Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
This story has got Isabel Oakeshott, part of Leave.EU’s inner sanctum and close to Banks, scrambling to get her own story out now. She’s made a statement overnight that she’s had access to thousands of Banks’s emails for the last couple of years and now sees the extent of his Russian contacts...despite sitting on a couch with Marr not long ago to slate Carole Cadwalladr for her investigative journalism. The two of them together completely refusing to see the links & Oakeshott claiming that she “was chasing unicorns”!
Turns out the unicorns were in Oakeshott’s attic all along!!
Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
This story has got Isabel Oakeshott, part of Leave.EU’s inner sanctum and close to Banks, scrambling to get her own story out now. She’s made a statement overnight that she’s had access to thousands of Banks’s emails for the last couple of years and now sees the extent of his Russian contacts...despite sitting on a couch with Marr not long ago to slate Carole Cadwalladr for her investigative journalism. The two of them together completely refusing to see the links & Oakeshott claiming that she “was chasing unicorns”!
Turns out the unicorns were in Oakeshott’s attic all along!!
Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
This story has got Isabel Oakeshott, part of Leave.EU’s inner sanctum and close to Banks, scrambling to get her own story out now. She’s made a statement overnight that she’s had access to thousands of Banks’s emails for the last couple of years and now sees the extent of his Russian contacts...despite sitting on a couch with Marr not long ago to slate Carole Cadwalladr for her investigative journalism. The two of them together completely refusing to see the links & Oakeshott claiming that she “was chasing unicorns”!
Turns out the unicorns were in Oakeshott’s attic all along!!
Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
This story has got Isabel Oakeshott, part of Leave.EU’s inner sanctum and close to Banks, scrambling to get her own story out now. She’s made a statement overnight that she’s had access to thousands of Banks’s emails for the last couple of years and now sees the extent of his Russian contacts...despite sitting on a couch with Marr not long ago to slate Carole Cadwalladr for her investigative journalism. The two of them together completely refusing to see the links & Oakeshott claiming that she “was chasing unicorns”!
Turns out the unicorns were in Oakeshott’s attic all along!!
So is Isabel Talkshitt incapable of doing an investigation into the remain campaign? I assume she thinks she is a journalist.
My thoughts exactly when she said that. Funnily enough, Isabel is not in her usual place on Sunday Politics today.
Glad you have brought this up. I was so furious about that, that I started a complaint process about it. I said it was unprecedented in that slot to invite a journo on, ostensibly to review the papers, but then to start attacking her own work; and even more so to partner her only with another (so-called) journo, not just of a different political outlook ( which is Ok and standard) but who had a direct stake in the story being covered up. And then to let that journo take over from Marr in "interrogating" the fellow guest. I noted that this happened after Marr had embarrassed himself by rubbishing CC's story when it broke, only for it to make global headlines all the following week.
I have been right through the process, and they have not given an inch. It has shaken my faith in the BBC. I don't suggest the whole institution has shifted to the right, but there are definite pockets of it, whereby certain high profile presenters think they are themselves the story and can behave as they wish. Marr is one, sadly, because I like his on screen persona generally. The other two are Andrew Neil, and John Humphries, the latter aided and abetted by the Today programme's editor Sarah Sands ( check out her background).
Balance is a bloody difficult thing to achieve, and I strongly support a strong BBC, which makes it all the more important that its supporters call out this kind of shit.
Isabel has a favourite line in digging others out by saying 'it's all about you', the irony now is possibly lost on her. In the political world there are a number of 'dark and sinister' characters. In my view Oakshott is one of them
The UK exports more to the Republic than to the USA so I believe.
The UK exports nearly 3 times as much to the USA ($61.6bn approx) than it does to Ireland ($22.9bn approx).
The USA is the UK's largest single export destination.
How is that possible? I thought one of the reasons the morons voted for Brexit was so we could do trade deals with the rest of the world!
By selling/exporting more stuff to the USA than they do to Ireland? Bit of a hunch/guesswork, I know, but may have legs.
Whoosh!
I think you whooshed yourself.
Don't think so. You don't seem able to post anything without a heavy dose of sarcasm of late. Bit like a 15 year old discovering sarcasm for the first time. It is tiresome and boring when adopted by a grown man.
