothered to check:

This may be the most accurate comment on it:

It took until the afternoon of October 11 for some of us (yes, including This Writer) to check the accuracy of the story – and find it wanting:

Some reporters have subsequently retracted and tried to justify their comments – but many of us believe it is too little, too late:

Rob “some beheaded” Burley was not retracting. He doubled down – but his logical fallacy was quickly pointed out:

Meanwhile, Suella Braverman was calling on police chiefs to arrest anybody who seemed to be demonstrating in support of Hamas:

(In fairness, the letter does state that context is everything, and urges police to act only if appropriate indicators are visible.)

Keir Starmer leapt onto the pro-Israel bandwagon, voicing his own support for Netanyahu’s war crimes:

Ash Sarkar commented, correctly pointing out that Starmer was supporting the collective punishment of the entire population of Gaza, half of whom are children; she was criticised for it by someone calling her an extremist, and this is her response:

With whom do you agree?

Here is Starmer again, reiterating his claim that Israel has the right to defend itself and Hamas bears responsibility for any harm to Palestinians that occurs as a consequence (twice) – and claiming that cutting off food, water and power to Gaza is not a war crime, even though it is… as the responses show:

Jake Wallis Simons turned up with a lengthy ‘X’ post repeating the “beheaded babies” lie and suggesting that Egypt should accept Gazans into their country to escape Israeli bombs. In other words, he was calling for Gazans to flee their land and allow Israel to steal it:

By now, supporters of Palestine were also voicing their opinions on the conflict:

On October 11, Scotland’s First Minister Humza Yousaf revealed that he has relatives in Gaza, and appealed for sanity. Some compared this with the attitude of the Labour leader and found Keir Starmer wanting:

October 11 was the day US President Joe Biden started using the phrase “humanitarian corridor” – wrongly:

Nour Joudah is correct: a humanitarian corridor is a route out of a combat zone for civilians, who would be allowed to return after the conflict ends – and/or into that zone for food and other supplies. What Biden was advocating was “forcible transfer” of Gazans out of their home – forever. And that is a war crime.

It is what happened recently in Nagorno Karabakh, Armenia:

So it seems Biden was suggesting another war crime:

Read the following speculation and keep it in mind:

We could see what was being lined up from October 10, then. And some of us were prepared to ask the awkward questions:

Back to Keir Starmer. Despite his support for Israel’s war crimes, and planned war crimes, the right-wing media saw a chance to discredit the Labour leader using guilt-by-association with previous Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who once referred to Hamas as “our friends”.

Mr Corbyn used that phrase during a meeting in Parliament in 2009:

He explained to the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, during an investigation of alleged anti-Semitism in the Labour Party in 2016:

“The language I used at that meeting was actually here in parliament and it was about encouraging the meeting to go ahead, encouraging there to be a discussion about the peace process,” he said.

Asked whether he still regarded Hamas and Hezbollah as “friends”, the Labour leader said: “No. It was inclusive language I used which with hindsight I would rather not have used. I regret using those words, of course.”

So he only used that phrase diplomatically, in order to encourage aggressors to talk about peace.

But here’s Beth Rigby of Sky News, making it seem that he actually meant it, and accusing Starmer in connection with it. His response is shameful:

That’s a shocking denial of the facts by both participants in that interview.

Other UK media journalists seemed to be discovering their backbones – and started asking UK government ministers whether they agreed that Israel was breaking international law.

We know that denying food, water and power to Gaza is a war crime, so judge Grant Shapps’s words in this context:

After supporters of Palestine took to the streets, apparently celebrating the Hamas attack, the charity set up to provide protection for UK Jews against anti-Semitism – the Community Security Trust or CST – claimed that it was recording a rise in such incidents.

The problem was, its choice of example was bizarre – and the context note on the organisation’s ‘X’ post makes it look silly:

CST was soon joined by right-wing commentators with strident claims about UK Muslims:

Who do you believe?

Here’s another one. Is it inciting violence against Muslims, as the response suggests?

By this time, it seems, opinions in the UK were very much divided between those who wanted Israel to bomb Gaza into oblivion, with anybody living there getting out by any impossible means they could, and those who wanted Israel not to commit genocide on innocent Palestinians, while still wishing to see Hamas brought to justice.

These messages seem to sum up the opinions at this point:

To be continued…

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:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

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!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Cruel Britannia is available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The Livingstone Presumption is available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Vox Political reacts to Jeremy Hunt’s Tory conference speech [VIDEO]

Here’s a new thing for This Site: a video reaction to a politician’s speech.

