Blogs

Starkey’s right: his fellow Question Time panellists don’t know the meaning of ‘struggle’

3 May 2013

3 May 2013

Great stuff from David Starkey on BBC Question Time last night, hammering away at Harriet Harman, David Dimbleby, Victoria Coren and Shirley Williams for having attained their current positions in society with considerable assistance from their famous and influential (and of course loaded) parents.

Yes, precisely; it is pretty much the same every week. Starkey made the point that it is the left which does this sort of thing most often, although I think – looking at the cabinet and the staffing of Number 10 Downing Street – that he would be hard pressed to maintain that point. But nonetheless, he is right that the left does it too and is always less apologetic about it, insisting that despite having a famous name and a very expensive education, they have had their struggles too. No, you haven’t. You do not know the meaning.


More Spectator for less. Subscribe and receive 12 issues delivered for just £12, with full web and app access. Join us.

Show comments
  • The Elderking

    A hero of the people against feather bedded, privileged, lefties who have damaged our country so much.

  • Terry Field

    Starkey shows them for what they are; yet, since they do not know the meaning of struggle, they do not know the meaning of value, and it follows that they also do not have any perspective on what is right , and what is wrong.
    And that shines out of them every time they open their mouths.
    Starkey strips away the guff; he properly holds faux politeness in total contempt.
    He is a great brick in the wall of life.

  • Working class brit made good

    Brilliant Absolutely Brilliant! Starkey really lit up! And I thought he was a boring old queen!

    • http://www.facebook.com/mike.godfrey.754 Mike Godfrey

      Just proves that sexual preferences has no connection with good old fashion common sense and I also applaud the man.

  • Tom M

    David Starkey, I could listen to him all night. What a set of self-important pompous windbags he showed the rest up as (including Dimbleby).

  • http://twitter.com/limon0510 Md.Sultan Mahmud

    There is an old QT clip on you tube where Christopher Hitchens kills Ms Williams for talking against Rushdie’s knighthood. It is fun to watch. Hitchens is merciless!

    Click This Link

    • Abhay

      Are you an idiot? Why have you copied my posting verbatim?

    • Austin Barry

      And included my link. Are you Hari?

  • Seatofmypants

    Well done Starkey, showing up the nepotistic media (Coren and Dimbleby) and nepotistic polticos’ (Williams and Harperson). Odd that we have become so used to listening to these smug-liberal-left-aristocrats spouting on we never question what authority they really have to comment on…well anything beyond their rarefied circles. Does Harperson really feel she has been oppressed with her background? She genuinely does. That’s a little worrying.
    She does amuse me though especially when she comes out with claptrap like “we (Labour) need to listen” Unfortunately no one in their right minds believe her any more. They never listen. She doesn’t understand that people have ran out of patience with her and party (as well as the two others). UKIP’s support is not Shirley Williams “just a protest vote” nor is it mid term blues its something fundamentally deeper than that.

  • Differently Diverse

    If someone wanted to be brutally honest he’d remind Harriet Harman that she made it to her current position in an era when male politicians fall over themselves to promote and pander to women and will fast-track any female showing any signs of competence. It’s not nice or gallant to say it but it’s true.

    • http://www.facebook.com/mike.godfrey.754 Mike Godfrey

      They made a mistake here if we’re talking about competence !

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=523155833 Paul Holt

    It was reported during the 2010 General Election that Andrew ‘Bulbous Face’ Neil was after DD’s chair on Question Time. He was a little upset at his lack of involvement during the election night coverage so much so he was temporarily given a boat on the Thames to host an election night party for Dumbleby to hand over to infrequently. Andrew Neil was probably more irate afterwards given his calibre of guests that night. Bruce Forsyth and Joan Collins. An idea later described by former chairman of the BBC Michael Lyons as the “Ship of Fools” and “the most uncomfortable” of his tenure.

    I think Andrew Neil could actually do a decent job on QT. Given the Daily Politics guests over the years have become less of the well known and more of the obscure might prove politicians are afraid of his confrontational and debating style.

    I’ve always been a great fan of Starkey but he could never host QT except on a night as a replacement when actual foreseen comedy is desperately needed – Comic Relief.

    • Forest Fan

      Andrew Neil would be brilliant. One of the best moments in recent TV history is when Neil ripped Abbott to shreds.

  • zakisbak

    Harman,related to aristocracy,public school educated,hardly proletariat now is she.
    But the left,of course,is anything but a representative of the working class.
    It is an establishment of the bourgeoise,who then inform the proletariat how they should conduct their lives,while they,the political class,absolutely do not live as they preach.

  • darwins beard

    Good on the bloke

  • http://ajbrenchley.com/ Swank

    As my h. says: the idea that welfare dependency isn’t the result of socialist policies of 20 and 30 years ago…. Of course it is!

  • http://ajbrenchley.com/ Swank

    Thanks to Fraser Nelson for giving us this clip: as an expat I would never have been able to hear it otherwise.

    The important point, listening, is not whether the lady MP(s) forwarded redistributionist, business-regulating policies supposedly to help women when they got to Parliament; the important question is whether socialist policy works or fails. The evidence has long been in that it fails — by bankrupting the future to pay for today; by closing the doors of opportunity to people on low or merely average budgets, through taxation which removes the say over how their money is spent and which simply makes their own personal goals subordinate and subservient to what the lady MPs and their Labour colleagues think is important!

    We always think of ‘safety nets’ as lying underneath people. Very often they don’t: they lie like fishing nets OVER people, preventing them from bettering their lot and achieving their dreams. This is why I am anti-socialist, and why Starkey is, too.

    • http://www.facebook.com/mike.godfrey.754 Mike Godfrey

      Load expat shield on your PC, run it and go to BBC iPlayer and you’ll be able to watch any BBC program on their website including QT. I watched the whole of QT this morning from Spain and it was pure delight to see Starkey trash Harman and others.

      • http://ajbrenchley.com/ Swank

        Thanks, I’ll have to look into that!

  • Vince Mitchell

    I watched with great interest, and for the first time in a long time Harriet Harman was told some home truths by David Starkey and for once she was not able to read the prepared script as per her Labour party colleagues. It must be remembered that her husband is currently sitting in a woman only seat and has no right to do so, if I was one of his constituents I would be a little upset. ( Hypocrite comes to mind)

    It is rather irritating to watch the politicians from their own political parties reading from what is prepared for them and most of all they never ever answer what is asked of them.

    Maybe it is time that the format of the programme was changed and perhaps have a Chairman like David Starkey, because the current one does not press the politicians enough for an answer. Maybe he is not allowed to, as he has his own interests to look after.
    The question that I have is, who selects the panel and do they get paid ????

  • http://twitter.com/youngian67 Ian Young

    Starkey is an experienced professional academic who should be aiming higher than puerile playground insults. His main problem with class is that he hasn’t got any.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Andrew-Paul-Shakespeare/715581221 Andrew Paul Shakespeare

    Goodness me, if every Question Time turned into a right old ding dong like that, I’d never miss a single one! Electric stuff, sticking it up the lefties where they don’t like it.

