Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

GB News: a thread so you never have to watch it

The Comrades from GBNews have torn a sheet off of George Galloway's bog roll and are organising a "Celebration of Dysentery" at the Emanuelle Centre in Westminster. They promise: celebrities, probably Lady Colin Campbell, Doctors, and a blessing from the Cosplay Vicar.

It will only set you back £20 which is cheaper than a trip to the London Dungeons

 
Bridgen gone full on loon since losing the whip. His Twitter is just a stream of anti-vaccine loonery.
Well, until you go back to April 2021...

vs6BbSf.png


twitter link
 
Yeah recently he bridled at being called an anti-vaxxer and says he's had two doses of the AZ vaccine.

Wonder what happened between then and now? Did his wife leave him or something?
 
Yeah recently he bridled at being called an anti-vaxxer and says he's had two doses of the AZ vaccine.

Wonder what happened between then and now? Did his wife leave him or something?

His stance is that it's the mRNA vaccines that are dangerous. Because he's an ignorant fuckwit and it's new* "ooh sounds like gene editing". The statistics are (I think? I'm a bit out of date) clear that the more "traditional" AZ adenovirus-vectored vaccines have higher levels of the kinds of cardiovascular secondary effects than the mRNA ones. But why let facts get in the way eh? I expect that (because DNA/RNA link and a (very very) little knowledge being a dangerous thing) he'll be going on about how they cause cancers and rewrite your immune system or something similar soon.

* 20+ years in development mind, but that probably doesn't count. See "fuckwit" above.
 
His stance is that it's the mRNA vaccines that are dangerous. Because he's an ignorant fuckwit and it's new* "ooh sounds like gene editing". The statistics are (I think? I'm a bit out of date) clear that the more "traditional" AZ adenovirus-vectored vaccines have higher levels of the kinds of cardiovascular secondary effects than the mRNA ones. But why let facts get in the way eh? I expect that (because DNA/RNA link and a (very very) little knowledge being a dangerous thing) he'll be going on about how they cause cancers and rewrite your immune system or something similar soon.

* 20+ years in development mind, but that probably doesn't count. See "fuckwit" above.

Naive take here, but I would have thought the AZ vaccine would be considered more “scary” than a vaccine which just contains direct instructions for ribosome translation without any transcription involvement or the imported DNA getting into the cell nucleus. :confused:
 
Naive take here, but I would have thought the AZ vaccine would be considered more “scary” than a vaccine which just contains direct instructions for ribosome translation without any transcription involvement or the imported DNA getting into the cell nucleus. :confused:

It might be, with a little bit more knowledge that these people don't have. It's partly the name - mRNA sounds genetic-engineeringy - perhaps if they called the AZ one a "cellular nucleus hijack vaccine" it could have gained more traction with the loons.
 
Christopher Chope needs the fucking chop. Class A cunt and has been for decades.
He was arguing that people with a second home should not have to pay Council Tax on them the other day in the House. Double taxation he said.
I wonder if they will have some celebratory Up-Skirting (another of his favourite topics in the House).
 
Yeah recently he bridled at being called an anti-vaxxer and says he's had two doses of the AZ vaccine.

Wonder what happened between then and now? Did his wife leave him or something?

He lost a court case against his brother, in April, and the judge called him a liar. Earlier this month he was suspended from parliament for taking bungs.
 
Last edited:
A fair bit to unpack here.


GB News has entered the new year with a new plan: cut costs, hire more major talent, get off an advertising blacklist – and force all producers and presenters to take training workshops brushing up on “the law and Ofcom”.

The controversy-prone, right-leaning TV channel, which has spent a turbulent first 18 months weathering on and off-air turmoil and trying to shake a reputation as the “British Fox News”, is apparently ready to grow up.

Alan McCormick, the GB News chairman, is aiming to make the operation more “disciplined” and none of the approximately 200 editorial staff will be exempt.

Translation - it's not going very well, we're in the shit and need to get out of it.

In a new year missive to staff outlining the priorities for the business in 2023, seen by the Guardian, McCormick said the first step will be a training schedule designed to help GB News avoid repeatedly falling foul of the media regulator Ofcom’s broadcasting code.

“This will ensure every producer and presenter has the most sophisticated knowledge at their fingertips,” McCormick said. “Initial workshops, on the law and Ofcom, are vital for all with no exceptions. Education is always a great investment.”

In its self-proclaimed mission to be an insurgent force and alternative to mainstream media, the channel continues to blunder into image-tarnishing controversies in the way its presenters and guests handle topics including culture war issues, anti-vaccine conspiracies and, most recently, antisemitism.

