Suella Braverman - Beyond Belief

Not featuring on the front pages of our free and fearless press today, despite the media appetite for going after those on the left alleged to have dismissed or belittled Holocaust survivors, Suella Braverman, inexplicably elevated to the rank of Home Secretary, has been at her tone-deaf and intolerant worst, refused to say sorry, and appears to have misused Civil Service resources.

That is in addition to being called out by a Holocaust survivor, which, had it happened to someone in the Labour Party, would have been splashed across several front pages. What happened can be put directly: before a constituency meeting last Friday evening, Joan Salter MBE, who is 83 and whose family perished at the hands of the Third Reich, asked her a question.

The exchange was captured on video. “I am a child survivor of the Holocaust … In 1943, I was forced to flee my birthplace in Belgium and went across war-torn Europe and dangerous seas until I finally was able to come to the UK in 1947”. She came to the UK. But the rest of her family did not.

There was more. “When I hear you using words against refugees like ‘swarms’ and an ‘invasion’, I am reminded of the language used to dehumanise and justify the murder of my family and millions of others … Why do you find the need to use that kind of language?” What say Ms Braverman?

The Home Secretary deflected, talking at length about how her own parents came to the UK, as if this excused her use of language, before claiming “There is a huge problem that we have right now when it comes to illegal migration, the scale of which we have not known before”. Claiming asylum is not illegal, something one might have expected a cabinet minister to know.

Moreover, the main reason for what she was discussing - people arriving on the Channel coast in small boats - is because the Government of which she is a member has effectively closed off safe routes for those people to claim asylum, for instance, in their own country or elsewhere in mainland Europe. But she could at least say sorry and agree to tone down the rhetoric. Yes?

Er, no. “I won’t apologise for the language that I have used to demonstrate the scale of the problem … I’m not going to shy away from difficult truths nor am I going to conceal what is the reality that we are all watching … we have a problem with people exploiting our generosity, breaking our laws and undermining our system”. We have, whisper it quietly, a greater problem with dishonest and opportunist politicians. But she knew her audience.

As the Guardian report noted, “Braverman’s answer was greeted with applause from the audience”. That’s mighty white of you, Fareham people. But that was not all: despite this being a constituency meeting and therefore not Home Office business, that office’s official Twitter feed was soon being put to use to defend Ms Braverman. I shit you not.

“The Home Secretary attended an event last night and took questions, including on immigration policy … Footage of a conversation with a holocaust survivor is circulating online. The video has been heavily edited and doesn’t reflect the full exchange”. The full video is freely available. But do go on.

“The Home Secretary listened carefully to the testimony … She thanked her for sharing her story [no she didn’t] The Home Secretary also expressed her sympathy [no she didn’t] and set out why it is important to tackle illegal migration”. Seeking asylum is still not illegal. But there was more.

“Since the footage misrepresents the interaction about a sensitive area of policy, we have asked the organisation who posted the video to take it down”. It’s got Sweet Jack to do with the Home Office, whose Twitter account should not be used for party political ends. And in any case, it didn’t work.

Sonya Sceats, CEO of Freedom From Torture, told her followers “The Home Office asked us to take down our video. But we are standing our ground. Full video here so you can see for yourself how Braverman responded to Joan”. And the full video remains available as I type. Good for them.

Strangely, those who went after the Labour left with such fervour over allegations of minimising the Holocaust or dismissing the experiences of its survivors are today silent on Ms Braverman’s disgraceful behaviour, as tone-deaf as when Dawn Foster called her out for using the anti-Semitic “Cultural Marxism” trope, another Nazi-era conspiracy theory.

If she had represented Labour, though … I’ll just leave that one there.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Corbyn Era Legal Bills AREN’T

Demonstrating that impartiality is becoming a more occasional concept for the Corporation, the BBC has been telling readers of its website about a potential legal bill coming down the track at the Labour Party. The story was originally headlined to claim that this was a “Corbyn-era” legal action, the inference being that any dent in Labour’s coffers as a result would be down to Jezza.

The headline has since been changed and the article rewritten (it’s no longer about the Corbyn era, but “Ex-Corbyn staff”), but still hinting very strongly that it was Jezza Wot Done It. So what’s it all about? Here’s the Beeb’s account: “three Jeremy Corbyn supporters - Georgie Robertson, Laura Murray and Harry Hayball … have been blamed by Labour, along with two other Corbyn supporters, of leaking a controversial internal party document, which included private emails and messages”. Zelo Street covered that episode HERE.

So what is Labour doing? Consider the new title of the BBC’s piece, “Ex-Corbyn staff court case could dent Labour election fund”, and then this snippet: “Labour is taking the five Corbyn supporters to the High Court for conspiring to put the document into the public domain”.

It might be more accurate to say “Labour high court action could dent party’s election fund”, then. And the reason for the potential dent? “The UK's data watchdog has told the BBC it will not be prosecuting three Jeremy Corbyn supporters - Georgie Robertson, Laura Murray and Harry Hayball”.