  • Fraser Cullen

    Completely agree with many of Starkey’s point, but at times he gets carried away in his own momentum. This was typified by his arguments on the show regarding the NHS and specifically Doctor’s pay. He reeled off facts and opinions which were utterly false.

    • Fergus Pickering

      You mean about doctors’ pay. What are the true figures?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1235432615 Johnny Norfolk

    David Starkey should be the chairman of QT.

  • http://www.facebook.com/sam.j.gunn Sam Jayne Gunn

    I enjoyed seeing that old fart starkey get a battering from the panel on question time, he should know when to keep his mouth shut sometimes.

    • Abhay

      Starkey was not battered. He made the other panelists cry!

    • FrankS

      Wishful thinking, SJG!

    • Hexhamgeezer

      He wasnae battered – he was very chipper.

      • Daniel Maris

        I was worried about his thumb though…had it been bitten by a rabid lesbian feminist?

    • Forest Fan

      What getting a battering from your elitist
      friends? I don’t think so.

    • http://www.facebook.com/mike.godfrey.754 Mike Godfrey

      Funny, all I’ve ever seen is him trashing wet liberals !

  • Eddie

    I have yet to watch this show on the Sunday morning repeat, but I believe it was hilarious (and I despise that harriden harpie Herr Harman, so glad Starkey pummeled her). I think it was filmed in a grammar school?

    Starkey is of course right. The left are always full of it here – well, Owen Jones’ father is a middle class professor (salary scale = £73k pa). Plenty of lefties live in million pound houses in London and have benefited greatly from mass immigration pushing up property prices to silly levels: ditto for others, but leftie hypocrites are really jaw-dropping in their hypocrisy here. They want to defend giving benefits and huge pensions to public sector workers who don’t know what the word struggle means either!

    Grammar schools like the one in Dartford and the one Starkey went to gave ordinary boys and girls a chance. Labour – supported then by the Tories – scrapped them. You will know your place. (Of course, the lefties send their kids to one of the few decent state schools in London – the Oratory, Fortismere in Muswell Hill – whlist ordinery people have to send their kids to schoolls which are 90% ethnic or leave London).

    I am from a similar background to Starkey and know what struggle means too – and now I run a small business, so know it more, as I don’t just plod along in mediocrity drawing a safe public sector salary.

    Hoorah for Starkey, the gay blade! He’s far far better at presenting TV history programmes that all the goofy women academics the BBC has parachuted in too. Maybe Starkey could present a TV series on leftist hypocrisy and how the working class have never been socialists (that’s the preserve of public school educated hypocrites like the aristocratic Williams and Harman, daughter of a rich surgeon).

    • Forest Fan

      Well said Eddie.

    • lgrundy

      “Maybe Starkey could present a TV series on leftist hypocrisy and how the working class have never been socialists (that’s the preserve of public school educated hypocrites like the aristocratic Williams and Harman, daughter of a rich surgeon)”.

      Great idea. The British Left have never been properly investigated on TV. What about the links between the British Labour Party, our trades union movement and the Soviets? In archives all over Eastern Europe and the former USSR there must be numerous files naming British Labour Party and trades union traitors who were actively collaborating with the Soviets to destroy Britain.

      According to Peter Hitchens as soon as it came to power the Labour Party ordered the destruction of any MI5 files which might implicate government ministers or left-wing MPs in Cold War communist subversion. Unfortunately for these traitors there will still be plenty of files recording their treason held overseas – if only anyone can be bothered to look for them. Where’s an ‘investigative journalist’ when you need one?

      • allymax bruce

        You only need to look across the Atlantic ; The Republican Party!

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        “Where’s an ‘investigative journalist’ when you need one?”
        Up HMG’s donkey I venture to suggest.

      • Eddie

        Agreed. It could also focus on the traditional anti-semtism of the British left and its apeing of the pro-Arab Soviets – something we still see and hear today in the spoutings of brothers in Islam Mohammed al-Livingstone and that Fahkr al-Galloway.

        The BBC and Channel 4 would fight hard to stop it, though – as they would fight hard to stop their bias being exposed.
        The BBC has never been fully investigated either. They seem very keen on fly on the wall documentaries about everyone else – but they’re never allowed one to be filmed about how things get done at the BBC (which we pay for, of course). I wonder why…
        Maybe viewers might be a bit shocked at the political correctness, socalled ‘positive action’ (ie banning white men), the labyrinthine layers of pointless management, the utter talent-free status of most managers, the incompetence, amateurish processes, the hige salaries, perks and pay-offs to those who climb to senior management (and get payoffs of over half a million to leave…)

        • Forest Fan

          and the bullying.

    • http://www.facebook.com/mussi.buma Mussi Buma

      My friend with a PhD and a member of the Socialist Worker Party always lived in leafy Tory boroughs. She made sure both her children went to private schools & Oxbridge. Socialism is for other people. As George Orwell noted the middle class intellectuals who become socialists do so as a means of keeping the working class in their place, and removing the upper class from power.

      • James Strong

        You can’t make sure that your children go to Oxbridge.
        You can encourage them in their aspirations, you can guide them to be diligent in their studies, but unless they are very bright as well as hard-working they are not going to get there.

        • Eddie

          I think The Queen and Price Philip were pretty sure their kids went to Oxbridge on a couple of C or D or E grade A levels.
          I know someone who was at Cambridge with Prince Edwina – had his own rooms and valet apparently. He got a D and two Es at A level, I think.
          Still, maybe it would have been cruel to send him to the Polytechnic University of the North Circular with the other thickies…

          • Abhay

            There is a kernel of truth in what you say. And I can completely understand your annoyance with the effete, metropolitan elite who mouth nonsensical political correctness of liberal, social kind and then quietly do the elitist thing privately.

          • justejudexultionis

            Not true re. Harvard since they scrapped ‘pre-admission’.

            • Eddie

              Ah but they do let in a lot of blacks by quote still eh? Often because they are good at sport (though thick as mud). When they use merit alone as in Stanford I think, there are no blacks and loads of Chinese eh?
              I take your word for it on Harvard, However, I seem to remember hearing last year about a case brought by some daughter of a multi-millionaire who got her into one of the Ivy League colleges (I think they complianed when she didn’t get an A in everything …)

      • neil kenny

        Good point .. but it would also assuage their own guilt and sense of social disenchantment..

    • Daniel Maris

      Maybe they should have him and Mary Beard present a series on key historical moments…I can see some sexual chemistry there…

      • FrankS

        “sexual chemistry” – of the An An and Chi Chi kind, perhaps!

  • http://ajbrenchley.com/ Swank

    Victoria Coren. For some reason (I’ve never laid eyes on the woman and know nothing about her) it made me think of Victoria’s Secret. Which, in my late-night slightly goofy way of thinking, gave me an inspiration. How about a military-themed lingerie/women’s intimates shop called Victoria’s Cross? What do you think? It would only be in the best of taste ;^)

    • Wessex Man

      see my reply to Cayce Pollard

    • UKSteve

      Oh, yeahhhh! Let me know if you need help with funding :-)

      Always had massive hots for La Coren, right up until she married David Mitchell.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      Is that something like the Shanghai squeeze?

