Wednesday, September 21, 2011

BBC South East CENSORSHIP? & Kent Leadership challenge?

tvHow would you know (you may well not) that Conservative Leader in Kent Council Paul Carter, was being likely to be challenged for the leadership of his party and consequently the political leader of the Kent Council, an organisation with around a two billion pound spend, who deal with local education, roads, social services and all those tentacles of government that actually effect you personally.

Well you would know if you read This is Kent Website or Paul Francis KM online, however if you get news from the BBC south east, forget about it.

Imagine a leadership challenge to David Cameron, and BBC news, just cannot be bother to report it, you cant, so why do we put up with it, at what is still an important regional level?

Its not that BBC don’t have the resources, it’s just they choose not to report on regional politics, which of course seems a bit stupid, image a time when at national level the leader of major political party is challenged and state funded journalists refuse to cover or mention it.

So why is it that BBC South East decide to keep us in the dark. What else gets put on the back burner by South East journalist?

BBC south east do, do politics, unfortunately, the only regional link though is generally some dead beat local MP who gets asked about a national issue, which merely replicates BBC national news.

Why they do this, I assume that it is because it is easier, than going to county hall and sitting down and listening to turgid meetings or censorship.

Every few months, when the taxpayer funded broadcaster, fails to report on major political stories, I email or phone BBC regional flunkies, a pointless exercise I know, sometimes fobbed off with a response from some minion with an epic corporate vocabulary or utter bollix.

Still if someone from the BBC would explain why they can devote less resources to cover local democracy that is wasted on the weather I will be happy to give them the oxygen of publicity. Perhaps Mick Rawsthorne (Regional Manager) would like to email me an answer, it would I think be a first.


  1. Or maybe they think (probably rightly) that most people aren't particularly interested.

  2. Maybe they do Peter, and you'd be right as most people have like you been groomed to think that politics has nothing to do with them.

    What a sad state of affairs, a country with compliant unquestioning worker ants like yourself

  3. I didn't say that I myself isn't interested, did I? So no need to get personal.

  4. Fell about laughing at the thought of the BBC, dear old lefty aunty, in league with the Tory party on a cover up.

    The truth is more probably that these leadership challenges are no more than rumours, or wishful thinking in some cases, at this stage and do not amount to actual news. Local media of course thrives on such snippets being generally incapable of recognising real news even when staring them in the face.

    Loved 7:16's comment, as ever obsessed with the brotherhood, and had another good belly laugh at the thought of Paxman with his trousers rolled up!

    Just where do you find your followers, Tony? Mind you, you have given my day a bright start so keep up the good work.

  5. Most people are too busy trying to keep up the payments to the parasitical system. Too tired to care.

    Tom Clarke makes me laugh, forever trying to sow division, somewhat reminiscent of old Bluenote.

    If we stand firm together, the parasites days are numbered.

  6. Tom Clarke, you should read the KM article and blog by Paul Francis rather thsn just dismiss it as a rumour. Paul Francis has done his job as he often does and reported what is going on at KCC. Its clear that its not just a few that have had enough of cllr Carter and the direction he has taken KCC at the expense of us tax payers and the children that he hada duty of care to protect. he should of concentrated on core services rather than his expansionist schemes.

  7. Nice idea, Lawful Rebellion (a contradiction in words if ever there was one), but I am afraid the idea of the people standing together or waking up, as you sometimes suggest, is the stuff or fairy stories.

    Truth is that years of dumbing down, not least of all by Labour governments, have made the masses less aware of what is going on than people were back in the first half of the 20th century. Then there was a definite move away from the old class system. Unfortunately it was simply replaced with another set of 'leaders' this time more determined than ever to keep the peasants in their place. Sadly the poor dummies actually thought this lot, the Attlees and Wilsons, were for them.

    Keep dreaming if you must but the best bet is to look out for number one.