Coming from the serial petulance offender, that's some compliment.
You seem incapable of posting without a churlish comment. Most likely born out of your inferiority complex. If you shout, scream, wave your arms about like a spoilt kid and generally be a bit of a dick towards people, it doesn't make you sound grown up. It accentuates your childlike manner.
Pot kettle? Amazing that you, with your posting history on here, think you can comment on dickish behaviour by other people!
Also amazing that you, a Millwall supporter, probably make more posts on this forum per month than I do. By this time next year you will have made more posts on here in total than me even though I have been a member since 2009 and you have been a member since 2012.
That'll teach me. I'm certain to have a rethink based on that criterion.
Yours,
Another Moron
If the cap fits.
I'll have a large.
That's the 10% that we humans use. I got rid of the rest.
One punter here even posts as two people....
Who? You’ve intimated at this before. I’m genuinely interested to know who you think this person is
Said it here three times in the last 18 months will not be saying it a 4th time. This is typical of people having more interest in what they say rather than what others do.....its the reason you have two ears and one mouth....may i add this behaviour in recent months has stopped, once the fool concerned knew i was on to him.
Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
Well that explains it. In did wonder who the guy was that was holding a gun to my head when i voted.
Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
Well that explains it. In did wonder who the guy was that was holding a gun to my head when i voted.
Fair enough. I'm sure you're right and the Russians weren't in any way interested in undermining the legitimacy of the Leave referendum campaign through their involvement with the bloke paying for it.
The Russians have plenty of interest in seeing the destabilisation of the European Community. It’s exactly why they helped fund the leave campaign. Not the official one of course but the unofficial one. As if that makes any difference apart from the likes of Johnson, Gove, IDS et al in maintaining a pretence that their hands were clean.
The UK exports more to the Republic than to the USA so I believe.
The UK exports nearly 3 times as much to the USA ($61.6bn approx) than it does to Ireland ($22.9bn approx).
The USA is the UK's largest single export destination.
How is that possible? I thought one of the reasons the morons voted for Brexit was so we could do trade deals with the rest of the world!
By selling/exporting more stuff to the USA than they do to Ireland? Bit of a hunch/guesswork, I know, but may have legs.
Whoosh!
I think you whooshed yourself.
Don't think so. You don't seem able to post anything without a heavy dose of sarcasm of late. Bit like a 15 year old discovering sarcasm for the first time. It is tiresome and boring when adopted by a grown man.
Coming from the serial petulance offender, that's some compliment.
You seem incapable of posting without a churlish comment. Most likely born out of your inferiority complex. If you shout, scream, wave your arms about like a spoilt kid and generally be a bit of a dick towards people, it doesn't make you sound grown up. It accentuates your childlike manner.
Pot kettle? Amazing that you, with your posting history on here, think you can comment on dickish behaviour by other people!
Also amazing that you, a Millwall supporter, probably make more posts on this forum per month than I do. By this time next year you will have made more posts on here in total than me even though I have been a member since 2009 and you have been a member since 2012.
That'll teach me. I'm certain to have a rethink based on that criterion.
Yours,
Another Moron
If the cap fits.
I'll have a large.
That's the 10% that we humans use. I got rid of the rest.
One punter here even posts as two people....
Who? You’ve intimated at this before. I’m genuinely interested to know who you think this person is
Said it here three times in the last 18 months will not be saying it a 4th time. This is typical of people having more interest in what they say rather than what others do.....its the reason you have two ears and one mouth....may i add this behaviour in recent months has stopped, once the fool concerned knew i was on to him.
If you don't say who you think posts "as two people" and what makes you believe it, you should really withdraw the accusation. Spill the beans, Chippy! (Or stop making accusations).
The Russians have plenty of interest in seeing the destabilisation of the European Community. It’s exactly why they helped fund the leave campaign. Not the official one of course but the unofficial one. As if that makes any difference apart from the likes of Johnson, Gove, IDS et al in maintaining a pretence that their hands were clean.
Putin and the Russians are linked to the entire Alternative Right movement. There's no need to panic - simply observe that some are operating at the level of empire trying to facilitate tectonic shifts.
