Welcome To Zelo Street!

This is a blog of liberal stance and independent mind

Friday, 24 February 2017

Guardian Abandons Press Victims AGAIN

The House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport committee has issued its response to the Government’s “consultation” on commencing Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act, and part 2 of the Leveson Inquiry. It has recommended that sham press regulator IPSO should be given a year to become Leveson compliant, and that if it doesn’t, then at least partial commencement of Section 40 should follow.
Kath Viner, editor, the Guardian

That would mean costs protection for those pursuing complaints against publishers - like national newspapers - which would mean, in the case of actions deemed to pass a credibility threshold, those publishers that refused to submit to low-cost arbitration of those claims, as is offered by truly independent regulator Impress, the publisher would find themselves liable for both sides’ cost in any subsequent legal action.

This is because the “reasonable route” to take would be to offer that low-cost arbitration; to deny complainants this, and force them to bet the house on going to law, is deemed to be unreasonable, and hence the penalty. Many papers are either not reporting this, or are doing so selectively and slanting their reports to fit their agenda, which is inevitably hostile to Section 40, and especially Leveson Part 2.

And talking of Leveson 2 (covering the relationship between press and Police), which would cover less than trivial items such as the wider use of phone hacking - it didn’t just happen at the late and not at all lamented Screws - along with the creative back catalogue of Mazher Mahmood, the Daniel Morgan murder, the trade in illegal information gathering, and much more, the Committee has recommended it should go ahead.

So who is reporting this news? To its credit, London business freesheet City AM has carried the story and reported it more or less straight down the line (the paper even describes Impress as “Government-recognised”, rather than the more pejorative “state-backed”), and of course campaigning group Hacked Off has a press release out, with comments from QC Hugh Tomlinson, who is the group’s Chair.
One other paper that has reported the story, although slanted out of all proportion and turned into another tedious rant about Max Mosley and the NUJ, is the Murdoch Sun, although, as Zelo Street will be discussing later this weekend, they have good reason right now to be telling anyone who will listen that they should “look over there”.

But one news source which had been in the vanguard of reporting the battle over press regulation reform, and which had for so long championed the causes of many of the victims of press misbehaviour, has been silent: step forward the Guardian. Once again, as I pointed out with the paper’s hypocrisy and volte face over Section 40 last month, the legacy of Charles Prestwich Scott and his successors is being forgotten.

Instead, the Guardian is being gradually assimilated by the Borg of the media establishment, to end up an anodyne shadow of its former self. The next exposure of press misbehaviour will not be achieved by those at King’s Place.

Hence the need for others to step in and take forward the torch of genuine investigative journalism. The Greatness of the Guardian was for a time, but not for all time.

Jeremy Corbyn - We Have To Talk

What little solace Labour could take from the realisation that, however bad the party was under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, UKIP was infinitely worse, was wiped out with the result from a by-election some way North by Northwest from Stoke Central, in the Cumbrian constituency of Copeland, where they lost to the Tories for the first time since 1931 (the seat, formerly Whitehaven, had been Labour since 1935).
While the seat, vacated by Jamie Reed running off to secure More And Bigger Paycheques For Himself Personally Now from the nuclear industry, has not been quite as safe as some have painted it in the recent past - Reed’s predecessor Jack Cunningham scraped home by fewer than 2,000 votes in both 1983 and 1987 - for the opposition to lose a seat to a governing party is little short of a humiliation.

The Tories in Government last won a seat at a by-election from an opposition party in 1982, and even then the circumstances were unusual: Angela Rumbold won Mitcham and Morden not from a Labour candidate, but a former Labour MP, Bruce Douglas Mann, who had defected to the nascent SDP and then decided, unwisely, to fight a by-election in the aftermath of Mrs T’s successful prosecution of the Falklands conflict.

Excuses from the Corbyn faithful have already proliferated: their candidate was not left-wing enough (wrong), it was Reed’s fault (ditto), it was the media’s fault (ditto), it was a one-off (and so is every other constituency), it was Tony Blair’s fault (wrong), and now Corbyn himself is saying the voters in Copeland were “let down by the political establishment”. He’s been an MP for almost 34 years - he IS the political establishment.