That makes the idea of the party going after them into a rather challenging proposition. Hence “some in the party are concerned that the commissioner's decision could make the case less likely to succeed … If it fails, lawyers for the Corbyn supporters say they will seek to recover their costs … The party has said it is confident of the case it is making to the court”. However.

“But the stakes are high … The BBC understands the estimated combined legal costs of the five Corbyn supporters, added to Labour's costs, range from more than £3m to around £4m”. But all is well, because “Labour says it does not recognise these figures”. Ho ho ho. In any case, “The case against the Corbyn supporters is likely to reach court in early 2024 - just before an expected general election”. And the party has already failed to find the leaker.

I kid you not. “The party brought in an external investigator to try to find the source or sources of the leak but this failed to reach a definitive conclusion. It then hired a top lawyer, Martin Forde KC, but his inquiry was also unable to identify the culprit or culprits”. Yet here it is naming and shaming.

Which the BBC confirms: “Labour's lawyers accused five prominent Corbyn supporters of putting the controversial document into the public domain. They told the High Court that the five had conspired to leak the document and to undermine the Starmer leadership in the process. The five ex-officials also included Corbyn's ex-chief-of-staff Karie Murphy and his former communications chief Seumas Milne". And it gets worse.

“[The five’s] lawyers, Carter Ruck, accused the party of ‘an attempt to deflect on to them [the five] its own liability’ as data holder for the leak, and in a statement said that ‘the individuals will vigorously defend themselves in the proceedings and will seek full reimbursement of their costs of doing so from the Party’”. The Beeb now suggests some in the party are getting cold feet.

“This includes a member of Labour's ruling national executive, who told me they feel too many of the party's resources are being drawn into disputes and disciplinary matters … some supporters of the current leadership fear a court case may simply bring some of the old enmities and issues back to the fore”.

I’ll go further: to carry out another act of petty retribution in the lead-up to a General Election campaign could be one own goal too many. Yes, Labour has been winning by-elections of late, but these are one-off contests where the party can throw everything at the campaign (and win without the Rotten Lefties™). It can’t do that at a General Election. Simple as that.

Blaming Corbyn for Labour’s financial woes, when his leadership saw a surge in membership and money coming into the party, will not wash. And blaming those against whom the new leadership takes legal action it does not need to take is equally bogus. Redefining reality and gaslighting have their limits.

Labour was about politics once. Maybe, just maybe, it should be about it now.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Sad Little Man Speaks

It was blindingly obvious from the get-go that the main target of Prince Harry’s memoir Spare was not the Royal Family, individually or collectively, but our free and fearless press. As in so many cases when proof of reality is needed, the opposition comes riding to the rescue. This week it has come galloping, to the benefit of Haz’ publishers and the charities set to benefit from book sales.

You're even more desperate, Dan

When Haz referred rather disobligingly to News UK’s CEO, the twinkle-toed yet domestically combative Rebekah Brooks, the Murdoch Sun went into meltdown as yesterday’s editorial gave readers the print equivalent of a screaming tantrum, the kind of outburst Ms Brooks is rumoured to indulge in when berating the folks in the Baby Shard bunker who actually do the work.

Then it was discovered that the Prince had made an equally disobliging reference to former Sun executive editor, the deeply unpleasant Dan Wootton, everyone’s least favourite economic migrant, who now rants for money at Gammon Broadcasting News (“Bacon’s News Channel”). Desperate Dan reacted as Ms Brooks did, by throwing a mardy strop.

The only difference was that Wootton, a deeply immodest individual with much to be modest about, threw his toys out of the pram at the Mail, another series of titles which would rather not have the Sussex spotlight shone too brightly in its general direction. And another series of titles against which Haz has launched a lawsuit. These events are not coincidental.

So what did Harry say about Wootton? Here’s the relevant passage from the book: “We got word from Sara that the Sun was about to run a story saying the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were stepping away from their Royal duties to spend more time in Canada. A sad little man, the newspaper’s showbiz editor, was said to be the lead reporter on the story”. There was more.

“Why him? Why, of all people, the showbiz guy? Because lately he’d refashioned himself into some sort of quasi Royal correspondent, largely on the strength of his secret relationship with one particular close friend of Willy’s comms secretary - who fed him trivial (and mostly fake) gossip”. OUCH!

The Wootton wig-out does not disappoint, although not, perhaps, in the way he might have intended. “Spare shines a light on a life of ultimate privilege and opportunity most human beings could only dream of that is blighted by constant paranoia, bitter resentments and downright nastiness towards those who do their best to try and save this man child from himself time and again”. A better description of Dan Wootton is hard to imagine. And there is more.