Putin is linked to the League, Le Pen, Trump and Brexit and they all have the same rhetoric, the same deployment of campaign linguistics.
Blame Muslims, blame immigrants, blame the EU and blame the establishment. This is not a new strategy and it works to a certain extent after a big economic event like the crash or the Eurozone crisis.
Fortunately the UK has had time to sober up and look at the execution of this vote. And staying close to the EU looks a good option. Some are already rehearsing their betrayal speeches so now we all get to decide which side are we on:
The side of the DUP, UKIP, Farage, Fox, Banks, Rees-Mogg and Putin plus Trump. Or the centrist European tradition? That's a decision which the Italians have to make too, and all of Europe when they elect their Parliament next year.
Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
Well that explains it. In did wonder who the guy was that was holding a gun to my head when i voted.
No one is suggesting that but it is worth asking how many bogus, Russian paid ads that leave voters were subjected to.
Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
This story has got Isabel Oakeshott, part of Leave.EU’s inner sanctum and close to Banks, scrambling to get her own story out now. She’s made a statement overnight that she’s had access to thousands of Banks’s emails for the last couple of years and now sees the extent of his Russian contacts...despite sitting on a couch with Marr not long ago to slate Carole Cadwalladr for her investigative journalism. The two of them together completely refusing to see the links & Oakeshott claiming that she “was chasing unicorns”!
Turns out the unicorns were in Oakeshott’s attic all along!!
So is Isabel Talkshitt incapable of doing an investigation into the remain campaign? I assume she thinks she is a journalist.
My thoughts exactly when she said that. Funnily enough, Isabel is not in her usual place on Sunday Politics today.
Glad you have brought this up. I was so furious about that, that I started a complaint process about it. I said it was unprecedented in that slot to invite a journo on, ostensibly to review the papers, but then to start attacking her own work; and even more so to partner her only with another (so-called) journo, not just of a different political outlook ( which is Ok and standard) but who had a direct stake in the story being covered up. And then to let that journo take over from Marr in "interrogating" the fellow guest. I noted that this happened after Marr had embarrassed himself by rubbishing CC's story when it broke, only for it to make global headlines all the following week.
I have been right through the process, and they have not given an inch. It has shaken my faith in the BBC. I don't suggest the whole institution has shifted to the right, but there are definite pockets of it, whereby certain high profile presenters think they are themselves the story and can behave as they wish. Marr is one, sadly, because I like his on screen persona generally. The other two are Andrew Neil, and John Humphries, the latter aided and abetted by the Today programme's editor Sarah Sands ( check out her background).
Balance is a bloody difficult thing to achieve, and I strongly support a strong BBC, which makes it all the more important that its supporters call out this kind of shit.
Oakeshott is so far ingrained into the Tory right/UKIP, I have always found it impossible to take her seriously. SP used Julia Hartley-Brewer today, so like for like really.
Marr & Humphrys are just caricatures now. Neill annoys me, because there are times when he shows he can be a fine journalist, but he reverts to type too often.
Sarah Sands is best mates with Boris. Don’t think there’s much more to be said there.
Any idea of impartiality on the BBC, I’ve also given up on Question Time, is a myth. Only worth tuning in for certain guests, who you know can overcome the interrogation/shout overs that are apparently journalism these days.
Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
This story has got Isabel Oakeshott, part of Leave.EU’s inner sanctum and close to Banks, scrambling to get her own story out now. She’s made a statement overnight that she’s had access to thousands of Banks’s emails for the last couple of years and now sees the extent of his Russian contacts...despite sitting on a couch with Marr not long ago to slate Carole Cadwalladr for her investigative journalism. The two of them together completely refusing to see the links & Oakeshott claiming that she “was chasing unicorns”!
Turns out the unicorns were in Oakeshott’s attic all along!!
So is Isabel Talkshitt incapable of doing an investigation into the remain campaign? I assume she thinks she is a journalist.
My thoughts exactly when she said that. Funnily enough, Isabel is not in her usual place on Sunday Politics today.
