28 6 mins 11 yrs

Copying almost verbatim from the thoughts, not of Chairman Mao, but another who thinks he is better and more worthy than just about anyone else; Andrew Marr. I give you slices of the wisdom of the BBC commentator and ‘journalist’

“Teachers are the most effective anti-racist campaigners in the country, this means more than education in other religions, it means a form of political  education. Only people who understand the economic forces changing their world, threatening them… have a chance of being immune to the old tribal chants.

And the final answer, frankly, is the vigorous use of state power to coerce and repress…

I firmly believe that repression can be a great, civilising instrument for good.

Stamp hard on certain ‘natural’ beliefs for long enough and you can almost kill them off…

A new Race Relations Act will impose the will of the state on millions of other lives too.”

The Head of the Church in England and Wales, which has been mercifully on the sidelines of this story, says that what’s happened is “shameful”; that abuse was
not deliberately covered up. Archbishop Vincent Nichols is with me now. Good morning, Archbishop.

ARCHBISHOP NICHOLS: Good morning to you.

ANDREW MARR: I know you’re off to conduct Palm Sunday Mass shortly. Can I ask you about the persistent allegations and fears that the Pope in his previous job as Head of the Congregation of the Faith was involved in these cover-ups; that there was a strong desire in the church, as somebody put it, not to wash our dirty linen in public?

ARCHBISHOP NICHOLS: Well as far as the role of Cardinal Ratzinger’s concerned, he was not involved in any cover-up. The case of the priest from America, for example, had already been reported to the police in 1975, and it was over 20 years, 25 years before it came to the attention of the Holy See. Because the role of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is to oversee the canonical legal procedures, not …

ANDREW MARR:  I understand. The Head of the Church in Ireland, Cardinal Brady, was there when children who had been abused or people who’d been abused were sworn to secrecy. Do you think his position is now untenable?

ARCHBISHOP NICHOLS: But again, it has to be understood. You know the media has a very proper role in invigilating, in looking at what’s going on and bringing things to the surface, and I totally accept that role of the media. But the media also needs to be a bit more attentive to detail, so the secrecy that is concerning … that’s around the cardinal in Ireland was the secrecy for the process of a trial. It’s like giving victims anonymity in the course of a trial. Now they think …

ANDREW MARR: (over) But they then have to swear secrecy forever after …


ANDREW MARR: … which is quite something if you’ve been the victim of something like this.

Andrew Marr:—-I found this, from June 3, 1940, by the American journalist H L Mencken: “The function of a newspaper in a democracy is to stand as a sort of chronic opposition to the reigning quacks. The minute it begins to out-whoopthem it forfeits its character and becomes ridiculous.”

Marr on bloggers as “inadequate, pimpled and single”, and citizen journalism as the “spewings and rantings of very drunk people late at night”.

When asked for the secret of being a good reporter, number one rated political reporter Andrew Marr told Press Gazette: “I think as with any kind of journalism, curiosity is essential. You also need a basic fair-mindedness. You have to accept that most of the people in the political game have mixed motives but part of their motives are good ones and they do want to make the world better, whether they are on the right, centre or left.

Andrew the Good:-  “A good journalist treats the business of politics, if not everything that happens in politics, with a certain amount of respect – which I try to do.”

Andrew Marr this morning:- “I did not come into journalism to go around gagging journalists. Am I embarrassed by it? Yes. Am I uneasy about it? Yes.” But he added: “I also had my own family to think about, and I believed this story was nobody else’s business. I still believe there was, under those circumstances, no public interest in it.”

But Mr Marr added that the use of injunctions seemed to be “running out of control”. He said: “There is a case for privacy in a limited number of difficult situations, but then you have to move on. They shouldn’t be forever and a proper sense of proportion is required.”

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

28 thoughts on “The Thoughts of Chairman Andrew!

  1. Ah, the headline led me to think it was another Andrew.

    But I guess we won’t be hearing from him until after 5 May 😉

  2. Two dudes can have a “civil ceremony”.

    Shariah law can be practised

    Crime rates are soaring.

    Police are being made redundent


    The public mustn’t know who Andrew, the two-bit journalist is BANGING.

    Anyone care for an educated guess?

    No one choose Susan Boyle……cause I got her!