I apologise in advance for the state of my face; I’m getting over an illness so I’m stubbly and spotty – and a bit croaky.

Here’s the clip:

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:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

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!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Voters cringe as Keir Starmer launches local elections campaign

Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner: prepare to recoil in horror at their local election launch video.

This was predictable, after Keir Starmer had Labour’s National Executive Committee block Jeremy Corbyn from standing as a party candidate in general elections.

Members of the public were always likely to consider Starmer unkindly; he just made it worse with the kind of cack-handed publicity drive we are more used to seeing from Tories like Theresa May or Liz Truss (heavens help us).

I mean…

Get the picture? That clip alone has managed to wipe away all the points Angela Rayner earned at Prime Minister’s Questions on March 29.

There’s worse, though. The following tweets may speak for themselves:

So if zombies and/or reanimated corpses get the vote, Starmer might have a chance.

As far as the rest of us are concerned – he can whistle for it.

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:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

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!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Responses to Liz Truss as prime minister: from the sublime to flat-out trolling [VIDEO] [EXTREME LANGUAGE]

Liz Truss: being prime minister is a big job – but she looks smaller than the podium where she accepted it.

Reactions to the election of Liz Truss as the Conservative prime minister are rolling in – and they appear universally negative (although sometimes you have to read/listen between the lines.

Admittedly, the first clip is from before the result was announced: Joe Lycett’s appearance on former BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg’s new Sunday morning show.

It’s summed up nicely by Maximilien Robespierre here:

Mr Lycett then turned up on Times Radio to explain the meaning of his outburst (presumably for the hard-of-thinking, so he was in exactly the right place):

Following her election, Russell Kane’s comment will be hard to beat. Brace yourself, though, because the language on display here isn’t just near the knuckle; it’s knuckle-shredding:

Among politicians, the Labour Party’s response has focused on Truss’s attitude to working people – and it’s not good:

This seems supported by Truss’s apparent keenness to support the rich. Her solution to the cost of living crisis is not to help the people who are actually facing serious difficulty, but to give huge amounts of money to those who are already extremely rich! This is from Robespierre again:

Scotland’s First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, said if Truss governs in the same way she has campaigned, she’ll be a disaster for the United Kingdom. Here’s more analysis from Robespierre:

You can see how this has been going.

Fortunately, James O’Brien has a reason for it – he thinks Liz Truss is an android:

Possibly the nastiest comment on Liz Truss becoming prime minister relates to Home Secretary Priti Patel, who has announced that she is quitting, and going to the backbenches, before Truss sacks her anyway.

Patel insisted that leaving government was “her choice” – but it’s clear that she’s leaving ahead of Truss’s boot.

Nevertheless, Patel demanded that Truss must back “all aspects” of the policies she had put in place on illegal migration – which makes no sense at all; if Truss wanted rid of Patel then it’s because she doesn’t like Patel’s work – right?

Well, that would be the case normally. But it could just be that Truss doesn’t like Patel. So the nasty comment could refer to either Patel or Truss herself, for potentially putting personal distaste over professional respect.

(Even though Patel doesn’t deserve any respect at all.)

All in all – well, you can draw your own conclusions, can’t you?

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.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

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:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

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.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

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!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Reactions to NHS privatisation Bill scream how bad it is. No comment from Starmer though

Masked like a bandit, not to protect others: it seems Keir Starmer is funded by a private donor who profits from illness and injury and cannot be trusted to safeguard our NHS.

What a strange man Keir Starmer is. His name was on Labour’s amendment calling for the Health and Care Bill to go no further towards becoming an Act of Parliament – but, after it failed, he has nothing to say against the legislation.

This Writer has waited more than 24 hours for Starmer’s considered response to the progress of a Bill that will seriously harm the UK’s greatest institution – and his party’s greatest achievement. Not a dicky bird.

He seems to be almost entirely alone, though. Labour’s MPs had a ‘form’ tweet to send out:

Others had more to say:

The Open Democracy article states that, considering the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic, the government has two choices: it can either support the NHS to meet its legal obligations to provide us with the healthcare we need for the years ahead – or it can reduce those obligations; reduce our rights to access healthcare.

It says the Health and Care Bill proposes reducing the government’s obligations to secure NHS care for us all, further than the Tories have gone already – and cutting our ability to get that care. This fits with the conclusions previously put forward by This Site.

Labour’s Jon Trickett highlighted something the Bill doesn’t address:

Well, I did say the Bill would not make it possible to employ a single extra nurse or treat a single extra patient. Perhaps I should have emphasized that medical staff who are already employed by the NHS would find it hard to survive on the meagre pay it provides in the future.