Glad you have brought this up. I was so furious about that, that I started a complaint process about it. I said it was unprecedented in that slot to invite a journo on, ostensibly to review the papers, but then to start attacking her own work; and even more so to partner her only with another (so-called) journo, not just of a different political outlook ( which is Ok and standard) but who had a direct stake in the story being covered up. And then to let that journo take over from Marr in "interrogating" the fellow guest. I noted that this happened after Marr had embarrassed himself by rubbishing CC's story when it broke, only for it to make global headlines all the following week.
I have been right through the process, and they have not given an inch. It has shaken my faith in the BBC. I don't suggest the whole institution has shifted to the right, but there are definite pockets of it, whereby certain high profile presenters think they are themselves the story and can behave as they wish. Marr is one, sadly, because I like his on screen persona generally. The other two are Andrew Neil, and John Humphries, the latter aided and abetted by the Today programme's editor Sarah Sands ( check out her background).
Balance is a bloody difficult thing to achieve, and I strongly support a strong BBC, which makes it all the more important that its supporters call out this kind of shit.
Oakeshott is so far ingrained into the Tory right/UKIP, I have always found it impossible to take her seriously. SP used Julia Hartley-Brewer today, so like for like really.
Marr & Humphrys are just caricatures now. Neill annoys me, because there are times when he shows he can be a fine journalist, but he reverts to type too often.
Sarah Sands is best mates with Boris. Don’t think there’s much more to be said there.
Any idea of impartiality on the BBC, I’ve also given up on Question Time, is a myth. Only worth tuning in for certain guests, who you know can overcome the interrogation/shout overs that are apparently journalism these days.
What I don't get about the Marr show and its paper review is what they think it is for. And I tried to ask them. I have got no problem if they match up say Fraser Nelson or Tim Montgomerie or Jane Moore with someone equally smart from the Guardian or the New Statesman because they at least show basic adult manners and an interesting insightful discussion often takes place. But then they put on Hartley Brewer, Oakeshott, or Platell, who have no such manners, a shouting match takes place, and the producers are presumably going "Wow. Great TV" It's supposed to be a paper review you cretins, not a Sunday version of Question Time.
One of several points in my complaint which they swerved was why, if Marr still harboured doubts about what Carole C. had proved, he had not just invited her for a 121 interview, where he could have questioned her and she would have had the space to answer, without that cretinous cow screeching in her ear. It was interesting that in the subsequent weeks, after they had received my and other complaints, they actually got Christopher Wylie in for a 121, where he acquitted himself admirably and left Marr in no doubt what a big deal this is.
It was also noticeable when Marr had to take time off again recently that they asked Nick Robinson and Emma Bartlett to stand in, but not Eddie Mair, oh no. Can't have him grilling the likes of Boris Johnson on that programme, can we?
Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
Well that explains it. In did wonder who the guy was that was holding a gun to my head when i voted.
Are you for real? Whatever way a person voted in the referendum surely we have to be very concerned when foreign governments attempt/succeed in influencing events to their own benefit.
Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
This story has got Isabel Oakeshott, part of Leave.EU’s inner sanctum and close to Banks, scrambling to get her own story out now. She’s made a statement overnight that she’s had access to thousands of Banks’s emails for the last couple of years and now sees the extent of his Russian contacts...despite sitting on a couch with Marr not long ago to slate Carole Cadwalladr for her investigative journalism. The two of them together completely refusing to see the links & Oakeshott claiming that she “was chasing unicorns”!
Turns out the unicorns were in Oakeshott’s attic all along!!
So is Isabel Talkshitt incapable of doing an investigation into the remain campaign? I assume she thinks she is a journalist.
My thoughts exactly when she said that. Funnily enough, Isabel is not in her usual place on Sunday Politics today.
Glad you have brought this up. I was so furious about that, that I started a complaint process about it. I said it was unprecedented in that slot to invite a journo on, ostensibly to review the papers, but then to start attacking her own work; and even more so to partner her only with another (so-called) journo, not just of a different political outlook ( which is Ok and standard) but who had a direct stake in the story being covered up. And then to let that journo take over from Marr in "interrogating" the fellow guest. I noted that this happened after Marr had embarrassed himself by rubbishing CC's story when it broke, only for it to make global headlines all the following week.
