Peter Cunningham writes: “The following article on BBC online “US abortion rights in the balance?” ends with the sentence “And for many women with unwanted pregnancies in that southern state, little would change.” It is interesting that the author choose not to use the equivalent, “And for many unborn babies in California, little would change – they would continue to be killed.”
Ritter pointed out this Newswatch article on the higher coverage of the white-on-black murder of Anthony Walker compared to the coverage of the black-on-white murder of Richard Whelan, the asian-on-white murder of Christopher Yates, or various other killings. Ritter writes, “I agree with the editors laying out of the facts in terms of how these horrific murders are covered by the BBC. I don’t agree with his conclusion though. One horrific murder is not much more newsworthy than another simply because it is classed as ‘racist’. But at the BBC, this fact is all important.”
Another correspondent pointed out this story: Gaza gang seizes lion in zoo raid. She writes, “This is an item about how a “mafia-style gang” may be holding a lion-cub and two ‘Arabic-speaking parrots’ – fine as far as it goes. She adds:
But please note the following:
“The BBC’s Alan Johnston in Gaza says human abductions in the Gaza Strip usually end with the victim being freed quite quickly and unharmed”.
There is something soooooooo nauseatingly mild and reassuring about this. It’s saying, well there are kidnappings, but absolutely no need to condemn or worry about them because, don’t you see, nothing happens to the victim, it’s quite lot of fun really for them, takes them out of their boring routine.
Where is the condemnation of such a horrible crime against humans, and awful for animals too?
There have been a number of kidnappings in Gaza, which is in a state of chaos and lawlessness since the israeli withdrawal. Often the kidnap victims are foreign aid workers and journalists. I just wonder if Alan Johnston and the BBC are worried he could become such a victim if he doesn’t say the right things on the BBC website to appease potential kidnappers.
So we are forced to pay for such appeasement through our licence fee.
As usual, could correspondents note that I will quote their names if and as they appear in the text of the email, or, if taken from a comment, using the form of their names that they have filled in the comments box. Let me know if your name has been quoted when you would prefer it was not, or omitted when you would prefer to have it quoted. Do not rely on my memory!
Those mafia-gangs will have to be careful now. Cruelty to humans might not register with the Left, but cruelty to ANIMALS !
Not every murder where the victim is from one ethnic group, and the assailant another, is racist.
You can tell the lack of quality of the BBC when they confuse ethnicity and race.
OT
No BBC coverage of this:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005550880,00.html
Blair should be embarrassed.
So what was their excuse for the low coverage of the horrfic Kriss Donald case?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kriss_Donald
Or Gavin Hopley’s?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Hopley
Or Ross Parker, or numerious others come to that?
Ian – letter in Soldier magazine today from an RAF Squadron leader apologising for the regular removal of aircraft from the passenger airbridge from Iraq to the UK which results in many soldiers NOT getting their R and R or less days than they were supposed to get.
“It’s already clear how badly the British Army rate the efforts of the RAF maintaining the Op TELIC airbridge”
He is also raging at RAF Top brass who keep claiming things are OK and letting the RAF boys and girls on the ground take the flak from disgruntled soldiers who have arrived home after 6 months a week late or ended up with a couple of days to see their family before heading back.
Not the RAF’s fault in the main – not enough spares and there are “engineering difficulties” with the C2 (the USAF’s C17 leased by us) which are denied by the top brass. (yeah right!)
Soldier magazine liked his letter so much they sent him a silver Army tankard and have demanded an interview with the RAF’s top movements control people as to why soldiers keep getting messed about. His letter is also going to be published in the RAF News so maybe someone will take notice?
Another story the BBC misses or ignores ….
At least the MoD has got “enough” wide-screen flat-panel TVs to make up the cricket viewing figures.
From the Jon William’s article –
” Witnesses said one of the men had laughed and joked about killing a white man. But the judge said it hadn’t been a racist crime.”
That still doesn’t explain the stark disparity in coverage between the black youth, Anthony Walker’s murder and that of Christopher Yates and Richard Whelan, before their cases went to trial.
Last August, there was also another murder of a white man, David Henkel, who was beaten to death by a gang of Albanians in Kent. The local newspaper reported that David was racially abused, but yet again, this was ignored by the BBC.
At least the fool of a judge consigned one short-lived piece of madness to the dustbin. The MacPherson Report, following the murder of Stephen Lawrence, stated that a crime is racist even if only the victim or witnesses believe it to be so. There doesn’t have to be evidence of the racist motivation of the accused, just the belief by the victim or witnesses is enough to tag a crime as racist.