Thanks Dan, here's your salesman of the week award

“I needed to take a wash after reading [the book] … because of the number of vitriolic and deeply personal swipes he takes”. But here a problem enters: while the press today claims to have spoken to more of those “sources” in and around the Royal Family, the only significant item they pony up for readers is the Duchess of Cambridge driving a car. You read that right.

“Women drives car” is inflated to become the Sun’s front page lead as we are told “STANDING FIRM [surely ‘sitting behind the wheel’? - Ed] … Kate defiant while senior Royals urge caution over Harry Coronation invite”, with the supporting article adding “Family members are concerned they would not feel comfortable speaking freely if the pair are there … A source told The Sun”.

A source told the Sun. A sodding “source” told the Sun. Er, hello, this is total crap. And so are “According to insiders” and “Another source said”. What the Sun, and dopey Dan Wootton at the Mail have not twigged is that they are the only ones making all the noise. They and their press pals. The actual Royals aren’t saying anything. Hence “A source told the Sun”.

Which tells you that Haz’ primary target was not the Royals, but the army of sad, self-important, bottom-feeding grotesques that are the press’ Royal “experts”, “editors”, “correspondents”, and other sundry hangers-on. That the target has been successfully hit is shown by the cacophony of whining from them. The press has behaved as Zelo Street has been telling for years now.

The Sun’s howling editorial yesterday, and Dan Wootton today, have confirmed that the press is Haz’ main target. Because it is the press that has been screaming about his book. And by doing so, all that has resulted is a first day sales total of 1.4 million books, e-books and audio books. Haz got an advance of $40 million for four books. It has probably already been recouped.

Our free and fearless press - a bunch of sad losers. No change there, then.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Rebekah Brooks Loses It

The saying was that if you wanted to know Rupert Murdoch’s opinion on the topics du jour, you had to read that day’s Sun editorial. Now, with Don Rupioni looking towards the thorny matters of who should succeed him, and who should head up the allegedly soon to be merged News UK and News Corp US operations, the presence behind those editorials has changed.

Now, each morning’s Sun Says rant is more likely to reflect the priorities and prejudices of News UK’s CEO, the twinkle-toed yet domestically combative Rebekah Brooks. And one of her priorities is clearly to kick anyone who is seen as a threat to the monarchy. Which means her prejudices include taking against the Sussexes, something not lost on Haz’n’Megs.

That Harry dislikes Ms Brooks cannot be in any doubt, after a passage from his best-selling memoir Spare became better known. “I asked him to remind me, what was this editor’s name? He said it, and I committed it to memory, but in the years since then, I’ve avoided speaking it, and I don’t wish to repeat it here. Spare the reader, but also myself”. But then he does speak it. Sort of.

“Besides, can it possibly be a coincidence that the name of the woman who pretended I went to rehab is a perfect anagram for … Rehabber Kooks?” Then he twisted the knife. “Who is this editor? Loathsome toad, I gathered. Everyone who knew her was in full agreement that she was an infected pustule on the arse of humanity. Plus a shit excuse for a journalist”. OUCH!

What Haz would also have known, especially given he launched a legal action against the Murdoch press, is that Ms Brooks stands accused of snooping on him, using the full resources of the late and not at all lamented Screws, for several years, determined to catch the then under-18 Prince doing illegal drugs, or consuming alcohol while under age.

That snooping was in full swing by September 2001 - five years earlier than the date usually associated with it, as 2006 was the time when those working for the Screws, Clive Goodman and Glenn Mulcaire, were caught hacking not just Haz’ voicemail, but also his brother’s. Sadly, as Mulcaire told, “There was no evidence that Prince Harry was using drugs, soft, hard or otherwise”.

The dossier assembled by Expose News shows that Ms Brooks was obsessed with the Prince. A significant amount of money was sprayed up the wall trying to nail him. It is inconceivable that Haz would not know by now what she had been up to, or, indeed, that she read his comments without being filled with anger, almost to the point of spontaneous combustion.

So it should surprise no-one to read today’s Sun Says, which gives every sign of its writer occupying the no man’s land between plain mardy strop and full-on wig-out. “HARRY’S book is laid bare for all to see. It is an orgy of self-pity and cowardly, baseless abuse. It should shame him forever” is the opening salvo, with “cowardly” and “abuse” beginning the pot-meet-kettle-athon.

We are told “Harry comes across as he is: A monumentally entitled, thoroughly unpleasant bully driven by ugly, petty grudges and utterly blind to his own hypocrisies”. Pot meet kettle it is. Do go on. “What’s more, many of his endlessly self-serving anecdotes fall apart under even the gentlest scrutiny”. No citation. Nor will there be any. It’s just Ms Brooks losing it.

But the silent majority backs her, honest. “Sun readers have seen enough. Their verdict is overwhelming. They consider the book an unforgiveable [sic] betrayal. They say Harry and Meghan must be barred from the King’s coronation which the public will have to fund. And they demand their titles be stripped from them”. Hardly any of those readers have actually read it.