Only now, after 18 months, are they introducing training. :facepalm: And, if you employ loons, they are bound to 'blunder into image-tarnishing controversies.' :facepalm:

Ofcom launched 28 investigations into GB News output last year, finding 17 breaches of the UK broadcasting code, and it currently has two cases open relating to the presenter Mark Steyn’s show, which has repeatedly raised doubts over Covid vaccine safety.

I didn't realise they had 17 complaints upheld so far, come on OFCOM, time to revoke their broadcasting licence.
 
The Comrades from GBNews have torn a sheet off of George Galloway's bog roll and are organising a "Celebration of Dysentery" at the Emanuelle Centre in Westminster. They promise: celebrities, probably Lady Colin Campbell, Doctors, and a blessing from the Cosplay Vicar.

It will only set you back £20 which is cheaper than a trip to the London Dungeons


I knew the cosplay priest was on one but I didn't realize James Delingpole had gone down the rabbit hole with him. Always was a complete fuckwit long before the rona came to visit.
 
I knew the cosplay priest was on one but I didn't realize James Delingpole had gone down the rabbit hole with him. Always was a complete fuckwit long before the rona came to visit.

Is he an actual priest?
I’m not sure about the rules re: that sort of thing but I’m sure there are churches in America who will ordain anyone for a few bob.
 
Is he an actual priest?
I’m not sure about the rules re: that sort of thing but I’m sure there are churches in America who will ordain anyone for a few bob.

The CoE wouldn't have him, so he joined the 'Free Church of England', looks like they have 17 churches in England.


Calvin John Robinson (born 29 October 1985) is a British political commentator, broadcaster, and clergyman who is a deacon in the Free Church of England (FCoE). Previously, Robinson had worked as a secondary school teacher and became a video games journalist. From 2020 to 2022, he was a minister in training for the Church of England, but was refused ordination, prompting him to join the FCoE.

WIKI link
 
Is he an actual priest?
I’m not sure about the rules re: that sort of thing but I’m sure there are churches in America who will ordain anyone for a few bob.


He's not a priest yet. He's still a deacon which is the next rank down. He was Trained in the C of E, but they decided not to ordain him. However, the "Free Church of England" which split from the main lot in the 19th Century had fewer qualms took him into their fold.
 
He's not a priest yet. He's still a deacon which is the next rank down. He was Trained in the C of E, but they decided not to ordain him. However, the "Free Church of England" which split from the main lot in the 19th Century had fewer qualms took him into their fold.

A couple of articles I saw seemed to be saying that they refused to ordain him because he didn't agree that the CoE was institutionally racist.
Which seems a weird state of affairs all round.
 
Wonder what you have to do to complete your vicar training and then be told you're not suitable.

(Edit: cross post)
 
Is that just his version of events though?
It is, but probably not far from the truth. His media profile probably did for him. Here's a Church Times article on the issue

Richard Kirker is an example, from the late 1970s of someone who made it to being a deacon but wasn't priested, in his case because of his gay rights campaigning

 
Is that just his version of events though?

It doesn't look like it (he mentions being "conservative" and a "traditionalist" being factors - obv that could cover a multitude of things - it reads to me like journalists' interpretation).
The CoE itself seems quite tight-lipped on the matter.
I haven't looked at loads of stuff on it tbf - just a few links.
 
I've gone down slightly more of a rabbit-hole than I should've.

It looks like:

1) Before the stage of offering him a job, the bishops become aware that he is an attention-seeking loon active on Twitter and likely to be a liability (I guess they probably do social media screening). There isn't evidence that this makes them want to block his ordination, although you can see why it might do. But they're not supposed to block him for political views, which might make it tricky to act.

2) He has helped them out though, by making it clear he will only accept jobs in London diocese and at GAFCON member churches. GAFCON being a conservative, evangelical, secessionist church organisation. I haven't been able to find out how many CofE churches in London fit this bill, but it seems like there are not many GAFCON chuches in the UK and they are mostly independent of the CofE. The church he ends up being considered for is Anglo-Catholic and not a GAFCON member, but is opposed to women being ordained (something CR is also opposed to). So, it seems likely that he redistricted himself to a choice of zero churches, but is being considered for the closest thing they can find.

3) So, the bishops don't actually need to block him, they just need him to be found unsuitable for this particular parish.

4) His position of denying that any sort of systemic racism exists seems to be a particular sticking-point, and it's perhaps not hard to make the case that it makes him unsuited to a central London parish with a mixed-ethnicity congregation. So, reading between the lines, maybe that's what they did. Although, maybe that's an inevitable thing to conclude regardless of whether the were also concerned about his Twitter account.
 
Back
Top Bottom