  8. I see the conspiracy theorists / nutters have been allowed near a computer again.

  9. Tom Clarke (and his various previous blogging aliases) is only interested in down-playing any negative story about the Tory Party while exploiting the same sorts of stories about Labour. He is simply demonstrating his customary bias.

    That includes his usual laughable whinge about the BBC being left wing. Puleeze!

  10. Spare me the Tory bias nonsense, Anon, for I merely questioned whether the BBC and the Tory party could be seen as bedfellows. Likewise the suggestion that like Bluenote before me I am only trying to sow division.

    What you mean is that anyone who disagrees with you, me, Bluenote or anyone else, is divisive because they do not share your view of some parasite run society.

    Think about it and tell us who are these parasite people. Politicians, perhaps, yet an ever changing group? Maybe the leaders of industry and commerce like Alan Sugar or Richard Banson? Or is it the dreaded masons, whoever they might be.

    Suggest you get real and grow up before the bogeyman comes to get you.

  11. How anyone who posts as 'anonymous' can accuse anyone else of having blogging aliases is beyond me.

  12. Sorry Peter, a quick response as I was waiting to start work.

  13. Anon, Lawful Rebellion etc., where are you? People are attacking you yet you fail to respond. Have you lost the argument or is it simply past your bedtime?

  14. We have a right of lawful rebellion but it is not to bring change. It is to assert the constitutional monarchy. Before it occurs HM the Q must be called upon to render immediate remedy.

    It is related to the principle that you cannot break the law to enforce the law. If forces of the Crown offend agaiunst the people then the people can rebel and put such forces (police being the prime example) back in their place or in their coffins.

    Perhaps Sir Richard Dannutt had this in mind in recent years when he reminded the country that the Army will always be loyal to the Queen no matter what.

    This sort of constitutional malarkey used to be standard Army and the Nation training for SAS.

  15. Retired, you say in one point that you cannot break the law to enforce it yet then suggest it is OK for the people to put the police in their coffins. Sounds like extreme law breaking to me.

    Think you are getting your constitutionally monarchy rights a bit confused and suggest a couple of paracetamol and some hot chocolatye is probably the answer.

    Mind you, you are right about the army, along with the other armed services, swearing allegiance to HM but they also have to obey the orders of those properly appointed by her including ministers.

  16. Coronarion is an unique wedding.

    The monarch weds the people and the union becomes a body of authority called the Crown.

    There is supposed to be two geat balancing powers in the Realm. The Crown and Parliament.

    The Crown is the authority for armed force, police and the administration of justice.

    It is treason to undermine HM the Q as sole fount of justice in mercy.

    The Coronation Oath binds every judicial and constable oath.

    Constables are not servants of government. A constable is not a servant of his Chief constable. Every constable is an independent ministerial officer of the Crown.

    A constable holds office conditional that he defend the rights, freedoms and liberties of the Realm.

    Hence every constable should have acted to prevent the multicultural experiment which is unlawful.

    ACPO is a Ltd company. It has no Crown authority to centrally organise constables to offend against the people of the Realm.

    Margaret Thatcher in the policing of the miners strike committed immense treason by centrally organising constables to offend against the people.

    The miners could have informed HM the Q via the House of Lords that it was their intention to use lawful rebellion to re-assert her position as sole fount of justice.

    If HM the Q failed to deliver prompt remedy then the LAW is that the miners can take out the police.

    Hence LAWFUL rebellion.

    It was Churchill who warned that one day the police would become a Gestapo. If we failed to prevent it then we would have one day to confront it.

    The first way to go now of course is to hold Parish elections for the office of constable and elect our own volunteer onstabularies.

    The power of the state to appoint constables is on loan on trust to govt. Govt has betrayed that trust for decades by recruiting the most malleable to be police officers to make of them what they will.

    Sir Robert Mark warned it was happening 40 years ago.

  17. The Army oath binds the soldier to obey orders.

    A constable oath makes him an independent ministerial officert of the Crown.

    A constable is not given orders he is charged with duties.

    In the discharge of duty a constable, though for an unsworn man a matter may be civil, is criminally answerable to the Queen.