And then comes the dead giveaway. “We understand the Palace’s desire to keep silent”. That’s what all the howling down of Haz’ book is about: his exposure of the inter-dependent and ultimately highly toxic bond between the monarchy and our free and fearless press. The Haz bashing comes almost exclusively from the UK media class and their hangers-on.

The monarchy sells papers and clicks; by palling up to the press, the monarchy protects itself from any drift towards republicanism. But what neither can countenance is the relationship being exposed before the court of public opinion. Nor can Ms Brooks restrain herself from throwing a full-on screaming tirade after Haz tweaked her tail so publicly.

It will get worse: she is, by now, so used to getting her way, and bringing the resources of the Murdoch mafiosi to bear kicking those who dare to stand against her, that she won’t stop screaming until appropriate retribution has been extracted for Haz’ refusal to bow before her. The words “Harry comes across as he is”, used against her, are far more revealing.

Because Rebekah Brooks does indeed come across as she is - a monumentally over-promoted, psychologically unstable, talentless, dislikable and hateful individual without whom the world would be a significantly better place. She is, like so many of her pals and too many of the politicians she has backed, a prime example of what happens when there is no-one to say “No”.

Harry has the press figured out. We are being told that’s a sin. No it isn’t.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Alex Mullen - Creep And Hypocrite

You may not have heard of Alex Mullen. But he has been, albeit briefly, in the news this week, because of the impending release of Prince Harry’s book. What’s the connection? Ah well. Mullen was Caroline Flack’s agent, and the late Love Island presenter dated Haz briefly, before our free and fearless press got wind of it and effectively ended their relationship.

Alex Mullen

Mullen has also passed severely adverse comment on Haz’ book mentioning that relationship, kicking off in no style at all to anyone who would stop by and read his Instagram posts. He wants Haz to be stripped of his titles. If only anyone who really matters were bothered. Worse, Mullen is hardly a disinterested party, and nor does he appear an especially reliable witness.

Alex who?

What’s his beef? Mullen, oddly for a PR, has taken his Twitter feed private, but Zelo Street has the details. This is the one that sums up his case: “Gross for Prince Harry to reveal such private details about Caroline Flack. The way the press spoke about her at that time & the reason they split are both very sad & it’s gross he’s using her name to help sell his book. The Royal Family need to strip him of all titles NOW”. And there was more.

Caroline Flack

“Ugh. Prince Harry talks about unconscious bias. Reeks of critical race theory and 21st Century Marxism. As furious as I am with him over Caroline Flack, he’s being indoctrinated by his abuser Meghan Markle. I dread the inevitable divorce”. There speaks someone who does not know about Marxism, or, indeed, critical race theory. But is he an otherwise reliable witness?

How about this one? “Our very own, unelected billionaire Prime Minister Rishi Sunak fits into the pockets of his WEF masters’ pockets. Unfortunately the leader of Sunak’s opposition Keir Starmer is as sinister. Changes bordering on revolution are required if democracy & freedom are to stand a chance”.

He has Retweeted an item posted by The Freds telling “The Path to Defeating The WEF: How We Plan to Fight and Win”, accompanied by a photo depicting Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates and George Soros and showing the conspiracist dog whistle “The Great Reset”. Yes, well. How about politics?

It doesn’t get any more credible here. Last year he told his followers “Let’s hope to God Boris isn’t ousted. It’ll be another disaster as with Thatcher’s removal and the next election will be a nightmare. The public still warm to him. We all broke the rules! Let’s move on and get the economy moving and taxes down. Labour will make the majority poor”. Think that shows a lack of self-awareness and detachment from reality? It gets worse.

“Yes, it’s insane. The country voted for the Conservatives lead [sic] by Boris Johnson. Only they should have the power to remove him if they wish. Which I doubt they will because the alternative is terrifying”. And then … “The only option is [Liz Truss], from a poor selection. Every other candidate is either inexperienced, woke, corrupt or slimy. I have to support [Liz Truss]”.

None of this finds its way into (for instance) the Mail’s report of Mullen’s mardy strop. Nor has anyone within our free and fearless press tested his reaction for consistency: much of the detail to which he so seriously objects appeared in the Murdoch Sun when Ms Flack had the Bizarre column given over to her in 2017. Did he complain? Did he stuff. He Tweeted it out!

“[Caroline Flack] takes over [Dan Wootton]’s Bizarre today with exclusive [Love Island] gossip. Tune in Mon 5th June on [ITV2]”. It gets yet worse: what is in Haz’ book is no more than what Ms Flack herself wrote in her own memoir Storm In A C-Cup. Did Mullen object? But you know the answer.

As Richard Bartholomew put it, “Caroline Flack wrote about media intrusion in her own autobiography (‘Storm in a C-Cup’), including the ‘bit of rough’ framing. For tabloids to claim that Prince Harry has betrayed her memory by drawing on her own public recollections is both absurd and grotesque”. The “bit of rough” line was also in that Bizarre column Mullen didn’t object to.