So perverse is the left that they think it right that a crime is categorised as more serious (remember folks, a ‘racist’ murder carries a higher tariff) on no evidence at all.
Then along come Lord Justice Nutcase to say it ain’t so! Even when witnesses give actual, real evidence that we have a racist murder that can be ignored. As far as I’m aware the left hasn’t yet consigned the practice of judicial precedent to the bin so we’ll take him at his word and regard McPherson as no longer relevent. This, of course, is until next week or next year when the left will contort themselves, perform another volte face and make an even greater mockery of what was once British justice.
Elect judges.
Remove judges that harm the population.
Off topic bias report.
Last night, on the 6 o’clock news, the anchor (Mermot McDonahan?) said that two teenagers had been given prison sentences for the murder of Anthony Walker and that his mother had said that justice had been done — omitting to say that she said that sticking to her values, she forgives the murderers (see Walker murderers ‘forgiven’).
According to offical Home Office figures, between 2001 and 2004 there were twelve racially motivated homicides were the victims were white. (the vast majority of cases btw) And it just so happens that on every single one of those 12 occasions there was something more important for the BBC to report.
It’s a PDF document btw
Click to access s95race04.pdf
Did someone mention torture in China?
CHINA TORTURE ‘STILL WIDESPREAD’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4491026.stm
Right. The BBC has noticed (though not enough to put it on the front page.) We have:
Torture remains widely in use across China, a top UN envoy has said. Manfred Nowak, who has spent nearly two weeks in the country, added that some officials had tried to obstruct his fact-finding efforts.
And
Torture methods cited in a statement at the end of his visit included use of electric shock batons, cigarette burns, and submersion in pits of water or sewage.Mr Nowak spoke of one detainee forced to lie on a bed in a particular position for 85 days. He also raised concern about psychological torture, particularly in labour camps, which he said was designed to alter the personality of the detainees. Asked about the prevalence of torture, he answered: “I consider it on the decline, but still widespread.”
Now we know that Abu Ghraib represents man’s greatest inhumanity to man. We now this because the left, with the BBC in the vanguard, droned on endlessly about it. But if being forced to wear knickers on your head and undergoing the kind of degrading treatment which some people, including at least one lezza friend of mine, would pay good money for is the nadir, then stand by for wall to wall coverage of Chinese torture.
The BBC has noticed and won’t rest until the world has noticed too.
Won’t they?
“It is interesting that the author choose not to use the equivalent, “And for many unborn babies in California, little would change – they would continue to be killed.”
If they’d used a sentence like that I’d have complained – it smacks me of rank pro-abortion bias.
I thought this wesbite was against that kind of thing?
*website
I think the comment was meant as a pro-life statement, Chief.
Unfortunatly the BBC mindset is present elsewhere throughout public radio.
I heard the 6 o’clock news here in France begin with “Humanity has tken a step backwards with the execution of the 1000th person in the US”.
Now this is in a France which will welcome with great pomp in a few days the Chinese Prime Minister who executed 3400 people last year, which amounts to over 80 000 over the last 24 years.
That is of course only the official figure; no question of mentioning the 70 million put through the meat grinder by the man of whom he is the heir in line direct
BBC FOUR, The (Lefty) World.
A long emotive piece with mood music bewailing the fate of those executed on death row in the US (nowhere the victims of course) leaves no doubt that the (Socialist workers) Broadcasting Corporation is not in favour of the death penalty.
As it happens, neither am I but I resent some jumped up State Information Service taking a position on this issue as others may disagree.
“humanity has taken a step backwards”
It does every day with the criminality in this country increasing,despite doctored figures that may say otherwise.
It could have taken a step forward if that (Labour)MP hadnt talked for over three hours to stop a new law which would help us defend our homes from criminals.
Rob Read
The chief constables should be elected too.And the magistrates.
What gets up the BBC’s snotty nose isn’t so much the death penalty per se, (no hissy fits over Iran’s, Saudi Arabia’s or Pakistan’s death penalty for bogus crimes such as “defaming” Islam).
No, it’s the thought that ordinary people in the US have been allowed a say in matters such as capital punishment. A deep resentment that US citizens have far more control over their lives then liberal elites would like them to have.
