General BBC-related comment thread!
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.
I think this blog should lead a boycott of the licence fee.
This might be a good time to start it.
The Labour government is promising tax cuts in its Pre-Budget Report on Monday.
An obvious target should be the BBC licence poll tax.
It seems that our responsibility for all the poor of the world trumps eco-loonery.
The BBC are repeatedly (Newsnight & now BBC News Channel) showing a report on the harsh life of the Brazilian cane cutter, forced into hard labour by our demands for bio fuel. Somehow we (the West), & not the Brazilian government, are responsible for imposing & enforcing elf’n’safety laws in Brazil.
This comes just a day after the BBC relished telling us that Bric (Brazil, Russia, India & China) are inheriting the world.
George R:
Could not agree more. I have always maintained that abolition of the BBC would:
-Give every family £140
-Several £billion of assets to flog off to fill Brown holes in public spending.
-Get rid of one of the largest Electricity users in the UK and save all those CO2 emissions (if you believe in that one!)
-stop the anomaly where every young serviceman in his barracks must have a TV licence affixed to the TV in his bunk whereas criminals in jail do not.
Even the BBC could see the environmental benefits – they have been pushing that line for years, too dumb to see that they should be the first casualty.
I poster on the thread below has suggested that a slight paucity of comments in comparison to recently would suggest the storm is passing…
Auntie under attack – again
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/22/bbc-television-trust-local-news?commentpage=1&commentposted=1
Not sure I’d go along with that.
Before the spellink ‘n gammer trolls leap out of the green room, that’s ‘A poster…’
The Guardian ends the article linked above by Peter: “The BBC is actually far more treasured and valued than anyone would guess from the kind of press it routinely gets – a point that the Tories would do well to remember before jumping on easy bandwagons. It would not take so very much to turn the BBC back from being everyone’s Aunt Sally to everyone’s favourite Auntie”.
This is the conclusion drawn by the Guardian and it’s ilk. In general people consider the BBC a lost cause. How do you reverse arrogance? Can’t be done.
“Dr Michael Jones:
I think this blog should lead a boycott of the licence fee.”
You won’t get many takers on that I’m afraid. You’d be amazed how many of the posters here willingly pay their licence fee.
It’s like the psychiatric hospital in “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”. They could all walk away from the BBC at any time, but are too afraid of what ‘the state’ will do to them if they do.
John Bosworth | 22.11.08 – 4:20 pm |
The Guardian editorial is pure Toynbee twaddle.
The phraseology used regularly trips off of the preposterous bat’s tongue every time she’s on twat Marr’s show.
The BBC often claims that its commercial activities subsidies the licence payer. So was any of our cash lost in this venture?
“More than 30,000 retail jobs were at risk last night as Woolworths fought to avoid collapse …Some 25,000 staff work in Woolworths stores and another 5,000 for two other businesses in the Woolworths group: EUK and 2entertain…2entertain is a joint venture with the BBC which produces and distributes BBC programmes on DVD and has had big successes with shows such as Little Britain and Top Gear.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/nov/22/woolworths-retail-mk-one
It’s like the psychiatric hospital in “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”. They could all walk away from the BBC at any time, but are too afraid of what ‘the state’ will do to them if they do.
Kill the Beeb | 22.11.08 – 4:27 pm | #
LOL, Thanks!
The Guardian and the BBC are two ends of a pantomime horse – who’s surprised that one so loves the other?
R4’s PM caught (literally) red-handed again. This time, following an adulatory load of waffle about what The One might do to repair the US economy, the only person asked to comment was Lord Layard.
Lord who?
Ex-LSE (as if you needed to guess) Prof. Layard has ties to ZaNuLabour so tight he can effectively considered one of the inner cabal. It was Layard who dreamed-up the failed ‘welfare to work’ programme, who is a leading advocate of the bogus ‘Happiness economics’ scam and an all-round Lefty Keynesian economist.