Discontented Blairites and Brownites? They’ve kept schtum and held their fire for months now. The reality is that the Tories established a straightforward narrative: in a constituency where the nuclear industry is the largest employer, they took Corbyn’s anti-nuclear stance and played on it remorselessly. The strong Labour counter-claims on the NHS - especially after Theresa May visited the area and was evasive on the subject - fell short.

So other constituencies don’t have the nuclear industry. But Corbyn is just not cutting through to the electorate, either in Copeland or the wider country. Labour shows no sign of regaining ground lost to the SNP in Scotland, and no sign of tapping into those seats won in 1997 and 2001 which were later lost to the Tories. Jeremy Corbyn is not a credible proposition as a prospective Prime Minister - even with Ms May leading the Tories.

That’s the problem in one. Theresa May is not another Margaret Thatcher: she is weak and evasive, an unappealing figure propped up largely by a combination of fawning press coverage and - hello Corbyn fans - a lack of a credible opposition. Jezza has had enough time to set out his vision and take Labour forward. It hasn’t happened. The pleading will continue; for hardcore Corbyn fans, he can do no wrong. But the reality is different.

I’ll finish with this snippet from the BBC report: “Professor John Curtice, of Strathclyde University, said the Copeland result was the best by-election performance by a governing party in terms of the increase in its share of the vote since January 1966”. Two months after that, Harold Wilson went to the country and increased his majority from 2 to 97. Just be thankful Theresa May can’t do that right now. And get real about Jeremy Corbyn.

Paul Nuttall - End Of The Road

The Stoke on Trent Central by-election could not have been set up more favourably for UKIP: a candidate at odds with his party leader on the EU, an area that voted strongly the way the Kippers wanted in last year’s EU membership referendum, a mainly post-industrial constituency with discontent over the whole political system waiting to be exploited - and a storm on election day to depress turnout among Labour voters.
An' I used live bullets last night

Yet UKIP’s new leader, “Bad Bootle Meff” Paul Nuttall, got nowhere near Gareth Snell, who retained the seat for Labour. The Kippers only just retained their own second place from the 2015 General Election, with the Tories hard on their heels. And while Snell had faced his own questions over the occasionally dubious contents of his Twitter feed, he had come clean and ‘fessed up every time. Nuttall had lied, been caught, and then lied again.

There is still the possibility that Nuttall will be disqualified for making a false statement on his nomination papers; he could even face criminal sanction, possibly ending with a prison sentence. So he’d be a Crim as well as a Meff. What is also looming on the Kipper horizon is the spectre of the EU’s OLAF anti-fraud agency asking how UKIP funded their campaign manager Lisa Duffy, who is employed as an EU civil servant.
Squeaky selfish SOB finger up the bum time

That means she cannot work other than on European Parliament related business, and a Parliamentary by-election doesn’t count as anything like that. On top of that, the excuses made for Nuttall’s defeat have been lame in the extreme: the idea that Stoke on Trent Central was only 72nd on UKIP’s target list doesn’t stand up when the party’s leader makes a personal commitment to stand. Sack the spinners.

And then there are the two clowns who did not have to stand on the stage in the small hours of this morning and share in the defeat, but who need to take their share of the blame (although they won’t). Arron Banks, UKIP paymaster, prioritising a skiing holiday in a suitably exclusive part of non-EU Switzerland over bothering himself to do any more than insult the Hillsborough families on social media, is one of them.
WRONG

The other is former Kipper Oberscheissenführer Nigel “Thirsty” Farage, who took his bat home on discovering that Ms Duffy, who had passed adverse comment on The Great Man, was involved in the Stoke campaign. Farage has instead gone off to attend CPAC, showing the world that UKIP under his leadership was nothing more than a vehicle to provide More And Bigger Self-Promotion Opportunities For Himself Personally Now.

UKIP has still not enjoyed its Orpington moment, and with its current dysfunctional leadership and tendency for infighting it probably never will. The party won’t replace Labour in its northern heartlands by fielding a candidate reviled in his own city who is known to be a refugee from the Tories, and who struts around the constituency in tweeds like some minor landed gentry. This is not a serious political party.