In Britain and Europe of course, these weighty issues are deemed too important to be left to the grubby plebs. Our self appointed enlighten ones simply decide such things for us.
Capital punishment like immigration, gun control, almost anything to do with the EU, multiculturalism and law & order are issues now completely outside the control of any electorate in Britain.
Boy Blue: Well put. That’s why Marathon Talker Dismore gets a favourable article here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4492688.stm
If one Member of Parliament can block the introduction of new legislation by “… still speaking as time ran out for the measure at 1430 GMT…” things don’t bide too well for the UK. Is this guy really a democrat?
The BBC love him – for obvious reasons – and they’ve put a very favourable picture of him on their website which is only lacking the obligatory halo…
Well, as Dismore says: We can’t have vigilante laws, can we…?
Does it matter what the majority of voters want? Not a jolt.
It’s not just the BBC that soft-peddles China’s torture and abuse of human rights, the Murdoch press is notably quiet (the current issue of Private Eye has accused The Times of pro-Chinese bias), because Murdoch sees China as a lucrative market.
“The BBC love Andrew Dismore”?
Really? I very much doubt it, actually.
His views on most other topics are very far away as can be imagined from those which are usually, and sometimes justly, attributed to the BBC.
In fact, I suspect his outlook is closer to the stereotypical “biased BBC” commentator than the overwhelming majority of MPs of any party allegience.
But obviously doing some research before commenting here would be too much like hard work…
heres news of a UK competition thats only open to you if you are not white
Click to access phpXSomRA.pdf
Well, Venichka … you the master of the enlightened – why don’t you enlighten us? Maybe I should have written “The BBC love Andrew Dismore for his stance on vigilante laws” – fact is he’s a Leftie and hasn’t got much in common with most of the contributors / readers of this blog.
I’ve just taken a quick look at his “Law and Order Report” (http://www.epolitix.com/NR/rdonlyres/EB888952-7918-4BF1-88B1-F21F78F70D95/0/AndrewDismoreLawandOrder.doc) – he doesn’t explain his definition of reasonable force in it though.
Show me a Labour or Lib Dem MP who actually is in favour of the death penalty or who will fight for the victim’s rights instead of the rights of the criminal (and that includes the right to kill an intruder with a handgun!).
Let me make my own political stance clear: “Tom Tancredo for President” and “We need more real conservatives in Europe”
Feedback on Questiontime
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/4489774.stm
Not a single member of the audience admitted to supporting the Iraq war and many loudly complained about alleged “lies” leading up to the war. Could this have anything to do with the way the audience is selected? I applied to be in the audience and answered the various questions about my views. I made it clear that I supported the war in Iraq and the broader war on terror. Yet I was not selected to be in the audience. Not a single person expressing such views was selected. The bias is breath taking. If I could legally withhold my license fee I would do so
Dismore is really not a lefty, believe me. (I speak as a former constituent of his). Even his self-description is as a Fabian – the rightermost part of the Labour Party, for goodness sake.
In fact, amongst other things, he is possibly the single MP who has undertaken more research into Islamist terrorist groups – both in the Uk and internationally – and placed more pressure on the Government to take strict actions about them. I’d have thought that, in the broad, he would be someone broadly approved of by many readers/contributors here, actually.
(There are certainly other, well-BBC-fault-like things that he can and should be condemned for: as well as his rather dispicable habit of making lengthy democracy-destroying speechees in Parliament, I think he is also claims among the highest expenses of MPs – in large part because of the extensive amount of propaganda/information offered on a range of topics to his constituents. This could, perhaps, also be praised – but it is expensive and paid for by the taxpayer)
But what Dismore is principally associated with, as far as I am aware, is combatting and criticising the likes of HAMAS, Hizbullah, al-Qaeda, and groups linked with them. (It has been joked that he is, or should be a member of the intelligent services!) A wet liberal or lefty he is absolutely not and is very far from being.
Opposition to the death penalty is something that transcends party boundaries here, and – I realise you, and I daresay other posters here will not agree – I regard this as a very fine thing, the mark of decent and humane civilisation. (I suppose regulars here will regard me as some kind of spineless wet liberal in consequence, and, although I would reject that description, I can take it)
The point is – context – . This site does a lot of good work and points out sometimes quite outrageous malpractice on the part of the beeb. But it also seems to me that (particularly in the comments boxes) lots of things are taken out of context and misrepresented- and saying the beeb must love dismore is a (very minor) example of this.