Trickett makes other good points:

Of course, Jeremy Corbyn warned us about the Tory threat to the NHS in the run-up to the 2019 general election, as Cornish Damo reminds us:

How curious that Keir Starmer hasn’t thought to remind anybody of that!

Perhaps he’d rather not be associated with anything said by his immediate forerunner – even though Mr Corbyn was right.

Then again, perhaps there’s a more vulgar explanation:

Is this the answer, then?

Will access to the National Health Service in England be restricted by the Tories – at the demand of their paymasters in private industries that profit from illness and injury – with only token opposition from Labour because Starmer’s paymasters are also in private industries that profit from illness and injury?

Is that why we haven’t heard a word from him 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.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

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:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

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.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

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!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Mike recovers from vaccine reaction. What’s been happening in the world?

Well, that was a lot of no fun.

Readers of This Site will recall I stopped posting articles on Monday, right after the piece about Dido Harding being a racist. I posted a tweet explaining that I had received my second dose of the Oxford/AstraZenica Covid-19 vaccine and was having a strong reaction against it, and that I was going back to bed.

Interestingly, the literature on reactions to the vaccine turned out to be entirely accurate; I read it on Sunday afternoon, right after having the shot and it said strong reactions could last up to four days. Yes indeed.

I didn’t stay in bed for all four days but this is the first chance I’ve had to get back to the site.

I’ll try to clear the decks of everything I was planning to write about, back on Monday (or, more accurately, Sunday). I’ll just quote from relevant news articles, possibly with a comment – as they are now “old news”, I’ll be posting more for historical interest rather than to make any hard-hitting points.

Looking to the future, I have been out of the loop for half a week, so I will be keen to find out what has been happening in the world and what you think is important (I think the signal-to-noise ratio in the news at the moment is very poor).

Let’s get back to work…

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.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

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:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

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.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

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!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Theresa Mays ‘British Dream’ is a nightmare for the rest of us

Theresa May: Politically, she’s a dead woman walking [Art: Dave Brown].

To be honest, talking about it was a nightmare for her.

Theresa May’s keynote speech at the Conservative Party Conference was a disaster from beginning to end – not just because of the stunt by ‘Lee Nelson’ performer Simon Brodkin, not because of her extended coughing fit, in which she choked on her own words, not even because, it seems, arcane forces contrived to knock an ‘F’ off the slogan on the backdrop behind her (“F off”? It’s a headline-writer’s dream).

It was a disaster because it was rubbish.

This Writer thought it might be worth examining just the start of the speech, to demonstrate what I mean.

She started by telling us her life story. Nobody cared. We didn’t care that she thought the Tories under Margaret Thatcher were the party with all the ideas. Neoliberalism is dying a slow death, determined to take as many of us with it as possible. We didn’t care that she said the Thatcher project required hard work and discipline – Tory MPs come from a societal stratum that doesn’t understand the meaning of hard work, and as for discipline, count how often they stab their leaders in the back.

Nobody cared about her platitude about a Tory promise that each new generation should be able to build a better future. If that was the promise, then it was broken before Margaret Thatcher ever stood on the steps of Number 10. She planned the impoverishment of every working person in the UK and people like Theresa May have seen that project through, almost to its successful conclusion.

So when she said that dream was what she believes in, nobody cared. In fact, it was a turn-off.

She correctly identified the reason: “40 years later, for too many people in our country, that dream feels distant, our party’s ability to deliver it is in question, and the British Dream that has inspired generations of Britons feels increasingly out of reach.”

After 40 years, the Tories had failed to deliver on its promise. In fact, they have deliberately worsened conditions for the vast majority of the population. That should have been the moment she announced her resignation, called a general election, and left the stage.

And what’s all this nonsense about a “British dream”? She repeated the phrase more than 20 times during this benighted speech, as though it meant something. It didn’t. She was simply trying to copy the success of the “American dream” as an idea in the US. But recycled ideas, bought off-the-shelf, don’t work. We all knew what she was doing and we weren’t having any of it.

https://twitter.com/MattTurner4L/status/915618317876031489

(Although I notice the BBC seems to have swallowed it wholeheartedly, Radio 4’s PM programme happily repeating the nonsense.

At least she apologised for calling a ‘vanity’ election and running a lousy campaign.

She continued: “The choice before us now is clear. Do we give up, spend our time looking back?”

Yes. Conservatives are a backward-looking organisation that has nowhere left to go.