Bartholomew also notes “Alex Mullen's company website has a blurb from Dan Wootton calling him ‘one of the best connected Showbiz PRs in the industry’. His dependency on people like Wootton for his livelihood may explain his intervention against Prince Harry on behalf of the tabloids”.

Close to Dan Wootton? Sure is. After Desperate Dan bagged an award, he simpered “AMAZING!! Many, many congratulations to you sir. You should think about taking up this reporter lark full time. You’ve got the knack”. There was also “Happy birthday to the delightful [Dan Wootton]”.

Brutus Moriartus, this man is a bit of a crawler

And where the deeply unpleasant Wootton stands on Haz’n’Megs we all know. Richard Bartholomew has it spot on: Mullen is merely being not just a useful idiot, but an obvious and sickening creep. Also, a little examination of his Twitter feed shows him to be a weapons grade hypocrite. Not that any of that gets past the press, which is interested only in recycling his claims.

Without doing anything resembling journalism. No change there, then.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

So Farewell Then Sideshow Birb

While our free and fearless press was slapping the biggest dead cat its collective talents could muster on the nearest table over the latest Royal revelations yesterday, not only was the grim state of the country ignored once more, but news that might have embarrassed those out there on the right managed to sneak out almost unnoticed. Except by the BBC.

Katharine Birbalsingh

The Beeb, for once, reported straight the departure from the stage of one of the right’s greatest heroines: as the report told, “The government's top social mobility adviser has quit, saying she was doing ‘more harm than good’ in the role. Katharine Birbalsingh, who has been dubbed Britain's strictest head teacher, has attracted controversy since being appointed in November 2021”.

There was more. “She said her ‘propensity to voice opinions that are considered controversial’ was putting the commission ‘in jeopardy’ … She added she had become increasingly cautious about what she said”. For instance? “She also came under fire last April for saying girls are less likely to choose physics A-level because it involves ‘hard maths’ - later admitting her remarks had been ‘clunky’”. Clunky is the new unthinking and witless.

But she did occasionally call things right. The only problem is that her right wing backers didn’t want to hear it. “In June last year, she criticised Boris Johnson, describing the former prime minister as a ‘bad role model for children’ that sometimes didn't look ‘professional enough’”.

Understatement, much? But allied to the “clunky” episodes and occasionally telling her most ardent supporters what they didn’t want to hear was Ms Birbalsingh’s tendency to bring attention to herself in the most unfortunate ways. Like advertising a Churchill quote that was never uttered by The Great Man. Or inviting a figure from the far right into her school.

That figure from the far right was none other than Jordan Peterson. Who denies that racism exists, and that white privilege isn’t a thing. He stands accused of dabbling in eugenics. He discussed intelligence and race with Stefan Molyneux. Then there were his very quotable views on women.

“Feminists support the rights of Muslims because of their ‘unconscious wish for brutal male domination’ … The idea that women were oppressed throughout history is an appalling theory”. But one person rushed to her defence over the visit, “Father” Calvin Robinson, a regular on Gammon Broadcasting™ News (“Bacon’s News Channel”), who dishonestly responded “Such targeted hatred. The woke Left seem to think she’s the devil”.

Criticism is not hatred. And criticism is what Ms Birbalsingh received in significant amounts over the fake Churchill quote, which she had had painted on a wall in her free school. In response, as with the Jordan Peterson visit, she became appallingly defensive. “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it’s the courage that counts” was the quote. And Winshton did not say it.

But that did not deter Sideshow Birb, who even added a commentary: "We believe in children being courageous, in all of us being courageous, and the point of that Churchill quote is to say, ‘look - don’t think hooray, I got the eight that I wanted on the GCSE, it’s all done, because success is final, and don’t think when you fail at something, that failure is fatal’. It’s about being courageous all the way through”. Then came realisation that she was wrong.

The Tweeter known as Otto English had the bad news. “Britain's strictest Head teacher [Katharine Birbalsingh] has a fake Churchill quote on her school wall. Nowhere in the canon of Churchill's writing or speeches did he say this. Suggest you get some paint”. And Ms Birbalsingh’s response?

“Now they are calling for apologies for any mistake we make as a school. We make several mistakes a day. We learn from them and move on. I suggest you all do the same”. Who’s calling for apologies? “Lots of people”. Moreover, “I won’t bow to the mob and give you the repentance you want. Indeed I raise an eyebrow at it”. She’s still big. It’s the criticism that got small.

But, ultimately, the defensiveness was off the scale: “Well of course it was a mistake! Isn’t that obvious? It is the insistence on a crucifixion that is disturbing and weird”. Who insisted on a crucifixion? Who even mentioned it? Who knows? And, indeed, who cares? Not so much “voicing opinions that are controversial”, more being a total embarrassment.