Surely people here are not trying to replace what they perceive (perhaps rightly) as the existing biases of the BBC with another set of biases which match their own.
Or is this site only for supporters of hanging and for those who think it is acceptable to use “Leftie” as a term of abuse? I hope not. Surely the matter at hand is too important for that to be so.
Venichka: To me the term “Leftie” has become one of negative meaning. When I was younger I was a member of the Young Socialists (the youth organisation of the SPD here in Germany) – mainly because I got brain-washed into being a leftie by teachers and the media. Once you have freed yourself of the shackles of this disease you start to breathe a lot more freely – at least that’s what I have found.
I grant you that there are a few people on the left who see things clearly but generally I don’t see many Lefties opposing Islamofacism or the BBC’s bias because they’re in love with both Islam and the BBC… Their agenda is the same.
I noticed that Mr. Dismore is a member of a pro-Israel group so maybe I was unfair to him after him – maybe he’s the exception to the rule… I hope so.
O/T: Get ready: more large-scale State broadcasting and the pervasive disinformation that goes with it. I guess it had to happen. Even George Orwell would be the first to admit that there’s only one way tp tackle the BBC [i.e. the Ministry of Information] – create your own large-scale one. Smash the individual – a boot in your face, forever.
“France today announced the birth of a new international television news network half owned by the state that aims to rival the BBC and CNN when it starts broadcasting next year.
President Jacques Chirac, addressing his cabinet, said that France “must be at the forefront of the global battle of images, that’s why I am resolved that our country should have an international news channel,” according to government spokesman Jean-Francois Cope.
The French International News Network (CFII), known colloquially as CNN a la francaise will be run by a joint company owned by the leading private French television broadcaster TF1 and the public broadcaster France Televisions, Communications Minister Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres told a media conference.
France Televisions will be in the driving chair of the entity, whose 240 staff will produce programmes beamed to Europe, Africa and the Middle East at first, then later also to Asia, Latin America and North America.
News will be provided around the clock in French, though the plans also call for a four-hour slot of English programming and the option of adding Arabic and Spanish.
Chirac stated that “the goal is to show everywhere in the world the values of France and its vision of the world,” according to Cope, and promised that it would have the public financing “commensurate with its ambition.”
Oh My God.
OFF TOPIC
Some may be aware of the case of Stanley ‘Tookie’ Williams, who is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection in California – unless Governor Arnold grants clemency – on 13th December.
This man was arrested, charged and convicted of no less than four, cold-blooded murders.
Yet, after searching his name, what are we presented with?
“Reformed gang leader awaits death”
And in the “Stars line up in ex-gangster plea” article, his crimes are only mentioned, briefly, in the fourth paragraph. Have a look through and see what else you can pick out.
The story, the whole story, and nothing but the story should be al-beeb’s slogan. But in the case of the four kidnapped by an Iraqi gang, why is our beeb reluctant to tell us who these people are and a little about the Christian group they belong to?
These do-gooder types are experienced in making nuisances of themselves in war zones. But oddly enough, the bbc doesn’t seem to want to mention one particular war zone; Christian Peacemaker Teams is one of the groups, along with the International Solidarity Movement, who openly support Palestinian terror gangs.
On 30 November 2005 the National and Islamic Forces in Hebron held a press conference to ask for the release of four CPTers being held by an Iraqi armed group. They released a joint statement expressing their “sorrow at the kidnapping of four of the peace advocates from the CPT in Iraq.”
The first speaker was Sheikh Najib Al Ja’abri, who hosted the press conference at the Ali Baka’a Mosque in the Haret e-Sheikh neighborhood of Hebron. He spoke of his warm sense of working together with CPTers over the years. The second speaker was Abdul ‘Alim Dana of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, followed by Fahmi Shahin, Coordinator of the National and Islamic Forces in Hebron, representing the Palestine People’s Party.
In case anyone doesn’t get it, the Arabs named are all members of terror gangs.
Ken Kautsky,
Old news, but, yes, not cheery news, to say the least.
I am so awaiting Chirac’s retirement, even if it isn;t to his oh so deserved prison cell.
Do you know also about the English language international TV channel being launched by the Russian Government -supposedly this month?.
Its editor in chief is 26 or 25 years old – – – I’m sure she will be, erm “pliable”. In an interview recently when asked what the worse feature of Pres Putin, she went silent, stayed silent and then said “Russia is a very big country”.
It will definitely not be a disinterested and objective source of information.
