Out of my sense of respect for those people suffering great loss, I didn’t comment on the Castro situation in Cuba a few days ago . I’m sure you will all noticed how upset the BBC was at the news that one of their (non) American idols had exited stage left. But now that the grieving process has started in full the BBC is now rushing out contrived articles of pure PR such as “Castro relishes chance to rest”
The night before, I slept better than ever,” he writes in Cuban Communist Party newspaper Granma, three days after announcing his retirement. My conscience was clear and I promised myself a vacation.”
If you force yourself to read the entire article, it smacks of pro-Castro propaganda, finishing with a flourish – an attack on the USA. Losing Fidel has been a mighty blow to the US-hating communist-thug worshipping element at the BBC and I think Castro will continue to get very positive media treatment from his dear fans at the Beeb.
On Fidel’s death (I’m using his first name only to show what a hero he is to me), what are the odds on the BBC asking for “your tributes”?
hopefully he’ll die sometime soon
Perhaps a week or so after the BBC have finished basking in the warm glow of the great leader’s sinking from the world stage, they will turn their attention to another great leader in decline and bring us their fond memories of, and praise and adulation for, Ariel Sharon.
Then again, maybe not.
Castro would probably be on the same pay scale as Wonathon Woss if he worked for the BBC… and it might still happen now that this commie %^%^%^%^ is unemployed.
He would be classed as an “expert political anal-ist” by the BBC and Andrew “any time… any place” Marr would suck his cigar without question.
Mis-guided idiots love the BBC and the BBC loves mis-guided idiots… all payed for by the “TV licence”.
Ahhh… God bless Aunty Beeb.
It’s not just silly lefty liberals that have been duped by the ‘Castro Experience.’ Consider the evidence:
1) 638 assassination attempts by the CIA on ol’ beardy allegedly – are all the agency’s ‘black op’ merchants afflicted with Down’s Syndrome, Alzheimers, Aspergers etc? Castro is one of the very few ‘targets’ Langley will ‘neither confirm nor deny.’
2) No direct/indirect military attempt to remove him since the Bay of Pigs in 1962 (a shambolic CIA operation where air cover and supplies by sea were deliberately witheld) despite the US having the best equipped offshore base on the island at Guantanamo Bay.
3) Cuba has had the longest unbroken period of one party rule of any Latin American/Carribean state. The US has been frequently involved directly and indirectly in changing the regimes of Cuba’s neighbours but Castro has always escaped.
4) Cuban intelligence is widely regarded as having played a role in the assassination of JFK yet the US authorities have never launched a separate investaigtion into this theory – why not?
5) Castro sent over 90,000 troops into Angola/Portuguese Guinea in the mid 1970’s leaving Cuba’s back door virtually open for any US sponsored invasion. How could he have been so confident that no one would take advantage of the situation?
6) According to Norman Mailer the CIA in the 1950’s (after their experience with Nicaragua) wanted to burden the old Soviet Union with a dependent failed state. Castro’s revolution was actually funded with mob money (Meyer Lansky) not by the KGB.
7) Forbes Magazine conservatively estimated Castro’s personal wealth at a $150 million. There has been speculation for many years that this fortune is due largely to his role in drug trafficking between South and North America.
8) Respected TV journalist Gabby Weber has raised questions about the assistance that Castro has provided to certain US agencies in getting suspected Nazi war criminals out of the USA.
9) Many US based plutocrats and their scions have a strange fondness for the old dictator and are quite happy to accept his hospitality (Epstein, Maxwell etc).
10) The US or, more precisely, certain powerful factions within the US, would not have been able to hold sway over the rest of the America’s without the presence of a bogey man to justify their military, political and economic interventions.
Looks like Hugo Chavez is Castro’s heir. Just look what happens to the oil price whenever he makes a statement…
Mr Anon,
How would we know? 😉
David,
for all we know he’s dead already. The most recent footage makes it look like hes got no more than 12 months to live. Hopefully that footage was filmed 11 months ago
but we’ll know when he’s dead as Al Beeb will suspend normal programming and dedicate a few weeks of constant broadcasting to the greatness of this man and all the viva la revolution bollox that goes with it 😆
Why do our Lefties love such a vile dictator?