As Winshton might have put it, this may not be the end for UKIP. It may not even be the beginning of the end. But it is the end of the beginning. Bye bye UKIP.

Thursday, 23 February 2017

Rod Liddle Defends Piers Morgan BADLY

After former Screws and Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan decided he would not after all be hosting the Royal Television Society Programme Awards next month, he spent rather too much time telling anyone who would listen how he wasn’t sore about it, no sirree. Then, though, as Morgan is very much an Old Media person at heart, the Old Media had inevitably to ride to his rescue, if only to prop up his badly deflated ego.
I've only had one, honesht

And so it came to pass that Old Media has-been Rod Liddle used his latest Sun column - totally of his own volition, and not because he got leaned on by the twinkle-toed yet domestically combative Rebekah Brooks, oh no - to hit back at those rotten lefties who allegedly did his pal Piers in. “Trolling Piers Morgan for liking Donald Trump? You really must be a looney” he ranted (mental health smear: check!).

Telling anyone reading “A bunch of luvvies have suddenly decided the broadcaster is not worthy to host the Royal Television Society Programme Awards”, which is mere speculation, Liddle goes on to fib “You’re not going to lose an enormous amount of sleep over that … I don’t suppose Piers Morgan will lose much sleep over it either”. Like heck - see the Zelo Street post showcasing Morgan’s sore loser act right HERE.
Mr Happy wants you to know HE IS STILL HAPPY

Then he resorts to making it up: “A bunch of luvvies have decided he was not fit to represent them at the show … They got up a petition. They tweeted vigorously, their little fingers tap, tap tapping away … They made it clear there would be trouble if Morgan was allowed to present”. Yeah, right. The petition got fewer than 200 signatures before Morgan threw in the towel. It had zero effect on his decision.

So why did he jack in, O Wise Sun Pundit? “What had Morgan done that was so wrong? It’s because he’s been mildly supportive of Donald Trump”. Mildly supportive? If The Donald underwent colonic irrigation, it’s a toss-up who’d get flushed out first - Piers Morgan or Sean Hannity. But do go on: “because he’s been occasionally supportive of Trump, they decided he should not be allowed to present the awards”.
She's got nothing to do with this. Allegedly

Who is this “they”? You’ll love this: “THEM, the slebs … One of the shrieking protesters was the playwright Bonnie Greer … She said she would not sit down at a dinner table with Morgan”. Baloney. Ms Greer - who, not that Liddle is telling his audience, is one of the RTS judges - said she was not going to attend the dinner. She said nothing about sitting in anyone else’s company. Then we get the real reason for Liddle’s rant.

Whatever you think of Morgan (and he’s no great mate of mine), he is a brilliant broadcaster”. And there he sold the pass: this is a column written to order by Morgan’s Old Media establishment pals. And Rod Liddle still hasn’t got a clue why Morgan decided not to present. So I will give you all a hint on why he pulled out.

One, the petition had no effect. Two, many RTS members voiced their concerns, not about Morgan’s Trump fanboy behaviour, but his incessant use of any opportunity to publicise his favourite cause, which is Himself Personally Now. Three, with more hacking claims coming up against the Mirror titles - including the one which he edited - it was not seen as a good idea having him as some kind of example to others. And Four, his name crops up more than occasionally in the upcoming book on the Daniel Morgan killing.

Rod Liddle could have bothered himself to find out why Piers Morgan was given the chance to jump before he got pushed from hosting the RTS Programme Awards. He failed to do so - but then, he had his orders. He gets generously paid by the Murdoch mafiosi, but when the word comes down from the 13th floor to jump, the only question he is permitted to ask is “how high?” Still, it’s OK for a passed-over Major, I suppose.

Laura Perrins Double Hypocrisy

[Update at end of post]

The right-leaning part of the punditerati has recently been applauding a new recruit to its ranks: step forward Laura Perrins, co-editor of Conservative Woman, and inexplicably invited on to both BBC Question Time and the paper review panel on The Andy Marr Show (tm). Ms Perrins is much admired for her forthright, if monotonously delivered, views, although her cold and humourless nature is all too obvious.
Laura Perrins (née McGowan)

What all those talking up Ms Perrins are not telling, though, is that she is guilty of rank hypocrisy twice over. Her first foray into the arena of double standards came back in 2013, when she called into then Deputy PM Nick Clegg’s phone-in on LBC. The Mail was ecstatic at the result: “A stay-at-home mother who ambushed Nick Clegg on live radio tore into Coalition family policy last night … Laura Perrins, who gave up work as a barrister to look after her two children, said ministers viewed her role as ‘worthless’”.

