Laura Kuenssberg’s response to BBC Question Time’s Leaders’ Debate was extraordinary. Because she completely made up a story about the debate in an apparent attempt to prove her point.
Her point, of course, was to suggest Jeremy Corbyn struggled in the debate. Whereas Theresa May’s performance marked the start of her campaign’s recovery, after “a bumpy few days”. But that point is as much fiction as the story she made up to prove it.
Kuenssberg reported that the audience “pressed” both leaders in their “areas of vulnerability” on the Question Time special on 2 June. They pushed May on domestic issues. Particularly, on the cuts in the NHS, social care, education and more.
In contrast, Kuenssberg said, the audience confronted Corbyn on security issues, like the use of nuclear weapons. The BBC’s Political Editor said Corbyn’s “unwillingness to use weapons if Britain was under attack” didn’t go down well with the audience. This interpretation is, however, untrue. Corbyn did not say he wouldn’t use nuclear weapons. He said there would be “no first use” of them, meaning he wouldn’t start a nuclear war. Also, he said, in terms of a retaliatory attack, he would “decide in the circumstances at the time”.
Kuenssberg then concluded that while May seemed more on the “front foot” in the programme, Corbyn’s experience was less positive:
In contrast, Jeremy Corbyn who had been lapping up the political attention, and setting much of the momentum, seemed almost irritated by the end.
The “irritation” Kuenssberg speaks of didn’t exist. In fact, when presenter David Dimbleby told Corbyn it was the end of his Q&A session, he smiled and said:
But I’ve got so much more to say!
And he received applause and cheers for his contribution.
Importantly, Corbyn’s refusal to use nuclear weapons in a first strike capacity is something that should give us all more security. And this is shown in what would happen in the event of a nuclear tit-for-tat war.
In April, Defence Secretary Michael Fallon broke with UK convention and said he would not hesitate to fire nuclear weapons in a first strike. As a minister who has also increased the chances of a nuclear confrontation with Russia, The Canary looked into what would happen should Fallon act on his first strike rhetoric and carry out a Trident nuclear strike on that country. Here’s what we found:
There’s limited information about Trident’s force. But commentators say that today’s nuclear weapons are around seven to eight times more powerful than the atomic bomb the US used on Hiroshima in 1945. That bomb killed 140,000 people. And Trident can allegedly travel up to 7,500 miles. So it could reach Russia and kill masses of civilians.
But Russia… has 7,000 nuclear warheads; of which 4,500 are either deployed or stockpiled. That’s around 33 times more warheads than the UK has. And Russia’s weapons will be just as powerful, if not more so. Take the Satan 2 missile as an example. It can allegedly carry up to a dozen warheads and level an area the size of the UK in one hit. The UK has a population of around 65 million people.
And if that sort of nuclear conflict kicked off, the US would surely join the fray, with its 6,800 warheads. The US has just over 4,000 of these deployed or stockpiled.
This would be a global catastrophe.
The very real threat of a nuclear war commencing between the world’s larger nuclear powers, and the destruction that would bring, is why the audience gave one particular commentator the biggest applause of the night:
— Ian Fraser (@Ian_Fraser) June 2, 2017
The BBC‘s round-up of audience members who ‘stole the show’ listed this woman’s comment last. But that’s more a reflection on the BBC than the country at large. Because most people surely don’t want the catastrophe detailed here to play out. And now they have a politician standing for Prime Minster who’s determined to avoid a conflict that could see the UK lying at the bottom of the Atlantic ocean.
If that’s not an option people want, then we’re in a desperate place indeed.
Watch Corbyn’s full appearance here:
– Get out and vote on 8 June!
– Read more Canary articles on the general election.
Featured image via YouTube
We need your help to keep speaking the truth
Every story that you have come to us with; each injustice you have asked us to investigate; every campaign we have fought; each of your unheard voices we amplified; we do this for you. We are making a difference on your behalf.
Our fight is your fight. You’ve supported our collective struggle every time you gave us a like; and every time you shared our work across social media. Now we need you to support us with a monthly donation.
We have published nearly 2,000 articles and over 50 films in 2021. And we want to do this and more in 2022 but we don’t have enough money to go on at this pace. So, if you value our work and want us to continue then please join us and be part of The Canary family.
In return, you get:
* Advert free reading experience
* Quarterly group video call with the Editor-in-Chief
* Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
* 20% discount in our shop
Almost all of our spending goes to the people who make The Canary’s content. So your contribution directly supports our writers and enables us to continue to do what we do: speaking truth, powered by you. We have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence our vital opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right-wing mainstream media.
With your help we can continue:
* Holding political and state power to account
* Advocating for the people the system marginalises
* Being a media outlet that upholds the highest standards
* Campaigning on the issues others won’t
* Putting your lives central to everything we do
We are a drop of truth in an ocean of deceit. But we can’t do this without your support. So please, can you help us continue the fight?