  • allymax bruce

    Starkey was terrific; that angry bird, Victoria Coren was more interested in trashing the soul man, than the Questions

  • James Strong

    I couldn’t watch much of this show,;4 wimmin and a poof, I thought.
    But I did see the bit where Starkey pointed out that Dimbleby is an hereditary TV presenter and I saw Dimbleby’s reaction. Priceless.
    Is there any sane person in the BBC’s broadcast area who thinks Dimbleby would have done so well in broadcasting, or even got a start, if his name had been David Smith?

    • Eddie

      Oh the BBC has an anti-men policy now – so expect more all-female panels and shows, and endless reports on women’s sport by female sports presenters (like anyone watches women’s sport!). Their history programmes are now presented by irritating goofy women academics – Starkey’s series show how it should be done.
      The BBC is disappearing up its own femi-fundament.
      Dimbleby made £10 million 2 years ago by selling the media cuttings agency his dad set up.

      • Fergus Pickering

        I have watched women’s cricket. I urge other red-blooded males to do the same. The girls are all honeys..

        • Eddie

          Then you’ll be a big fan of the BBC’s new femi-policies – even though the football fillies and rugby gals tend to be rather butch and masculine (think pervy PE teachers at minor girls public schools).
          The BBC has lost all the decent sport except Wimbledon of course, so they have to pretend everyone loves watching women play sport at a level that even the worst professional sportsman exceeds.

          • Fergus Pickering

            Naw, you need the Sky package, Eddie. God bless Rupert Murdoch who gives us what we want and not what we are supposed to want.

            • Eddie

              No really into sport – I do wish I had Sky arts though, which seems to be fulfilling the BBC’s brief (the BBC isn’t).

  • http://biasedbbc.proboards.com/index.cgi Teddy Bear

    It’s like Starkey knows he won’t be given the time by Dimbleby and leftist QT panel to really explain his thoughts, which would show just how blinkard, trite, or downright unworkable their views are, so he has to resort to a ‘hit and run’ tactic – which he does very well.

    When has the BBC allowed any right wing viewpoint to really be explained?

    • Icebow

      I note that they called in an ‘expert’ on the ‘far right’ once. Have they ever called in an expert on the far left, or on Jeremy Paxman?

  • thanksdellingpole

    Shut the BBC down.

    • Abhay

      Or give them 2 years to become competitive and phase out TV licensing.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1296945479 John McClane

        No, shut them down. Make the license payers shareholders, sell off the back catalogue and return the proceeds to the shareholders. It’s our money. Shut them down.

      • thanksdellingpole

        No, gut them, tear them up, throw strips of them to the private sector sharks and base it all on the treason trials they thoroughly deserve.

        Again, already, they’ve been embroiled in yet another peado scam, caught out again, but they get away with it!

        • Abhay

          I am equally angry at these guys. Nasty scandals, metropolitan-liberal bias and a sordid love of childish multiculturalism – enough reasons already.

          But their corporate termination should benefit the citizenry monetarily. Immediate ending of TV licensing, I think, will be a worthy, patriotic campaign. Most British families will benefit.

          • thanksdellingpole

            I think the BBC need to be humiliated for what they did and continue to do, letting them off without proper analysis would leave the door open for them, I want the future generations to see clearly what happened.

  • Austin Barry

    Hilarious viewing.

    The panel’s outrage was as if Starkey had produced a particularly rancid turd and bowled it along the table.

    Surely, Starkey is a national treasure?

    • Salvatore

      Starkey really is a pompous windbag and his opinions on the welfare state, bus passes and the rest do not bear scrutiny but he was just so, so, so right about the other members of the panel last night; they were so nettled and so eager to just kill him it almost made me a Starkey fan.

      • Eddie

        Did he mention maternity pay and child benefit being paid to people living in houses worth £750,000 in Clapham (and 2,3, or 5 times that in Glenda-land – Hampstead and Highgate).
        Time we included ALL assets in means testing. That way £4 biliion a year could be saved from stopping maternity ‘pay’ linked to income at all, and instead help poorer mothers and kids.
        Problem is, democracy is just legalised blackmail, and everyone has their nose in the trough – if any party takes away these sponge benefits, they will lose votes.
        Maybe we should have a dictatorship instead? Kim Il Starkey sounds good, don’t it?

      • Fergus Pickering

        Pompous? I don’t see him as pompous. Dimbleby is pompous.

    • GUBU

      David Starkey bowling rancid turds across a table at Harriet Harman? Now there’s an idea for a series….

      • Icebow

        I think she did say something sensible a some point, but in any event she’s already as excremental as she can be. Horrible.

    • Daniel Maris

      I’m hoping they write him into Vicious for at least one episode.

    • UKSteve

      He is. And a world-renowned authority on Tudor England.

      • Eddie

        Which is ironic, seeing as the Twdrs were a Welsh family, not English at all.
        (yes I know, England referred to both back then – but worth pointing it out. Starkey says that the Tudors ruled like the Taffia. Americans won’t understand that…)

    • DougS

      I like the description but it’s going to take a while to get the visualisation out my head.

      On second thoughts, I’m not sure that I want to!

    • neil kenny

      Te he.. although i cannot imagine too many sweet smiling turds.. all spin doctors have their workout..

  • snozzle123

    Starkey was on fire last night, awesome viewing. I might not agree with him 100% but he offered clear and logical arguments against opponents who were left looking like they had lost £10 and found 5p and could not match is eloquence. That flummoxed stupid Doctor woman getting all bent out of shape over Starkey criticism of GP’s pay was priceless. Starkey is really good at resisting being browbeaten by mockrage and emotional arguments and bats it all right back. The tactics of the left don’t work on him.

    Shirley Williams was pretty good too I think.

    • stickytape

      I thought Victoria Coren was the star, much as I like Starkey, he came across as a bit of a caricature, although he made some good points, which generally went unnoticed because of his abrasive nature.
      Lecturing people doesn’t always work.

      • snozzle123

        I know what you mean but he never plays the authoritarian, he always supplies facts and arguments.

      • OldSlaughter

        Maybe a star, but she asked why people in a sweatshop didn’t have childcare.

      • neil kenny

        Coren is a sneering snob at the heart of the london metroploitan liberal elite.. i wonder how many times she has visited a inner city or frankly any comprehensive school.. NHS hospital.. public library.. oh she with enormous connections.. and frankly not very funny.. but i suspect that doesnt worry her as she doesnt need to worry about anything.. awful woman.. representative of only the awful london liberal elite..

        • Fergus Pickering

          Why on earth should anyone visit a comprehensive school unless they had to? And how o you visit an inner city. You mean some shithole full of criminals I take it. Why would anyone want to do that?.