That’s a fascinating one, because Ms Perrins had not, it seemed, “given up work”. Indeed, she was, under her maiden name of Laura McGowan, working on The Journal Of Criminal Law, for which she was the legislation editor. Her name is on the Journal’s Criminal Law Legislation Update, which was published in December 2014 - more than a year and a half after she phoned LBC to berate Clegg (and get in the Mail).

It gets worse: a regular Zelo Street source tells that Ms Perrins was also lecturing at UCL Laws during the 2013-14 academic year, where I am told she also called herself Laura McGowan. That Laura McGowan and Laura Perrins are one and the same can be seen from a photo in the Law Society of Ireland Gazette for December 2007.
So far, so hypocritical, but Ms Perrins managed to top that in an article for the Mail bearing her by-line and published earlier this month, with the online headlineThere's no shame in being a Mrs! As Miriam kicks up a fuss over being called Mrs Clegg, LAURA PERRINS says the successful 48-year-old lawyer's aggressive feminism does her no favours”. The by-line sneeringly says “By (MRS) Laura Perrins For The Daily Mail”.

After starting with “Well, I hate to say this, but Miriam Clegg might be a bit sensitive. The wife of our former Deputy Prime Minister has gone off the deep end on social media after being invited to an event to mark International Women’s Day - in her married name”, readers are told “I do wonder why it is such an unforgivable crime to take your husband’s surname? I did, though I never think of Perrins as my husband’s name. For me it is now our name - as a family unit that includes our three children”.

So why did Ms Perrins not take her husband’s name when she was still contributing to The Journal Of Criminal Law? And why did she still call herself Laura McGowan when lecturing at UCL Laws? Remember, both of these have come after she made great play out of coincidentally and totally by accident phoning LBC and trowelling on her being a married woman called Laura Perrins. Whoops, another slice of hypocrisy!

What you will not read in all the right-wing cheerleading and spin. Hello Laura Perrins.

[UPDATE 1725 hours: Ms Perrins has responded via Twitter to acknowledge that the person at left in the photo from 2007 is indeed her.
So that's an admission, then. Good to see she is happy with this post]

Arron Banks Sad Hillsborough Trolling

The question of why some members of society become wealthy, while others languish in poverty, has taxed writers and thinkers for many years. Following Charles Darwin’s On The Origin Of Species, William Sumner declared that “The millionaires are a product of natural selection ... the naturally selected agents of society for certain work. They get high wages and live in luxury, but the bargain is a good one for society”.
Throwing the kitchen sink at it isn't working

How Sumner would have explained Aaron Banks will forever be one of those great unanswered questions in the realm of Life, The Universe, And Everything. UKIP’s foremost paymaster may be unfeasibly rich, but his sense of self-awareness, and ability to know when to shut his North And South rather than verbally dig himself into an ever-deeper hole, somehow went missing in his ascent of the monetary greasy pole.
Are Arron's just shot me in the f***in' head