No doubt some of you will consider me uncharitable, but I shall just have to take that on the chin: my only regret at the news of the retirement of Fidel Castro was that it didn’t happen about 49 years ago, and in a way that ruled out any prospect of a comeback. Castro was a tyrant and a murderer who destroyed the prosperity of his country, and who has handed over the rule of Cuba to his even more repulsive brother. I wish the unhappy people of that island an early liberation from this vile family with its self-serving Leninist doctrines. How amusing, though, to read the thoughts of our own Leftists on this historic moment, what with their having to deal with the abundant evidence of Castro’s savagery and failure. One, perhaps sensing the losing battle, opined that this was “a moment for generosity”. Oh really? Tell that to the multitude who lost their lives trying to flee Castro’s despotism, and those who have experienced a loss of human rights about which, in any other context, the Left would have been loudly protesting.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/02/23/do2301.xml&page=2
David Vance, Mr Anon, Lurker in a Burqua – you really don’t get it do you?
In the parlance of cheap spy fiction: Castro is a double, an agent provocateur – a tool of Western intelligence.
Here’s my post again – READ IT THIS TIME.
1) 638 assassination attempts by the CIA on ol’ beardy allegedly – are all the agency’s ‘black op’ merchants afflicted with Down’s Syndrome, Alzheimers, Aspergers etc? Castro is one of the very few ‘targets’ Langley will ‘neither confirm nor deny.’
2) No direct/indirect military attempt to remove him since the Bay of Pigs in 1962 (a shambolic CIA operation where air cover and supplies by sea were deliberately witheld) despite the US having their best equipped offshore base on the island at Guantanamo Bay.
3) Cuba has had the longest unbroken period of one party rule of any Latin American/Carribean state. The US has been frequently involved directly and indirectly in changing the regimes of Cuba’s neighbours but Castro has always escaped.
4) Cuban intelligence is widely regarded as having played a role in the assassination of JFK yet the US authorities have never launched a separate investaigtion into this theory – why not?
5) Castro sent over 90,000 troops into Angola/Portuguese Guinea in the mid 1970’s leaving Cuba’s back door virtually open for any US sponsored invasion. How could he have been so confident that no one would take advantage of the situation?
6) According to Norman Mailer the CIA in the 1950’s (after their experience with Nicaragua) wanted to burden the old Soviet Union with a dependent failed state. Castro’s revolution was actually funded with mob money (Meyer Lansky) not by the KGB.
7) Forbes Magazine conservatively estimated Castro’s personal wealth at a $150 million. There has been speculation for many years that this fortune is due largely to his role in drug trafficking between South and North America.
Respected TV journalist Gabby Weber has raised questions about the assistance that Castro has provided to certain US agencies in getting suspected Nazi war criminals out of the USA.
9) Many US based plutocrats and their scions have a strange fondness for the old dictator and are quite happy to accept his hospitality (Epstein, Maxwell etc).
10) The US or, more precisely, certain powerful factions within the US, would not have been able to hold sway over the rest of the America’s without the presence of a bogey man to justify their military, political and economic interventions.
Looks like Hugo Chavez is Castro’s heir. Just look what happens to the oil price whenever he makes a statement…
Well that proves it then, doesn’t it.
David Vance,
“How would we know?”
Easy,the day long talk show on the BBC radio,the Cuban flag at half mast on Broadcasting House,,countless subtle little hints like that.Oh yes and a tear soaked Polly Toynbee.
According to the article, the US “has blockaded the island state for nearly five decades.”
Excuse me, but what blockade? The United States enforces a bilateral trade embargo against Cuba, but a trade embargo and a blockade are not the same thing, as the BBC well knows.
But hey, when it comes to portraying the US in the “correct” way, i.e., in a war-like and aggressive light, why worry about an inconvenient thing like facts.
Yes, the only Cuban blockade is the usual communist one of blockading their own people inside the country.
