Please use this thread for off-topic, but preferably BBC related, comments. Please keep comments on other threads to the topic at hand. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments – our aim is to maintain order and clarity on the topic-specific threads. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog. Please scroll down to find new topic-specific posts.
Open thread – for comments of general Biased BBC interest:
Bookmark the permalink.
The BBCs institutional Islamism is so entrenched in their reporting that they are incapable of noticing the irony, now that the boot’s on the other foot! ‘Taken out of context’, ‘misconstrued’- now where have we heard this before? That they have to repeat it twice!!!
Australian cleric in dress furore
But a spokesman for Sheikh Hilali said the quote had been taken out of context
But a spokesman for Sheikh Hilali said his comments had been misconstrued
http://timblair.net/ee/index.php/weblog/uncovered_meat_is_the_problem/
http://timblair.net/ee/index.php/weblog/meat_sheik_sorry/
More facts in Tim Blair’s articles than the entire weight of BBC expertise was able to manage……
Liam Fox:
“We have become used to a non-stop anti-war agenda from the BBC but broadcasting propaganda on behalf of this country’s enemies – at a time when our armed forces are being killed and maimed – marks a new low.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6086276.stm
Not sure I totally agree, since the views of the Taleban, twisted as they are, are probably of interest and worth reporting.
I think the problem comes from the overall approach from the BBC, where the views of murdering racist misogynist scum seem to be given more respect than those of law abiding citizens of mid-west America.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6079768.stm
Beeb report on Spanish jounro kidnapped in Gaza being released.
What they DID NOT add which is actually of interest since it gives yet another reason for countries like Egypt and Tunisia to carry on their policy of stopping women wearing the veil was:
An Associated Press photographer was freed unharmed Tuesday after a harrowing day in the hands of Palestinians who abducted him at gunpoint and dressed him in women’s clothes to spirit him from one secret location to another.
He said the kidnappers held him in a small room, where he was kept for about four hours during which he was visited by masked men. Later he was put in a car dressed as a woman and taken to another location. “They put a bag on my head and they dressed me up as a woman, as a woman in a long veil,” the photographer added.
So as well as being nothing more than a political statement the veil is the criminals’ best friend.
William Shawcross as ever gets it right:-
“Iraq’s deputy prime minister Barham Salih made an excellent impression in London this week — but he was surprised if not horrified by the level of hysteria and ‘defeatism’ that he found in the media.
The bias in much of the coverage of Iraq, both here and in the United States, helps only those violent extremists who are trying to destroy the country. It dreadfully discourages all the millions of Iraqis who still need our support to build a decent society.”
http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/25958/to-abandon-iraq-would-be-to-court-disaster.thtml
Thankyou BBC. And an extra special thankyou to John Humphrys, for going all the way to Iraq to tell us what he thought before he went.
Australian cleric in dress furore
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6086374.stm
And even the BBC couldn’t find a photo that made him look benign! But he’s apologised now – so that’s all right, isn’t it?
By the way, one of the links given is for “Australia”. More relevant (but not to the BBC) might have been “Islamic intolerance” or something like that.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6083472.stm
Another one. BBC reports that Michael J Fox does an ad ref stem cell research for the Democrats. They then add remark that conservatives claim that Fox is either off his medication or acting to lend weight to the ad.
However Fox freely and regularly ADMITS that he DOES deliberately come off his medication before ads or appearances in Congress to show the effects of his disease. Surely that should have been added to the article as at the moment it would appear to suggest that (a) nasty conservatives are being beastly to poor man (albeit that Limburgh has in fact apologised – something Democrats never seem to do…) and (b) without stem cell research Fox cannot control his disease when in fact many of the effects can be lessened by medication available without the need for stem cells.
What many are wanting is a cure but at the same time others do not want this way of finding one as it involves the death of foetuses, something which some people feel is not acceptable. Whether you agree or not BBC should at least try and provide insight into both views – something that has NOT happened here.
The truth about the inner workings of the BBC fearlessly revealed. Its a joke isn’t it???
http://www.thepeoplescube.com/
………….