    The only order binding on a constable is by Warrant a separately sourced authority also derived of the Crown.

  18. Yet another load of old cobblers from Retired. Really old chap it is time to put a sock in it before you bore the pants of us all.

  19. Try telling the station sergeant that you don't have to obey his orders. Where do you get all this stuff, Retired? Presumably out of some archaic source long since superceded by subsequent legislation and judicial ruling.

  20. Tony

    People do not think of themselves as compliant at all. The Romans deliberately educated the English into servitude.

    Now the people are linguistically programmed and mistake that for education and mistake their programming for their independent opinion.

    The people are issued with a label set for example choose your independent opinions from the provided options as follows:



    Little England

    Conspiracy theorist

    Human Rights



    Not appropriate


    Enriching culture

    Working on so many levels



    Respect for diversity

    Communication skills

    Freedom of speech (equating to right to anonymity)

    More enlightened way

    Education is the answer (With no sense of irony)

    We are a multicultural society that enriches us all

    Where there's blame there's a claim


    In about 1650 there were about 27,000 slaves in Barbados. About 23,000 of those were white British shipped in chains from Britain.

    Black African people tended to be made the overseers and black men forced white women slaves to work naked knowing their pale skins could not stand the sun. The black overseers raped particularly the Irish women slaves and this provided offspring Creole slaves.

    Ooooh aren't some historical facts helpful to the social experiment needs to place collective guilt upon the white "ethnicity" in UK ?

    Better keep the facts out of the linguistic programming model then.

  21. OMG, what a seriously boring old fart! ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  22. Of course the media and the players behind KCC are in bed together in some cases quite literally I should think.

    Which 'Crown' would that be the 1 square mile of the City of London which controls everything, from behind the scenes of course, or HM Queen Elizabeth of the 'Windsor' family who is supposed to be the defender of the common law ?

    May be Carter needs to be dispersed with after becoming or about to become too much of an embarrassment and has been given his marching orders from the puppet Mp's ?
    Of course they would have to create a smoke and mirrors excuse , prob came up with that in the lodge.

    Children services and the latter should never been mentioned in the same breath they are a disgrace to their public paid 'profession'

  23. And so RC goes on and on and on in his various guises be that Retired, or Anonymous or Lawful Rebellion, presumably under the misunderstanding that we are all as thick as he is. Well read, perhaps, in boring trivia but intellectual argument does not figure.

    Just ignore what others say and post again in one of various guises pretending to be supportive of his own case.

    Only consolation I guess is that I only have to suffer him on blog sites. Just imagine what he must be like to live with!!!

  24. You would never believe it but as if by magic cllr Carter was on raidio Kent Breakfast this morning for a question and answer session or rather a self promotion session. And would you believe it 2 former KCC cabinet members are to challenge him at next months party meeting. Just in case Tom Clarke thinks this is make believe he can listen to the man himself on BBC Iplayer.
    I trust that the BBC will now give the same air time to the others that are standing.

  25. Rick or Retired do you ever consider that less might be more.

  26. Yep heard Carter blowing his own trumpet as usual.The bigger they are the harder they fall.To be replaced with another non transparent puppet no doubt! Makes you wonder why they are making such a fuss all of a sudden and what it might be covering up.

  27. Retired, I never said it was make believe, but at this stage a couple of former cabinet members, one of whom was sacked by Carter, are saying they are to mount a challenge to his leadership at the Conservative conference. It has not happened yet and, in any event, it is internal. What coverage the BBC give it will depend on how news worthy they consider it to be.

    Whatever, they cannot on this occassion be accused of any party bias for all the contenders are Conservatives. Makes a change from local Labour members perpetually whinging about Clive Hart's leadership. That's politics I guess and inevitable when you put all those egos together.

    By the way, I understand paracetamol is very good for relieving the symptons of parasitic phobia. You should try it.