The BBC didn’t exactly overreport Cuba’s recent release of 4 political prisoners held since 2003. The news was tucked away near the bottom of ‘Caribbean news in brief’. Guantanamo Bay prisoner news never seems to get such low BBC billing does it? Yet more BBC bias.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/caribbean/news/story/2008/02/080218_nibfeb18.shtml
James read your post, just dont agree with a lot of it thats all
But when Castro’s officially declared dead by Al Beeb, we should all meet up and have a celebration with a few bottles of champagne, wonder if they’ll report that
Jim Nauchtie’s interview with Oliver Stone (Today programme, 23 Feb) plumbed new depths by its propaganda and downright lies. In the continuing glorification of Castro by the BBC, this piece was one of the most outrageous I have heard. Its love-in with this man knows no bounds. Shocking.
For the BBC leftists what is the prob. with embargo turned “blockade”? Do they want the “pure” and “social” Cuba make business with “corrupt” USA capitalists?
John F,
Heard it – utterly sickening Castro love in – the BBC have really plumbed new depths….
One leader standing down another taking his place without subjectng himself to an election.
I am glad nothing like that could happen in our socialist paradise.
“If you force yourself to read the entire article…”
I actually found the whole article far easier to read, even though I disagree with the opinions expressed, than any of David Vance’s comedically poor, highly prejudiced, frequently inaccurate and risibly badly written pieces on this blog.
James Walker:
It is true that Castro sent tens of thousands of troops to fight in Angola in the 70s/80s, but I am sure I read somewhere that as part of the deal to resolve the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 the US agreed not to invade the island or allow its territory to be used as a launching base for any third-party invasion, which might account for Castro not being overly worried about “leaving the back door open.” Also in the aftermath of Vietnam I doubt whether there would have been much appetite for an invasion anyway.
if america wanted to destroy cuba economically all it would have to do is close GITMO, its Cubas main source of foreign currency and if the cubans wanted the US out of GITMO all they would have to do would tell their ppl to stop working for the Americans, who’d clean their toilets then
johnf/David Vance
Re the Today interview with Oliver Stone: Oliver’s killer point in Fidel’s favour (unchallenged by Naughtie) was that “he didn’t do it for the money”. Well that lets Mao, Pol Pot and Stalin off the hook then. Also Oliver – encouraged by Naughtie – couldn’t resist giving Bushitler a kicking at the end of the interview.
“I think Castro will continue to get very positive media treatment from his dear fans at the Beeb.”
And so it proves, David. Did anyone else hear the fawning letter from an email correspondent read out on the PM programme yesterday? The one that said that Castro’s education and healthcare system puts ours to shame.
Now I know the NHS has its little foibles, but let’s not try to compare it to this.
(Warning for the squeamish – you won’t like this image!)
http://picasaweb.google.com/samimurphy/CubanAndHaitianRefugees/photo#5069218233969348786
or this?
http://barbadosfreepress.wordpress.com/2006/02/19/if-barbados-needs-cuban-medical-help-then-we-are-really-in-trouble/
And are we to believe that the BBC don’t have access to pictures such as these?
Not all lefties remain so worshipful of the wonderful workers’ paradise that is Cuba.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/514326/castroandx2019s-cuba-was-no-place-for-a-socialist-like-me.thtml
I beg the indulgence of the site owners.
Firstly can I state I have recently been to Cuba and hate the place about as much as it is possible to hate any country. It is not just very bad it is far worse then even I first imagined. Which is very much worse then can possibly be imagined.
I am a small business man. Consider myself to be basically RIGHT WING, a life time libertarian as well as a Conservative Party activist and therefore voter.
The following points are never made by the MSM and especially the BBC, for reasons that will become I hope, very clear.
Castro was financed trained and promoted by the CIA. ( This is a well documented fact that not even the CIA deny. )
The Soviet Union no longer exists, so any deals made 46 years ago no longer apply. The cold war apparently ended 17 years ago.