“Or do we do our duty, look to the future and give the country the government it needs?”

Yes – by throwing in the towel and letting Labour take over.

This country will judge us harshly if we get this decision wrong.

Yes we will.

“Because all that should ever drive us is the duty we have to Britain and the historic mission of this party – this Conservative Party – to renew the British Dream in each new generation.”

A “historic” mission to renew an idea symbolised in a phrase that Mrs May had literally just mentioned? Give us a break.

“The dream that, for decades, has inspired people from around the world to come to Britain. To make their home in Britain. To build their lives in Britain.”

And then to be accused of being illegal immigrants after somebody saw Mrs May’s racist “go home” vans a few years ago, perhaps?

So far, her speech had been easily-dispelled waffle. Apparently the next section was subtitled “The good a Conservative government can do.” Let’s look at her claims.

“Seven years ago, our challenge was to repair the damage of Labour’s great recession – and we did it.”

Whose “great recession”? It has now been firmly established that the recession was caused by an international banking crisis and had very little to do with the Labour government that was well on the way to re-balancing our finances when the Tories turned up, hand in hand with the Liberal Democrats, and flushed us all down the toilet.

“The deficit is down.”

But the Tories promised to eliminate it by 2015 – two years ago.

“Spending is under control.”

But the Tories have announced £15 billion of unfunded spending since the election.

“And our economy is growing again.”

Debatable.

“An income tax cut for over 30 million people.”

A huge mistake when you’re trying to pay off a deficit. Better to increase wages and therefore ability to pay tax.

“Four million taken out of paying it at all.”

A sign of failure. They don’t earn enough. What happened to the promise that each generation would do better than the last?

“Employment up to a record high.”

On zero-hour contracts. If everyone worked just one hour a year, the Tories would claim full employment (not my line).

“Unemployment down to a historic low.”

Because so many jobseekers have been sanctioned – some of them into the grave.

“Income inequality at its lowest for thirty years.”

The most doubtful statistic This Writer has seen in nearly a quarter of a century as a news reporter.

“More women in work than ever before.”

Forced there to make ends meet for their families, or because they cannot afford to retire.

“Over 11,000 more doctors in our NHS.”

All of whom started training under Labour.

“Over 11,000 more nurses on our hospital wards.”

And nobody taking up new training places because the Tories have poisoned nursing as a career.

“Free childcare for 3 and 4 year olds doubled.”

Postcode lottery?

“1.8 million more children in good or outstanding schools.”

Have the Tories lowered standards, then?

“3 million more apprenticeships.”

How many full-time jobs at the end of them?

“Crime down by more than a third.”

Is that reported crime? Recorded crime? Or actual crime?

“More young people from disadvantaged backgrounds going to university than at any time in the history of our country.”

And getting hugely into debt.

“Britain leading the world in tackling climate change,”

With fracking?

“eradicating global poverty,”

By importing it all here?

“and countering terrorism wherever it rears its head.”

A sick joke. Five successful terror attacks in the UK this year – and this year isn’t over. Mrs May herself ordered the cuts that made the police less able to investigate and prevent terrorism.

“Same sex marriage on the statute book, so that two people who love each other can get married, no matter what their gender.”

This was a certainty in any case. A Labour government would have brought it in if the Tories had not.

“And a National Living Wage – giving a pay rise to the lowest earners – introduced not by the Labour Party, but by us, the Conservative Party.”

A living wage would pay enough for a person/family to be able to provide for themselves without relying on any benefits at all. The Tory living wage does not allow this and is, therefore, a lie.

“Never allow the Left to say they have a monopoly on compassion.”

Next, Mrs May moved on to a particularly cringeworthy passage in which she tried to claim that Tories fight injustice. At the end of every anecdotal example she mentioned, she said, “That’s what I’m in this for.”

No. She’s in this for power and money. We all know this because, despite calling an election to satisfy her own vanity and losing her Parliamentary majority, Mrs May did not do the decent thing – she clung on, first by lying to the Queen about having done a deal with the DUP, then by doing a deal with them, then by rigging the composition of Parliamentary committees to give the Tories a majority they do not deserve. She is continuing as prime minister because she wants power for its own sake.

Let’s move on to the reactions before I lose the will to live.

