Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. This is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may also be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated! It’s your space, use it wisely.
General BBC-related comment thread!
Bookmark the permalink.
Who will the BBC support on UK MASS IMMIGRATION controls: Keith VAZ or Sir Andrew GREEN?
‘Daily Mail’ report:
“Minister calls for stricter immigration controls amid fears rising unemployment could lead to racial tensions”
[Extract]:
“But ministers have previously resisted calls for an overall limit on immigration.
Keith VAZ, the chairman of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, said he astonished by the comments: ‘I would be astonished at a Labour immigration minister in effect changing the policy.
‘His predecessor and the Home Secretary have made it very clear they do not support a quota.’
“Sir Andrew GREEN, the chairman of Migrationwatch, which argues for balanced migration, said Mr Woolas was the first Labour minister to link immigration and the population.
‘If they succeed in delivering, they will have done our country a considerable service,’ he said.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1078680/Minister-calls-stricter-immigration-controls-amid-fears-rising-unemployment-lead-racial-tension.html
Sheesh, the November party invite list must be reducing hourly..
Licence to ill
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/18/friedrichschiller-television
I guess at least they won’t need to ask for so many to BYOB bubbly.
george r – migration watch were on r5 this morning. frank field and keith Best on
r4. good balanced coverage.
some good EU and govt knocking stuff on today this morning. had the chap from the metric martyrs on, who is terrific. humphries was v biased in his favour, and quite right to. well done auntie!
wwl
If you do not work for the BBC, or are not a marxist, why do you bother coming to this blog wasting your time? You defend the indefensible. Maybe you’re one of Dolly Drapers Nu Lab drones?
BBC report:
“Migrant numbers ‘must be reduced'”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7677419.stm
Of course, the Labour government has done the damage to British society as a result of its open-door policy on mass immigration; and the demographic consequences, notably high immigrant birth-rates of certain immigrant groups, will be with British people for ever.
The contradictions of Labour policy on immigration continue, as Brown/D.Miliband/J.Murphy still campaign for the entry to the European Union of 75 million Muslim Turks, many of whom (1 million?) will come to the UK, and by EU rules cannot be refused residence, and citizenship.(This should be spelt out more in the BBC report, but it doesn’t see this as an issue of concern for the British people.)
For the record, these are the numbers relating to MASS IMMIGRATION into the UK, which has been largely the result of LABOUR government policies:
[Extract from ‘Migrationwatch’ document: ‘Balanced Migration’,pdf format]:
“Our concern is not the principle of immigration, but its scale. In recent years we have
seen an entirely new phenomenon: very large scale immigration, the impact of which
has become a matter of increasing public concern. Official figures show that, over the
last ten years, nearly 2.5 million immigrants have arrived and almost three quarters of
a million British people have left, thus adding 1.6 million directly to our population.
This rate of arrival is 25 times higher than during any previous influx of immigration
in nearly a thousand years of our nation’s history.
This situation is not mainly due to the recent influx of East Europeans from new EU
member states. Leaving aside the movement of British citizens, two thirds of
immigrants in 2006 were from outside the EU. Nor is this influx due to globalisation.
It is largely the result of government policies dating back more than a decade.”
[Preface].
Click to access balancedmigration.pdf
Nu Labour and the BBC knows that our economic collapse will reduce immigration from Eastern Europe. They are trying to get credit for something that will happen anyway.
Immigration from the rest of the world will be less affected.
Nobody in Government or the BBC will point out that the total number of immigrants in the country will still be increasing just not increasing as fast as it was increasing before.
Yesterday’s R4 PM programme was an excellent example of the BBC and it’s mindset
Nice little report on why Islamic banking may be the way forward in the current banking crisis.
Nice little report ripping ‘Joe the Plumber’ to shreds, and by linkage, John McCain (whilst still ignoring Obama’s past)
However pride of place must go to the Letters section (naturally these won’t be ‘selected’ on any basis of being in tune with what the BBC believe).
Some wag suggesting that unemployed bankers could be put in charge of the railways so that when they inevitably screw-up the Government (all praise) can step in and privatise the railways (Hooray!)