And what was he on PM for? Well, beisde telling us how brlliant The One’s ideas are, he was there to boost Brown and Darling’s half-baked attempts to revive our economy and, specially prodded by his BBC interviewer, to rubbish the Conservative’s alternative proposals.
Not a single opposing view was allowed to interfere in this party political broadcast.
Thus does the BBC go about its work – biased all the way through.
Isn’t that right, trolls?
Presumably the BBC, and BBC Arabic TV service, already have Sharia-compliant pensions:
“Muslims to be offered Sharia-compliant pensions by Government”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/3496730/Muslims-to-be-offered-Sharia-compliant-pensions-by-Government.html
GCooper
Yes – Layard has been a Labour hack all his career. Where did he get his peerage – just like the slightly older Labour economist peer, Maurice Peston, who is/was a dreadful man, socialist and nationalisation ideas hard-baked into his brain.
Layard’s ideas on welfare have helped vreate an entire generation of wasters, with an army of public servants looking after them.
Why is the BBC leading every news bulletin with the Pakistani “militant” death ? Is it really the top news item, while the world economy spirals down the plug ?
News at 5 on Radio 4 had an interview with a reporter from the Independant. Not once was the word terrorist used – it was militant, militant, militant.
Is the BBC newsroom stuffed with pro-Islamist editors and researchers ?
Not really on a par with Guido’s Assistant Commissioner Paddick gem, but still a bit of fun for the weekend:
Knight for a day
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/mediamonkeyblog/2008/nov/21/1?commentpage=1&comm
Interesting that the Grauniad is not above a tease or two.
BBC filth still pushing the Chavez line.
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7733690.stm
Nowhere in the article do they report this from the Telegraph:
Several senior opposition figures have been banned from standing for office by the government-controlled judiciary.
Leopoldo Lopez, who was the favourite to win the elections’ top prize, mayor of Caracas, was barred on the grounds of corruption despite having no conviction or any pending trial.
“The façade of democracy is crumbling,” said Mr Lopez, 37, from his offices in the exclusive district of Chacao in Caracas.
“A court has ruled I cannot hold political office until 2014, ensuring that I cannot stand for these elections, those of the national assembly in 2010, or for the presidency in 2012.”
Other opposition candidates, including Mr Chavez’s former wife, have accused the controversial Venezuelan leader of effectively becoming a dictator.
Marisabel Rodriguez, standing for mayor of her home town of Barquisimeto, said: “Chavez wants to control every aspect of our lives. He will not be happy until he had set up a Cuban-style dictatorship here.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/venezuela/3496565/Chavez-accused-of-behaving-like-dictator-ahead-of-elections.html
Excellent post GCooper.
LSE=fabian factory
Happiness economics=usual leftie bunkum economic theory, to be used to cover up the destruction environmentalism will wreak on traditional/20th C. economic measures.
Radio 4 love to promote hapiness economics. Funny that.
Here’s one the beeb will not cover.
12 political dissidents arrested in Liverpool.
http://tinyurl.com/5d7t6v
Who are the fascists?
This ‘Telegraph’ report from SOMALIA does not relegate, as does the BBC, the violent role of the Islamists:
‘Telegraph’
“Parties, women and new cars in lawless land where everyone wants to be a pirate”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/piracy/3502475/Parties-women-and-new-cars-in-lawless-land-where-everyone-wants-to-be-a-Somalian-pirate.html
The ridicule which Somalis pour on the impotent West is apparent. Talking of Miliband…
I’m confused, on the BBC News web page;
The chancellor is spending the weekend putting the final touches to an economic plan expected to include tax cuts and big public spending increases.
The measures, designed to revive the flagging economy, are to be announced in Monday’s pre-Budget report.
However, on the ITN News web page I read;
The Chancellor will reportedly announce the need for tax rises and a reduction in public spending in his pre-budget report.
Am I living in Looking Glass Land ? What should I believe ? Tax is rising or falling ?
BBC are trying to preach a world of love to everyone. Trying to please everyone.