  28. It may be a Conservative party matter but the kind of person that becomes the leader at KCC has a major impact on the way the council operates and spend our money. Indeed by all accounts cllr Carter sets the policies and the present cabinet are just there as bystanders. Under Carter we have seen KCC set up businesses in competition to local concerns and take their eye off the ball where core services and investments are concerned. The business may make money but we have seen failure in areas like child services and many expensive commings and goings in top personel. A bit like the way Thatcher treated her cabinet and eventually they revolted.
    It is thus essential that the BBC gives air time to cllr Carter's opponents rather then just let him alone preach to the tory KCC councillors.

  29. All very well, anon, but according to you they are all transparent puppets so it really makes no difference what transpires.

  30. Interesting, anon, how you bring Thatcher into the picture. Seem to recall Brown spent his time in No. 11 plotting how to get rid of his neighbour and then the whole Labour party seemed to be wondering how they could get rid of Brown. Now they have elected the wrong brother who is being stalked by the ever ambitious Balls. In politics they all have delusions of grandeur, regardless of party, and are perpetually scheming and plotting Ceasar's downfall.

    You tried those paracetamol yet?

  31. Sorry Tom Clarke, but you did not merely question the sleeping arrangements of the BBC and the Conservative Party, you argued that the stories were merely rumours and not newsworthy. And that was my point - your attempt, yet again, to play down any negative story or news about your Party.

  32. Now you have completed lost me, Anon. Since when did I query the sleeping arrangements of anybody. Surely that suggestion eminated from you.

    As to your comments about my alleged party, I reiterate that I consider it unlikely that the BBC and Tories would make a happy union. That is not a defence of either organisation and, furthermore, I ridiculed your perpetual harping on about funny handshakes and secret societies.

    In this instance, who are supposed to be the masons, Paul Carter or those challenging him and just how do they figure into a conspiracy of silence with the BBC. It is all fantasy as ever with you,then you twist other peoples comments and, above all else, never properly answer any point on which you are challenged.

    As ever you bore a debate to death due to your inability to move away from or even intelligently defend your own pathetic conspiracy theories. With you it is just bigotted dogma.

  33. The last comment was by me and the anonymous label was a mistake.

  34. Tom Clarke, as I have conceded to you before - in your various guises - it is, I fully appreciate, difficult to distinguish between anonymous posters. I am not the "Anonymous" who talks about freemasons and conspiracy.

    My posts here were 22/09 at 13.29, and 24/09 at 01.00.

    In your first contribution, you said that the "truth is more probably that these leadership challenges are no more than rumours, or wishful thinking...and do not amount to actual news". There have in fact been various reports, including statements from two leading Tories, that confirm that challenges are being mounted to Carter's leadership. In seeking to play these down, you are doing exactly what I have accused you of doing - trying to discredit or bury a negative story about your Party. Simple and undeniable - by you.

    You also questioned what others had claimed about a "conspiracy" between the BBC and your (Tory) Party. You "fell about laughing at the thought of the league with the Tory Party...". Which, again, is what I have said.

    I hope that clarifies it all for you.

    Just picking up on another contribution, I am not criticising you - or anyone else - in any way for using different names. Unlike some, I have no issue with anonymous posters - which of course you are, as am I. Speaking of which, I am heartened to see Batty Nora resurrected from the dead over on Thanet Life (whose blogmaster now adds Robocop to his list of incredible achievements). Now "she" does intrigue me, for her timing if nothing else. I wonder if this is a cover for the local MP or his wife, or perhaps a Moores family member, or even Moores himself in cyber drag?

  35. Isn't the Queen at the head of Freemasonry ? why would they bother to propose a toast to her and how about the Duke of Kent a very high ranking freemason.

    Is cllr carter involved in the building industry his planning application for a house in his backyard when through with flying colours? can always trust a tory to make a profit.

    A property tycoon's company has bought half the Olympic Village at a knock-down price, months after making a £50,000 donation to the Conservatives.