This was then followed by some Dave-Spartist type pointing out that the Government have done an excellent job and it’s all the fault of Thatcher anyway.
Can anyone pinpoint the date when BBC News turned from just reporting the news to pushing their ‘agenda’ at every opportunity?
Just as the BBC’s main emphasis in its political line of Labour apologetics on the ‘financial crisis’ is not to apportion any blame to Brown and Labour ‘boom and bust’ policies over the past 11 years, so the BBC gives the impression that Labour is not responsible for the immigration of over 2.5 million people to the UK.
So the BBC, as on ‘Newsnight’ last night, in its attitude to a Tory shadow Treasury official who was attempting to argue the case about Brown’s responsibility for the economic crisis, was cut short with a ‘we don’t want to know who you think caused the crisis, we want to know what you as a Party would do about it’.
Similarly, on mass immigration, the BBC wants to get off the issue of Labour’s responsibility for this over a decade, and to narrow the discussion to: what is to be done now.
The BBC: and its politically convenient amnesia to favour Labour.
The article about immigration policy also failed to mention that the link with population size was made first by David Cameron and that is where Labour has lifted the idea from.
The BBC, its economic/business policy pundits, and the Labour Party connections:
1.) Robert PESTON:
biographer of a book on Gordon Brown-
[Extract from ‘Wikipedia’ on Peston]:
“The fly cover of the book describes how ‘Peston was given unprecedented access to Gordon Brown and his friends and colleagues. Telling Brown’s side of the Blair/Brown power struggle, it is believed that Peston has used the relationship then built up with Brown for many of his later financial news story ‘scoops’ at the BBC.”
‘The Daily Mash’ has:
[Extract]:
Tom Logan, a trainee accountant, said: “He only err gets all these err stories, because he err spent much of the err last 10 years with his err nose rammed straight up err Gordon Brown’s err dirt box.”
‘Robert Peston transformed into pure energy’
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/celebrity/robert-peston-transformed-into-pure-energy-200810081310/
2.) Will HUTTON:
On his political views, ‘Wikipedia’ entry summarises:
“The analysis in his books is characterised by a support for the European Union and its potential, alongside a disdain for what he calls American conservatism • defined, among other factors, as a certain attitude to markets, property and the social contract.”
On his prostrate attitude towards the BBC (he is tipped by some to be the next indentikit ‘multicultural’ General Commissar of the BBC), let him speak for himself, with this conclusion to his subjugating public lecture for the BBC.
If Peston’s nose is near to Brown, Hutton’s nose is apparently near to that of the BBC:
“For it[the BBC] is a great Enlightenment institution • recognised outside this country for being one of our very best national achievements. It is a global name with global reach. If its reason for being is to be one of the principle upholders of Britain’s public realm, paradoxically it gets very little public reward or acknowledgement for doing so. It is time that we the public had better mechanisms for certainly expressing our concerns • but also our appreciation. You’ve got your faults, BBC. But you are loved.”(by W. Hutton).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/thefuture/transcript_hutton.shtml
‘Evening Standard’:
“The truth behind the cant of a BBC fat cat” (by David Sexton):
[Extract]:
“In her address to the Royal Television Society, Bennett [Ms. Jana Bennett, ‘Director of Vision’ BBC] actually spoke aloud the corporation’s holy slogan: ‘I embrace diversity’. That’s not the entirety of the BBC’s most sacred mantra, though.
“In its entirety, the text runs ‘I embrace diversity’, and then, sotto voce but never to be omitted,
‘and I love the licence fee’. In Jana Bennett’s own case, she’s probably quite fervent about it, I’d guess. Last year, we paid her £536,000 in salary and bonus. At £139.50 a go, that was 3,842 licence fees all for her. Maybe, if I’m lucky, mine among them.”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23574429-details/The+truth+behind+the+cant+of+a+BBC+fat+cat/article.do
This is the ‘reality’ behind Labour’s vague statement on mass immigration controls, as the BBC reports it, by a Romanian, about the interests of Romananian people in Britain:
“Romanians call for equal right”
( by one Petru Clej, apparently a Romanian, who in this article appears to be reporting/lobbying on behalf of Romanian people in Britain.)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7668976.stm
The way this is reported, by a Romanian, the BBC, by default, represents the British people largely as bystanders in their own country (who are mugged to pay for this article as licencepayers)!