Banks embarrassed the Kippers’ new leader, “Bad Bootle Meff” Paul Nuttall, by calling the Hillsborough stadium disaster “an accident”. He was made aware that he was causing offence to the families of the victims, who have had to fight long and hard for that combination of truth and justice which the establishment fought equally long and hard to deny them. Banks now says, more or less, that he doesn’t care about such things.
Worse, he claims this is all a Labour Party smear campaign, which is at once untrue, malicious, and defamatory all in one. As Andy Burnham had to point out to Banks and his pal Nigel “Thirsty” Farage earlier this week, there was a conscious effort to set up an all-party group on Hillsborough and take the issue out of party politics. Labour has not been the source for the criticism raining down on Arron Banks.
David Conn of the Guardian, who knows a little about Hillsborough, described Banks’ behaviour as “sad trollingand observedBanks’s insensitivity, self-absorption and lack of empathy are now, lamentably, endemic features of Twitter as it turns from cool-seeming social media platform to an unsupervised playground for name-calling and bullying”. Brian Reade of the Mirror was rather more direct in his response.
Only one 'politicising' Hillsborough is Nuttall. Now crawl back to your favourite tax haven and make an irrelevant noise there” he advised Banks. When The Great Man whined “What's deeply wrong is smearing someone, who was there, for your narrow political ends. People do realise there is an election this week”, Read snapped back “Nuttall tends to smear himself whenever he speaks - doesn't need me to help him”.
Liverpool’s Mayor Joe Anderson pointed outAt the end of the day he is someone who is ill-informed and not knowledgeable of the facts … This was the biggest miscarriage of justice that the British legal system has ever seen and only came to light because of the determination of the families … Maybe Arron Banks would feel quite differently if he had lost someone in the tragedy”. Banks’ sick selfishness blinds him to reality.

And that reality is Banks and his pal Farage may have helped Nuttall … to end up losing today’s Stoke Central by-election, and badly. But then, the democratic process is not about natural selection. And nor is the idiocy of Arron Banks.

Wednesday, 22 February 2017

Guido Fawked - Pie Stunt BACKFIRES

The Murdoch goons at the Super Soaraway Currant Bun are once again in the spotlight, and, not for the first time, for all the wrong reasons, after a sponsorship and betting stunt involving Sutton United FC and their stand-in goalkeeper Wayne Shaw not only went horribly wrong, but was seen to go horribly wrong. Alleged editor Tony Gallagher once again showed that he was exercising little control over his unprincipled rabble.
There was rather more than just today’s front page splash proclaiming “Sutton Roly-Poly Goalie Axed … Fury as keeper sacked over snack … Cup novelty bet sparks OTT probe … HUNG OUT TO PIE”. Laugh? I thought I’d never start. The reality is more prosaic.

Sutton United had reached the last 16 of the FA Cup. For their match against Premier League Arsenal, Sun Bet sponsored them, and then the cheap and nasty stories about Shaw began, starting withSutton goalkeeper Wayne Shaw is famed for his red hot ‘Roly-Poly Goalie’ chilli sauce and has had offers to do a NAKED PHOTOSHOOT” which also mentioned “Shaw’s been given odds of 8/1 with Sun Bets to be seen on TV eating a pie!

Just remember that line: after the match, which Sutton sadly lost, Sun readers were then told Sutton reserve keeper Wayne Shaw chomps a pie gives two fingers up to the modern footballer’s lean diet”. But then Shaw departed the club, with the Sun admittingA betting row erupted as a result of the incident and manager Paul Doswell confirmed Shaw’s departure on Tuesday afternoon”. It seems Shaw’s pals bet on him. Whoops!
Guess who's empathising with pie-eating?

And there is an investigation going on into the whole affair, prompting the Sun to demand that everyone Look Over There: “Celebs lead fans demanding Sutton keeper Wayne Shaw get his job back as he’s SACKED by club for eating a pie in the dugout thanks to OTT novelty bet probe after club’s Arsenal heroics”. But FA rules BAN players betting.

The Murdoch mafiosi are adamant, though, and have signposted a “Piegate Petition”. So who is the enterprising person starting this one? To no surprise at all, it has been started by the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines and his rabble at the Guido Fawkes blog, just to showcase (a) Staines’ sheer shamelessness - nobody embodies the phrase “who ate all the pies” quite like The Great Guido - and (b) the still very close relationship between the Fawkes gang and the inmates of the Baby Shard bunker.
Also not told by the Fawkes rabble, but put directly by the Tweeter known as Sun Apology, is “That footage of Sutton Utd sub Wayne Shaw eating a pie wasn't all it seemed. It was a grubby PR stunt set up by The Sun. Shame on them both”. And MediaWatch has put it yet more directly: “If Mediawatch weren’t so disgusted by The Sun’s deliberate obfuscation of the facts, we would be amused by their use of the words ‘novelty bet’ on the front page. Because of course ‘novelty bets’ are placed by ‘novelty gamblers’ who can win or lose ‘novelty money’ … The Sun are right to say that Shaw has been ‘HUNG OUT TO PIE’. They’re just wrong about the identity of the executioners”.