  36. Sadly, Anon, you seem to have no understanding of anything I have written and persist with your own interpretation of my motivation. To cover that issue, it is simply that I get some pleasure from blogging and I cannot resist rebutting unfounded assumptions.

    Moving on to freemasons, why should they not toast the head of state. Many organisations quite rightly do but that does not make HM a mason. I do not know if the Duke of Kent is one but, frankly, what difference does it make if he is? It is a gentleman's club and, like many such organisations, does not seem to have the following levels of yesteryear.

    Finally, I do not have many other guises and whoever you may have conceded to in the past, I assure you it is not I.

  37. Nora Batty, once a regular commentator on ECR's blogsite, has reappeared on an issue over on Thanet Life that should be of concern to all parents and those having the best interests of our young people at heart.

    Up springs our anti-Tory blogger with accusations of her being a Tory MPs wife or a member of Simon Moores's family. No doubt she also was behind the Deal bombing and committed perjury somewhere along the line!

    Is it suddenly just Tories who write echoing concerns about those who supply drugs and alcohol to school children or is it simply he cannot stand anyone agreeing with Cllr Moores on anything. How bigotted is that?

    Get real for far from suggestions Nora might be an MP's wife, how do we even know it is not a bloke in written drag?

  38. Precisely, Will Lambert, as I said, it could be Moores in cyber drag. Glad you agree.

  39. Will Lambert - all these Tory supporter names makes me want to break into a chorus of Uncle Tom Cobbley and all - you need to dismount from your high horse for a moment.

    Batty Nora always charged in to defend Moores when he was in a corner - whatever the issue - and has been silent for years. Her resurrection now is a "surprise" - hence my (sardonic) observation. She re-appeared BEFORE the story about children having cigarettes (not drink or drugs as you suggest) being bought for them.

    I do agree with Moores about child exploitation, and applaud his interventionist spirit. But I also believe that true samaritans do their good works quietly and move on. They do not blast off about their works in the way that a certain Tory Councillor does.

  40. Anon, reading both the posting and comments on Thanet Life, reference is made to something wrapped in silver paper and a parent tells of their child being supplied with Malibou. Hence, whilst the silver paper wrapped substance may not have been a drug, Malibou is certainly alcohol.

    See you make assumptions as ever that everyone who comments is a Tory, even Nora whoever she (or he) might be. Evidence would suggest, however, that she is not a Moores creation for I recall her going well back into early Eastcliff Richard days along with Miss Piggy and the rampant nun. Imagine they were probably Tories as well in your book.

    Like you I too applaud Cllr Moores efforts in this instance but think, particularly as a councillor, he had a duty to publicise this incident. I would hope by now he has told the police and the local schools. This is not a party political issue but something that should concern us all.

  41. We must agree to differ, Will Lambert. Have a nice day.

  42. Anon 8:17, I would dearly love to agree to differ but don't know what exactly we are supposed to be differing about. Presumably that everybody who blogs with a name is a Tory!

    Anyway, you too have a nice day for the weather is pleasant on this early Sunday morning.

  43. Nice try on your part to point-score, Will Lambert, but the areas of difference are quite clear. And no, not every Tory blogs with a name - and certainly not with the same (made up name) name every time.

    But still have a nice day...

  44. Now there is the difference, anon. I said presumably every body who blogs with a name is a Tory whereas you have twisted that to not every Tory blogs with a name. Subtle difference but different I think you must agree.

    To be honest, the blogger, he who persists with his (I say his for I know who he is) theories on parasites running the show, masons, funny handshakes, councillors committing perjury, the people waking up and sundry conspiracies and cover ups, so winds me up that I feel compelled to respond. In so doing I guess I go somewhere well to the right like some latter day black shirt and make comments that are more wind up than reasoned argument.

    Unfortunately, you have a habit of getting caught in the crossfire, your lefty hackles play up and you respond with your anti-Tory rhetoric. Actually I am apolitical but probably over react to bigots and the plain stupid.

    In other circumstances we could probably find much to agree on and have a decent conversation.