        • stickytape

          A man who knows about sneers and London liberal elites speaks out. Clap Clap Clap.
          Grow up and don’t be so jealous of other people. You know nothing about Victoria Coren, why pretend you do?

    • Eddie

      Williams is always good. She is a first class leftie hypocrite – but she is always worth a listen.
      Herr Harman, on the other hand, should be sent to the east… A couple of years on a council estate in Norwich should do her.

      • Abhay

        There is an old QT clip on you tube where Christopher Hitchens kills Ms Williams for talking against Rushdie’s knighthood. It is fun to watch. Hitchens is merciless!

        • Jackthesmilingblack

          I saw that. Talk about tearing her a new *sshole.

        • Jackthesmilingblack

          My comment has been deleted, yet again.
          Is the true that the Moderator section operates out of Bangalore?

        • neil kenny

          As eloquent as a 1st rate wordsmith as CHitchens was.. he was a snob and political drifter! He was, like his brother, a communist some years ago.. so why listen to him when he changed his mind! He was also a self admitting snob.. who had little empathy for working or work motivated people..

          • Fergus Pickering

            Hitchens worked. he would have starved else.

            • Eddie

              Oh come on – he and his brother Peter were upper-middle class, privately educated, from a millionaire family.

              • Abhay

                They are not from a millionaire family from what I have read. Their father was a naval officer.

          • Abhay

            Neil,

            You are being a bit rough on CH. Yes, he was a Trotskyist two decades ago. But since then he had altered his politics substantially. He did not completely abandon the Marxian dialectical way of viewing the world though. One is allowed to change one’s mind.

            I like him for his wealth of knowledge that he would deploy, his polemical style, his robust defense of freedom of speech and conscience and the way he bashed idiots in discussions and debates.

            His brother is a good writer as well – quite thoughtful.

          • http://twitter.com/Hitchslap_82 Andy M

            Being unforgiving of stupidity and affronts to free speech does not make him a snob. There was absolutely nothing snobbish about Hitchens – he came across that way perhaps due to his robust self-confidence and accent, but ultimately this is the man who still toured doing talks and debates while he was riddled with Cancer and even took the time to share recommended authors with a young girl:

            http://youtu.be/hevP4NaoI3c

            (at around the 7:44 mark)

            It would have been very easy to simply sit back and try to enjoy the last year of his life but he continued giving to his admirers.

            Not only that, but is a snob really going to let himself get waterboarded? The mindset of a snob is not one to put themselves in any discomfort for the masses, as snobs think they are above doing anything for others.

            His actions do not acknowledge the claims you level against him, and they infact refute them.

            Having read a lot of his books and watched almost all his debates, I can say you are actually continuing what is more of a myth than truth about his political affiliation. He changed some views slightly, but ultimately he kept to most. He also made a point of justifying every view he gave with evidence. He was one of the most well-read and knowledgeable journalists/public speakers of all.

        • Austin Barry

          Here’s the Hitchens clip. He also chastises the QT happy-clappers.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcQ2XXfw_Mw

          • Eddie

            Interesting clip. Hitchens is of course right in exposing the rank hypocrisy of the left and those who see themselves as ‘liberals’ when they pander to the vile, abusive, bullying, literalist versions of Islam.

            People really do have to get out of this obsessive fixation on not offending Muslims. Why not offend them? Islam and its ways offend many, and the turning a blind eye to its many abuses in The West offend even more.

            Shirley Williams and others were also cynically pandering to the Muslims who voted Liberal after abandoning Labour because it was in government when Iraq was liberated and whenh the Islamofascists ihn Afghanistan were attacked.

            That says all you need to know about many Muslims in the UK really – the enemy within if there ever was one.

            By the way, you’d think offending people was legal. I thought so too until I was arrested for sending emails to someone who tried to rip me off in business. ‘Harassment’ apparently. The police report says ‘he send offensive emails’. Now I am legally damaging that person’s business (which is going down the plughole). Hoorah!

            1984 is here and real. The police are idiots – they tolerate the intolerable from Muslims and yet chase around arresting people who say bad words on Facebook and emails. Surreal.

            • Jane

              HAAAAA IRAQ LIBERATED….lolooooooooololol….sorry that made me laugh

        • http://twitter.com/Hitchslap_82 Andy M

          This outstanding performance on QT is actually what alerted me to the existence of The Hitch and allowed me to become a huge admirer of his, to a degree where now he was in my opinion the greatest defender of free speech, critical thinking and Western democracy. To be honest as my profile picture suggests, I may be a little biased!

          The way he tore apart Williams and apologists for suppressing free speech was sublime, eloquent and merciless! There were very few public intellectuals who could truly tear the panel to shreds, other than Hitch and Starkey. I find myself tuning in to QT week after week hoping that I will see someone else that can do this. So far, the only other person I can remember truly going for it against the panel and the audience was the Spectator’s own Douglas Murray, who has put in some epic performances over the last decade and is great viewing in debates – I recommend people check out his performances on YouTube.

          • Abhay

            Well, common-sense driven irreverence on QT is also shown by a few others – Nigel Farage, Peter Hitchens are two names that come to mind. You can always expect fireworks when they are on the panel.

            • http://twitter.com/Hitchslap_82 Andy M

              True. They are in my ‘second tier’. Peter Hitchens I feel is really a poor man’s Christopher, but he does make sense on some issues and is not afraid to express his opinions. One of my favourite moment’s of his was when someone attempted to call his bluff on poetry and put him on the spot asking him to recite a poem – thinking he couldn’t do so. He did in great dramatic fashion. Cue tumbleweed as panel and audience can do nothing but accept he is the real deal. Farage is also very good and I enjoyed him the other week. David Aaranovich taking on Galloway was also a nice moment – when he brought to light Galloway’s saluting and praising of Hussein and Al Assad.

          • Damon

            You mean, presumably, the same Christopher Hitchens who used to tell his mate Martin Amis, ‘There wasn’t any famine in the Soviet Union in the 30s. There may have been occasional shortages.’ (See the preface to Amis’s Koba the Dread.)

            • http://twitter.com/Hitchslap_82 Andy M

              You’re not providing any context to the comment and until I actually see him say it from his own mouth for myself I’ll remain skeptical he even said it. Infact, if Amis is quoting him, as a dead man he has no opportunity to respond and put the comment into a context, which I’m sure he would do.

              That said, Amis was Hitchens’ friend and it could be argued that this means he wouldn’t misquote him out of a sense of honour, but in that case it could also be argued that in theory he wouldn’t take snipes at Hitchens in such a manner, yet he did. So who knows.

              To play devil’s advocate and assume he did say it, as I say the context is not given – the idea that Amis printed such a thing suggests to me it is was a joke. Not to mention, sometimes Hitchens said things to get a rise out of people, to keep himself amused.

      • RobertC

        Living on a council estate in Norwich is punishment enough ……

  • Wessex Man

    There was only one woman on that panel that in any way silenced the old fool, Victoria Coren and he is, he’s not even our best Historian. He seems to have built a formidable rep on being rude. He’s no sort of role model, just a windbag.