The United States, if they wished to, could therefore invade and liberate the place within a few days. Or simply easily finance and promote a counter revolution. My personal impression is that the people of Cuba are so sick, poor, starving, repressed and depressed little resistance would be found. I am sure the CIA must know this.
The Bay of Pigs was a deliberate CIA planned to be cock-up. Designed to create an enemy close to the US so to make the American people insecure. While placating Cuban exiles and Cuban nationalists. Mainly by getting many of the bravest ones killed.
The Cuban Missile crisis was also a CIA KGB plot to achieve the same, and cement Cuba as a regular thorn in the American peoples side. Also to act as a constant propaganda tool for the effectively fascist Corporate Capitalist powers that control America and much of the world including the UK.
Olly Stone as is Mick Moore are both working for the CIA, whether they know they are or not. (I personally believe they both know they are, but there is no way to be certain, and it matters not much, anyway.)
The CIA is part of a very high establishment organization that created and sponsors pan-national governments such as the EU and the UN. The EU sponsors the BBC, so there is your connection.
Why do you lot think the CIA has bases in Cuba of all places. Can you lot not collectively ever put 2 and 2 together and come up with even close to 4?
For these government and their secret service bodies to have a purpose. Conflict, potential or real, must be promoted or created to help keep the establishments of the world in power over the common people. It is the justification for higher and higher taxes, larger and larger military expenditure, ever growing government, and its otherwise pointless repressive laws.
We are being and have long since been mind controlled by our own ruling elites. THE BBC IS PLAINLY CLEARLY AND OBVIOUSLY PART OF THIS RULING CLASS CONSPIRACY. They conspire constantly together against the interests of the common man. But only at the highest possible levels.
IMO without this constant messing with our heads, the world would be in a almost constant state of peace. This is no good at all for the ruling class of any state. Not Europe, China, Africa, Britain, America, Cuba or anywhere else. Because if this happened the ordinary people would quickly start to realize that they do not need them. That they are in reality our worst enemies and aways have been.
There is a fair and reasoned argument that says that economic political and social division and conflict, is essential to the accent of man. But that is a different issue. An issue they have no intention of debating with the sheep or the cannon fodder.
Put it this way.
Do any of you really believe that if the people that really control the United States REALLY wanted to assassinate Castro they would not have done so 49 years ago?
This is a very big complicated game they are playing.
I hope that with the help of the internet we will soon stop helping them play it. Because this game we always lose. Whether we know we are playing it, or that we are always losing at it, or not.
Umbongo and others.
You are right to see the BBC as having a completely contradictory attitude to moral religious and political problems and issues. This because it clearly DOES to the point of seeming insanity.
But please, instead of believing the equally insane thing that the BBC its governors and all its employees are all mad.
Perhaps you may start thinking a bit more ‘out of the box,’ as they say.
Please please remember this evil divisive left, right, middle, propaganda and eventual brainwashing has been going on for very a long time. Not just in our media, but within our entire education and political establishments. Way before you, me or anyone working at the BBC were even born.
Therefore 99.99% at least of the people involved, have absolutely no idea what they are really doing. I DO, and so now you do too. So you NOW have no more excuses for your justifiable confusion.
Understand this and all becomes as clear as day. Carry on thinking what they have trained you to think, and nothing will EVER make sense, for the rest of your lives.
The BBC and MI5/6 monitor this site. I am not a naturally paranoid person. Just a free thinker with a big mouth that simply cant stand having the piss taken out of me or other ordinary people.
My identity I am sure is now known by the powers that be, so if I suddenly stop commenting, you may guess why.
However I think it is now time to tell it how it is, because these people now have simply so much control over just about every single aspect of our seemingly free existence. Therefore they no longer really give a serious toss, what people like myself say or believe.
Atlas shrugged:
I am a small business man. Consider myself to be basically RIGHT WING,…ipant in this dastardly scheme.
…Please please remember this evil divisive left, right, middle, propaganda and eventual brainwashing has been going on for very a long time…
My identity I am sure is now known by the powers that be, so if I suddenly stop commenting, you may guess why…
…Therefore they no longer really give a serious toss, what people like myself say or believe.