The following are trawled from Twitter and have been chosen because they are either relevant or gave me a giggle. Enjoy – you need some light relief after the above:

https://twitter.com/BootstrapCook/status/915549142541271040

And:

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:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

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.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

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!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

A few words about respect

141224respect

Blogger kittysjones put out a very interesting article yesterday (Tuesday) entitled Greens: the myth of the “new left” debunked in which the position claimed by the Green Party – that of being the ‘true party of the Left’ – is disputed. The article states:

“The Green Party do not have an underpinning ideology that can be described as left-wing at all. Some of the links with far-right and fascist ideology are very worrying.The fact that the Greens have themselves chosen to regard the Labour Party as their enemy means that they don’t see a potential ally, yet they manage very well in coalition councils, working amicably side-by-side and cooperatively with Tory and Liberal Democrats.

“Don’t let them fail the people of Britain by voting Green next year and allowing the Tories to remain in government another five years. People are suffering and dying as a consequence of Tory austerity; we need to ensure that ends. Vote Labour. That is the genuinely socialist thing to do.”

What is even more interesting than the article (which provides evidence to support its claims) is the reaction to it by some supporters of the party it criticises.

Here’s one: “You really must be running scared to write what you know to be utter rubbish. Thank you for invoking Godwin’s law because it just makes Liebour look all the more desperate and ridiculous.” The author of this comment was unwilling to put their own name to it, being described merely as ‘A Green Nazi’ – interestingly, because Godwin’s Law is, of course, the application of an inappropriate comparison with the Nazis.

The article does indeed compare Green ideology with that of the Nazis, but it does so on the basis of clearly-referenced evidence; therefore it would be wrong to suggest that the comparison is inappropriate. On the other hand, the commenter’s inability or unwillingness to provide any evidential argument against the assertions, relying on disparagement (“utter rubbish”) and insults (“Liebour”) suggest that in fact they are “running scared”, “desperate” and “ridiculous”.

The author’s response was one to which Yr Obdt Srvt has had to resort many times: “If it’s ‘utter rubbish’ then why don’t you explain how, in what way you disagree, rather than being a fascist and proving my point, by simply stooping to insulting the author?” This reply generally provokes one of only two possible responses: Silence, or invective.

Another comment (this one by ‘Nuggy’ – again, not likely to be their real name) attempted to twist the article into a gross generalisation: “Equating all greens with Malthus is like equating all socialists with Pol Pot or Kim Il Sung.”

It was easily put down by a reference to accuracy: “I equated the cited green policies with the ideas of Malthus.” [italics mine]

There was an (unintentially?) hilarious suggestion that the article was libellous; it isn’t, as anyone with knowledge of the laws of defamation will confirm.

And then there were the insults, first mentioned in a reply to Tim Barnden (at last, someone with a real name!) who asked: “Why are you moderating out most replies Ms Jones? Are you in fact not up for a debate?”

This was a continuing theme on the comment column, and the replies indicate the kind of pressure that was being brought to bear by people claiming to represent the Green Party: “I’m up for debate, just not up for allowing personal abuse and bullying on my site… I have had hundreds of comments from largely abusive green supporters… I am getting some pretty terrible personal abuse from Green supporters. But not much criticism of the content and details in the article, unfortunately.”

The Green Party isn’t the only political organisation whose supporters behave in this way.

Vox Political has received exactly the same responses (in different contexts, obviously) from supporters of the Conservative Party (although admittedly this has tailed off considerably since VP was launched in 2011), Scottish nationalism (including the SNP), and most particularly UKIP.

Many, many examples are available if anyone wants to question the truth of this claim.

It’s simply not good enough.

Perhaps those of you who consider this behaviour to be acceptable (it isn’t) may be persuaded against it if sites like VP and kittysjones parcelled up all your abuse and sent it to the head offices of these political parties as examples of how their supporters represent them?

You see, there are rules to this kind of debate and it seems too many people are breaking them. That’s just damned disrespectful and there’s no reason anyone should put up with it.

So, if you are one of those who types out streams of profanity and hits the ‘send’ button before engaging your brain, it’s time to change your ways.

This site values informed debate. We appreciate it; sometimes it can even be persuasive (in VP‘s case this has occurred several times).

But from now on, anything else will receive an appropriate response.

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

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:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
commenting on UK politics and the people it atttracts.
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

‘Purred like a kitten’ did she, Cameron? That’s no way to discuss the Queen!

kittencomment

Don’t read this on a full stomach or you may lose your lunch. It seems David Cameron has been overheard discussing how he broke the news to Her Majesty, the Queen, that Scotland had voted to remain in the United Kingdom and keep her as their monarch. “She purred down the line,” he said to former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Here’s how the Daily Mirror reacted:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
bringing you the best of the blogs!
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

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:

Donate Button with Credit Cards