Talking to the Enemy?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/talking_to_the_enemy.html
Nice to see the pantomime season getting underway with Torchwood last night. Quick, everyone, now that we’ve got alien girly trapped, look at your fingernails/shoes/guns for a moment – oh no! the baddy has got away!!! Preposterous.
And where do I find that recording of drunk Chas Kennedy rehearsing for liberal speech? Or did I imagine it?
The hermit like BBC Business Editor, appointed as a replacement for the Romford Rottweiler, is seen even less than was Mr Randall. Assuming he has managerial responsibilities (& you wonder if that is the case at the BBC, is “editor” just a pay grade), he is playing a blinder.
Someone has appointed famous Guardian reader Graham Le Saux to present BBC2 finance/investment programme, “Working Lunch”.
I suppose that is a tranfer deal with odd job man Adrian Childs moving from finance to football.
Not surprisingly with the BBC the presenters of the programme have always appeared to be actors or journalists who have been assigned to present a finance programme, rather than them having any particular interest or extpertise.
Today was another instance of the pantomime dame stockmarket presenter (Adam ?) talking about a rise in the market, only to be taken by surprise when the live feed showed that the market had turned. If he was interested in the market he would be constantly noting the market.
More pro-Taliban propaganda today from the BBC:
Nato struggles in Afghanistan
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/5345452.stm
‘Civilians killed’ in Nato raids
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6086064.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6087506.stm
At least one of the cartoons also portrayed Muhammad as a terrorist.
………………………………..
should’nt that read militant.
For facts on Afghanistan not available on the Beeb…
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20647376-1702,00.html
Another classic performance from Jeremy Al-Vine. They were supposedly discussing the Aussie ‘clerics’ comments about uncovered women deserving to get raped, except the actual topic turned out to be whether or not the Australian government had over-reacted to his defence of rape (or ‘spoke about about how women should dress’ as Sheik Jeremy put it)
It was a classic BBC discussion too. A flakey Labour MP vs the brother of an Australian minister – an aid worker in Pakistan (i.e. another flake). So, yes, the BBC really did have a Liberal on to discuss what a Conservative might say (if they’d actually invited one on), balanced by a screaming moonbat.
Magazine Article “After a Fashion” by Steve Thommkins
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6087360.stm
Article tries to find similarities in the historical controversy of robe wearing ministers in the 16th Century and todays veil debate.
Here’s my email I sent at the comments section:
“In fact, we’ve been here before, 400 years ago – or somewhere uncannily like it. ”
Er, no! This is a debate about hiding your face with a mask. This is not a debate about wearing clothes that differ from the the societal norm!
“Then as now, public opinion was divided on the subject.”
Wrong Again. You make it sound like it is a 50-50 thing. The vast majority of people (some polls have said as much as 97%) are against the VEIL. You can easily verify with some research on the topic including BBC HYS.
will | 26.10.06 – 1:05 pm | #
re the BBC so-called ‘business’ coverage pantomime.
Rebecca Marston on R4 Today this morning:
Business news with Rebecca Marston
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today2_biz_20061026.ram
British American Tobacco (BAT) released their annual results today, the Director of Regulation & Corporate Affairs is on to discuss the results. But not from a business performance perspective you understand, oh no. Gotta get past the beeboid lefty liberal anti-business mindset which in this case is:
smoking = baad
business = doublebad
successful profit making business – triplebad
smoking + business + profits = hyperabad (you get the picture..)
First two questions from the Beeboid ‘business’ journo Rebecca Marsden are as follows:
1. “…the global tobacco industry trading outlook is the best it has ever been. Is that a cause for pride?”
Eh?
2. “There will be as many smokers in the world by 2050 as there are today partly as a results of you ‘pushing’ into countries where smoking is growing and these are the poorer countries. Do you think that is questionable moral practice on behalf of BAT?”
and so on. Following the interview have no idea whether the performance of the business was good, bad or indifferent. Pantomime ‘business’ coverage from the BBC.