Atlas shrugged | 23.02.08 – 4:08 pm |
—————————————–
You’ve thrown up two (at least) contradictory points there:
1. You say that the division of right, left, etc is purposefully DIVISIVE and essentially a brainwashing regime. But this after having declared yourself right-wing. Logically, this puts you as an active and willing participant in that scheme.
2. If ‘they’ (the Illuminati? The New World Order? The giant man-eating lizards so beloved by Mr. Icke?) no longer give a serious toss what ordinary people like you say, why should you suddenly “stop commenting”? Hmm? As far as they are concerned, you are just another mad figure of fun spouting laughable bollocks and thus easily ignored…
I think Area 51 is missing one of it’s aliens…..
What I wanna know is why Haloscan lets Atlas shrugged post such long comments. If I try something like that, it chops me off well before the end.
I think he must have some power he’s not telling us about.
Atlas shrugged,
While it’s true that the US decided long ago to basically let Cuba fester like an open sore for decades as an example, much of the rest of your story is sheer fantasy.
It’s a good thing people like you are around to make sure everyone thinks the CIA is omnipotent. Goodness knows that if the enemies of the US really knew just how fractured and incompetent the Agency has been for I don’t know how long now, this country would be in serious trouble.
But hey, let’s take your logic seriously for a moment. If you are a Conservative party member and activist, then you are, as blankfrank pointed out, part of the problem. Although it’s pretty obvious that you are an unwitting participant in the machinations of the evil Establishment against whom you protest here. Even with all this arcane knowledge you seem to be unaware of who controls your own party. MI-6 and a few mates from school really pull the strings behind the scenes. And let’s face it, they’ve been split between the CIA and the KGB since the late ’50s (naturally a few shirt-lifters went both ways). So your own party is another tool for the Establishment to keep people like yourselves where you belong. How else to explain the fool Cameron getting so much public support from supposedly proper conservatives?
Hang on, that’s starting to make sense….
Other than that, do you have any comments on the recent episodes of BBC bias being discussed on this blog?
David Preiser:
While it’s true that the US decided long ago to basically let Cuba fester like an open sore for decades as an example, much of the rest of your story is sheer fantasy.
That’s why we come here, David. Analysis of that quality just can’t be got anywhere else.
I’m not ashamed to admit that Atlas Shrugged had me for the last three hours.
Then along you come.
Devastating. But vital…
.
The involvement (or not) of the US (or others) in funding & sustaining Castro (for whatever ends) is absolutley NOT important here.
The key to this is that the BBC are fawning over a Dictator who suppresses his people, denies them the vote and forbids them to travel or leave Cuba.
Who pulls Castros strings need not detain us here, the fact that Jim Naughtie and others at the BBC think that the resulting puppet show is a jolly good thing is what is worrying.
For anyone who has lurking rose coloured specs when it comes to Fidel’s Cuba (no-one on this site I know apart from the trolls) – Neil Clark’s devastating account of his holiday in Cuba last year in this week’s Spectator is a must read. How these bogus liberal/lefties at the BBC can sustain their delusions (or worse) in the face of this kind of evidence truly beats me.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/i//the-magazine/features/514326/castroandx2019s-cuba-was-no-place-for-a-socialist-like-me.thtml
That’s a good read, an excellent article, but I’d be suprised if Mr. Clark suddenly had a Damascene conversion-style experience because of it. You never know.
But yes, the fawning over Castro by our beloved beeb is revolting. I do agree that as an a political figure of the 20th cenrury he deserves some little coverage, but sadly, the beeb don’t know where to draw the line between a piece of reportage and a panegyric.
Hillhunt, you can sneer all you like. Your words are meaningless. I do not hear you. You will accomplish nothing here.
But by all means continue to post as many comments as you like, if it makes you feel better.
Was there some BBC bias you wanted to deny today?
David Preiser
I do not claim to know everything. I thought I made that quite clear. I work almost entirely with my own common sense and personal experience, backed up by a large slice of Jungian psychology and much reading of straight forward main stream history books.