I have been right through the process, and they have not given an inch. It has shaken my faith in the BBC. I don't suggest the whole institution has shifted to the right, but there are definite pockets of it, whereby certain high profile presenters think they are themselves the story and can behave as they wish. Marr is one, sadly, because I like his on screen persona generally. The other two are Andrew Neil, and John Humphries, the latter aided and abetted by the Today programme's editor Sarah Sands ( check out her background).
Balance is a bloody difficult thing to achieve, and I strongly support a strong BBC, which makes it all the more important that its supporters call out this kind of shit.
I am glad you have come to that conclusion, for those of us a little further to the left the bias of presenters, talking over guests from the (broad) left and excessive invitation of right wingers has been apparent for sometime.
I watched Marr this morning and felt myself comparing and contrasting his interviews with Kier Starmer and David Lidington (and yes I had to look his name up). He wasn't awful with Starmer but he interrupted and kept 'not understanding' what was being said. Whilst with Lidington, who is the de facto deputy PM, it was just a pleasant chat.
I felt that too, but wondered if it is just that I agree with Starmer more than the other bloke! When somedody is saying something that makes sense it seems harsh interrogating them, but when their position doesn't the same level of interrogation seems soft! Starmer talks far more sense than most politicians for me personally! I would need to watch it again but won't as I've seen it once. Overall, I think the Marr show is one of the few worthy shows as I think politics demands the detail which it sometimes provides. Question time skirts over it due to its flawed format.
Detail has to be the friend of truth and the enemy of Boris Johnson.
I felt that too, but wondered if it is just that I agree with Starmer more than the other bloke! When somedody is saying something that makes sense it seems harsh interrogating them, but when their position doesn't the same level of interrogation seems soft! Starmer talks far more sense than most politicians for me personally! I would need to watch it again but won't as I've seen it once. Overall, I think the Marr show is one of the few worthy shows as I think politics demands the detail which it sometimes provides. Question time skirts over it due to its flawed format.
Detail has to be the friend of truth and the enemy of Boris Johnson.
I agree, it is hard to calculate your own bias into any situation. And as hard as I tried it is likely to still be a factor, having said that I have been critical of Labour's stance on Brexit and Lidington is just about the most amiable Tory you could hope to meet.
I tried to look outside who I was more likely to support and just focus on the interviewer and believe that there was a significant difference in approach. Particularly considering that the government of the day should always be the ones held to greater account.
The UK exports more to the Republic than to the USA so I believe.
The UK exports nearly 3 times as much to the USA ($61.6bn approx) than it does to Ireland ($22.9bn approx).
The USA is the UK's largest single export destination.
How is that possible? I thought one of the reasons the morons voted for Brexit was so we could do trade deals with the rest of the world!
By selling/exporting more stuff to the USA than they do to Ireland? Bit of a hunch/guesswork, I know, but may have legs.
Whoosh!
I think you whooshed yourself.
Don't think so. You don't seem able to post anything without a heavy dose of sarcasm of late. Bit like a 15 year old discovering sarcasm for the first time. It is tiresome and boring when adopted by a grown man.
Coming from the serial petulance offender, that's some compliment.
You seem incapable of posting without a churlish comment. Most likely born out of your inferiority complex. If you shout, scream, wave your arms about like a spoilt kid and generally be a bit of a dick towards people, it doesn't make you sound grown up. It accentuates your childlike manner.
Pot kettle? Amazing that you, with your posting history on here, think you can comment on dickish behaviour by other people!
Also amazing that you, a Millwall supporter, probably make more posts on this forum per month than I do. By this time next year you will have made more posts on here in total than me even though I have been a member since 2009 and you have been a member since 2012.
That'll teach me. I'm certain to have a rethink based on that criterion.
Yours,
Another Moron
If the cap fits.
I'll have a large.
That's the 10% that we humans use. I got rid of the rest.
One punter here even posts as two people....
Who? You’ve intimated at this before. I’m genuinely interested to know who you think this person is
Said it here three times in the last 18 months will not be saying it a 4th time. This is typical of people having more interest in what they say rather than what others do.....its the reason you have two ears and one mouth....may i add this behaviour in recent months has stopped, once the fool concerned knew i was on to him.