  3. I don’t see why newspaper should report extra-marital affairs. It’s not news unless the person involved was a public advocate of fidelity. I don’t see why footballers and actors should have their privacy invaded. I don’t see where the public interest is in having their private indiscretions blazed across the headlines of the gutter press.

  4. Crime rates soaring?

    But your murder rates have remained very low compared to the NRA-occupied USA.

    ( They fell further since 2009, when this article was written )

    Your burglary and other crime rate is disgracefully high, but I’d rather be burgled in Birmingham than murdered in Memphis.

  5. This is priceless. For Mike, Andrew Marr is a ‘journalist’. For Eddie he’s a “two-bit journalist”.

    Like him or loathe him, this is what Wikipedia tells us about Mr Marr’s recognition as a journalist (sans inverted commas):

    In 1995 he was named Columnist of the Year at both the What the Papers Say Awards and the British Press Awards, and received the Journalist Award in the Channel 4 Political Awards of 2001.

    He was considered for honorary membership of The Coterie for 2007. Marr has received two British Academy Television Awards: the Richard Dimbleby Award at the 2004 ceremony and the award for Best Specialist Factual Programme (for his History of Modern Britain) at the 2008 ceremony.

    So a little respect might be due from Marr’s inferiors 😉

  6. Eddie –

    No need to guess at who the disgusting Marr was sleeping with. Guido spilled the beans three years ago:

    A Story You Won’t Get from the BBC, Guardian or The TimesThe Secret of Three of Westminster’s Media Gate-keepers

    Hilariously, Marr was stumping up for years for a child which isn’t his. There are rumours about who the biological father is. Given that the strumpet at the centre of it all is a political groupie he’ll be a household name.

  7. Henry94 –

    I don’t see why newspaper should report extra-marital affairs.

    Well, if we’re talking politicians then yes, I want every part of their lives pulled apart, picked over and examined. They do it to us, they should have no protection back from civil society, none at all.

    If we’re talking celebs, well there’s a market for it. Too many live their lives vicariously through the dull doings of dull celebrities. But should papers be able to report on affairs? The alternative to “yes” is “no”, and that’s not a road down which we want to go.

  8. Modest Proposal

    Papers should report largely as they do today, but when I take power, I will impose a death penalty for the paparazzi who stalk and jump out of bushes. I don’t care if ” celebrities ” are in the public eye – if they don’t want to put up with that, they should not have to.

    Hang ’em from the tallest tree in Hyde Park.

  9. If the pompous pious ass Marr, can afford to takeout a super injunction then we the license payer are paying this pompous pious ass too much money. Off with his head, sack the ass.

  10. quote:-

    Mr Marr told the Daily Mail that he took out the super-injunction to protect his family’s privacy but says he will not pursue it any further.

    The unnamed woman is understood to be considering taking out her own High Court super-injunction to protect the privacy of her own family and her guide dog.

  11. The real point of all this is not about whether we can be informed of the sexual affairs of celebrities but the much more serious issue of the freedom to report news. The freedom of the press to investigate and report events (from the trivial to the most serious) should not be in the gift of an unelected unaccountable judge. It should not be up to one man or several within the closed ranks of the judiciary to decide what the population should be allowed to know. The law should enshrine the freedom of the press with very narrow and very specific exceptions for example to do with natuional security, criminal witness protection or protection of victims of sexual crime. It should not be at the whim of a judge to grant injunctions as he or she sees fit. Stories about who has slept with whom may be trivial and not vital for the public to know, but the freedom to report them – provided the story is accurate and factual is part of the price of maintaining and defending a genuine free press in a democratic society.

  12. Henry , if they do not wish to appear in print , these celebs must not commit indiscretions that might land them there .

  13. “Hilariously, Marr was stumping up for years for a child which isn’t his. There are rumours about who the biological father is. Given that the strumpet at the centre of it all is a political groupie he’ll be a household name.”


    So to speak.

  14. Colm –

    Broadly, yes.

    However, the law is not being made in these cases by judges, it has been passed by Parliament. It’s this Human Rights Act which nasty old reactionaries warned against. It guarantees a right to privacy. That’s the law, judges are merely working out how it applies in specific cases as it arises.

    Of course, our fusty old common law managed these things quite nicely, but then it’s been our supreme law since Saxon times. We had alot of time to finagle and diddle with these things as we moved along.