Another right-wing favourite not up to the job. No change there, then.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Daily Mail Goes Royally Spare

As was amply demonstrated by Edwin Hayward more than a year and a half ago, it matters not a jot whether the Sussexes say anything in public or keep totally schtum - our free and fearless press has decided that, in failing to do the usual Royal deal with the papers, it will dump viciously and constantly upon them, a situation exacerbated by Haz’n’Megs’ legal actions.

Also exacerbating the press hostility is the equally vicious racism directed at the Duchess: from talk of “exotic blood”, to “Harry’s girl is [almost] Straight Outta Compton”, to the ultimate exercise in plausible deniability, Sarah “Vain” Vine having a NIGG-ling worry about Megs, the dog-whistling has been both unmistakable, and equally inexcusable. Now it is getting ridiculous.

We have known for some time that Haz has written, or partly written, a memoir called “Spare”, which will be published next week. The press, and especially the Mail titles (against whom the Sussexes have taken legal action, in which, so far, the Mail titles have lost), have speculated ad infinitum, and indeed ad nauseam, over the contents. Now they know some of the detail.

This is because some of the outlets selling the book in Spain have begun to sell copies ahead of the agreed launch date. Now that some of the press has translated the contents, the inmates of the Northcliffe House bunker, under the less than benign leadership of their editor-in-chief, the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre, have decided to throw that book back at Haz.

What the f***'s this got to do with me, c***?!?!?

The ranting headline is all that the most discerning rant connoisseur could wish for: first it teases “Jan Moir’s Unmissable Verdict” (about which few people give a flying foxtrot), before thundering “World stunned by prince’s litany of excruciating attacks on family … Writes of ‘assault’ by William, bust-up with Kate & ‘wicked stepmother’ Camilla … But after years of hearing him wail about HIS privacy, millions will groan … OH SPARE US!”

Quite apart from the unintended benefit to both Haz and the charities which are set to receive significant sums from sales of the book - all this attention will mean it sells out next week, the week after that, and the week after that - the Mail manages to miss that they need the Sussexes. Badly.

The Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday are heavy on opinion writers - pundits who are paid obscenely large sums of money to dispense their superior insights to the titles’ readership. In doing so, they shape public opinion, bending it to the iron will of the Vagina Monologue. As the Sussexes have taken the titles to court, they must be punished until they repent.

Jan who? Rebecca who?

Were Haz’n’Megs to accede to the sneering bigotry and play nice with papers like the Mail, the hatred would evaporate overnight. That would also be true if the Duchess were to cease blanking the appalling Piers Morgan, whose obsession with her shows no sign of abating. But they won’t play nice, so the Mail trowels on the abuse at every opportunity. It’s the next best solution.

After all, it sells papers, and so helps pay for all those opinion writers. Hence Jan Moir being sent over the top to be characteristically catty about her targets. And Rebecca English, so-called Royal Editor, having her name above that front page lead. Pundits who would be unemployable in the big bad real world outside the bubble of our out of touch media class.

But the cracks are already beginning to appear in the Mail’s edifice of hatred: the version of the paper that readers in the USA see takes a rather less hostile line, with Ms Moir’s swipe relegated to further down the page, although the line that the Mail is getting the US media to take a more hostile line towards Haz keeps getting peddled. But the Sussexes are popular there.

Above all, this faux outrage - so the Royals are a dysfunctional family like so many others No Shock Horror - allows the Mail, while claiming to be loyal and patriotic (and based for tax purposes not in the UK), to sling the biggest dead cat it can find on the table, rather than let its Middle England readership know that the country is in a very bad way, and the Mail is directly responsible.

It was the Mail that dumped on Ed Miliband (including the anti-Semitic attacks) to keep Young Dave in Downing Street. It was the Mail that then called anti-Semitism on Jeremy Corbyn. It was the Mail that slavishly supported Theresa May, before slavishly supporting now-disgraced Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, and then - God help us - Liz Truss.

The Mail titles have backed every last inept politician in Westminster. How convenient for them to be able to tell readers to Look Over There, even as the NHS is on its knees, the cost of living is ever-increasing, and industrial unrest threatens to boil over into actual civil unrest. They sell papers, the momentary interest is maintained, and they get away with hypocrisy and mendacity.

But the public is not as stupid as the Mail hopes. We see you, Paul Dacre.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Sunak Pledge Rehash NOT JOURNALISM

The right-leaning nature of most of our free and fearless press is well-known, along with the increasingly desperate shilling by hacks and pundits in support of whoever occupies 10 Downing Street, providing he or she is a Tory. This was true of Young Dave, Treeza, the now-disgraced occasional PM Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, and even the comedy interlude of Liz Truss.

So it should surprise no-one that the craven and slavish coverage continues with Rishi Sunak. What is not good enough is that titles which claim to spend good money bringing their readerships allegedly quality journalism have descended to the level where they are merely transcribing Downing Street press releases, as no more than uncritical and unquestioning cheerleaders.

