How the BBC have been relishing the news that the Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has been found guilty of an abuse of power by an official inquiry in Alaska. If you want bias incarnate listen to this link if you can stomach it….with even Watergate being thrown into the rhetorical swirl. The BBC, like the rest of the Obamessiah cheer-leading MSM, are using this to beat up McCain and Palin bang on cue. In fact the report shows that the Governor acted within her proper and lawful authority in the reassignment of Walt Monegan. The report also illustrates that this was a partisan led inquiry run by Obama supporters and the Palins were completely justified in their concern regarding Trooper Wooten given his violent and rogue behavior. Of course if we want real investigative journalism, I can’t wait for the BBC to get stuck into Obama’s association with self proclaimed terrorists and his outreach programme into radical Islam. For some reason, the Beeb have been mute on those minor matters but then again I guess they are so excited about the fact that they can drag Sarah Palin’s name through the mud that they just don’t have the time. Also have a look at the image of Palin the BBC use on their lead portal to illustrate this story, subtle eh? The witch-hunt the BBC have been leading against the Alaskan Governor has been remarkable in it’s intensity as even those who are not fans of Palin acknowledge. It makes me hope she will run for the Presidency in 2012 as the prospect of the BBC intelligentsia being driven mad appeals.
THE PERILS OF PALIN.
Bookmark the permalink.
It is interesting that the bbc have become a little more balanced on Troopergate. This is because it is now an unexploded bomb, and Reuters, Bloomberg, and Forbes have all given far more balanced and comprehensive information than the bbc.
For instance Blanchflower was paid $100,000 for his 8 week job, and the founding committee were very divided on its findings, but still allowed it to be put in the public domain.
I wonder why?
Also the bbc are very scared that they be branded pro Obamma and anti-USA in America – this is now happening and becoming publically known.
A telephone interview on the Rush Limburgh (sic) Show brought up bbc bias toward the Democrats and their biased questioning.
It went into word by word detail how the bbc was confronted by a McCain supporter with this when they were interviewing outside a shopping precinct.
Getting this message constantly to the USA is a sure way to curtail the bbc’s ridiculous self defeating bias.
The 2006 Obama – Odinga lovefest in Kenya will surely come up just before the election?
about bloody time that the yanks woke up to the BBC…
“special relationship” my ass
yeah – thats some relationship – suck up to america , while at the same time stabbing in the back with bbc propaganda worldwide.
at least the french and germans are upfront and honest and dont try to play that game with the americans.
Archduke
“special relationship” my ass
precisely – my opinion of the USA after it stabbed Britain in the back over the suez canal – siding with General Nasser , the saddam hussein of his day
On the subject of the subversive nature of the BBC, I just posted this on the open thread:
Meanwhile, you’re not going to believe this: I turned on that old-fashioned thing called a radio about an hour ago at about 18:55 GMT and while searching for a station stumbled across the World Service and these words:
The Koran, coming to a skyscraper near you.
This was followed by a peal of laughter.
I was livid. Unfortunately the reception was not great and I missed the name of the programme, but from the Internet guide it was probably Over to You, from 18:40 to 19:00 GMT, though it’s possible what was on the radio at the time differed from the internet programme. I’m going to try to track the programme on “Listen Again” and take this further.
In many respects the foul BBC has become an apologist for Islamic terror.
geoffrey sturdy: This so called Special Relationship has only ever been seen by the British. The Americans generally see the UK as no different to the rest of Europe and it’s something that does piss me off about the USA.
On Fox News for example the likes of Bill O’Reilly talk about Europe not doing their bit in Afghanistan, yet we have had thousands of British soldiers fighting and dying, but Fox do paint the UK as part of Europe and not fighting (like the French and Germans for ecample)
You can look to later evidence than the Suez Crisis for evidence of this. The cancellation of the TSR2 was politically motivated by the USA at the time the UK was looking for a finacial baleout from the World Bank and the excellent TSR2 was competing against the American F-111 bomber.
AS much as I love the USA I do sometimes despair at how little they see the UK as being not part of europe and stamp on us as much as they do Germany and France.
Most Brits love America and Americans, but when British blood is being spilt but ignored by the USA media people get pissed off.