“Today” has Gordon Brown on for an “interview”. He is asked his views on a few random financial subjects, for instance, red tape and corporation tax: Evan Davies also asks him a question. Gordo is not cross-examined: his views (at length and uninterrupted) are taken as gospel. Then the interview switches to the Beeb agenda – climate change and Iraq. FFS this is the man who is singlehandedly responsible for ruining the best private pension arrangements in the world. I believe (although I stand to be corrected on this) that the BBC has NEVER interviewed him about his responsibility for the pensions debacle let alone cross-examined him on it. Again, bias (after all BBC employees’ pensions are safeguarded by the taxpayer so who cares?) compounded by crap journalism.
abandon ship said:
“Not sure I totally agree, since the views of the Taleban, twisted as they are, are probably of interest and worth reporting.”
Which would be ok if we werent at war with them. Are we at “war” with them or not?
You didnt catch the BBC running around with the S.S. in WW2? why should Afghanistan be any different? i think , that is what Mr Fox is trying to say.
” Umbongo | 26.10.06 – 2:17 pm | ”
agreed umbongo – the interview was utter crap.
“Do you think that is questionable moral practice on behalf of BAT?”
what sort of finance/business question is that FFS?!!!
The worst thing about Loyn’s piece about the Taleban was the bumfluff he was sporting in an attempt to appear ‘ethnically correct’.
A twist on the constant airings of the thoughts of Leader Ming
Oliver Kamm from his blog essay
In defence of the Iraq War
In the last fortnight or so I have received quite a large number of invitations to appear on radio and television to argue the case for the Iraq War. I realise this is no reflection on my cogency; the programmes’ researchers state frankly that they have severe difficulty finding anyone willing to represent the pro-war view. I have appeared on some of these programmes debating, respectively, allegedly progressive and also High Tory opponents of the Government’s foreign policies. One thing on which my fellow interviewees and I, and everyone reading this, will be able to agree is that if the defence in the broadcast media of Tony Blair’s foreign policies is left to me, then Tony Blair is in trouble. I appeal to anyone reading this who may have influence in government circles to take this issue seriously. The case needs to be made. If we lose the argument at home, we shall fail to sustain our obligations in Iraq.
http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2006/10/in_defence_of_t.html
Time to play: Spot the Right-Winger.
This Week’s Question Time Panel
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/6085390.stm
This is getting tedious.
BEN BRADSHAW MP (Lab)
LORD ASHDOWN (Lib)
MICHAEL ANCRAM MP (Conservative Left)
DAME PAULINE NEVILLE-JONES (ex BBC Governor)
JANET STREET PORTER (?)
Is Ancram supposed to be the right-wing view? Here’s how the BBC introduce him:
MICHAEL ANCRAM MP
“An outspoken supporter of the Iraq war, he decided in April that “the time has come for our troops to leave Iraq with dignity and honour.”
Bias? What bias?
Oh, and this weeks QT is coming from Exeter. Can you guess the political/demographics of this area?
Exeter Quick Facts:
1. Ben Bradshaw (Labour) has been the Member of Parliament for Exeter since the general election on 1st May 1997 (with a +40% share of the vote)
2. Labour is the largest group on the City Council.
3. In the 1991 census the city’s Black, Minority, Ethnic (BME) community was 1.4% and this rose to 2.3% in 2001. This means Exeter has the highest proportion of people from BME communities in Devon and Cornwall and the seventh highest out of 45 council areas in the south west region (Bristol, Gloucester, Cheltenham, Swindon, Bournemouth and Bath are higher).
Sources:
http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/exeter-labour/benbradshaw.html
http://www.exeter.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4064
bradshaw used to work for the beeb and his partner neal dalgleish is a newsnight journalist. Not so much bias as incest!
I seem to recall that there was a minor scandal when he was given paid leave from the beeb to allow him to campaign full time for a seat in Parliament.
Imam accused of ‘gay death’ slur
A gay rights campaigner has accused an Imam of saying the execution of gay Muslims to stop the spread of disease is “for the common good of man”.
I see the BBC is going out of its way to minimise the Manchester Imams remarks, maybe because of the too close proximity to the Australian Imam
The Imam did not deny the comments but said he had been misinterpreted
The comments were made in a private meeting
And then to round the BBC article off the human rights angle, and reminder that we are all Islamaphobes and watching too much Neighbours on TV:
‘Demonising Muslims’
Massoud Shadjareh, from the Islamic Human Rights Commission, said this was not an issue for Muslims.