Dan -“Feedback on Questiontime
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/progr…ime/ 4489774.stm
Not a single member of the audience admitted to supporting the Iraq war and many loudly complained about alleged “lies” leading up to the war. Could this have anything to do with the way the audience is selected? I applied to be in the audience and answered the various questions about my views. I made it clear that I supported the war in Iraq and the broader war on terror. Yet I was not selected to be in the audience. Not a single person expressing such views was selected. The bias is breath taking. If I could legally withhold my license fee I would do so”
I’ve noticed with the QT feedback section the moderators seem to selectivley withhold some comments until several days after the show is broadcast. And these opinions that turn up later (which include mine) tend to be politically views that lean to the Right.
In case anyone hasn’t found the relevant part of the report highlighted in Sarah W’s post, it is the last paragraph on page 29:
“Over this three-year period, the police reported to the Home Office 22 homicides where there was a known racial motivation. Twelve victims were White, 4 Asian, 3 Black and 3 of ‘Other’ ethnic origin. There were no current suspects identified for 5 of these victims, 3 of who were White, 1 Black and 1 ‘Other’.”
The BBC gives Robert Fisk the opportunity to plug his book & bloggers the opportunity to fisk his contradictory opinions.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4393358.stm
e.g.
we’ve reached a point in the Iraq story that our access to real sources – not the Americans and the British and the Iraqi government but real people – is so restricted that we can only just about do our jobs.
The first thing they should do is say to their readers or viewers that they are confined to their hotels and don’t leave and don’t do any street reporting.
By using a Baghdad dateline they give the impression they can check stories that they can’t.
So for example, when the Americans claim they killed 142 “terrorists” in Tal Afar, the impression is given they can check the story out, but they can’t because they can’t go there.
But he really does know
Iraq is in a state of total anarchy from Mosul all the way down to Basra.
There are armed insurgents on the streets within half a mile of the Green Zone in Baghdad, where the US and UK embassies are. The whole American project in Iraq is effectively dead.
More at
http://ussneverdock.blogspot.com/2005/12/britain-robert-fisk-why-its-called.html
Venichka,
the issue here is not whether posters agree with the death penalty or not (as a matter of fact I’m undecided and lean towards the ‘no’ line). The issue as I see it is that the beeb pushes the anti capital punishment line – when what it should be doing is reporting facts. Even worse is the massive coverage given to capital punishment in the States while practically ignoring the incredibely high rates of execution in china – for crimes which are nowhere near as serious as murder.
If the beeb was to retain a smidgeon of respect it should be consistent and cover the story in China as well as in places like Iran.
But it seems that demonising the US is all the beeb is good for nowadays.
The stupidity of this is obvious when not all US states have this type of punishment – yet “america” is lumped as one big state.
Great bit of incisive reporting from the ever tearful Barbara Plett, recently shipped off to Pakistan. After the death of Abu Hamza Rabia the BBC is, of course, trying to play down a bit of good news in the war on militants/terrorists. After much research our Barbara reports
“The BBC’s Barbara Plett in Islamabad says it is not clear how important Hamza Rabia was in al-Qaeda.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4494428.stm
Perhaps she should have looked on the BBC website, where she could have found that:
“Faraj heads the international operational wing of al-Qaeda, with the help of an Egyptian accomplice, Abu Hamza Rabia,”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4494428.stm
Or tried putting the name into google where she would have found much more. Maybe she couldn’t see the screen through the flood of tears after the death of a poor misguided criminal.
Speaking of Vigilantism (sic?) let me tell you about something I saw on TV last week:
It was one of those make-over shows currently so popular in the States, a house makeover, the trouble was things were being stolen from the construction site including, believe it or not, an entire bathtub. Conceeding that the police had more important cases of their hands the renovators staked out the house themselves, armed with a shotgun and a six-pack.
About two in the morning they saw a light in their house and went into action, chasing off the perp and giving him such a good scare he wouldn’t be back. No shots were fired.
All this on national television mind you! I gather their actions would *not* be legal in the UK?
‘Vigilantism’ is fine, it just doesn’t need the capital ‘v’!
J.G.. a good time to remind ourselves just what kind of evenhanded journalists Al Beeb keeps on the payroll
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/3966139.stm
S is N
Good reminder. Its funny though, that there are no links on the tear story page to the BBC’s own finding that the
“Arafat report ‘broke BBC rules”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4471494.stm
They have other up-to-date stories in their ‘Key Stories’ section of this page, but not the fact that the story people are actually reading broke the rules. Let me get this straight. The BBC finds a story broke its own rules, yet it still thinks that it is acceptable to continue to broadcast the story with no hint of this fact. Amazing.