One look at today’s miserable offerings demonstrates this superbly: the Murdoch Times, marking another downward step from the heights of the title that Don Rupioni and his gang acquired all those years ago, has told readers “Sunak: My five pledges to restore British pride … I will halve inflation, grow economy, reduce debt, cut NHS waits and stop migrant boats, vows PM”.

Anything verging on analysis? Pointing out the flaws in Sunak’s glossy PR? You jest. “Rishi Sunak promised yesterday to halve inflation and return the economy to growth this year with policies that would restore ‘optimism, hope and pride in Britain’ … [he] told an audience in east London that his objectives represented both the ‘people’s priorities’ and the ‘Government’s priorities’”. I’m sorry, but this is crap. This is not journalism.

And sadly, the same has to be said for those labouring within the Northcliffe House bunker under the less than benign gaze of the Mail’s editor-in-chief, the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre. “RISHI: JUDGE ME ON MY FIVE-POINT PLAN TO FIX BRITAIN” is the Daily Mail’s take. There was more.

“RISHI Sunak yesterday staked his premiership on delivering a five-point plan to fix Britain … He also vowed to slash NHS waiting lists, stop small boats crossing the Channel illegally and get on top of the National Debt before the General Election expected next year”. This “report” is no different from what has been run by the Times. Because this, too, is not journalism.

It could not be any more pro-Tory if the front page had had the Mail or Times masthead removed and replaced by the Tory party logo. This is the nadir of what Peter Oborne characterised as “just shovelling it on”. No questioning, no critique, no analysis, and with the racing certainty that, should Sunak not deliver on any or all of his pledges, no reminder to the PM that he failed.

Worse is the mildly creepy suggestion of an emerging personality cult: recent Tory leaders getting the first-name treatment, a habit that emerged with “Theresa” and really took off with “Boris”, continuing with “Liz” and now firmly embedded in right-leaning press speak with “Rishi”. The leaderships of many totalitarian dictatorships of the past would have loved it.

There are good reasons for supporters of the current Government to talk up the Sunak pledges: mildly inconvenient facts like the Tories having inherited an NHS in half-decent shape and almost run it into the ground, the small boats arriving because there are no safe migrant routes, no mention of all the industrial unrest, and don’t even think of mentioning Brexit, for instance.

Where, for instance, is the faintest hint of detail as to how NHS waiting lists are to be “slashed”, other than perhaps hoping for a mild winter? There will be no “slashing” of waiting lists without some money being ponied up, perhaps to offload yet more treatments to the private sector. Inflation is already forecast to fall, so Sunak should not be allowed to claim that as an achievement.

How is he going to grow the economy at any significant rate without resolving the relationship between the UK and EU? His own party won’t let him move a millimetre in that direction. We are being fed the 1929 mood of Vision And Boundless Hope And Optimism without the good times actually being present, and with little prospect of them returning any time soon.

Nor are we seeing half-decent journalism. I’ll just leave that one there.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Rachel Riley - Say Sorry

One might expect that settling a defamation action brought by Countdown numbers person Rachel Riley against one or other of her detractors would include issuing an apology, if only to concede that the person making the allegedly defamatory statements was mistaken, had made an honest error.

Ellie Williams

So when Ms Riley is the one making a mistake, and an apparently high profile one at that, it might also be expected that she would issue some kind of mea culpa, lawsuit or no. Which brings us to the case of Eleanor Williams, a young woman from Barrow in Furness, who claimed back in 2020 that she had been a victim of an Asian grooming gang operating in the town.

She claimed to have received injuries from beatings administered by gang members: money was raised under the auspices of “Justice for Ellie”, and the local Police force, along with local media, were deemed to have failed her, as they had concluded that there was no evidence that those Ms Williams accused had been involved in grooming young women.

A retired Greater Manchester Police detective, Maggie Oliver, became involved. And among those standing firmly in Ms Williams’ and Ms Oliver’s corner was Rachel Riley, who said, in a Tweet that is still live as I type, “This should be front page news today. This poor girl, let down so badly. Thank god ex GMP detective [Maggie Oliver] is fighting for her and however many others like her. Warning: very distressing content. #JusticeForEllie”.

Rachel Riley

Exceptionally, I have included the stats for that Tweet, the likes and Retweets. Ms Oliver clearly appreciated the endorsement, responding “Thank you [Rachel Riley]”. To which Ms Riley doubled down with “No, thank you Maggie”. But she’s said nothing about the latest development in the case.

As the BBC has reported, “A woman who falsely claimed she had been raped and trafficked by an Asian grooming gang has been found guilty of perverting the course of justice. Eleanor Williams, 22, of Barrow-in-Furness, was found guilty of eight counts at Preston Crown Court. She posted photos on social media in May 2020 of injuries she said were from being beaten but the jury heard she inflicted the wounds on herself”. There was more.