The Great Guido is so desperate to be thrown a biscuit by the Murdoch mafiosi that he and his rabble are willing to participate in this sham. As for some of those well-known faces who have also been pitching in, well, I’ll deal with you later. Another fine mess.

Simon Danczuk’s Pals VOTED OUT

The chances of Rochdale’s still nominally Labour MP Simon Danczuk returning to the party’s ranks following the still-incomplete investigation into his conduct hinge on a number of factors, of which that inquiry is just one. Another is his support among local Labour members, party workers, activists, and local politicians. And news has arrived on Zelo Street that Spanker Si has suffered a serious setback in this area.
Since the infamous case of the “Rochdale Seven” - the expulsion of seven Labour members over their complaints about Danczuk’s suitability as a candidate which was triggered by his then girlfriend Karen Burke being dumped at Alicante Airport with no money and two small children to look after - Danczuk has had the backing of his local Labour party, duly rubber-stamped by the national organisation.

But after he was suspended following the revelation of his “sexting” a 17-year-old girl just over a year ago, the cracks started to appear. When it came to nominating a Labour candidate for the new post of Metro Mayor for Manchester, Danczuk’s backers tried to keep front-runner Andy Burnham out of the constituency. They failed: Burnham got to address local party members, and Rochdale CLP then backed him.

So it should have surprised no-one last week, at Rochdale CLP’s AGM, that Simon Danczuk’s friends and apologists got what the Norwegian football commentator memorably called “One hell of a beating”. Apart from the position of treasurer, which none of Spanker Si’s detractors wanted to contest, every other post up for grabs was secured by someone who wants Danczuk out of Rochdale Labour politics.

Every last post on the CLP taken away from what is referred to in a tone more serious than outsiders might imagine as “The Danczuk mafia”. Another prop kicked away from an MP who still fantasises about being let back into a party which gives every sign of not wanting anything more to do with him. And it gets worse - a lot worse.

Simon Danczuk has long peddled the idea that his Liberal and later Lib Dem predecessor Cyril Smith was not merely a homosexual, as had been long believed following the 1979 revelations by the Rochdale Alternative Paper, which were followed up nationally by Private Eye magazine, but a paedophile as well. But in the book written for him by his then side-kick Matt Baker, the claim that Smith was pulled over by Northants Police on the M1 with a stash of child porn in his car was later shown to be completely fabricated.

Now, as the excellent Northern Voices blog has confirmed, Danczuk’s claims about Knowl View school have collapsed. As with the Northants Police claim, no evidence has been found to back up the claim in Danczuk and Baker’s book, which is looking increasingly like a work of fiction. And the MP has alienated Greater Manchester Police into the bargain - for not getting the result he wanted.

Simon Danczuk has just suffered two highly significant losses in his campaign to remain as an MP. Now it’s over to the Labour Party to finish the job.

Milo - Delingpole To The Rescue

Back in January 2013, a vapid and vindictive creep called Milo Yiannopoulos ordered one of his gofers - he never did have the cojones to do this kind of thing himself - to pen a hatchet job on this blog. As a result, The Curse Of Zelo was placed upon him, and two months later, his allegedly brave new tech creation the Kernel Mag closed, with its figurehead mired in debt, a result entirely of his own making.
"Gay marriage" ... "Global warming" ... "Red meat conservatism" ... "Bird-slicing, bat-chomping eco crucifixes" ... "Incoherent sneering" ... "Backing the indefensible" ... "Career oblivion"

Yiannopoulos then fetched up in Berlin, relaunched the Kernel, only to soon see himself removed from its team. Undeterred, he then reinvented himself - inasmuch as one can reinvent a cretinous nonentity - as standard bearer of the snivelling inadequates unable to get out from behind their keyboards and shrug off their inability to interact with the opposite sex. He became the champion of the “GamerGaters” and darling of the “Alt-Right”.
The real Milo Yiannopoulos - an empty nobody