Not mine though as I dont have a television.
For some strange reason, the agents of the BBC are harrasing me because of the non trade between me and them.
I dont do business with the local Jaguar dealer, but he doesn`t threaten me in my house and accuse me of tax evasion.
Funny way to go about things.
A bit late but Front Row, The Radio 4 evening arts programme, last night managed to get its four penny worth in on America. Some author allowed to rant on about Sarah Palin saying he would leave the planet if she was elected VP. How I’d love to be waving goodbye as he launched himself with a one way ticket into space in early November. The presenter didn’t fail to get in her opinion of GWB and seemed disappointed that the new film about to be released about him isn’t as negative as hoped.
This is not the first time negative opinions on the U.S. government have been expressed on this programme. Mark Lawson is obviously not a fan of GWB but what the hell has that got to do with an “arts” programme? Oh hang on a minute it is on the BBC.
George R
Would you like to sign my petition which is going “round the world” for the Romanian labour market to be opened up to Moldovians, Kazakstani`s and North Koreans?
The news bulletin on Radio 4 has been bullshitting all day about Phil Woolas’s immigration announcement. The line they keep using is “the Tories claim/say the government have stolen/taken their policy”. It’s nothing to do with what the Tories claim/say; Labour have stolen this policy. It caused a huge ruckus at the election in 2005 because Blair played the race card with it. Labour won’t implement anything of course – they are just using it to sound tough. But why is it that the Tories only ever get to “claim” things on the BBC, rather than simple facts being true?
Andrew Gilligan has said the BBC would never have given him the freedom to publish the string of stories about Ken Livingstone’s record as London mayor that he wrote for the Evening Standard.
According to BBC staff magazine Ariel, Gilligan told the BBC audio and music festival: “BBC management would have wet themselves and back-pedalled on the story.”
The claim was denied by BBC director of editorial policy David Jordan, who replied: “The idea that we would run away is a figment of Andrew’s imagination.”
http://blogs.pressgazette.co.uk/wire/4041
But run away is exactly what BBC London’s political editor Tim Donovan did when offered Lee Jasper emails a year before the Evening Standard.
I was honestly prepared last night to sit down and watch the full hour of Newsnight where they were putting bankers and traders “on trial” about what went wrong. (I’m assuming that this was a full show and not the usual ‘best of the week’ mix they broadcast in the US about issues the BBC thinks we need to understand.)
Unfortunately, the very first question was – from Will Hutton, I think? – that because short-sellers don’t have any actual personal connection to the people on whose loans their trades are based, aren’t these people’s savings just chips with which you can gamble? Isn’t short-selling just pure gambling because the traders don’t have a personal connection to the mortgages and debt they’re trading on?
This is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever heard. If you put it like that, the entire stock market is a casino. Technically, I actually agree with that, but so what? All investments are gambles. Buying a house is a gamble, as is buying a stock or trading currency. (Did the BBC have George Soros on to smack him around for gambling when he helped tank the pound? I forget.) It’s completely specious to start this whole thing out based on the premise that only short-selling is gambling, and then only because the shorters don’t have a personal connection to the paper they’re trading. And Irwin Seltzer and the Tett woman played along.
The poor Scotsman in the dock didn’t know where to turn. I mean, he couldn’t very well say, “It’s all really gambling, innit?” So what the hell else could he do? Shameful that at least two otherwise intelligent people played along with that game. I guess they figure they’ll come out looking good in the end if they point fingers at the culprit, sort of like troublemakers in medieval villages fingering old ladies as witches.
I turned it off without waiting for the brilliant contributions of Gavin Esler, and watched Mobile Suit Gundam instead. If I’m expected to suspend my disbelief, I’d prefer that it’s while watching giant mecha bash each other in Japanese.