It seems that I have had the desired affect and made people think a bit. Which is fine by me.
The CIA is not omnipresent. It works with similar organizations around the world. It is not the unseen hand it is only one of the main fingers.
Please do not think for one second I am anti American or anti capitalist. I am a libertarian in the pretty much Ron Paul mode. Which means I not only LOVE AMERICA and AMERICANS, I don’t really trust anyone or anything, especially when my life liberty and most of all my spare cash are concerned.
I have no particular extra comments about BBC coverage concerning Castro.
Other then stating yet again that the BBC is clearly part of a massively clever conspiracy to spread establishment disinformation and division around the entire planet.
I fail to see how virtually any reader or contributor to this site can believe anything else. You all see it YOURSELVES every day in every single product the BBC broadcasts.
The BBC claims and very much seems to be ANTI AMERICAN, ANTI BRITISH ESTABLISHMENT, ANTI CAPITALIST, ANTI SEMITIC and ANTI many many other things. Which is very largely is almost all of the time.
BUT and it is a very big BUT.
The simple TRUTH is that it can not under any circumstances be any of these things whatsoever. When it really comes down to the proverbial IT.
Who better can there possibly be to spread establishment disinformation then the BBC?
Who would you think some brainwashed lefty would trust more. Me, you, this blog, David Cameron, Lord Rothschild, The Queen of England herself, or the BBC?
The best trained highly interested lier to get away with really important bullshit, is the propagandist the idiot thinks he can trust the most.
Surly this fact is a plane as the nose on our faces. Or has 30 years in business clouded my vision?
I made some very substantive points on my last post. I note none of them has yet to be even seriously contradicted never mind answered.
I have spoken to many Cuban Nationalists in my cousins home state of Florida over the years. None of these people have the slightest understanding as to why the US has not put an end to their countries suffering many years ago. They know that the place is set for counter revolution and has been for 45 years at least.
But the button has never been pressed since the Bay of Pigs. Any historical reading of the BofP fiasco would indicate is was not then either, in any serious way imaginable. For gods sake this is the country that pushed Hitler our of western Europe and the Japanese Empire out of the Pacific.
You can ask yourself WHY, and keep asking until you come up with an answer that is logical?
Atlas shrugged,
I never thought for a moment that you were anti-American or any of that, if it helps. But your essays are part of a discussion for an entirely different blog from this one. This does nothing to contribute to the discussion at hand, that the BBC talking heads love the illusion of Castro and Cuba for no other reason than it’s a tiny thorn in the side of the US. Idiotic BBC producers think this way entirely on their own. No marching orders from above needed.
The points that ‘Atlas Shrugged’ makes, although ill measured, support my long held suspicions about Castro’s real relationship with the West generally and the USA in particular.
Whatever secret treaty subsisted between the US and the USSR in the wake of the so called ‘Missile Crisis’ (a strange affair which is starting to unravel very slowly)this would not have hindered the CIA from subverting Castro from within (remember Allende)or from sponsoring some third party military strike when the wall came down.
All this serves to show that liberal lefties are not the intellectual sophisticates they imagine themselves to be.
Road Map Shrugs:
On Love…
I not only LOVE AMERICA and AMERICANS, I don’t really trust anyone or anything, especially when my life liberty and most of all my spare cash are concerned.
Only St Paul puts it better.
Don’t you think?
Biased BBC: The Love Train
.
When Castro does kick the bucket, perhaps the BBC would be kind enough to drop the loathsome Great Leader facade and list his real achievements:
Confiscation of land from Cubans for what turned out to be Soviet-style collectivized farms.
Elimination of free elections.
Capture of all TV, press and radio for government propaganda purposes.
Termination of all cultural, political and economic ties with the United States.
Forming an alliance with Russia.
Breaking up of family life and placing medium-aged children into special farm communes so “the children will be under the influence of teachers and not their families”.
Confiscation of more than a billion dollars worth of American industry which Castro had neither the expertise nor finances to operate.
The sending of more than 600 persons to the firing squads when first taking over Cuba.