But now, all that has gone the same way as the Kernel Mag as those who were prepared to hand Yiannopoulos chat show invites, speaking dates and book deals despite his rabid sexism, racism, transphobia, and incitement of hatred (and his personally being one of the nastiest pieces of work ever let loose on this planet) have decided that advocating peadophilia is one bridge even they are not prepared to cross.
Even then, after Yiannopoulos had pretended that relationships between older men and 13-year-old boys were A Good Thing, there were some prepared to merely shrug their shoulders, say it was “Only Milo”, and hand him yet another free pass. One such was another of those deeply unpleasant individuals within the motley collective of the irredeemably batshit that is Breitbart, James “saviour of Western civilisation” Delingpole.
Del Boy was cool with having a paedophilia apologist on his team. And when the likes of David Aaronovitch spelt out why Yiannopoulos had been dropped by those previously prepared to put up with him, the Delingpole auto-sneer was out in full force: “IMO literally no one does sanctimonious humbug better than David Aaronovitch”. And, as for his colleagues at Breitbart, “Love to know these five made up characters at Breitbart the anonymous Senior Editor claims are ready to give up their salaries because Milo”.
See, Breitbart staffers weren’t really threatening to leave! It was all a rotten lefty plot! Just a “Breitbart ‘Senior Editor’ briefing anonymously against Milo”. Del Boy had only sympathy for Yiannopoulos: “Milo is going to fucking hate this attention. Poor guy. He just wants to be left alone”. Why Delingpole is so stupid as to believe that Yiannopoulos gives a flying foxtrot what he thinks is another of life’s unfathomable mysteries.
But he was prepared to take to, er, Facebook (why wasn’t it published on Breitbart? Who knows, and indeed, who cares?) to defend the indefensible: “Conservatives who throw their own to the wolves: my take on the squishes rejoicing in Milo's ‘downfall’”. It was all the fault of lefties, and of course Saul Alinsky, who died in 1972.
James Delingpole, and no doubt others on the right, cannot get their collective heads round the reality of Milo Yiannopoulos’ demise - he went too far, even for the most screamingly batshit. So he was dropped by CPAC, his publisher, and with his departure from Breitbart, his employer. There is nothing radical or conservative about Yiannopoulos - he’s a Grade A shit, and deserves everything coming to him. End of story.

Tuesday, 21 February 2017

Paul Watson - Alt-Right Nobody

Among all the clamouring for attention as the right-wing spin brigade and Fake News outlets try to talk up the claims that Europe, and especially Sweden, are now hotbeds of violent crime, and that it’s all because they let Scary Muslims (tm) in, one sad soul stands out among the keyboard warriors. He is Paul Watson, and he lives not in Mainland Europe, or the USA, but south of the river in London’s Battersea.
Paul Watson - fantasy versus reality

Watson has a Twitter photo which suggests an image rather more hip and cool than the anaemic rabbit-caught-in-the-headlights looking geek of reality. There is a good reason for this: Watson is not only a cowardly gobshite, he has to project the idea of credibility, where he has none. Even in geek mode, he stands in front of a world map which shows his horizons extend beyond the Lidl at Clapham Junction. Allegedly.
The unintentional hilarity was exemplified by his rush to defend Milo Yiannopoulos following that advocacy for paedophilia: “Well done, professionally outraged libtards & Never Trumpers, you just made #CPAC 2017 the most eagerly anticipated ever! … Milo must be mortified that he's at the center of another controversy again. I mean it's not like that's his whole schtick. Oh wait…” Yiannopoulos has since been dropped by CPAC.
Still, if at first you don’t succeed, well, just suck some more seed, eh? After Yiannopoulos then had his book deal canned, Watson was there spinning obediently: “In other news, MIlo's future book sales just doubled”. Yeah, right. And then he went wrong, and disastrously so, goading his critics “I cannot believe you idiots picked a fight with me about Sweden. It's my favorite topic. Working on a video that will decimate you”.
Ah, that crime-ridden country once again. And the temptation for Watson was just too much: “Any journalist claiming Sweden is safe; I will pay for travel costs & accommodation for you to stay in crime ridden migrant suburbs of Malmo”. Louis Barfe was willing to show this idiot up for what he was: “I claim my free holiday in Malmo, you idiot child”.
Watson’s idea of what Sweden actually looked like then took a knock as George Weah’s Cousin called him out: “How come you deleted this then m8. Is it because one is a picture of 80s London, and another a Football game?” Whoops! And the numbers willing to take him up on his offer led Lucy Lyons to ask “Looks like you are paying for a LOT of people to go to #Malmo - wow, you are super generous. Are you going to charter a plane?
Far Right Watch concurred on the charter and who was paying: “At this rate, we're looking to Charter a Flight to Malmo for everybody. It's okay, @PrisonPlanet is paying!!” Watson span himself silly, pretending that he was making good on the offer and that it was only for one. But J J Patrick was on his case, and is crowdfunding a damages action against Watson for breach of his unilateral offer, made on Twitter.
Meanwhile, Nils Karlsson has advised Watson “Hello, @PrisonPlanet. I'm a deputy mayor in Malmö. I would be happy to meet with any journalists you send here to [see] for themselves”. He may have a long wait in store.