While I’m on the subject of stupid things that make me turn away from the BBC, if they’re not promoting this US election as the most important election in human history, why did they just run a commercial on BBC America about their coverage, telling me that this election will affect food prices world wide (accompanied by footage of small African children carrying bags of grain), “Climate Change” (with the obligatory polar bear), decide “peace in the Middle East”, and “change your world”?
Mere hype to get me to tune in to their coverage, of course. No evidence of the BBC playing on emotions, stoking fear, etc. They’re obviously just playing to my ego, buttering me up by telling me how important the US is. That must be it.
Are you able to record and upload that BBC America promo?
I see the BBC America blog is highlighting Ricky Gervais’s comments on Obama and Palin (loves the former, Hitler reference for the latter).
FWIW, The Office (US) is better than the original, IMHO.
In case you do not know about the malignant influence of Common Purpose on the BBC, you can find out here: http://www.stopcp.com/cpmedia.php
my word, that’s hilarious. is it a chris morris spoof?
Whats the difference between the soviet unions show trials and the BBC current affairs programmes?
Both are set up to deny a fair hearing,both are designed for a set verdict,both rely on fear and hatred,both revel in exposing scapegoats who cannot defend themselves,both use highly selective evidence and cutting, the former theough torture and fear, the latter through expert media manipulation!
In soviet times the orthodoxy ruled and EVERYTHING either had to support the greater narrative or be destroyed by any means necessary.
Dissent was crushed using blunt instruments of fear and torture and murder in soviet times, one will, one leader, one ideology, one cause, one agenda was the theme.
The BBC cannot use the above BUT they have learned by heart the more subtle propaganda tricks of both soviet and national socialism.
The BBC supports the national/international socialist method/agenda and uses all the subtle propaganda tools at its multi billion pound media empires disposal, the BBC are expert in fakery,dishonesty,dirty tricks,lies,manipulation and propaganda, its what they do best. They studied Marx and Engels and Trotsky at uni AND believed it, they seek a new world order based on what you might call an amalgamation of international and national socialism, I cannot think of a name for it, but it uses the media as a weapon where torture and murder are beyond it(for now) it will use character assasination,dirty tricks,selective editing,denying a voice to dissenters and all the other subtle tricks of the despot.
The BBC have been infiltrated by evil people and they are assisted by useful idiots(of which there has always been a plentiful supply) these usually end up in the same mass graves as the first victims once their usefulness comes to an end!
I hope a ‘useful idiot’ beeboid reads this and looks a little closer at the dirty hands that guide the empire, it takes just one to start the ball rolling, JUST ONE ‘UI’ to start breaking the spell, you there beeboid, reading this and smirking, will you still be smirking as you dig your own grave?
It started by denying others a fair platform and ended in the killing fields and grave pits.
WWL giggles and laughs, he thinks it cannot happen, he thinks it impossible in this day and age, he thinks he is safe as long as he sticks to the agenda, he thinks he is so right that everyone else is so wrong, so sure, so sure, and yet and yet that tiny voice so often ignored keeps whispering, lets hope he listens eh?
BBC report:
“Labout ‘floundering’ on migration”
(Note: BBC avoids word ‘IMMIGRATION’ in its headline.)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7677962.stm
Although this BBC report does refer to various political opinions, it underplays the issue of UNEMPLOYMENT of British people, which today’s ‘Sunday Express doesn’t:
“Immigrant Jobs Shock”
[Extract]:
“IMMIGRANTS are squeezing hundreds of thousands of British workers out of jobs, official figures show.
The explosive revelations, slipped out by the Government last week, forced an astonishing Labour U-turn last night with new Immigration Minister Phil Woolas admitting that it was too easy for migrants to come to Britain.
“The Tories accused Labour of hypocrisy and questioned whether ministers had the appetite to push through the tough immigration controls needed.
“The figures produced by the Office for National Statistics reveal that the number of British-born adults in work here fell by 365,000 in the past two years.