If you don't say who you think posts "as two people" and what makes you believe it, you should really withdraw the accusation. Spill the beans, Chippy! (Or stop making accusations).
Great post..... Wheres fiiiiishhhh when you need him
Blimey, it turns out the bloke bankrolling the Leave campaign more than any other has been caught out lying about his links with Russia. Who would have thought it...
By sheer coincidence presumably, around the same time Mr Banks was provided with an opportunity to invest in Russian gold businesses worth £billions. What fortunate timing.
This story has got Isabel Oakeshott, part of Leave.EU’s inner sanctum and close to Banks, scrambling to get her own story out now. She’s made a statement overnight that she’s had access to thousands of Banks’s emails for the last couple of years and now sees the extent of his Russian contacts...despite sitting on a couch with Marr not long ago to slate Carole Cadwalladr for her investigative journalism. The two of them together completely refusing to see the links & Oakeshott claiming that she “was chasing unicorns”!
Turns out the unicorns were in Oakeshott’s attic all along!!
So is Isabel Talkshitt incapable of doing an investigation into the remain campaign? I assume she thinks she is a journalist.
My thoughts exactly when she said that. Funnily enough, Isabel is not in her usual place on Sunday Politics today.
Glad you have brought this up. I was so furious about that, that I started a complaint process about it. I said it was unprecedented in that slot to invite a journo on, ostensibly to review the papers, but then to start attacking her own work; and even more so to partner her only with another (so-called) journo, not just of a different political outlook ( which is Ok and standard) but who had a direct stake in the story being covered up. And then to let that journo take over from Marr in "interrogating" the fellow guest. I noted that this happened after Marr had embarrassed himself by rubbishing CC's story when it broke, only for it to make global headlines all the following week.
I have been right through the process, and they have not given an inch. It has shaken my faith in the BBC. I don't suggest the whole institution has shifted to the right, but there are definite pockets of it, whereby certain high profile presenters think they are themselves the story and can behave as they wish. Marr is one, sadly, because I like his on screen persona generally. The other two are Andrew Neil, and John Humphries, the latter aided and abetted by the Today programme's editor Sarah Sands ( check out her background).
Balance is a bloody difficult thing to achieve, and I strongly support a strong BBC, which makes it all the more important that its supporters call out this kind of shit.
Oakeshott is so far ingrained into the Tory right/UKIP, I have always found it impossible to take her seriously. SP used Julia Hartley-Brewer today, so like for like really.
Marr & Humphrys are just caricatures now. Neill annoys me, because there are times when he shows he can be a fine journalist, but he reverts to type too often.
Sarah Sands is best mates with Boris. Don’t think there’s much more to be said there.
Any idea of impartiality on the BBC, I’ve also given up on Question Time, is a myth. Only worth tuning in for certain guests, who you know can overcome the interrogation/shout overs that are apparently journalism these days.
What I don't get about the Marr show and its paper review is what they think it is for. And I tried to ask them. I have got no problem if they match up say Fraser Nelson or Tim Montgomerie or Jane Moore with someone equally smart from the Guardian or the New Statesman because they at least show basic adult manners and an interesting insightful discussion often takes place. But then they put on Hartley Brewer, Oakeshott, or Platell, who have no such manners, a shouting match takes place, and the producers are presumably going "Wow. Great TV" It's supposed to be a paper review you cretins, not a Sunday version of Question Time.
One of several points in my complaint which they swerved was why, if Marr still harboured doubts about what Carole C. had proved, he had not just invited her for a 121 interview, where he could have questioned her and she would have had the space to answer, without that cretinous cow screeching in her ear. It was interesting that in the subsequent weeks, after they had received my and other complaints, they actually got Christopher Wylie in for a 121, where he acquitted himself admirably and left Marr in no doubt what a big deal this is.
It was also noticeable when Marr had to take time off again recently that they asked Nick Robinson and Emma Bartlett to stand in, but not Eddie Mair, oh no. Can't have him grilling the likes of Boris Johnson on that programme, can we?