    • Payne by name

      I think Victoria just came across as silly and smug. Asking what the childcare provision at a Bangladesh factory was, is just utterly pointless. Should we also enforce some liberalist colonialism in all these countries and demand they have disabled parking bays, environmental policy on the printers and free trade coffee in the coffee machines?

      It displayed the stupidity of so much needless pontificating that happens on QT i.e. when someone pulls out the tedious ‘the rich are getting richer and the poor getting poorer’ or the classic sentence at the end of every Labour riposte ‘we need to do something about growth and jobs’ – cue the robotic clapping from an audience incapable of recognising empty crowd pleasing rhetoric.

      Bravo for Starkey to call the lunacy exactly as he saw it.

      • Wessex Man

        You miss my point entirely, it’s not about welfare and she said nothing so stupid, her politics are the complete opposite of mine and I don’t seek to ally my views with hers. That doesn’t stop Starkey being a silly old fool who tries to be rude on any and every point!

        • terregles2

          Unfortunately there seem to be many people who really just cannot debate. They refuse to listen to any point of view that is in any way different to their own. If anyone disagrees with them they cannot discuss the difference they only mock and try to humiliate and insult the other person.
          We saw it on Question Time when the pompous rude little man Starkey attempted to prevent the four women from speaking.
          He shouted them down and displayed what a rude little boor he is.
          Look how popular that made him. Britain has indeed become a rude and nasty country.

          • UKSteve

            It has, but that is the very product – largely – of the women you support here.

            That damage that Harman and her vile cohorts have inflicted on my beautiful country is immeasurable.

            They women, WIlliams, an arch-traitor and rabid Eurpohile, Harman with her history, and the uber-lightweight Greening lined up with a woman I like and respect – but who said absolutely nothing insightful, much less relevant.

            Doubtless, Starkey was outraged at such a low grade panel.

            • terregles2

              ” They women.” Well you have certainly proved that standards in British education have dropped to an all time low.
              Which party was in power when you were in full time education?

              • UKSteve

                It was a ‘typographical error’ – look it up? – and was only 1 that you spotted (there were 3).

                That’s the best you can come back with? – my 10-year old nephew could do better.

                • terregles2

                  Your ten year old nephew could do better. That must have brought about some relief within the family.

                • Icebow

                  Might as well edit….

                • UKSteve

                  Doesn’t seem much point now.

                  To infer a lack of education based on typo’s is the ultimate absurdity, indicative in my view of under-education and over-brainwashing.

                • Icebow

                  It’s just what I’d have done. I’m prone to typos, so I’m grateful for the editing facility. I agree with your second sentence.

                • UKSteve

                  I have a decent vocabulary, and I’m a brilliant speller.

                  But no-one can hold a candle to me, after 26 years in IT as the world’s worst typist! :-/

              • Colonel Mustard

                What was that you were saying about nasty rudeness, mocking, humiliating and insulting others?

              • Fergus Pickering

                Should’ve been them women.

              • Redneck

                terregles2

                I am afraid that I found your reply, to UKSteve, to be rather rude

                • terregles2

                  You are right it was rather rude… my apologies. It was because of previous rude posts by UK Steve and I assumed that it would not bother him to have the same back. That is no excuse You are correct though two wrongs don’t make a right and I should not have added to the rudeness.

                • Redneck

                  Terregles2

                  A gracious reply, thank you.

          • DougS

            “….We saw it on Question Time when the pompous rude little man Starkey attempted to prevent the four women from speaking….”

            He’s even braver than I thought!

          • arnoldo87

            Only popular on this blog. Most people see Starkey for what he is – which is exactly how you describe him.

            • Colonel Mustard

              Is that why you slither around here then? Slumming it with the untermenschen? If the sentiments are so boorish for your refined intellectualism one must ask why you bother?

              Oh, of course, for all Starkey’s rudeness, the true art of sneer can be guaranteed from you and the rest of the left’s hypocritical snobs.

              • arnoldo87

                As opposed to your fair-mindedness and fact-filled respectful debating style, old bean?

                • Colonel Mustard

                  Just another of your sneering smears. We debated the Vietnam War once and my comments were considerably more fair-minded and fact-filled than yours.

                • arnoldo87

                  Sorry, Colonel. I have never debated the Vietnam War on line with anyone.
                  Are you sure you’ve been hydrated today?

                • Colonel Mustard

                  I’m confusing you with “victor67”. Not hard to do.

                  As you were.

                • arnoldo87

                  Thought not

              • Icebow

                Starkey can be hard to like, even among those who loathe letfies as much as I do, but here he was an intellectual Type 45 destroyer among proud little gunboats.

                • Fergus Pickering

                  Hard to like? I like him.

                • Icebow

                  I didn’t say I didn’t like him. I used to dislike him in an earlier, clued-down, phase, so can I understand how for some he may be a taste that has to be acquired.

          • biggestaspidistra

            Are you implying he’s little, and that in some way contributes to his rudeness, because I think that may be hate speech and they can come after you for that.

          • Fergus Pickering

            Is he little. Seems normal sized to me. Can’t four women cope with one man?

          • Fergus Pickering

            Harman spoke for far longer than Starkey did. And I guess that Williams and Coren spoke for at least as long.

        • UKSteve

          Then you must’ve been watching a different programme. Have another look on iPlayer?

      • UKSteve

        Brilliant.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cayce-Pollard/100002186052296 Cayce Pollard

      Vicky came over as ludicrous. Her claim that impoverished taxpayers (ie, almost all of them, certainly compared to her) were right have paid for her multi-millionaire father’s bus pass ought to be enough to condemn New Labour to electoral invisibility for a generation at least. That’s her vision of the welfare state? Her old man could have bought a bus if he’d wanted one, let alone a bus pass – why the **** was I forced to pay for it?

      Vicky went from private school to Oxbridge to cushy media job sorted by Dad’s mates. It is _absurd_ to have some like her attempting to make any comment about the real world at all. Unless there is some specific reason for wanting a poker player on the panel, the BBC really must be barred from making this sort of person the “fifth” on Question Time. Why not just pick someone at random from the street and ask them to be on the panel – it would be more interesting (and shocking) I imagine to listen to a member of the public than a smug lefty whiner.

      • http://twitter.com/sojomiff mark smith

        Unbelievable rubbish. Victoria Coren was by far the most impressive panelist.
        Outside of this rather peculiar group of views, the overall view is that she wiped the floor from the intolerable, insufferable pantomime clown, Starkey.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cayce-Pollard/100002186052296 Cayce Pollard

          So you agree that taxpayers on the breadline should pay for a bus pass for a multi-millionaire? Or could you perhaps be more specific as to which of her views was “impressive”…

          • Wessex Man

            Grow up, do you seriously think that millionaire OAPs use bus passes. It seems to me that this thread is turning into a NewStateman thread. She’s made a success of her life so you hate her how sad!

            • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cayce-Pollard/100002186052296 Cayce Pollard

              Did you actually watch the show? She _specifically_ said that that her millionaire father used his bus pass. Stop commenting on things you didn’t see, hear or understand.

              • terregles2

                If a few rich people use the bus pass then it is hardly going to bankrupt the country. If her father is a millionaire then presumably he has paid in lots more income tax than the rest of the population.He has therefore paid for his pass many times over, It is not cost effective to means test bus passes. For every rich person who uses a pass there are thousands of housebound who do not use any transport. Many more do not like bus travel. Lots of retired people prefer to use their cars.

                Use of free travel helps to keep the routes open for other passengers. It encourages people out of their homes which helps the local economy when they buy lunches, coffee etc. and use the local shops.

                It is bad for people to sit all day in the house. Being out in the community helps to keep them healthy.
                It seems incredible that greedy bankers who helped bring this country to its’ knees walk away unpunished and some spiteful people in this country take their anger and spite on those who have worked hard and paid tax for over 50 years.
                Sniping over a bus pass how petty!

                • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cayce-Pollard/100002186052296 Cayce Pollard

                  “Sniping over a bus pass how petty!”

                  Sniping? It was the only specific point that Vicky raised in the entire programme, which is why I used it as an example of the welfare state catastrophe that has overtaken the nation. Why have bus passes at all?

                  P.S. To everyone who says that we should raise taxes on people like Vicky in order to pay for bus passes, I say good luck with that. If you put their tax up, they will just hire better accountants. You won’t raise any more money for the exchequer. If you really want Vicky and the others to pay their fair share and help the less well-off to be able to afford a bus pass, then raise the income tax threshold to £25,000 and bring in a land-value tax.

                • terregles2

                  If you want the elderly to give up their bus passes many of them have said they are prepared to do that but only after MP’s have given up some of their perks. Not least their subsidised food and drink at Westminster.The elderly have to pay to susidise the bars in the House of Commons. Imagine having subsidised alcohol in the workplace. Mind you that would explain a lot.

          • terregles2

            Perhaps rather than stopping free bus passes for millionaires we should perhaps just slightly raise the rate of income tax they pay. That might have more of an impact on the taxpayers who struggle on the breadline.,

            • Ron Todd

              Make the rich pay a bit more and we can afford whatever the liberal/socialists want to spend more money on this week. Unfortunately life is not that easy. I am undecided on universal benefits the advantage is they are administratively a lot simpler to run that mean tested benefits the disadvantage is they do give money to those that do not need it. What we do need is a much simpler tax/benefits system

              • terregles2

                I think that most people whatever their political outlook would agree that the benefits system really needs to be changed. Why though do you assume that raising the tax level slighty for the extremely rich would mean that the money would have to be spent on benefits.
                Could we not make them pay a bit more and spend the money on schools or health. They would still be wealthy and it would help our country to get back on its feet.
                You are right many who do not need it do receive benefits but I would include private landlords and some wealthy companies. Tax payer’s money is given to private landlords who are really charging excessive rents.More of our taxes are paid to people who work hard but are paid a poor wage not adequate to live on. In effect tax payers are subsidising comapany profits.
                I would agree let’s chase lazy people back into the workplace but don’t just target them. Let’s get all the scroungers every last one of them and that must include the bankers who stole our money and the politicians who fiddled their expenses. It includes the rich who use creative accounting and it would help the morale of the country if the royal family were seen to be making some sacrifice. We should all be in this together except it appears that the people who did not create the problem are being made to suffer most of the consequences.

        • arnoldo87

          Mark,

          You need to understand that the commenters on this blog represent a right wing constituency whose views are miles away from median opinion. Where else would Starkey gain such support?
          I agree with you. Coren was the star of the show.

          • terregles2

            Coren and indeed the other three women made Starkey look like the pompous, ill mannered, arrogant, rude little man that he is.

            • UKSteve

              Not at all. He outclassed them by miles – as always.

            • Colonel Mustard

              To you and the other lefties.

          • UKSteve

            “…median opinion….” being…..yours?

            • arnoldo87

              No. I’m slightly to the right of that – and a good distance to the left of Starkey and (I guess) you.

              • Colonel Mustard

                Rubbish. You are a notorious lefty and contrarian, active on many blogs under various thinly disguised variants of “arnoldo87”.

                • arnoldo87

                  Notorious, eh?
                  You know more about me than I do, Colonel.

                • Colonel Mustard

                  Yep! The notorious generally never know that they are.

          • Colonel Mustard

            Oh dear. Reinforce your inflated leftist ego by appealing to a fellow traveller and invoking the deceit that you represent a mainstream view rather than a gobby and opinionated urban elite. Coren is a TV performer. She was performing. Everything was said to relish the word play and to provoke with her trademark “final word” certitude of the nanny, which is why she appeals to ghastly leftists like you.

        • Colonel Mustard

          Er, no, she wasn’t. She was performing an act.

          And of course you and the other fellow travellers “outside of this peculiar group of views” would say that wouldn’t you. The great lefty deceit is to promulgate the consensus of their orthodoxy at every opportunity, usually through intellectual snobbery as seen by the lefty interlopers creeping into this thread to pronounce judgement from on high. Only they are enlightened, correct and morally superior. We are not worthy!

          Give me Starkey to pompous twits like you any day.

          • Wessex Man

            I never thought that you Colonel Mustard would be sticking up for this foul mouthed waste of space Starkey. I have been accused of many things in my life but never a “lefty” it me I’m glad that I’m not as liverish as the posters on here.

            Yesa Cayce Pollard, I watched the “show” he was being a particular bore more so than he usually is and he was shut up by Victoria Coran and wary of her for the rest of the show.

            • Colonel Mustard

              In this age of suffocating sanctimony, feminannyism and political dishonesty Starkey is actually a palliative. We have entered an era where the Left effectively hold sway over the narrative and are the only ones allowed to be provocative, outrageous and combative – even though they are essentially reactionary. On QT time and time again one sees panelists of the right on the defensive, under fire and coerced into conforming to the language of their opponents, appeasing, arguing half-heartedly, terrified of ‘giving offence’ with words that fall foul of the left’s lexicon of the ‘unacceptable’.

              Starkey is Napoleon’s ‘whiff of grapeshot’ against the Paris mob. He brings a necessary balance and an honesty to the trendy, urban, metropolitan dinner party of cosy troughers that is the BBC. Long may he continue to do so and for that I shall forgive his discourtesies.

            • Fergus Pickering

              You must have been watching a different show. She was wrong about bus passes. They are not free. We pay the bus companies large sums for them. As Starkey said.

          • Icebow

            I have said before, somewhere, that the more intellectually powerful people of the ‘right’ appear, the more emphatically will the malignant leftists tend to portray them as stupid. I’m not sure that the idea of the ‘right’ (let alone ‘far right’) has much validity, as of course others have noted: the real polarity, one may suspect, is lefties v. normal people. Every personnel dept. in this country needs to be purged of the so-called ‘politically correct’. (Can everyone please always use the quotes?)

