Fascist behaviour in London last night as BBC reporter Nick Watt is seriously harassed by a crowd:
Absolutely disgraceful behaviour from conspiracy-loving wingnuts, high on falsehoods from the likes of Ivor Cummins. I hope that BBC political reporter Nick Watt is alright. https://t.co/ZxPumDYg2y
— Ian Fraser (@Ian_Fraser) June 14, 2021
When a free press is not respected then we are in very deep trouble.
The BBC is not loved by a lot of people across the political spectrum. We are going to very greatly miss it when it's gone in its current form .
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
There appears to have been rather a lot of police in the vicinity doing very little about the situation.
I noticed exactly that
Exactly what Trump encouraged in the US from the outset of his Presidency, Richard, and that we now know led to the secret surveillance of journalists and Democratic politicians by the Trump Justice Department. So, let’s see if anyone in the UK government speaks out against this behaviour. If not we’re certainly well on the way to the type of Trumpist fascism that so deeply infects US politics and society now.
Agreed
Good lord. Why didn’t the police stop that?
He was on his own for goodness sake. That’s what shocks me – no one came to his aid.
The BBC may have already gone BTW. I will not miss it. I don’t think there has been much to miss.
Last night on BBC Laura K was basically sucking up to Boris yet Robert Peston of all people on ITN basically told us what needed to be said – that this delay in unlocking (will it be a delay by the way or are they saying one thing and doing another yet again?) is his own fault as he did not deal with air travel from India quickly enough – Peston said it all in plain English.
The Beeb has been playing some silly games and in doing so has pleased no one. Maybe it had an impossible task anyway? No matter.
As you allude this morning, we are now going into a long deep dive into fascism. So this is what it looks like?
Laura K is left out on her own now
The journos took a ‘family photo at the G7. She was not in it
Richard,
You have just posted a blog about BBC journalists being harassed. Then it the comments to your own blog you yourself cheaply smear a BBC journalist who herself is the victim of constant smears and has had to have protection previously.
Have a think about your own actions.
Being critical is part of discourse
Aggression is not
For heaven’s sake see the difference
Your comment is ridiculous
Any condemnation from the Government? Shouldn’t think so. They have no interest in an independent press.
I take a somewhat different view to others.
Indeed, the people that chased/harrassed the BBC “journalist” are deluded (wrt corona, lock down etc). However, there has been endless criticism on the blog both above the line and below of main stream media – indeed some of the above note that Kunesberg is no better than a gov’ mouthpiece (& thus by extention the BBC and Newsnight). Increasing numbers of people are starting to recognise that. What we saw is a symptom of this recognition. The people chasing the journo/gov mouthpiece are certainly deluded, but the outcome was that at least one member of the MSM felt some fear. Perhaps they should chase some tory MPs – that would be nice to see.
So no, I don’t see this as an example of fascism – I see it as an example of the worm tuning – albeit a deluded worm.
To be fair, we don’t have a free press and never have done. In fact, it’s a point long made by outside observers such as Dmitri Orlov,that one of the main differences between Western Europe and the Soviet Bloc was that we believe we have a free press, whereas they knew full well it was all propaganda. We saw it very recently and obviously with Corbyn. A man who has fought racism all his life, smeared by the MSM to the point where many now say he’s a known antisemite. I’m not a Labour voter btw, before anyone rushes to silly assumptions about me being a Corbynista.
I agree.
The attacks on Jeremy Corbyn were universal in the British press including The Guardian. But the fact that you feel obliged to say “I am not a Corbynista” just emphasises the point that you yourself are influenced by the vicious and personal propaganda against JC. All attention was on the person of Corbyn, NOT his Party’s politics and in particular, The Labour Party Manifesto. In 2019 the Labour Party published “It’s Time For Real Change”. It provides details on regional job creation, nationalisation of the natural monopolies of rail, mail, water and energy, full-fibre broadband free to every citizen through a new public service, lifting children and pensioners out of poverty, proper funding and support for education at all levels, tidal energy and low-carbon hydrogen investment, eliminating fuel poverty, ban fracking, windfall tax on oil companies, etc. It constructively attacks profit as a regulator of natural resources etc. And so much else.
You, and many others who read Richard’s posts, need to read the 2019 Labour Manifesto and start discussing the programme there instead of going on about Jeremy Corbyn. Our country needs this change amongst the opposition to this corrupt and destructive Government of ours. We need a new leader of the Opposition that can build on the 2019 LP Manifesto.
Until you realise that you will be working with other parties if Labout ever sees power again I would stop saying what we should do and wonder what the route to getting rid of the Tories looks like
It emphatically is not about accommodation with them
But I reiterate, if Labour thinks it has all the answers, let alone all the answers in one manifesto (much of which was not terribly relevant) then it is helping maintain Tory power. That bis certainly what you are doing. I presume you wear a blue rosette come election time? You might as well.
If you want to be red, talk to the worlds beyond Labour
Talk to those who might suggest there are other issues of concern as well
Stop being so arrogant, in other words. Then you might also be listened to more
@Birgitta
<>
I’m afraid to say that this sentence itself reads like propaganda to me. I spend more time than is good for me reading Chinese government propaganda. If I had a penny for every time I have come across a statement of the general form “The fact that X thinks/does/says Y shows that they have been influenced by Z’s propaganda”, often said with the air of one privy to an arcane source of great wisdom, then I would be a rich man indeed. I am convinced that many that make such utterances are not aware that what they are saying is a blatant non sequitur. But, I’m afraid it is and, at best is indicative of an inability to engage in rational argument and, at worst, a form of bullying.
<>
I only came across this blog a few months ago but have been reading it every day since then. I haven’t seen any “going on about Jeremy Corbyn” although his name is mentioned when it seems relevant. Most of the discussions here are about topical political issues, but, if I wished to discuss the 2019 Labour Manifesto, I’m sure I could find plenty of places on the internet where I could Indulge in that particular pastime. I spend quite a lot of time on the Internet discussing Chinese politics but I don’t come over here demanding that every one does the same. As to what you think people do or do not need to read, it’s unwise to assume you know what others have or have not read. I recently managed to make a fool of someone who told me I ought to read Mao Zedong’s little red book by correcting his bowdlerized version of quotations from it.
<<Our country needs this change amongst the opposition to this corrupt and destructive Government of ours.
You know in Chinese as an many other Sino-Tibetan languages there are three forms of the pronouns we/us/our. There is a neutral form that works more or less like “we” in English, but there is also an inclusive form meaning “we including you” and an exclusive form meaning “we but not you”. Delete the first “this” from the above sentence, and use “our” in the inclusive sense then I will agree with you. However when you say:
<>
then, if you are using “we” in the exclusive sense, pehaps that is true. Perhaps you and the Labour Party do need that. However that is not the change I think we (in the inclusive sense) need amongst the opposition in order to rid ourselves of our destructive government. What is needed is cooperation between the opposition parties to ensure that the Tories cannot win the next election. Political parties, by their very nature, are not very good at cooperating and no doubt there are faults in all the opposition parties but by far the greatest stumbling block to cooperation is the attitude of the Labour party. If the Labour party cannot or will not change its attitude then we are looking forward to permanent Tory rule.
How can you possibly know whether or not Shadiya Kingerlee, was influenced by the propaganda against JC? Your stated reason for suggesting she was Indeed the most reasonable reading of her post suggests that she was not.
Word press mangled my quotes from Birgitta’s post.
They should be, in order:
‘But the fact that you feel obliged to say “I am not a Corbynista” just emphasises the point that you yourself are influenced by the vicious and personal propaganda against JC.’
‘You, and many others who read Richard’s posts, need to read the 2019 Labour Manifesto and start discussing the programme there instead of going on about Jeremy Corbyn.’
‘Our country needs this change amongst the opposition to this corrupt and destructive Government of ours.
and:
‘We need a new leader of the Opposition that can build on the 2019 LP Manifesto.’
The tools of fascism are very quietly being sneaked in by the Tories.
Where is the outrage?
Priti Patel’s new threat to British journalists
Now, Boris Johnson’s government is taking us even more down a very dangerous slippery slope.
A largely unnoticed and unreported consultation paper on changes to Britain’s Official Secrets Acts drawn up by the Home Office shows that the government is preparing far-reaching threats to the media and the public’s right to know.
It intends to abandon the existing distinction between spying and leaking, and between leakers, whistleblowers and journalists. “Both primary and onward disclosures have the potential to cause equal amounts of harm”, the paper states.
(Read the full article where there is much more detail)
https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-06-15-priti-patels-new-threat-to-british-journalists/
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/legislation-to-counter-state-threats
Who is submitting to this?
I can remember a time when laws restricting freedom of speech would be discussed and criticised in the UK press but not in the South African press.
I am sorry if I have broken the rule here and made some political comments. However, to put down both the Conservative Party and the previous Labour leader constitute discussing politics. So my conclusion is that we cannot entirely avoid political Party politics. However, I do agree that it should be avoided to continue having interesting and fruitful discussions here.
What is in both camps of politics and economics is micro and macro economics. Natural monopolies used to be seen as contrary to the efficiency and effectiveness of national, business competition. By allowing rail, gas and energy industries and others in new technology to be dominated by national or international oligopolies or even monopolies we are damaging competition. The answer is not to outsource to small companies in industries which are NATURAL monopolies where the most effective and efficient solution in terms of inputs or/ and outputs one owner is best. It was discussed whether regulation of such industries would solve the problem but if competition is simply ineffective or just artificial, the best economic outcome is surely public ownership with monitoring and transparency by democratically elected bodies. In spite of the additional, financial cost and added inefficiencies, from a social cost-benefit analysis viewpoint, such a solution would have greater benefits in the short and long-term, in my personal estimation. In the long term, prices would be lower, more investments would take place in infrastructure. Thus the economic analysis would show greater effectiveness and cost efficiency would be achieved.
I am not asking anyone to avoid party politics here: I do them all the time
Internal party disputes can get boring though
On the issue of natural monopolies I am in agreement with you: they should be under state control
The weakening of our institutions continues at a pace as Johnson follows in the footsteps of Erdogan.
…..Boris Johnson is to strip the Electoral Commission of the power to prosecute law-breaking, just weeks after it launched an investigation into his controversial flat refurbishment.
Now ministers have announced that a new Elections Bill will remove its ability to prosecute criminal offences under electoral law — arguing it “wastes public money”…….
…..The watchdog launched an immediate protest, warning the move would “place a fetter on the Commission which would limit its activity”.
The shake-up was condemned as a “thinly-veiled government power grab” by the Electoral Reform Society.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/electoral-commission-boris-johnson-flat-b1868407.html