So now media cannot have an opinion? CNN, Fox, Al Jazeera – all biased – CNN focusing on the beauty of Bush, Fox the scathing and unreliable remarkrs on anything that moves and Al Jazeera focusing purely on the perspective of the Middle East. Regarding the issue on Fidel, didn’t he nationalised markets and protected from the corruption and exploition of Cuba’s resources from America in 1959? i wonder whoever created this site must either be oblivious or incredibly naiive. Furthermore, “David Vance” please discuss perspectives you have on history: the cold war, the WW2 – from another perspective would you call that biased? Anyway i can’t believe i bothered to even visit this non-sensical site.
No problem with news media having an opinion, as long as it`s stated as such and not presented as fact.
Bbc opinion, as presented is usually indistingishable from fact,and often the line between the two is intentionally blurred.
The killer blow, payment for this`opinionated`news is compulsory, on pain of imprisonment.
The government do not force any of us to pay for CNN, Fox, Al Jazeera and sky.
When forced to pay for a news service that strangely prides itself on impartiality.
In a country with political views that range from left of marx to the right of genghis khan, i have the right to expect news delivered as a public service is,
informative,accurate,politically neutral and free from the political opinions of it`s editors and
presenters.
Even the bbc,or at least some of its employees have admitted this aint so,check out the sidebar.
Anyway i can’t believe i bothered to even visit this non-sensical site.
Jon | 24.02.08 – 4:26 am
Let me be the first.
8) The BBC unlike all the other examples you give has a legal obligation for neutrality.
8) The BBC is supported by a compulsory tax, enforced by penalties up to and including gaol. It is not a private business subject to market forces
8) The BBC by its charter represents Britain to the world, not its enemies
David Vance
Jon’s post reinforces an idea I’ve had for a long time. It should discourage newbies from bringing up the same questions, time after time. This blog needs a F.A.Q. file
and a `dumb` filter
Only St Paul puts it better.
Don’t you think?
Biased BBC: The Love Train
.
Hillhunt | 23.02.08 – 11:39 pm | #
Hillhunt (AKA “sticky fingers”) – shallow, smug, a bit pervy and typically beeboid.
http://nothingtodowithhunting.blogspot.com/2006/08/rio-ferdinands-punternet-wind-ups.html
deegee: ” The BBC unlike all the other examples you give has a legal obligation for neutrality.”
Unfortunately, most commenters on Biased BBC seem to operate on a definition of ‘neutrality’ that the rest of the world wouldn’t recognise.
Neutrality – actually, more accurately, we’re talking about balance – does not mean that the BBC should never report on things which some may not agree with. It does not mean that News Interactive can’t carry comment, if clearly labelled as such.
banjo: “and a `dumb` filter”
I’m all for that. But I suspect it would filter out 90% of all content on the site…
Matt, in my opinion BBC news is biased and I don’t want to pay for it for that reason. I’ve no objection to you or anyone else buying BBC news if it appeals to them. This freedom to buy the news we personally want to buy already applies to every single news source in the UK except the BBC. It is about time this anomaly is ended, and if BBC news is so trusted it has nothing to fear from a voluntary BBC subscription system. People willingly buy good quality products. They don’t need to be forced to buy them.
The BBC’s coverage of Castro is something I wouldn’t buy. It is biased, third rate journalism from people who don’t need to produce quality product to attract customers.
John Reith Spins in His Grave:
Nice find! Hillhunt has been busted with his own attempts at a blog.
http://nothingtodowithhunting.bl…t-wind- ups.html
The profile of which has had a staggering 541 views since June 2006.
No wonder he comes up here so eager for attention. No-one is coming to him.
Love the posting about Ferdinand and Punternet Hillhunt. That would be if I knew what the fuck the point of it was supposed to be. A lot like your postings here really. And just like them, I found the only proper thing to do with your pathetic ramblings was to excercise my scroll wheel on them.
Jon
“… i can’t believe i bothered to even visit this non-sensical site.”
Well, you don’t need us to spell out what you can go and do then…