I’ve written to Bill O’Reilly at Fox News about him lumping the UK in with the rest of Europe about Afghanistan, but have never had a reply.
Meanwhile, this is wildly OT but Israel is not doing too badly in the qualifying rounds for the 2010 Football World Cup in South Africa. Just beat Luxembourg 3-1 while last month Luxembourg beat Switzerland in a shock 2-1 defeat in Zurich. It’s early days yet, with three games played and seven to come but Israel is placed second, below Greece and above Switzerland:
http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/preliminaries/europe/standings/index.html
Israel has qualified only once for the World Cup, in 1970. I want to see them qualify and Iran qualify as well and be drawn against Israel. The Iranians would then naturally refuse to play the evil Jews in case they might get contaminated, and they would have to drop out of the competition in disgrace.
Probably face a stiff penalty as well – like not being allowed to compete in the Cup till 2022.
Ah well, we can dream.
geoffrey sturdy | 11.10.08 – 8:40 pm
glad you recognise that it goes both ways.
although the suez crisis was part of a bigger Eisenhower policy – to never let the british empire rise again.
for they had dragged them into a 2nd european war. and come 1945, the americans were heartily sick of it.
cant blame them to be honest with you.
Martin | 11.10.08 – 9:34 pm
martin – we are fully signed up to the EU arent we?
that is why the yanks dismiss us as “europeans”.
a bit of a reality check is needed by yourself – step outside your shoes and look at britain as an american.
try it.
it aint pretty.
Most Brits love America and Americans, but when British blood is being spilt but ignored by the USA media people get pissed off.
I’ve written to Bill O’Reilly at Fox News about him lumping the UK in with the rest of Europe about Afghanistan, but have never had a reply.
Martin | 11.10.08 – 9:34 pm
most yanks realise that britain is a lost cause. just look at our government sucking up to islamists and allowing our country to become a hotbed of islamic extremism.
the “britain is lost” meme is quite common amongst americans i converse with. germany and france – not so much. both countries , despite the EU , seem to be vastly more on side.
also – the fact that we’ve had a socialist government for over 10 years doesnt help matters either.
although the germans not shooting taliban in afghanistan really does piss them off.
the french attacking somali pirates without recourse to the UN or EU is something that they admire… “fuck human rights – lets send the commandos in…”
the french have balls.. we dont. and the yanks admire folks that stand up for themselves. instead we give them Marxist Gordon fucking Brown..
martin – as ever, i haven’t got a bloody clue what you are on about. Galloway is filth. But he is on the extreme. The righteous way is not on the extremes.
Archduke – no i don’t see it. and neither does mccain. what gibbering nonsense. either candidate is fit for the presidency.
And Gordon – agreed, my grief quickly turned to anger and a desire for military action. i supported the invasions of afghanistan and iraq, and still do.
whitewineliberal: Galloway is a twat, but he’s of your ilk.
However, please answer the question. 8 years of liberal Bill Clinton gave us 9/11 and other terrorist attacks.
What makes you think 4 or 8 years of Obama won’t give us worse?
Hmmm Clinton also appears to have given us the present financial crisis with the support of Obama but no mention on the BBC.
No martin, galloway is of your ilk; full of insults, and inanities, and little else.
Martin,
I listen to O’Reilly and find him to be pretty fair and balanced, TBH. I fear he is right about Britain these days – the country is in hock to the EU socialists, despite what many on this site believe. Tell me you are not embarrassed by the mealy mouth MOD and the lack of resources and respect for our servicemen. I’m sure O’Reilly would be the first to say that the problem is not the guys at the front but the assholes that direct them from above.
We appear to always go back to the adage “Lions led by Donkeys” in the defense of our country.
Now NuLabor have a new MOD boss and listening to him is like listening to the previous one but without the past experience – I have no confidence the forces will get better equipped and supported.
It is all very well saying the country gets the government it deserves, but the armed forces have to live and suffer under these incompetent fools.