“During the same period the number of foreign-born adults working in Britain has soared by 865,000.”
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/66805/Immigrant-jobs-shock
George – the express is a ridiculous rag. The BBC link you give leads to a very good and balanced article, giving prominence to tory views The links show how the bcc is covering all the ground you could hope for. Radio 4 yesterday ditto, when the issue led its coverage.
Cassandra – the answer to your first question is quite a lot. What a ludicrous juxtaposition. Godwin’s in there somewhere.
“They seek a new World order based on what you might call an amalgamation of international and national socialism…etc” –
Does anyone else here agree with this? Not just me who thinks this is OTT presumably?
This morning the BBC are reporting through clenched teeth that:
“The presidents of the US, France and the European Commission have unveiled plans for a series of summits to discuss the global financial crisis. Speaking before talks at Camp David with Nicolas Sarkozy and Jose Manuel Barroso, George W Bush said it was “essential that we work together”… The Europeans want the meetings to pave the way for talks on an overhaul of the world’s financial regulatory systems.”
But why is Gordon “saviour of the world financial system” Brown not going to be there? Could it be that the Labour spinners and their friends in the BBC have exaggerated the role and influence of Gordon “the man who f*****d up the UK economy” Brown? Could it be that in reality world leaders know that Gordon Brown is a shambling joke of a Prime Minister, a man who got lucky when he inherited a healthy economy and wasted the inheritance on social-engineering and wild public spending?
whitewhineliberal
Do you read the Express? If not how have you formed your “liberal” opinion?
Please tell us which newspaper you read. It will help us better inform ourselves on your opinions and see what slanted view you voluntarily pay for rather than having to pay £140 a year for a slant I for one do not agree with.
Does anybody else think that the bint on the Andrew Marr show is giving Mandelson an soft interview. With both of them agreeing that he has done nothing wrong.
She let him ramble on far to long with what sounded like pre prepared answers to questions arranged in advance.
Baron Mandelso of Foy in the county of Herefordshire and Hatrlepool in the county of Durham. Thats a mouthful as he said to Reinaldo.
Ron Todd | 19.10.08 – 10:05 am | #
No, sorry, I don’t. Though I’d wish she’d have stopped saying ‘no one is excusing you of having done anything wrong’, which gives him an out. The media is asking serious, legitimate questions about social relationships colouring professional objectivity and responsibility. Mr. Marr et all please note.
So for me, the Andrew Marr Show – sans its ‘hero’…. No bad thing.
Maybe not having dinner partners interview politicians is a good thing.
So… go, Sophie!
If Peter ‘Just call me Lord’ M is an example of a government of all the talents being reassembled, Lord help us.
In several minutes of utter waffle, I could find no evidence of a fine mind or an ability to communicate, and whose final comments on his best buddy and unsubtle partisan (‘you are just being Tory press smearing me if you question my judgement’) lashings out betray a total lack of credibility, humility and sense of reality.
For a BBC interviewer, especially not one of their ‘big beasts’ (who have almost all been sucked into the belly of another beast), I thought she allowed him to take himself apart.
I’d be ready for a complaint from the ‘minders’ soon. And then sadly, a ‘correction’ from Aunty.
I’d suspect a plane has been sent for Mr. Marr right now.
whitewhineliberal 8:56 am
Thank you for informing me, as in automated replies from BBC complaints department, that:
“the BBC is covering all the ground you could hope for”.
That’s that then.
I have to presume that you are talking about the BBC’s coverage of IMMIGRATION here, sorry, MIGRATION, although you talk in vague generalities.
No. You may be amazed at this, but the BBC does not do what I hope for.
Nowhere near. On its coverage of IMMIGRATION, the US election, Climate, the Labour government, the EU, Islam, etc. etc.
But keep exposing yourself by trying to defend the indefensible.
Just how thick are the Tories?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7676076.stm
I see now Yvette Cooper is saying what I was suggesting the other week, that the banks should be stopped repossessing homes at the moment.
Why on Earth didn’t the Tories come out with this earlier instead of sucking up to the Government?