Saddoes who spend all their time behind the keyboard can get themselves into terrible trouble when they encounter the real world. Paul Watson might just get that now.

Piers Morgan Protests Too Much

After he was given the presenter’s role at next month’s Royal Television Society programme awards, only to find there was significant resistance to his product offering, former Screws and Daily Mirror editor and three-days-a-week co-host of ITV’s Good Morning Britain Piers Morgan decided on Sunday afternoon that, on reflection, he would pass on the gig and announced his withdrawal from the event.
Mr Happy wants you to know HE IS NOT UNHAPPY

Much of the press coverage focused on what had caused The Great Man to throw in the towel when he is normally not averse to heading towards the sound of spoken and written gunfire - as well as being prepared to take every opportunity to further the promotion of Himself Personally Now. Had it been the petition (doubtful)? Had RTS members leaned on the charity (possible)? Had he jumped rather than being pushed (ditto)?
Whatever the reason, Morgan was not, repeat not, REPEAT NOT going to make a big deal of it. No, not at all. No sirree. “I have great respect for the acting profession. I just don't think actors' political views are any more important than anyone else’s" he sniffed, not complaining at all, before acknowledging praise for his return to GMB: “Makes a nice change from people howling for me to be banned”. Sniff! Blub! Snot fair!
And this was a mere entrée: soon it was all being blamed on his apologies for Combover Crybaby Donald Trump. “Does seem odd that awards show hosts should now be chosen based purely on the strength of their anti-Trump hatred”. To one Tweeter who suggested he had bailed out too early, he again sniffed “It's a fairly hollow victory to demand someone be banned for not sharing your opinions”. Anyone got a nanoviolin?
There was more, and once again the temptation to use the word “Liberal” as a term of abuse overwhelmed The Great Man: “What's so bizarre is this hysteria is coming from liberals who profess to stand for free speech & tolerance”. Even Gary Lineker’s gentle teasing - suggesting someone else would have to give Ewan McGregor his award - could not lift the gloom: “They can get JK Rowling to do [it] instead”. Sniff! Sob!
Hark at Mr Happy, eh? Then Tony Robinson criticised the RTS for inviting him in the first place, and Morgan snapped: “Oh pipe down, Baldrick - you sanctimonious old fool. I criticise Trump when he's wrong & defend him from absurd hysteria”. And he wasn’t really being hounded: “I don't mind being hounded. I'm not a victim here. But I do find it odd behaviour from those who supposedly espouse free speech & tolerance”.
Plus he wasn’t sneering at the Independent: “Oh, yes, I'm SO embarrassed that a bunch of howling Trump-loathing liberals wanted me banned from hosting a charity awards night”. And then came the final, delusional, pièce de résistance: “I've always been rational re Trump. It's everyone else who's been losing their mind”. I AM BIG - IT’S THE PICTURES THAT GOT SMALL. Yes, Piers Morgan was channelling Norma Desmond all along.

He’s not at all sore about losing his latest self-promotion opportunity. And if anyone says otherwise, he’ll whine and sniff until they get so fed up they let him do the gig anyway.