He said homosexuality was “not compatible” with Islam, just as it was not compatible with other orthodox religions, such as Catholicism.
“Just one man talking to another becomes an issue, Muslims are being put under a magnifying glass.
“I think that this is part of demonising Muslims,” he said.
“Just one man talking to another becomes an issue”
ah sure – poor auld Adolf was only talking to his mate Goebells in the Burgerbraukellar. nothing to worry about.
john | 26.10.06 – 4:11 pm
Interesting that in a clash between a gay and islam the muslims seem to come off best.
I couldn’t have forecast anybody being favoured against a gay in a beeb report a couple of years ago.
Why is the BBC so piss poor with its news. The Manchester Evening News tells us much more below. I can’t believe the BBC didn’t know this, instead they chose to end their article with the demonising of Muslims and cite human rights lawyers. Essentially, the BBC is not giving us news it is pure propaganda! And we have to pay for this, and find the news elsewhere on the net!
Muslim cleric ‘backs execution of gays’
Dr Casson said: “He told me that in a true Islamic state, such punishments were part of Islam if the person had had a trial, at which four witnesses testified that they had seen the actual homosexual acts.”
He went on: “I asked him what would be the British Muslim view and he repeated that in an Islamic state these punishments were justified.
“They might result in the deaths of thousands, but if this deterred millions from having sex and spreading disease, then it was worthwhile to protect the wider community.”
What did she expect?
The troubles of reporting from Iran
By Frances Harrison
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6087434.stm
For the new BBC Iran television channel to survive, it will have to broadcast Islamic propaganda. It will be shut down otherwise. Actually I can see how the environment will suit many at the Beeb…..
“” “Do you think that is questionable moral practice on behalf of BAT?”
what sort of finance/business question is that FFS?!!!””
It’s a tobacco company. They make products that kill those foolish enough to use them as intended.
Either you are OK with that, or you are not OK with it. If BAT is extra profitable, then bully for shareholders, and the BBC is not OK with that.
If you don’t own shares of BTI/GLH/ITY/MO/RAI/UST then you have no relavence to comment on the companies activities if you are not directly affected by them.
We must be fair; Pauline Neville-Jones does appear to be on the Conservative side.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Neville-Jones
Janet Street-Porter is left-wing but not really in the certifiable moonbat category. Exeter is Labour but some of the surrounding areas are certainly not. It will be interesting to see the make-up of the audience tonight, though sadly I will be doing so pissed. Surely it must be better than Glasgow or Preston.
The BBC and half a story;
“Youths torch two buses near Paris”
Police say passengers only just managed to flee in Nanterre
Youths in the Paris suburbs have attacked two buses on the eve of the first anniversary of rioting among immigrant communities.
In Nanterre, northwestern Paris, about 10 passengers fled a bus as masked youths set it ablaze, police said.
A similar attack happened in Bagnolet, eastern Paris, where a youth held a gun to the bus driver’s head while others set it on fire, officials said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6086418.stm
Pity those thugs wore masks otherwise the BBC would have published just who they were?
pounce | 26.10.06 – 6:06 pm
Pity those thugs wore masks otherwise the BBC would have published just who they were?
Were they masks or veils?
A missed opportunity on PM (radio 4) tonight.
eddie mair gets to interview General Pace, Chief of the US military, and wastes most of the time asking him political questions in a doomed attempt to split the General off from his political masters.
The time could have been much better spent asking Pace about military matters that are within his responsibility.
It’s all a bit amateur.
More spin from the dancing dervishes of White City.
Tonight, the BBC’s website carries the headline: ‘Straw backs BBC Taleban piece’.
Strictly true, as far as it goes. But why wasn’t the headline ‘Fox slams BBC Taleban piece’?
Having perpetrated this disgusting act of Talebanophilia, the BBC is attempting to brush aside complaints by focusing on Straw’s approval and burying the reason why Straw defended it in the first place – the chorus of attacks from vertebrates.