Did you also spot the blatantly biased link on the same page, which is also linked to in the middle east section of the main World news page today.
Israel missile test ‘successful’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4492212.stm
At first glance this would suggest that those evil Israelis have developed a new weapon to attack their peaceful neighbours. But, actually the first sentence reads “Israel has carried out a successful test of its Arrow missile defence system”. Biased? The BBC? Can’t wait for the results of the review.
Socialism is Necrotizing | 03.12.05 – 7:26 pm | #
from the link:
bombarding the world with news [correction – with my views] of what we think [correction – with what i think, and want you to think]is an historic event
i mean, that’s pretty much what she said – er, meant – isn’t it?
could someone please tell me how to put quotes from earlier comments/links into italics, better to make them stand out as such, please? thanks
Stick before the quote and after the quote. Do the same with to bold
Now I think the above will not actually show the codes once posted so remember it is < then i or b followed by a > and to close it is < /i or b followed by > Keep it altogether or it won’t happen
OK?
<i> italic stuff here </i>
That should come out right…
dave t
Gotcha!
S-i-N
Thanks for the reminder, I’d quite forgotten how awful Plett’s piece was/is. Plett’s confessed blubbing attracted the attention but the rest of that article rarely rises above Palestinian propaganda.
Never forget people, the left is a place full of sick, wierd perverts.
It is quite amazing how low this web site has become on the Yahoo, MSN , Google ..etc web search engines.
Let me pose the question…… is this because the efiminate Chancellor at No.11 has dictated to HIS BROTHER at the BBC to ensure that no visible oppostion should exist in the British Communist world?
Maybe the ‘thinking’ gay day Andrew Neil will tell us next week, in ‘This Week’.
Dismore seems pretty loyal Labor (about a 3% rebellion rate according to this site. That’s not too supportive of the BBC (it’s not Lib Dem), but he seems broadly BBC favouring. Against Fox Hunting, in favour of banning religious hate speech and smoking, greatly in favour of higher taxation, and so on. Against business and in favour of regulating everything. On the other hand, being supportive of Blair isn’t all bad. He’s in favour of supporting Iraqis, for instance, and moderately supportive of foundation hospitals. Doesn’t seem to keen on giving schools autonomy, on the other hand. Criminal sympathies noted above, although I guess his support for ID cards suggests that he’s OK with criminals losing civil liberties when the rest of us do too.
In all, I get the impression that outside Iraq debates, the BBC should be supportive of the guy. He supports gay rights, and he’s apparently the guy who got an exception in for Diwali when they passed a curfew law on fireworks. His fillibuster here may have seen him being a jerk, but he seems about as positive as you could hope for from a labor backbencher. Certainly significantly better than any Lib Dem in the house. Voted for St. George’s day, which makes me happy. Suggests that he’d be OK with people wearing lapel pins with English flags. I’m very certain that he’d allow piglet mugs. He might even own one himself.
I think most if not all regular visitors to this site now consider the BBC to have tottaly lost ALL credibility. As such it is not now possible to watch news reporting or indeed ANY output from this organisation without feeling that you are being manipulated. Politicaly correct dogma is manifest in everything, from the weather report to the cricket results. This is very upseting to us Brits that know how much of our common culture in the last 70years has been influenced and reinforced by the BBC. Our arragance and confidence in believing that “those really shitty things elsewhere, could not happen hear” was because we thought the wonderfull BBC would not let it happen. Somehow they would protect us from abuse and corruption from our own goverment.
WE NOW KNOW WE WERE WRONG very wrong.
We feel naked and exposed for possibly the first time in our lives.
Its brown trousers time.
The states propergander machine is working to protect New Labour, more hard than it did to fight the nazis. I now dont know why they did bother fighting the nazis. They dont even like Jews.
Looking forward to seeing the BBC reporting on the propopsed 23% M.P. pay rises. Probely mention it for half a day smile a lot and then forget about it. They have got there own pay rises to hope the goverment does not ask to many questions, to think about.
When the police decry the vigitalant it shows how far they have fallen from the origina principles of policing.
The Nine Principles of Policing
1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
4. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
5. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
9. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.