When will they learn that this is in fact impossible. The world is full of hate, pain, killers, paedophiles, monsters…
Trying to portray all muslims as good people is utter bullshit. You can’t even say some muslims are good people. They believe in what the Qur’an tells them.
They are told by their book that they must never doubt what it says.
They are told to take neither Jews or Christians as their friends. And that they are all evil doers.
Men have status above women.
They are taught to hate and that, therefore is the essence of their belief. The fact that the BBC tries to defend that makes them as bad as the Muslims.
Good spot cogly.
Would be laughable if crash Gordon raises taxes.
I hope he does
by the way , today is Victory in Iraq day
http://www.zombietime.com/vi_day/
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/31981_Bloggers_Celebrating_Victory_in_Iraq_Day
Cogly, Darling is doing to pull a fast one. He’s going to cut a few taxes, and borrow to pay for most of these cuts. He’a also doing to announce some efficiency savings to con people into thinking that’s where the money for the tax cuts are coming from. I’d be amazed if he actually mentioned tax rises on Monday, though.
What is the difference between a monopoly nationalized corporation financed by government borrowing indirectly from a central bank who’s losses are underwritten by the tax payer.
and a
Monopoly unnationalized corporation financed by private borrowing indirectly from a central bank who’s losses are underwritten by the tax payer.
As far as the consumer and the tax payer are concerned?
Answer: not very much if effectively any difference whatsoever, as we can now clearly see, can we not?
Especially if the same highly select group of mega rich people that control the Bank of International Settlements that dictate to the central bank. Control also all political parties including very much the Green Party.
We are now in the year 2008 moving swiftly into 2009 and we don’t even have a free broadcast media 80 years after the invention of TV.
The BBC is all the worst things imaginable. Yet the BBC in itself is not our worst problem.
The BBC gets way with, persistent lies and dis information for one very important main reason.
The rest of the broadcast media is, persistently lying and dis informing every bit as much as the BBC, on a second by second basis.
How exactly this level of ‘co-operation’ is achieved between seemingly independent media, is up for debate. But the fact that channels 3,4,5, Sky and the BBC, are singing from EXACTLY the same establishment New World Order agenda song sheet, is not.
This is is an interesting story from a Swedish English language news site, criticising the BBC about exagerating reports of famine in Africa.
http://www.thelocal.se/15798/20081119/
archduke:
“today is Victory in Iraq day”
This is a joke, right?
Here’s a good essay on the shortcomings of the US msm during the recent election, listing several failures of integrity which also apply to the beeb.
http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2008-10-05-1.html
Atlas, they take almost all their stories off the wires; AP; UPI; Reuters; PR.
Thats the main force behind the coordination.
If I believed in resolutions I might resolve to stop commenting on topics I didn’t really care about as though I was a self appointed panellist on Q.T. or something. ( I do do that, so I do.) (I’m not Irish but I do occasionally like saying ‘so I do.’ )
What I would stick to is the subject of BBC bias.
If everyone here got what they wished for, in a be-careful-what-you-wish-for type of way, would there be;
a, no BBC.
b, commercial BBC as in a you-gets-what-you-pay-for type of way.
c, a right-wing BBC.
d, a balanced BBC run by intelligent human beings not tied to a political party with an imaginative, entertaining and informed output.
Maybe funded by a modest telly tax covering non commercial broadcasting or some such other reform. I suppose that would be as unenforceable as a law against using a prostitute who works for a third party.
FAQ, namely, are we hypocrites who object only to leftwing bias but would be happy with a bias that suited our personal philosophy?
Personally I admit I would be happier with something like that. I am not a right winger, so I don’t want a right wing bias. My bias of choice would have some sort of moral framework with room for manoeuvre and space for dissenting voices. A bias against moral relativism so to speak.
It’s no good pretending, as we are supposed to, much as we might like to, or we think we ought to, that there’s no good and bad, no right or wrong, but there’s only different. That diktat is a contradiction in terms anyway, an oxymoron in a moronic type of way, and if taken to its logical conclusion it cancels itself out.
But if we hark back to what some people regard as the good old days when coppers gave hooligans a clip round the ear’ole and children had their mouths washed out with soap for saying a naughty word like ‘hell’ we’re in a nostalgic delusion.
I think the reforms that took place in the 60s were much needed and liberating. It’s a cyclical thing which has gone further than it should have, and it’s obviously time for the pendulum to swing back. But not to where it was before because we are, or should be more enlightened nowadays.
All this hooha about rossandbrand has sparked off a more fundamental soul-search about the BBC. We all object to being forced to pay for something we think has gone off. But without any media outlet that has a prescribed obligation to be independent, objective, impartial and informative where would we be? So although I object to being forced to pay for the rubbish we’ve got at present I want to improve it, not abolish * it.
Would you believe it. My computer won’t let me post that without the asterisk because even with the space it thinks I’m swearing! It’s trying to wash my mouth out for saying sh*t. And I wasn’t, sir.
kersal flyer | 23.11.08 – 2:35 am
No, it’s no joke.
Many blogs got together on November 22nd to celebrate Victory in Iraq Day.
Here is one of the leading blogs with links to some others
http://www.zombietime.com/vi_day/
^^^^
Scroll down that site – Zombie has loads of information.
Sue | 23.11.08 – 5:55 am | #
I think I understand what you are saying, at least most of it, and probably agree with much.
And I am guilty of a rather ‘all or nothing’ approach when in fact there are many nuances and, yes, people and programmes to commend.
However, as I am only presented with absolutes, I too tend to respond in kind.
I would wish there were links in support to confirm , but take just this from Cogly above at | 22.11.08 – 11:01 pm | by way of example.
Being forced to pay for government propaganda is but one area I am not happy at being forced to pay for, and would like the option of resisting.
If I can get/pay for what I do value but serve notice on the majority of the news output that they are a) mostly working to agenda b) totally unprofessional c) useless, and do so in a way that hits ‘market rate talents’ from reporter though editor through producer through compliance director right up to mega-bonussed director, sign me up.
Eddington meets Einstein had the obligatory gay issue raised.
Copenhagen it was not.
Andrew Marr has got Vince Cable on again.
Pushing the line that if Gordon Brown cuts VAT a bit we will all run out and spend more.
COcain and rent boys are already VAT free so the beeboids won’t be any better off either.
Doesn’t the VAT cut idea come from Ken Clarke? He was pushing it a few days ago.
I suggest that on this website at the right-hand side they include the following information as a link (too large for a single comment). They have not replied to my suggestion though when I sent an email. Perhaps they are too busy. Does anyone else know of a good permanent place to park it? The original information was on a website in 2003. I cannot remember the name of the website owner but he was a dissident from a communist country with a name something like Brokowsky. He was trying to organise a petition against the licence fee.
——————–
Noticed some additional comments and “facts” on the latest intimidating letter from the TVLA ? – here they are:
“… To help us update our records please write to us at TV Licensing … stating that you do not use a television. We will contact you in due course, just to confirm the situation.”
Helping out the TVLA keeping their records up to date is the very last thing you should do. If, for whatever reason, you do not need a TV Licence then … well … you are not breaking the law so why should you provide the TVLA with a statement ?
You are not at all obliged to contact the TVLA. There is no law that says you have to make statements – just ignore these people.
Keep in mind that these statements are only useful to be used against you.
Using sophisticated equipment on unlicensed household, we can identify if a TV is being watched within 20 seconds.
Whether the TVLA does or does not have electronic gadgetry to play “big brother”, fact is that no-one has never been convicted based upon “evidence” gathered by means of this type of electronic spying, which is in fact a breach of privacy.
If we suspect that an offence is taking place, we are authorised to request a search warrant if we cannot gain access.
Getting a search warrant involves spending money so they are used much less frequently than people think. If the TVLA has the evidence to get a warrant and they also have your name, then they will usually go straight to issuing you with a summons to bring you to court. This is administratively far more cost-effective.