This is a classic example of why the BBC should not be in a position to report on itself. It is incapable of honesty and objectvity – whatever superannuaed Lefties like Helen Boaden might claim.
Judge and jury simultaneously? No wonder the BBC has so much admiration for the Taleban!
“The Imam did not deny the comments but said he had been misinterpreted
The comments were made in a private meeting” SOoooooo by the same token the remarks made by racists cops and BNP members in private meetings were OK as well? Aye right. Either treat all the same in which case this moron gets the boot from his job as well or treat the Muslims differently. Which is it to be then Beeboids?
The troubles of reporting from Iran
By Frances Harrison
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6087434.stm
…
Ritter | 26.10.06 – 4:31 pm
She says:
One blog even asked if my husband beat me and ran a picture next to a story about me of a woman in a heavy duty black headscarf with a noose around her neck.
I think she means this very blog:
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2006/09/more-questions-than-answers-forgive-my.html
The BBC and half a story.
I am disgusted at how the BBC which has no problem in shouting “RACIST” when ever the victim is black remains somewhat silent on the murder of school child “Kriss Donald”
Just to prove my point here is what I am on about;
Girl arrested in racism inquiry”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6047514.stm
Meeting over ‘racist’ attendants
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/6036555.stm
Two badly hurt in ‘racist’ attack
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/6032025.stm
Two men hurt in ‘racist assault’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/5415512.stm
Asylum family ‘racist city’ claim
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_west/5414856.stm
All of the above transpired this month. In all of them the BBC uses the term “Racist” in which to lead with the story. In the first story a girl asked to be moved to a group which spoke English she is banded a racist by the BBC, in the second 2 men are injured in a suspected racist incident and the BBC splashes the word about more liberally than our Henry did. The last story is about how as an asylum seeker can’t move to London and claim benefits there so he plays the racist card. (in which the BBC is more than happy to support him) in which to hopefully move things along.
So in all of the above the Beeb is more than happy to bring out the racist card in which to play the victim card for the great unwashed.
Now contrast that with the story of Kriss Donald;
Schoolboy Kriss stabbed 13 times
A pathologist has told the High Court in Edinburgh that the primary cause of Kriss Donald’s death was 13 stab wounds to his chest and abdomen. Dr Marjorie Black said it was likely the schoolboy had been restrained as he was stabbed. She also found burns covering 70% of his body. The 15-year-old’s body was found on the Clyde walkway on 16 March, 2004. Mohammed Faisal Mushtaq, 27, Zeeshan Shahid, 28, and brother Imran Shahid 29, deny racially motivated murder.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6087918.stm
So a child gets held down by a bunch of thugs gets a right old kicking, gets stabbed 13 times while held down and then while still alive they burn him alive. And the BBC claims it may have been racially motivated.
Err No, it was a racist hate crime the fact that Muslims did this to a white boy doesn’t mean we have to hide the fact that it was a racist hate crime, it means that the Misguided criminals who committed it were and still are racists. But what really gets my goat is how the BBC has to hide all of this so as not to upset the poor Muslim community. Sod the bloody lot of them. Muslims can be racist just like everybody else, trying to say it isn’t so doesn’t mean they can’t be.
The BBC and half a bloody story.
“Just one man talking to another becomes an issue”
ah sure – poor auld Adolf was only talking to his mate Goebells in the Burgerbraukellar. nothing to worry about.
That’s the best BBC putdown I have seen!