            • terregles2

              I know many life long Tory voters who describe Starkey as rude and objectionable. Many right wing people dislike him.

              • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cayce-Pollard/100002186052296 Cayce Pollard

                I think he’s rude and objectionable. But I also think he was right. So what? I’m sure Vicky is a jolly nice person, but she’s still wrong.

                • terregles2

                  In your opinion she is wrong. That is only your opinion perhaps you are wrong.I respect anyone who disagrees with what I say they have a different opinion and I will listen to their point of view. I am not arrogant enough to call them wrong.
                  Their opinion is just different but no less valid than mine. if I listen to what they are saying they might persuade me to look at things from another perspective.
                  i have given the reasons why I think the elderly should have a bus pass. If anyone disagrees they should answer each point that I made with the reason that they disagree not simply say I am wrong.

      • Fergus Pickering

        Was Alan Coren a multi-millionaire. Well done him, if so!

    • Forest Fan

      My missus never watches QT but she did last night. She thought Victoria Coren was a snob and Starkey was a star.

    • Abhay

      He is logical though and not a bad historian at all.

  • Damon

    Somebody finally said it. Brilliany stuff from Starkey.

  • OldSlaughter

    ‘Cos it’s Bangla-bloody-desh’. Very funny.

  • http://ajbrenchley.com/ Swank

    Hear hear with knobs on! Or, put it this way, they have had the sort of ‘struggles’ that others would take on in a heartbeat.

    • Eddie

      Indeed. I once heard a yummy mummy in Twickenham chatting to her equally unwordly friend about what a struggle it was to get a decent cleaner, so thank goodness for all the immigrants who will work for peanuts (and they are very good at cleaning all the stuff for recycling and putting the bags out too – every greenie weenie yummy mummy hypocrite should have a Polish slave for this, y’know, so they don’t have to risk the trauma of breaking a fingernail…)

      • OldSlaughter

        Slaves?

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1296945479 John McClane

          Slavs?

          • OldSlaughter

            I’m sure you know that is the word root.

  • Corporal Jones

    Starkey is a great old Queen who is not afraid to say the unspeakable. Its people like Harperson that needs removing not just from the screen – but from any form of influence in public life. One of the biggest hypocritical loonies you could ever listen to – and her voice is more annoying than the faces she pulls. Whats great about today is that these lefty elites are being found out – and they don’t like it up em!

    • Eddie

      And god save the queen, deary!
      As a gay man he has an advantage in attacking women like Herr Harman and Williams – a straight man would come over a bit aggressive and unchivalrous (always tricky for a man to attack a woman, cf Kinnock and Thatcher).

      • OldSlaughter

        I agree but not about Kinnock and Thatcher. He could have asked her for a fist fight and still not looked capable of bullying her.

        • Eddie

          My point is that we have instincts to protect women (who may be carrying our babies or those of our tribe). Simple evolutionary biology – and why the plods will always automatically believe a devious, lying woman over an innocent man.
          Women politicians use this – they know if a man is as aggressive to them as he is to another male politician in argument, it is the man who looks bad. That makes it tricky for a male politician to attack a woman – cf ‘Calm down, dear’ etc.
          Thatcher was great at picking and choosing when to be equal to a man, and when she wanted to play housewife, or flirt, or come over all ‘I’m a woman’ blah blah blah.

          • Fergus Pickering

            He could be a potential toy-boy beater, couldn’t he?

            • Eddie

              Yes, but I doubt Harman would mind that. She is a big fan of non-anonymity for men accused or raype and other similar offences – which is a disgrace. Why should anyone be identified just because they are arrested on the say-so of some publicity-chasing compo-muncher? Ask Nigel Evans.

    • Eddie

      NB people can watch this again (or some of us for the first time) at 6pm Sunday 5 May on the Parliament Channel.
      Here endeth the public service announcement.

      • Eddie

        How can any poster possibly vote against this informative message? Mad.

        • Eddie

          Just watched this on a recording last night. One thing I noticed immediately: the usual squawking flocking of women ganging up on one man: so hypocrite Harman (who was really ruffled), Williams and the odious spoilt twerp Coren (who seems to think a childcare creche scheme is what starving women in Bangla-bluddy-desh really need coz it would be like so cool yah) ganged up on David Starkey like nasty snide schoolgirls. Very telling.

          Sadly, women always flip into this mode no matter what their age – I have seen lots of this sort of behaviour in the teaching profession, which is over 70% female. Whenever you have a lot of women around, you get this mocking, mobbing form of bullying through ostracising and exclusion – and women are the targets as much as, or more than, men. This is how girls bully. Women beware women!

          Despite the abuse flung at him and the chairman’s bias, Starkey hit home his points in a way none of the women there did. The rank hypocrisy he exposed was clearly something Harman couldn’t deal with – claiming like the liar she is that she made it alone and is some sort of feminist hero (she made it as an MP because she went to private school and her father was a rich surgeon). Ditto for the waste of space called Victoria Coren – without her father’s connections and money, she’d have reached her real level: working in a call centre doing cross-sales.
          Hoorah for David Starkey!

          • http://www.facebook.com/SyG21 Simon Gothard

            Bring back domestic violence!

            • http://twitter.com/Wes_Sexwater Wes Sexwater

              Not funny. Not even ironically. Sorry.

  • Tron

    The look on Harman and Williams faces was priceless.
    Dimbleby immediately tried to shut him up.
    Send in the Clowns!

    • http://www.facebook.com/chris.maslanka.5 Chris Maslanka

      What they said seemed more about self-validation than being about the issues. For essay marks I’d give them borderline fail; and for people with little to say they were allowed to go on for far too long presumably because dear old Dimbumblebee doesn’t really want to resolve any issue. But it was worth having them there just to see their expressions when old Starkey let ’em have it with both barrels. He’s worth it, just for that.

    • http://ajbrenchley.com/ Swank

      That’s what Dimbleby does on the program, isn’t it? Shame: I thought Dimbleby supported free speech, and not just when he’s wearing a pink shirt in the village whence he gets his name.

      • UKSteve

        “In BBC1’s Question Time in May [2009], a
        woman asked if the MP expenses scandal would give a boost to
        “….extremist parties like the BNP?” David Dimbleby asked her “By
        extremist, do you also mean UKIP?” Why? By whose criteria (apart from
        Dimbleby’s) is UKIP considered “extremist”

    • Damon

      And did you catch BBC-dynasty Dimbledy saying, ‘Leave me out of it, talk to the politicians.’ Absolute gold.

  • biggestaspidistra

    Quite right, Rod.

  • thisisGilb

    It’s hardly the point of the century, is it, Rod. The man also made various wildly inaccurate statements, and literally tried to shout people down while they made valid points. The man needs to be removed from my television screen, permanently.

    • anotherjoeblogs

      if you want him removed from YOUR television screen, may I suggest the remote control ? Starkey was entertaining and telly is about that as well as being informative.

      • thisisGilb

        I wasn’t aware I could remove single people from programmes I enjoy, so I’ll endeavour to find out. He wasn’t entertaining, he was obnoxious.

        • anotherjoeblogs

          Well the simple formula is if you think the programme is worth watching , you will have to put up with him. I don’t think you have the absolute right to deny those who do find him entertaining. You could get a friend to edit the programme and snip out the bits when starkey is on, as for him interrupting it may be more difficult.
          By the way, you were angry about him interrupting but you want him off Question Time for your own sake ? sounds a lot worse than interruption.

        • William Jay

          Do as I have just done, 18:30 Friday, Radio 4, News Quiz comes on, my wireless is retuned. (Is there anyone *more* obnoxious than Jeremy Hardy? Well, that Sandy Toksvig certainly gives him a run for his money.)

          • http://twitter.com/LoganDon don logan

            The thing about Sandy Toksvig is that she is without doubt the least funny person on the planet bar none.

            • jjjj

              Toksvig, Brigstocke (his interview in the Independent was shameless), Hardy. All unfunny.

              • Daniel Maris

                Brigstocke at least used to be incredibly fat, which might have been funny at the time.

            • Dicky14

              Chris Addison, Olly from the Thick of it, is fast becoming a contender. To make Mock the Week unwatchable is quite some achievement.

          • Daniel Maris

            It’s just about the direst thing on Radio 4 now.

          • Fergus Pickering

            I don’t mind Sandy Toksvig at all, but Jeremy Hardy is certainly obnoxious.

        • anotherjoeblogs

          x factor might be your cup of tea. try it, some funny buggers on it.

    • Adam

      So much for free speech…

      • thisisGilb

        He spent the majority of the programme trying to interrupt other members of the panel, with coherent arguments such as “You’re wrong” and “No, no, no”. I have no time for him.

        • http://www.facebook.com/chris.maslanka.5 Chris Maslanka

          Not “the majority”; it’s “the major part”; and OK I hear that you don’t like him. But I thought he was spot on, whether we like him or not. You cannot lead your life only hearing your own opinions reflected back to you. You need to hear contrary opinions.

          • rodliddle

            I quite like him, although I greatly disagree with him most of the time. The reaction to him is a bit like mine to your puzzles: if I can’t work it out, I don’t like it.

            • http://ajbrenchley.com/ Swank

              You disagree with Starkey a great deal most of the time? About what? Anne Boleyn’s portrait? Henry’s taste in signet rings?

          • thisisGilb

            ‘A major part’, surely. I did say in my initial comment that what he said regarding the panelists was “hardly the accusation of the century”, i.e. he was correct, but it was an obvious point to make. I don’t have a problem with contrary opinions, but I do have a problem with contrary old pillocks, who themselves cannot take it when people disagree with them

        • Fergus Pickering

          No. I got that.

      • http://www.facebook.com/chris.maslanka.5 Chris Maslanka

        Do you really mean to say that you could have sat through all that irrelevant inconsequential guff without dying of boredom if Starkey hadn’t racked up with his fraud detector?

    • OldSlaughter

      What were the wildly inaccurate statements?

      Which were the valid points he shot down?

    • http://ajbrenchley.com/ Swank

      Again, T, that’s really Dimbleby’s job description, ain’t it? Where’s your indignation at Dimbleby — or any of his favoured guests, for that matter?

    • snozzle123

      Actually he brought quite a few facts with him, more than the others.

    • Eddie

      He has been removed from our TV screens – the BBC has banned him since he told the truth about black people and the moronic whites who ape them, dya get me, blud?
      Why else do you think we have all those goofy femi-academics gurning their way through history programmes these days, which all focus on women, women and women (and maybe some ethnics too) and portray all white men as the devil. Lucy Wobbly, Wendy Beardie, the lot are irritating and patronising and – most importantly – boring.
      Starkey is a star!

      • Colonel Mustard

        There is most definitely a trend on the BBC, even in its drama, to demonise the male as a predatory suspect unless he happens to be David Tenant.

        • terregles2

          Or unless his name is Jimmy Savile or Stuart Hall.

          • Colonel Mustard

            Indeed. Whilst they bombarded with subliminal propaganda demonising the male of the species as predatory and/or dramas showing angst ridden women from Essex shrieking at each other, which have totally changed the ordinary discourse of our society, their own house is very much not in order.

            • terregles2

              Anti male propaganda demonising men is shocking and truly out of control in our society.

              The newspapers are even worse than the BBC. We cannot pick up a paper now without men being demonised as everything from violent rapists and drunkards to thieves bullies and paedophiles.
              It must stop. Let’s ban the programme Crimewatch and stop reporting all trials and their outcomes.
              The sublimial propaganda will be harder to tackle but perhaps the nation’s saviour Farage might have an answer for that.
              The angst ridden women from Essex are truly awful as are all the other soaps. It is though easier to deal with just don’t watch that drivel..

              • Fergus Pickering

                It does appear that rather more men that we thought was the case are paedophiles. I think female paedophiles are fairly thin on the ground.

                • Eddie

                  Not true. Most who hurt children are in the family and if we want to try and prevent that, we should have policies to stop single mother families and step families.

                  Re Stuart hall – he liked women, that’s all.
                  perhaps he fondeld the butttocks of young girls occasionally, but does that really merit destroying an old man’s life? Is that even abuse? Or just compo-chasing from middle aged women who see a pot of gold? What trauma would a fondle cause, really? Not to be recommended, but hardly a life-changing trauma.

                • Fergus Pickering

                  Nine years old! Rather a muslim view of what is a woman and what is a child. If he had fondled my daughter he would have got a punch in the mouth. And what has his age to do with it?

    • UKSteve

      Oh yes. We mustn’t have anyone on the screen you disagree with, must we?

    • Colonel Mustard

      It’s called diversity. I thought you lefties lapped that up.

      Oh, of course, not when it dissents from your orthodoxy. Then it must be removed – as in censorship, gulags and re-education camps.

    • http://www.facebook.com/ralf.janssen.52 Ralf Janssen

      I’m not British, but I have glanced at this programme and three minutes is all I can bear. Usually there isn’t much debate, just people you like to see on television making ‘valid points’ to each other. Such entitlement! Some people question their validity, otherwise there wouldn’t be much to debate. I certainly didn’t hear any valid points in this clip. All I concluded from the sobbing were the usual feminist lies: the one about unequal pay, the one about feminist legislation meant to support the family in stead of destroying it. That Starkey fellow was correct in an apparently not too obvious way for the other panelists, one of them recommended –if I’ve been reading Rod Liddle’s previous writings correctly- to be the next PM. Furthermore, he seemed remarkably restrained in such a hostile environment. You don’t have a problem with contrary opinions, just with the people who hold them.

      • terregles2

        The Equal pay act for women was passed in the UK in 1970 and was implemented in 1975 did someone say differently on QT.?

    • Fergus Pickering

      You can tremove him from your television screen any time you like. He stays on mine.

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here