« Previous | Main | Next »

PM Glass Box for Wednesday

Sequin | 16:00 UK time, Wednesday, 25 November 2009

LEAVES.JPG

Would you like to tell us what you thought of tonight's programme? Eloise Twisk is editing and she will look through your comments after we've had our post-PM meeting at 6pm.

Comments

  • 1. At 4:59pm on 25 Nov 2009, U14138029 wrote:

    Very good, so far.

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 5:03pm on 25 Nov 2009, Sid wrote:

    And getting better.

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 5:13pm on 25 Nov 2009, Sid wrote:

    'You could almost see them imperceptibly squirming'?

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 5:22pm on 25 Nov 2009, Sid wrote:

    Cameron, Gove & Osborne - do you really want them running the country?

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 5:26pm on 25 Nov 2009, funnyJoedunn wrote:

    The banks won because they held the government to ransom by letting the threat be known that they would intend to make up the money by charging for cash machine withdrawals. Think of all the millions of people who have benefits (without choice) paid into bank accounts and how government would have had to compensate them for by having to pay their charges to receive their benefits. Banks have indicated that they are not charities. However, they are quite prepared to take charitable donations from our government. They also cite, people should be more responsible with their accounts...laugh...I nearly dropped mi trousers.

    The second reason they won is...I just don't trust the supreme court on this. Why don't any of these people in these incredible positions of power ever talk with a broad scouse or black country dialects...or any kind of dialect come to that? No...not for me mate.

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 5:28pm on 25 Nov 2009, newlach wrote:

    Deeply disturbing to hear that a school with links to an extreme islamist organisation received substantial public funds. These allegations first surfaced in a newspaper over two years ago, so it would be interesting to know the extent and nature of the links at the time the funding was first granted.

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 5:42pm on 25 Nov 2009, Jonathan Morse wrote:

    Channel 4 had a programme in its Despatches series when it accused the Tories of receiving lots of money and support from 'Conservative Friends of Israel' which seemed to have access to the Tory leadership and influence over policy. This 'extremist Islamic group' probably isn't a fan of the Israeli treatment of the Lebanon and the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories so will have earned the anger of this group.

    Gove didn't seem to be sure of his facts, as if he was acting for someone else rather than following research he'd done himself. I think CFI have put in a lot of money to the Tories and this is what they get in return. Choice over questions asked at PMQ's - a lot of power.

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 5:47pm on 25 Nov 2009, Jonathan Morse wrote:

    Why does it have to be the 'Supreme Court'? - Bring back the Law Lords! (I know that they're probably the same people)

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 5:51pm on 25 Nov 2009, Kathleen wrote:

    It was good to hear from some children's guardians, but I wish you hadn't given the last word to the disingenuous manager! Guardians are being put under immense pressure at the moment, and the bullying management style that Cafcass has decided to adopt is an embarrassment - and far from conducive to doing good quality work. The idea that guardians are deciding not even to meet with the children they are supposed to represent because they are trying not to be intrusive is laughable! Or it would be if wasn't failing children and their families so badly.

    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 6:01pm on 25 Nov 2009, Sid wrote:

    newlach @ 6

    You wouldn't have been quite so disturbed if you'd listened to the whole item.

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 6:04pm on 25 Nov 2009, needsanewnickname wrote:

    Just to say hello to Sequin.

    And to express my utter confusion as to how the bank charge issue can go from court to court as a maybe until one says - no. What is the ultimate court?

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 6:11pm on 25 Nov 2009, Lady_Sue wrote:

    Good job Sequin.

    Frances: they could have a referendum...

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 6:23pm on 25 Nov 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Driving home, I heard a piece of scare-mongering by Cameron and a Tory spokesman (was it Gove?) about some Islamic schools. Sounded like some early electioneering by the Tories – are they making a play for BNP voters? Claims of ‘extremism’ and ‘radicals,’ were made many times in your piece – but you didn’t clarify what the Tories meant. Did they mean these schools had connections with orthodox Muslims? Did they mean these schools taught Islamic history? Did they mean the schools teach Islam according to Islamic principles? What’s wrong with that? You should have challenged the Tory speaker to define what he meant by Islamic extremism, I suspect he was relying on people making connections with ‘Terror.’