“One man told the court the false accusations had ‘ruined’ his life … Her Facebook post was shared more than 100,000 times and sparked demonstrations in her home town, however, the court heard this was a ‘finale’ to her story and she had injured herself with a claw hammer”.

And yet more: “Williams had falsely claimed business owner Mohammad Ramzan had groomed her since the age of 12 … Williams said Mr Ramzan had made her work in brothels in Amsterdam and sold her at an auction there … However the court heard that at the time, his bank card was being used in a Barrow B&Q … Another man falsely accused of rape, Jordan Trengove, told the court the allegations had ‘ruined’ his life”.

Could it get worse? “Another, she said, was an Asian drug dealer who had threatened to kill her and dump her in the sea unless she had sex with multiple men … He was actually a young white Tesco worker from Essex who she had been speaking to on a dating site”. You get the picture.

So what has Maggie Oliver been saying about Ms Williams and the revelations that she had been seriously creative to the point of lying? Her Twitter feed has, as I type, been quiet on the verdict. In a case where the far right, led by Stephen Yaxley Lennon, who styles himself Tommy Robinson, made serious capital from Ms Williams’ variously false claims.

Rachel Riley’s intervention, whatever her intention, gave Ms Williams’s claims, and Ms Oliver’s backing, an air of legitimacy which, it is now patently clear, they did not warrant. As well as sounding a cautionary note for all those minor slebs out there, it begs the question: where is her retraction?

Ms Riley should issue a mea culpa this time. And sooner rather than later.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Rishi Sunak - The Invisible Man

A bank holiday today has become the calm before the storm: as workers return to their offices, warehouses, factories, shops and hospitality outlets starting tomorrow, so the return of strikes. This week will bring rail strikes, which will happen in one form or another every day from Tuesday to Saturday. There will no doubt be more later in the month.

Because the Government has effectively decided to sit it out and force those striking back to work as their union funds dry up. But the Tories have misread the public mood badly. Also, the rail strikes are the mere tip of a very large iceberg, with ballots taking place for firefighters to join healthcare workers in the NHS, border force officers, teachers and many others in downing tools.

That is before one considers the current crisis in the NHS, and especially in A&E departments across the UK, the cost of living crisis, steepling energy prices, and the slow puncture to the economy that is Brexit. So, once again, it is time to dust off J K Galbraith’s definition of leadership.

“All of the great leaders have had one characteristic in common: it was the willingness to confront unequivocally the major anxiety of their people in their time. This, and not much else, is the essence of leadership”. That major anxiety, or rather those major anxieties, are clear: healthcare, and the cost of living. Who should be providing that leadership? Ah well.

The leadership should come from the top, and that means one person: the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak. So where is he? Anyone actually seen him out and about recently? Paging Rishi Sunak! But, apart from the slickly produced videos and other messages, all that comes back is the sound of crickets.

That there is a leadership vacuum is all too obvious from one look at today’s offerings from our free and fearless press: the estimate that A&E delays could be causing 500 patient deaths a week is widely reported, and the Mail is trying to talk up Sunak, telling “The scale of the exceptional New Year challenges facing Rishi Sunak was laid bare last night”.

But what neither the Mail, nor all those titles putting the “500 patient deaths” figure on their front pages, are telling is that Sunak is thus far apparently doing very little about it, save to admit that 2023 will “have its challenges”. Well, have I got news for Rishi: you’re not there to tell the voters how challenging things are getting - you’re supposed to be doing what you can to deal with those challenges. Confronting those major anxieties.

And the right-leaning part of the press knows that their chosen Prime Minister is absent from the field of battle. Hence many of them wheeling out Prince Harry to provide a little momentary interest; indeed, the Murdoch Sun has made speculation about what is in Haz’ new book, available next week at all good bookstores, its sole front page story. Look over there, proles!

Sunak could announce more resources for the NHS, and especially those A&E units, many of which are now effectively in crisis. But he has not, and most likely will not. He goes private. So do most of his pals. So do all those obscenely overpaid editors and pundits who help prop up the Government. For him, the world is excellent. He’s a Tory, and Tories don’t care.

It’s a similar story with strikes: the rich can summon up taxis, chauffeurs, and for longer journeys, jet charters. Their position at the nexus of power and money allows them to avoid the strikes, skip the queues. But with the i Paper reminding the Tories that their own voters blame them for the NHS crisis, one might think that Sunak would at least break cover and show leadership.

But he won’t, and come the next General Election, despite the mess over which he is presiding, most of the press will slavishly back him and his fellow Tories, no matter how unfit for public office they have shown themselves to be. Rishi Sunak is the new Invisible Man: he will not intervene, he will not address the major anxiety of his people in his time.

The country is leaderless. And no-one in power appears to care. Bad news.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton