Jump to content

The Biased Broadcasting Corporation


bickster

Recommended Posts

Not the beeb, but a senior msm hack.

Who are we to question what we may and may not see, of the chunterings of our superiors?  Says the "Chairman" of the lobby.

What a supine, craven cowardly press we have, genuflecting to the powerful, mocking the powerless, grubbing up justifications for every oppressive measure you can imagine, and drafting some more in reserve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, peterms said:

Not the beeb, but a senior msm hack.

Who are we to question what we may and may not see, of the chunterings of our superiors?  Says the "Chairman" of the lobby.

What a supine, craven cowardly press we have, genuflecting to the powerful, mocking the powerless, grubbing up justifications for every oppressive measure you can imagine, and drafting some more in reserve.

Jeremy Corbyn is a privy councillor, will have signed the official secrets act. If he passes protected documents to the media he is consciously breaking the law of the land, breaking his word and is using protected material for political/ personal advancement. 

Staggeringly awful from Corbyn.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, peterms said:

Not the beeb, but a senior msm hack.

Who are we to question what we may and may not see, of the chunterings of our superiors?  Says the "Chairman" of the lobby.

What a supine, craven cowardly press we have, genuflecting to the powerful, mocking the powerless, grubbing up justifications for every oppressive measure you can imagine, and drafting some more in reserve.

This journalist works for the Daily Telegraph.

It might be worth remembering that the Daily Telegraph recently chose - alone among newspapers - to break the embargo on publishing the first part of the report into the Grenfell Tower fire, an embargo that was put in place in order to allow grieving families of the victims time to read and digest the findings before the media scrum started.

He can go **** himself.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

This journalist works for the Daily Telegraph.

It might be worth remembering that the Daily Telegraph recently chose - alone among newspapers - to break the embargo on publishing the first part of the report into the Grenfell Tower fire, an embargo that was put in place in order to allow grieving families of the victims time to read and digest the findings before the media scrum started.

He can go **** himself.

Yeah, it’s appalling all round, reflecting badly on the Tory government, Corbyn and the journo. There are mitigations for all of them, but what a clusterpork. The govt had to be having trade talks with the US and others, Labour has to oppose the government, and the media when presented with such a story has to publish. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blandy said:

Jeremy Corbyn is a privy councillor, will have signed the official secrets act. If he passes protected documents to the media he is consciously breaking the law of the land, breaking his word and is using protected material for political/ personal advancement. 

Staggeringly awful from Corbyn.

I'm genuinely torn over this? How do you feel about whistleblowers?

It's not a good look during an election in which he's contesting, but if our prime minister is demonstrably lying to the public about the future of our health service, relying on documents being confidential to prevent the public realising his lies, I'd applaud any civil servant who leaked these documents to prove to the public that our government is lying to us. It becomes more difficult when it's by someone in Corbyn's position, but I think it was probably the right thing to do. the country is being sold down the river, **** the privy council.

Edited by Davkaus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I'm genuinely torn over this? How do you feel about whistleblowers?

He's not a whistleblower. To be clear in answer to your question, it appears that this leaked document has been a available for a while now. Over a month. What Corbyn's done is solely political, to gain benefit for himself and Labour, in both the timing and the message he's putting out. Who ever uploaded it didn't give it to the media to blow the whistle. It happens that I agree with Labour's message on the NHS. The Tories absolutely can't be trusted on anything. I'm not sure that the document proves anything at all, other than the UK and US are talking about post Brexit deals and the US would like a hard Brexit and to get hold of NHS contracts. No shit Sherlock!  If (he won't) Corbyn wins and does his ludicrous Brexit deal that he'll be neutral on, he'll have to have the same discussions with the same US negotiators. It proves nothing other than Corbyn's unsuitability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, blandy said:

Jeremy Corbyn is a privy councillor, will have signed the official secrets act. If he passes protected documents to the media he is consciously breaking the law of the land, breaking his word and is using protected material for political/ personal advancement. 

Staggeringly awful from Corbyn.

Can't agree with this. It was alredy in the public domain from when it was actually leaked a week or so ago. The Tories even said it was already thus. More of a stunt than a genuine leaking of a document

Discussions on trade talks have no place being covered by the OSA anyway, that in itself is wrong.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, blandy said:

Jeremy Corbyn is a privy councillor, will have signed the official secrets act. If he passes protected documents to the media he is consciously breaking the law of the land, breaking his word and is using protected material for political/ personal advancement. 

Staggeringly awful from Corbyn.

 

4 hours ago, blandy said:

 it appears that this leaked document has been a available for a while now. Over a month.

So you're saying that he has broken the law by circulating to the media something which is in the public domain?  Surely not.

But that's a side issue.  The point is of course that we should know what the regime is planning by way of handing over our assets and our rights, and not be cowed by bluster about official secrets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, blandy said:

Who ever uploaded it didn't give it to the media to blow the whistle.

This appears to be wholly wrong? The individual concerned appears to have 'spent ages tagging every journalist they could think of ' into tweets or Twitter messages (not sure which) advertising the Reddit link on which they were found:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bickster said:

Discussions on trade talks have no place being covered by the OSA anyway, that in itself is wrong.

It isn't wrong. Trust me I've had a bit to do with security and protection of Government data etc. over the course of my working life. It's neither wrong in terms of fact, nor in any kind of "misuse" (in this instance) sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, peterms said:

So you're saying that he has broken the law by circulating to the media something which is in the public domain?  Surely not.

But that's a side issue.  The point is of course that we should know what the regime is planning by way of handing over our assets and our rights, and not be cowed by bluster about official secrets.

Yes, I am. Whether something has been stolen by someone else, or by Corbyn directly, he knows what he is supposed to do is not to hand out copies to the media, but to alert the police or other authorities to the presence of sensitive, protected material wherever he "found" it.

It is a seperate issue, you're right. The document doesn't show "what the regime is planning by way of handing over our assets and our rights".

As I said earlier, if he gets in, he'll have to have the same trade talks with the same people on the same subject. The US position won't have changed.

What he's done is purely political. In a way in terms of confirmation that the tories are liars, you can't blame him, and looked at through the lens of an election, it makes sense probably to more people than not, in the moment. Looked at over time, he'll regret it if he's got any sense.

Nothing will be done, mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

The take away from this is Corbyn should be in trouble for leaking state secrets?

It's one take away.I didn't say he should be in trouble. It's really poor judgement from someone who wants to be pm, the journo bod is right. Now't will be done, mind.  Another take-away is that Johnson was lying.

So people who can't be trusted - Corbyn and Johnson. Who'd a thunk it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

 

what possible reason could there be for this other than inciting apathy in young would be voters? Not that I think it would work for a second, but it’s pretty transparent.

Edited by a m ole
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, blandy said:

It's really poor judgement from someone who wants to be pm, the journo bod is right.

Well, you could say it is and technically I'm sure you're correct, personally I see it as integrity which for me is more important in a PM than adherence to a rule designed to protect money from people.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

Well, you could say it is and technically I'm sure you're correct, personally I see it as integrity which for me is more important in a PM than adherence to a rule designed to protect money from people.

Thanks. integrity has more than one aspect, the way I see it. Were it to be the case that Corbyn sees the content of the report and determines that it is proof of wrong-doing, then yes, I can see that "integrity" might demand that he acts upon what he sees. Equally though, integrity is being able to abide by commitments you have made to observe confidentiality, to adhere to the rules you accept when you sign up to something like the Privvy Council, to protect HMG data.

To add to that, like I say, suppose Corbyn gets in, he starts discussions with the US on trade after doing his Brexit, or with Russia. When negotiations progress and some tory presents the equivalent leaked civil service document to the media, that hint at (for example) the new Labour Gov't being faced with a negotiating point from the US that wants the UK to allow US companies to bid for X-ray contracts or drug contracts or whatever, or that Russia wants the UK to allow Russian gas companies to provide energy to UK households - the tories then shout how Corbyn plans to betray, despite his words, his promises on the NHS, or how the UK is going to cede energy control and open us up to blackmail by Putin  - can you not see that that would be out of order? because all it actually shows is someone we have to negotiate with has their own interests and their own opening stance? It destroys trust in politicians when things they haven't done and actually aren't going to do get portrayed as near certainties for party political ends, by opponents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â