    Complain about this comment

  • 14. At 6:27pm on 25 Nov 2009, DoctorDolots wrote:

    There wouldn't be an issue if no Islamic schools received funding from the taxpayer. And that should be applied to all religious brainwashers. Children should be taught facts and truth, not beliefs and faith.

    How are Muslim kids ever going to integrate if they aren't part of mainstream education?



    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 6:29pm on 25 Nov 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    #11 Frances O,

    I agree - this issue just needs to be resolved once and for all. It seems to bump from court to court, with no signs of a conclusion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 7:06pm on 25 Nov 2009, Jonathan Morse wrote:

    I think the Court of Appeal should be scrapped - it always get it wrong.

    It may be that Court of Appeal judges know there's a higher court so they explore their predujices rather than the Law.

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 7:07pm on 25 Nov 2009, Sid wrote:

    R_SM - yes, it was Gove. And it was Tory scare-mongering of the most insidious kind.

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 7:10pm on 25 Nov 2009, Steve Tonks wrote:

    While I sympathize entirely with an actor getting annoyed with mobile phone use, I would like to comment further on the effects of mobile phone use on the audience. I recently visited the cinema and during the performance the lady next to me, while having the sound switched off insisted on texting at various times during the show. While not making a sound, the light on the phone came on every time she received a message and stayed on while she answered it, considerably spoiling my enjoyment. This only affected me and went unnoticed by everyone around me and certainly went unnoticed by the cinema staff. At my request the lady eventually turned it off. Only when a complete ban on mobile phones in cinemas and theaters is in place, will the actors and the audience be completely free to enjoy the entertainment free of interruption!

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 7:12pm on 25 Nov 2009, Richard Bramley wrote:

    hi there,
    I was very concerned to hear that PM considers the Spanish radio station intereconomia a credible source of information (you interviewed someone for them during your piece about bank charges in Spain). Within Spain this station is known for its extreme right wing views and its dubious journalism which includes false reporting and the harassment of fellow journalists. While the interview with them was not for long I feel that you should have seeked out a more "mainstream" source and not given succor to a radio station that promotes an extremely unpleasant agenda.

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 7:45pm on 25 Nov 2009, GotToTheEnd wrote:

    Grat anti-Tory stuff! That's what their own rhetoric is!

    Hooray!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 09:46am on 26 Nov 2009, davmcn wrote:

    Sid 4, Or a third party that accepts £2.4 million of dirty money?

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 11:39am on 26 Nov 2009, GotToTheEnd wrote:

    When ALL ELSE FAILS, I think Blair should be asked the following:

    Isn't it the case that you knew the truth about WMD or at least strongly suspected it, but deliberately gave the opposite impression to the British public and Parliament, and that this impression was created by you using your rhetorical and legal skills to create that impression whilst absolutely, absolutely strictly, not telling lies.

    Plus, I'd like to know

    Did you abandon the 45 minutes stuff after it was pointed out on Any Answers that Bomber Harris had used the phrase, in the 1920's, to describe his capacity to destroy Iraqi villages, and that it was a common phrase since, used by the Iraqis to describe British iniquity in Iraq.


    And then

    Were you surprised by Colin Powell's travelling poison labs UN presentation? Did you believe it or were you and the US mutually transparent in these fairy stories?

    My wife's office is to re-locate. The move is imminent. It's to be in late June or July. Even so, did you really think that 'Threats are imminent' would wash? No matter how you thought you could concertina time?

    Did you believe the Brtish people knew you were spinning webs of deceit, and, despite the usual anti-war niceites and the usual self protective 'Not in our name' opinion poll findings, that they wanted war no matter what it did for the government reputation?

    With the Tories in the loop wrt to all documents, did you think they were conniving with you (openly in secret?) in going to war any way you could? Did you ever think they ever believed the WMD fantasies?

    Did the mildness of the anti-war demos encourage you (cf Vietnam of your youth)?

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.