Sometimes I think the Tories want to lose the next election.
The BBC wanking on about the latest opinion poll again. Funny that over the last 6 months the BBC didn’t mention opinion polls once.
What the BBC don’t say is that most people still think he’s a loser.
I read most papers, and all the major broadsheets. The express i read. it’s a rag, a bad joke. its coverage of the missing young girl from portugal was as disgraceful a bit of journalism as this country has witnessed. it has no integrity, no standards. to pray it in aid of an argument is to lose the argument.
I like their horoscopes though
As a counter to the BBC’s propaganda on climate change, the second half of Christopher Booker’s article in today’s ‘Sunday Telegraph’:
“EU stands firm on carbon fantasies while Arctic ice grows”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/10/19/do1911.xml
whitewineliberal | 19.10.08 – 11:19 am | #
We all suffer from typos, but usually I know what is meant.
This defeats me.
ps: The signature ‘No sign of bias here’ at the end got left off.
Sunday Telegraph. P 11.
Greg Dyke gives the licence fee three years, at best. After that it’s over. The BBC should stop relying on the licence fee because it’s on the way out. The BBC spends half its £300,000,000 per year from the fee on collecting the money.
I think whitewine liberal is a fake. He is somebody doing a parody of a liberal to make them look bad.
Why else would he be scared to use his real name?
whitewhineliberal
An interesting, BBC complaints type, reply. Do you have to read all those newspapers for your work? You have told us you do have a job so I presume you do not sit in the Library all day reading them free there.
Do tell us which one(s) you actually pay for (on a daily basis), or will that give the game away.
The madness and bias roll-on, unabated.
R4, The World This Weekend devotes almost the entire programme to working out how the government can spend billions more taxpayers’ money in an attempt to ‘buy our way out of recession’.
Not a word is heard about the £50,000+ per head debt this spendthrift government has already landed us with.
Not a breath is spent on investigating the repeated failures of Keynesian economics – failures even acknowledged by Jim Callaghan.
There is silence on how the money could be found. How a country with record PSBR (if you ignore Mcbean’s Enron accounting) could function with the levels of taxation needed, is ignored.
No, for the unreformed socialists at the BBC, public spending is always good and always works.
Even when it isn’t and doesn’t.
And that’s bias.
GCooper – I heard the World this Weekend and was utterly sickened by the report. Exactly as you said we are going to spend our way out of a recession. As I said on another thread IT DOESN’T WORK!
As an aside did you hear that vile ‘architect’ describing how vital the programme was because that schools offered ‘social services’ etc. Policy deployment operative perhaps?
Pestis was trailing this ‘policy’ line on Monday.
I am beyond incredulity – I am ruled by a bunch of people who, apparently, are taken in by “equity release schemes”, who “borrow their way out of debt” or just buy that important holiday/50″ plasma.
The entire f**king economic mess is caused by the debt mountain, do we think making it bigger will
a) help
b) make things worse
The BBC with its highly paid staff should be able to pose a single question on this matter. Well the could if they didn’t believe completely in discredited big government spending and were not half way up the alimentary canal of the powers that be.
I would like to commend, while it lasts, the comments section of this morning’s Andrew Marr show.
Sadly mine was not included, but it was well covered by all the rest, bar one, which felt Peter ‘Call me, Lord’ M. did not come across well.
Bringing a slight smile to my lips this grey Sunday, the one that was almost fulsome in its praise was signed: ‘G.Brown’.
And this blog thinks the BBC can no longer do good comedy. To whoever got it through… well done!
Like I say, while it lasts:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/andrew_marr_show/7080519.stm
Cassandra says: “WWL giggles and laughs, he thinks it cannot happen, he thinks it impossible in this day and age, he thinks he is safe as long as he sticks to the agenda, he thinks he is so right that everyone else is so wrong, so sure, so sure, and yet and yet that tiny voice so often ignored keeps whispering, lets hope he listens eh?”