I do wonder what is going on in parts of W1A....
I have respect for your knowledge of journalism @PragueAddick.
Very difficult in a country split 52/48, or the current variant, but I have found the BBC interviewers, content and guests pretty balanced. The politicians to a large extent have said nothing of material interest in nearly 2 years.
As a leave voter I have found Hartley Brewer and Oakeshott a bit tedious.
The key quotation I come back to is David Dimbleby. " The British people have voted and we are out".
My wife immediately responded with, I doubt it, "they" will find some way to wiggle out of it.
The struggle ebbs and flows. It looks like that at the moment we're in the 'May voted remain, Hammond voted remain, the civil service are the establishment so they don't want brexit to happen.
This has edged ahead of 'the EU are being bastards, particularly the Irish', and 'the House of Lords are being bastards' and 'the Judges are being bastards' and 'The House of Commons is full of bastards' which has left 'remainers talking the country down' trailing behind.
All of that lot could be lumped together as 'they'.
What a conspiracy eh? Against the 'will of the people democratically expressed'.
Could it actually be that the brexiters don't have a clue what to do with their win, so they are like children yelling at the conspirators 'not to put them off, they're trying to think, it's SOOOOOOO unfair!'
I reckon the peoples vote/second referendum lot will hove into view as a bunch of bastards soon. That will be very welcome to the brexiters because they will have a fresh lot of people to blame, and they will continue to avoid having to come up with solutions to the problems they have ushered in.
Because we are so far down the road my inclination is simply to say there you are brexiters, have your brexit which is increasingly looking like the cliff edge.
But perleeese, when the chaos ensues, own it, because it is 100% yours.
The struggle ebbs and flows. It looks like that at the moment we're in the 'May voted remain, Hammond voted remain, the civil service are the establishment so they don't want brexit to happen.
This has edged ahead of 'the EU are being bastards, particularly the Irish', and 'the House of Lords are being bastards' and 'the Judges are being bastards' and 'The House of Commons is full of bastards' which has left 'remainers talking the country down' trailing behind.
All of that lot could be lumped together as 'they'.
What a conspiracy eh? Against the 'will of the people democratically expressed'.
Could it actually be that the brexiters don't have a clue what to do with their win, so they are like children yelling at the conspirators 'not to put them off, they're trying to think, it's SOOOOOOO unfair!'
I reckon the peoples vote/second referendum lot will hove into view as a bunch of bastards soon. That will be very welcome to the brexiters because they will have a fresh lot of people to blame, and they will continue to avoid having to come up with solutions to the problems they have ushered in.
Because we are so far down the road my inclination is simply to say there you are brexiters, have your brexit which is increasingly looking like the cliff edge.
But perleeese, when the chaos ensues, own it, because it is 100% yours.
I'd agree with this 100% but for one thing: Never in my life have I had the slightest inclination to be pushed off a cliff
Comments
This story has got Isabel Oakeshott, part of Leave.EU’s inner sanctum and close to Banks, scrambling to get her own story out now. She’s made a statement overnight that she’s had access to thousands of Banks’s emails for the last couple of years and now sees the extent of his Russian contacts...despite sitting on a couch with Marr not long ago to slate Carole Cadwalladr for her investigative journalism. The two of them together completely refusing to see the links & Oakeshott claiming that she “was chasing unicorns”!
Turns out the unicorns were in Oakeshott’s attic all along!!
I have been right through the process, and they have not given an inch. It has shaken my faith in the BBC. I don't suggest the whole institution has shifted to the right, but there are definite pockets of it, whereby certain high profile presenters think they are themselves the story and can behave as they wish. Marr is one, sadly, because I like his on screen persona generally. The other two are Andrew Neil, and John Humphries, the latter aided and abetted by the Today programme's editor Sarah Sands ( check out her background).
Balance is a bloody difficult thing to achieve, and I strongly support a strong BBC, which makes it all the more important that its supporters call out this kind of shit.
In did wonder who the guy was that was holding a gun to my head when i voted.
Nothing to see here, move along.
Putin is linked to the League, Le Pen, Trump and Brexit and they all have the same rhetoric, the same deployment of campaign linguistics.