    So what we have now is codified law in the form of the HRA, the alien Code Napoleon imposed on our Saxon way of doing things and it doesn;t fit. Will the ruling class do away with the HRA or the privacy aspect? Not a chance.

    French privacy laws, which feed in here, have for so long and so well protected politicians they are the country’s greatest criminals. Our ruling class would kill to have those protections (then block any report of the killing).

    Well, screw’em.

  15. Pete

    Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t believe the HRA does have a specific part guaranteeing the right to privacy. I believe the clause being used in these cases is one pertaining to the ‘right to respect for a private and family life’ which was meant to ensure the State did not interfer or block individuals freedoms to form relationships and families. It’s not the same thing as the French law on ownership of private information, but Judges have increasingly attempted to turn it into just that.

    I agree with you about the HRA. It is a law that had good intentions – to stop a repeat of the Nazis gross abuse of power – but has instead become much more of a charter for petty demands, unjustifiable ‘rights’ and avoidance of responsibilities and consequences.

  16. Colm –

    Yes, it’s the clause about a right to a private and family life in the HRA. Judges now are figuring out how to apply the law in specific cases which arise, but it’s the law as passed by the legislature, not a case of activist judges making it all up.

  17. pinky – That information cannot be released under a superinjunction granted to Mr McCann by Judge Vance. If and when Mr McCann returns and the injunction is lifted, I’m sure we will all hear about it in Andrew’s inimicable style 😉

  18. I should declare an interest. Rumour has it that a Man Utd player may be one of those involved and at this vital point in the season such distractions are most unwelcome. Anytime in June would be fine.

  19. English Common Law also gave you some of the worst libel laws on the planet and the disgusting practice of ” libel tourism ” to the London courts.

    Common law, like any constitution, should be praised only when it is good and fair, and should be changed when it is not.

  20. Wikipedia is open to editing and it is known that the BBC ‘monitors’ Wiki very closely, almost as censorship. So I’d reckon that Marr is the kind of guy who would eulogise himself and you are the kind of guy who would go along with it.

  21. Allan,

    I quote Wikipedia because it’s readily accessible. If you wish to check those awards then I urge you to do so.

    Wiki is monitored by a great many people, thus increasing its accuracy.

    “I’d reckon that Marr is the kind of guy who would eulogise himself and you are the kind of guy who would go along with it.”

    Reckon away. It’s uncanny how you know what kind of guy I am. Are you by chance the seventh son of a seventh son?

    I was going to suggest that there appears to be an awful lot of penis-envy on display here, but thought twice about it on seeing that Colm is in the ‘hood 🙂

  22. Yep

    Wikipedia should not be seen as conclusive proof of any matter, but I’ve read sections very closely on subjects that I know well, and I’ve for the most part found them to be fair and accurate

    Anyone who posts inaccurate information doesn’t get to stay as an editor.

    So, Allan, best to dispute the point at issue, rather than the messenger?

  23. RB,

    I have to say I agree with you, (no don’t faint, it is but a temorary aberration).

    The man is no fool, a hypocrite – most definitely. That he is often taken ‘out-of-context’, does not do him justice, the quotes above in red are a good example. There is nothing written there that we really disagree with, – we all know that people can be bullied into all manner of weird behaviour, – that he thinks it a good thing is another matter, that is the part we can disagree with, but after all, he is a socialist ‘through and through’, and we all know they prefer dictate to educate!

  24. Yes, I wondered where A McC had got to. I hope he’s OK and just taking a rest from writing on here for the time being. His posts were always interesting and well written, whether you agreed with his opinions or not. But, as Andrew often wrote in a way which took no prisoners, so to speak, I’m thinking, Perhaps DV asked him to ‘keep a low profile’ pending his (DV’s) election campaign?

  25. Phantom – in the fields of applied sciences and related subjects, Wikipedia is truly excellent. In areas of contention such as ‘global warming’, it has been corrupted as had been shown in a recent case of one of the custodians having been caught smearing scientists who disagree with the ‘consensus’.

    Over at Biased BBC, there are threads which revealed the extent to which the BBC goes to control its image and that of its staff on Wikipedia. DV will be able to point you in that direction.

Comments are closed.