Cassandra – I agree entirely with everything you say. Over the last two weeks I’ve had to stop watching the BBC or reading its news as it has mad me so angry. I think WWL underestimates the level of hatred their is for the BBC (and Labour), and if their pact continues beyond 2010, there is likely to be some very serious consequences.
The bBC, blowing the trumpet of propaganda for Terrorism and half the story.
Taleban kill many in bus attacks
Taleban insurgents have killed at least 27 people travelling on buses in the southern Afghan province of Kandahar. A Taleban spokesman said that all those killed in the attacks on three buses were Afghan government soldiers, but officials said they were civilians. The attacks happened on Thursday but the bodies have only just been found, dumped over a wide area. A number of the men were beheaded after the attack in the Maiwand district, local and military sources say. A Taleban spokesman said its fighters had boarded the buses travelling on the province’s main highway, removed men identified as soldiers and shot them.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7678717.stm
The traitorous bBC once again seen dropping onto its knees ,unzipping its Islamic masters trousers and blowing the trumpet of righteous terrorism.If these deaths had occurred at the hands of the ISAF . The bBC would have had eye witness reports from their men on the ground saying he had seen bodies of civilians killed by the US or its allies.
Yet when their ideological masters decide on a little bloodletting the bBC goes out of its way in which to excuse this abnormal behaviour as somehow a right. First of all they allow the Terrorists to get the first word in;
“A Taleban spokesman said that all those killed in the attacks on three buses were Afghan government soldiers
Then they allow their Islamic masters to explain why they murdered (Yes bBC murdered innocent people for the sake of their paedophilic master)
””We found government documents on them and we killed 27 of them,” he said. “The rest, who were civilians, we freed.”
Wow the BBC explains that the Taliban freed civilians, from whom may I ask?
The bBC, blowing the trumpet of propaganda for Terrorism and half the story.
WWL,
You misunderstood the purpose of the post I think, it was designed with the intention of annoying you, an itching powder if you will!
I meant no malice, I hoped the post might irritate you enough to think about the content.
Maybe I am wrong BUT what if im right or even part right? Think about that for a while, would you knowingly ride the easy wave to a totalitarian state with the foresight of where it might be heading and what you may be forced to confront or the choices you might have to make should it happen as I predicted?
Think about that WWL thats all I ask.
Are you so sure that you are right and I am wrong?
There is no doubt that you are far more educated than me with a far better turn of phrase BUT does that make me wrong or mistaken?
The bBC, why certain children do badly at school and half the story.
Mark Easton does a run down on ‘Ethnicity and the five-year-olds’ on the bBC.
It is sensitive territory but, if we are serious about trying to offer equality of opportunity to all in our multi-racial society, it strikes me as important to venture there. By the age of five, ethnicity already appears to have a significant impact on a child’s health, behaviour and cognitive abilities. The latest batch of data from the Millennium Cohort Study (MCS) has been published following the lives of more than 15,000 children who were born in the two years after the millennium. But it also involves their families. And through the reams of data we begin to get a picture of how different people live.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2008/10/ethnicity_and_the_fiveyearold.html
The above is explained further with the use of a number of snapshots of certain facts and figures;
PROBLEM BEHAVIOUR
Indian: 6.5
Black African: 6.5
White: 6.6
Mixed: 7.4
Other: 8
Black Caribbean: 8.2
Bangladeshi: 8.2
Pakistani: 9.2
COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT
White: 102.2
Mixed: 101.3
Indian: 98.3
Black Caribbean: 98
Other 95.7
Black African 91.4
Bangladeshi 88.6
Pakistani 87.4
OBESITY
Indian: 4.1%
Other: 4.8%
White: 4.9%
Mixed: 7.1%
Pakistani/Bangladeshi: 8%
Black: 12.5%
LONGSTANDING HEALTH PROBLEM
Indian: 13%
Black: 14.5%
Pakistani/Bangladeshi: 16%
Other: 18.3%
White: 19.8%
Mixed: 23.9%
I don’t know about you but a certain religious people are starting to stand out as being at the bottom rung on the ladder to a healthy life style. Can you spot them?