Blame Muslims, blame immigrants, blame the EU and blame the establishment. This is not a new strategy and it works to a certain extent after a big economic event like the crash or the Eurozone crisis.
Fortunately the UK has had time to sober up and look at the execution of this vote. And staying close to the EU looks a good option. Some are already rehearsing their betrayal speeches so now we all get to decide which side are we on:
The side of the DUP, UKIP, Farage, Fox, Banks, Rees-Mogg and Putin plus Trump. Or the centrist European tradition? That's a decision which the Italians have to make too, and all of Europe when they elect their Parliament next year.
Marr & Humphrys are just caricatures now. Neill annoys me, because there are times when he shows he can be a fine journalist, but he reverts to type too often.
Sarah Sands is best mates with Boris. Don’t think there’s much more to be said there.
Any idea of impartiality on the BBC, I’ve also given up on Question Time, is a myth. Only worth tuning in for certain guests, who you know can overcome the interrogation/shout overs that are apparently journalism these days.
My own response to our Issy...
What I don't get about the Marr show and its paper review is what they think it is for. And I tried to ask them. I have got no problem if they match up say Fraser Nelson or Tim Montgomerie or Jane Moore with someone equally smart from the Guardian or the New Statesman because they at least show basic adult manners and an interesting insightful discussion often takes place. But then they put on Hartley Brewer, Oakeshott, or Platell, who have no such manners, a shouting match takes place, and the producers are presumably going "Wow. Great TV" It's supposed to be a paper review you cretins, not a Sunday version of Question Time.
One of several points in my complaint which they swerved was why, if Marr still harboured doubts about what Carole C. had proved, he had not just invited her for a 121 interview, where he could have questioned her and she would have had the space to answer, without that cretinous cow screeching in her ear. It was interesting that in the subsequent weeks, after they had received my and other complaints, they actually got Christopher Wylie in for a 121, where he acquitted himself admirably and left Marr in no doubt what a big deal this is.
It was also noticeable when Marr had to take time off again recently that they asked Nick Robinson and Emma Bartlett to stand in, but not Eddie Mair, oh no. Can't have him grilling the likes of Boris Johnson on that programme, can we?
I do wonder what is going on in parts of W1A....
So much for taking back control.
I watched Marr this morning and felt myself comparing and contrasting his interviews with Kier Starmer and David Lidington (and yes I had to look his name up). He wasn't awful with Starmer but he interrupted and kept 'not understanding' what was being said. Whilst with Lidington, who is the de facto deputy PM, it was just a pleasant chat.
Detail has to be the friend of truth and the enemy of Boris Johnson.
I tried to look outside who I was more likely to support and just focus on the interviewer and believe that there was a significant difference in approach. Particularly considering that the government of the day should always be the ones held to greater account.
Very difficult in a country split 52/48, or the current variant, but I have found the BBC interviewers, content and guests pretty balanced. The politicians to a large extent have said nothing of material interest in nearly 2 years.
As a leave voter I have found Hartley Brewer and Oakeshott a bit tedious.
The key quotation I come back to is David Dimbleby. " The British people have voted and we are out".
My wife immediately responded with, I doubt it, "they" will find some way to wiggle out of it.
This has edged ahead of 'the EU are being bastards, particularly the Irish', and 'the House of Lords are being bastards' and 'the Judges are being bastards' and 'The House of Commons is full of bastards' which has left 'remainers talking the country down' trailing behind.
All of that lot could be lumped together as 'they'.
What a conspiracy eh? Against the 'will of the people democratically expressed'.
Could it actually be that the brexiters don't have a clue what to do with their win, so they are like children yelling at the conspirators 'not to put them off, they're trying to think, it's SOOOOOOO unfair!'
I reckon the peoples vote/second referendum lot will hove into view as a bunch of bastards soon. That will be very welcome to the brexiters because they will have a fresh lot of people to blame, and they will continue to avoid having to come up with solutions to the problems they have ushered in.
Because we are so far down the road my inclination is simply to say there you are brexiters, have your brexit which is increasingly looking like the cliff edge.
But perleeese, when the chaos ensues, own it, because it is 100% yours.