Ref my last post and how the BBC hides the racist murder of a child by a number of Muslim men simply for the crime of being white. I’ve noticed that for a while now the BBC have taken to listed all the articles about this racisthate crime. In which to ward off any criticism of their somewhat blatant biased reporting on this racist hate crime. To that end here are all those links exposed;
Schoolboy Kriss stabbed 13 times
Does the BBC shout racist? No,racially motivated but not racist.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6087918.stm
Kriss trial phone data not exact
Does the BBC shout racist? No, racially motivated but not racist.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6085022.stm
DNA ‘may link Kriss with accused’
Does the BBC shout racist? No, racially motivated but not racist.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6080850.stm
Kriss ‘was alive’ while on fire
Does the BBC shout racist? No, racially aggravated murder. but not racist
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6076884.stm
Expert describes Kriss injuries
Does the BBC shout racist? No, racially aggravated murder right at the bottom but not racist
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6069954.stm
Murder threat’ by Kriss accused
Does the BBC shout racist? No, racially aggravated murder right at the bottom but not racist
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6067118.stm
Kriss witness denies his murder
Does the BBC shout racist? No but it does say “alleged race-hate killing.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6062384.stm
Kriss trial hears of house hunt
Does the BBC shout racist? No, abduction and racially aggravated murder.but not racist.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6048974.stm
Boy tells jury of Kriss abduction
Does the BBC shout racist? No, abduction and racially aggravated murder.but not racist.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6044474.stm
Kriss witness ‘saw clothes burn’
Does the BBC shout racist? No, abduction and racially aggravated murder.but not racist.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6040392.stm
Kriss accused ‘not the culprits’
Does the BBC shout racist? No instead they quote “it is alleged, was racially motivated.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/5413510.stm
Kriss attacked ‘for being white’
Does the BBC shout racist? No, abduction and racially aggravated murder.but not racist
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/5409734.stm
Schoolboy murder trial under way
Does the BBC shout racist? Not really but they do say” The charge against the three men also alleges that the offence was racially aggravated.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/5400138.stm
So in every one of those links that the BBC now uses in which to defend their coverage of the race hate crime of Kriss Donald they don’t say “Racist” once. I wonder why?
“The time could have been much better spent asking Pace about military matters that are within his responsibility.”
The BBC is concerned about the social and moral aspects of existance. Conveying the news is purely incidental.
completely OT..
just finished on C4 – best & worst places to live in the UK.
http://www.channel4.com/4homes/ontv/best&worst/2006/worst.html
top 5 *worst* places to live
1. Hackney
2. Tower Hamlets
3. Merthyr Tydfil
4. Newham
5. Islington
top 5
1. Winchester
2. Horsham
3. Tunbridge Wells
4. Harrogate
5. South Cambridgeshire
hmmm.. there’s a lesson there somewhere that i cant *quite* put my finger on.
“I wonder why?
pounce | 26.10.06 – 7:31 pm |”
because in the racist BBC world, only whites are racist – even when a bunch of white guys beat up a black kid for his mobile phone, thats a “racist” attack – even though , the white kids couldnt give a damn and just wanted the mobile phone. They’ll probably sell it on to Leeroy Bling-Bling the local gak dealer.
When it happens in reverse, in the crap area (e.g. Hackney – see my post above), then the black robbers are so obviously downtrodden , poor kids – its not really their fault, the poor things.
5 Live this lunchtime:
Reporting the riots ongoing at the moment in the suburbs of Paris where their reporter Paul Henley is embedded
“The response of Nicholas Sarkozy has been to echo the extreme right wing – calls for ‘the rule of law’ and ‘violence to be punished'”
I sat in my car open-mouthed: “the rule of law” and “punishment of violence” is now extreme right-wing
A complaint is on its way to 5 live
Paulinus writes:
“A complaint is on its way to 5 live”
Well deserved, too. As I noted yesterday, Billy Bigmouth was on Simon Mayo’s afternoon programme yet again promoting his political opinions – a regular slot for the pint-sized Marxist, it appears.
On the whole 5 Live is a very dangerous affair. While peddling sport to the masses it seems to slip quite a lot of institutional Leftism into its output, no doubt hoping it will be absorbed without notice by Mondeo man.
best & worst places to live in the UK.
Archduke
UK, or should that be England & Wales? The BBCs Rab C Nesbitt in his four bedroom maisonette in Govan would make a great neighbour!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6081594.stm
Photo caption reads Taleban fighters appear both ferocious and fearless
One wonders then why the fearless and ferocious Taleban leader needs to hide his face?
Photo caption reads Taleban fighters appear both ferocious and fearless
One wonders then why the fearless and ferocious Taleban leader needs to hide his face?
In case Mummy sees him and drags him off by the ear for his tea which is going cold?