Britain is lost
Very interesting piece on the Rush Limbaugh website on which there is a transcript of a show in which a caller at a McCain-Palin rally last week described an ad-hoc exchange she had with a BBC reporter:
“There was a gentleman whom I knew had to be from the media, although I didn’t recognize him. He had a microphone in his hand, and right next to him was someone with a camera. So as I’m passing him, I said, “Make sure that you report the attendees accurately.” I didn’t really think he’d respond, but indeed he did, and I think he was kind of taken aback that somebody might challenge his journalistic integrity.
He asked why I would suggest that he wouldn’t do that, and I said, “Well, it’s really quite obvious. You rarely report the Republican attendees very accurately.” And then with that, of course, he tried to engage me and of course I was a willing participant in, you know, why I would choose to vote for McCain as opposed to Obama because Obama was better on the economy. I stopped him dead in his tracks and reminded him that really was a specious argument.
RUSH: Wait a second. I have lost you here. He asked you a question who you’re going to vote for, McCain or Obama because why would you vote for McCain, because Obama is so much better on the economy? The reporter said that to you?
CALLER: Why he did. He was from the BBC. That’s why I didn’t recognize him.
RUSH: Ah.
CALLER: He was trying to lead me in that direction, and I quickly reminded him that I believed his argument — and my daughter would love this expression, the argument — was a canard. Clearly I don’t believe Obama is better on anything, much less the economy. But he persisted, and I said to him, “Number one, I reject your argument out of hand that Obama would be better for the economy. He’s an anti-capitalist. He’s anti-business. He’s anti-everything I hold dear. But even if you were right — and I don’t expect that you are — what good is a sound economy if we’re not kept safe?” That seemed to surprise him. So he said, “So you think McCain would keep you safe?” I said, “Indeed I do.” He said, “So you think that being kept safe is more important than a sound economy?” So I had to remind him that clearly a sound economy is of no value if you have terrorists at your doorstep…”
So, the BBC’s pro-Obama bias is well known even outside the UK. Good that our American cousins recognise and are aware of this, and are ready and able to deal with it as this caller did.
JohnW
Sounds like Justin Webb to me
JohnA,
I think it was Webb. Here’s why:
Three days ago, RR commented that he heard this caller on Limbaugh’s show:
Here’s the transcript from the Rush Limbaugh show yesterday. The caller had been queueing to get into a McCain-Palin rally when she started talking to a Beeboid, quite possibly Justin Webb himself.
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/7966340393506936931/#424127
This call took place, then, on Thursday, Oct. 9. On the 10th at 1:15pm, mailman made this comment:
I had to take a double look at the 10pm news last night.
Webb was on covering an article on McCain and Palins latest rallys and how there were so many people there that they all had to wait outside…which McCain then did an off the cuff speach to them.
I was absolutely gob smacked…surely this would have to be the very FIRST item ever published by Webb that was actually positive about McCain?
Maybe Webbs drugs are wearing off?
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/9167292892722738193/#424155
I replied:
Webb is very, very sensitive about appearing partisan. He hasn’t really done it since the Palin Derangement Syndrome kicked in, but he used to go through all sorts of contortions on his blog to appear even-handed. And not as bad as his damning-with-faint-praise general defense of the US speeches, either.
What time of day did you see this report? If it was, in fact, Webb who was confronted by that Limbaugh caller, he very well may have done this report you’re talking about in response to that person, just to prove that he’s not biased. Things like this tend to be the obvious exception which prove the rule.
It would be interesting to know the timeline of events here. You may have caught Webb red-handed.
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/9167292892722738193/#424170
If the incident is now on Limbaugh’s website, that’s a good thing. Limbaugh seems to be vaguely aware of what the BBC is doing, but he just lumps them in with “all Liberal media”, so doesn’t consider the difference between the BBC’s position and that of US media. I doubt anything will come of this. I do wonder, though, if he has any idea how many negative articles they have about him on the BBC website? Webb certainly keeps an eye on his site.
I still think Webb’s report that mailman caught is a direct, guilty response to his experience with Limbaugh’s caller. The timeline fits, as does ol’ Justin’s pattern of behavior.
She was found innocent of charges, which was what all of the fuss was about. Why is the media still discussing this, it’s over. What about the association of terrorism and fraud that the liberal illuminati have?