Never ever let a TVLA Enquiry Officer, without search warrant, in your home. Do not speak to him/her – do not make a statement and do not sign.
We may caution you in compliance with the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and use your statement as evidence in your prosecution.
Now this is what it’s all about. As a profit making company the TVLA [Capita] depends heavily on people admitting that they do not have a TV Licence. The statement, signed by those who admit, is then used against you. This is a very cost effective way of operations for the TVLA.
Again… never ever let a TVLA Enquiry Officer, without search warrant, in your home. Do not speak to him/her – do not make a statement and do not sign.
–and here is another article on their site, originally pdf—-
WHAT SHOULD I DO WHEN THE TV LICENCE MAN CALLS?
————————————————–
IT IS ONLY POSSIBLE TO OFFER GENERAL ADVICE IN THIS DOCUMENT. IF YOU ARE IN ANY DOUBT WHAT YOU SHOULD DO CONTACT A SOLICITOR IMEDIATELY.
The purpose of a visit from a Television Enquiry Officer is to gather information that you have a television, but that you do not have a licence. You can always ask him to come back when you have had a chance to get some legal advice, before you answer his questions.
REMEMBER Television Enquiry Officers must interview you under caution, if they are to use their visit as evidence against you in court. The caution says:
You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. Do you understand?
So, if you answer questions, those answers can be read out in court, but:
YOU DO NOT HAVE TO SAY ANYTHING
This means “anything”.
You do not have to tell the enquiry officer your name, you do not have to tell him whether or not you have a television, or if you live at the address, or if you have a licence.
WHAT WILL THEY ASK ME?
No surprises here. Television Licensing officers are not paid to think for themselves, they have a list of questions to ask in every case. They are:
Day/date:
Name:
Address:
Post Code:
Are you the occupier?
Do you have a television licence on the premises?
Do you have a licence?
If no administer caution:
“You do not have to say anything. It may harm your defence if you do not mention when
questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. Do you understand?”
Time of caution:
TELEVISION SET
May I inspect the set?
Inspection details: Black and white/colour
Use?
Channels tested?
Was there a video recorder?
When was the set installed?
When did you first use the set without an appropriate licence?
When did you last use the set?
Do you have satellite or cable?
If yes which channels do you watch?
PERSONAL DETAILS
What is your date of birth?
What is your occupation or status?
I have to tell you that you may be prosecuted for an offence under the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949. Is there anything you want to say? You will than be asked to buy a television licence, “without prejudice”, or in other words pay for a licence and still run the risk of being prosecuted. They will then ask you to sign the interview record as accurate, but you
don’t have to do so.
THEY SAID IT MIGHT HARM MY DEFENCE IF I DON’T ANSWER
QUESTIONS.
You are being asked questions because they know you don’t have a licence, but they don’t know who you are, or if you are using a television. If you tell them who you are and you say you are using a television, they will usually take you to court.
If you don’t tell them you stand a better chance of not being taken to court as they don’t know who you are, or if you have a television. If they knew that in the first place there would be no need for them to call.
CAN THEY COME INTO MY HOME?
They can only come into your home if you let them in (Can I inspect the set?), or if a magistrate grants them a search warrant. They will only get a search warrant if they can satisfy the magistrate there are reasonable grounds to suspect you have a television for use on the premises.
———
SO I ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS AND NOW I’VE GOT A SUMMONS. WHAT CAN I DO?
—————————————————————
CAN I GET LEGAL AID?
Every one is entitled to receive a public funding certificate to cover magistrates’ court proceedings free of charge, even if they are a millionaire. If you want advice, you need to see a solicitor who deals in criminal law. Details of solicitors offering legal help can be found from the Legal Services Commission. Alternatively look in yellow pages for any solicitor displaying the Criminal Defence Service logo. If you are on income support, income based job seekers allowance, or working families’ tax credit, you will qualify for free legal help before you go to court. You may also qualify for this help of you are on a low income. Many solicitors will offer you a free first interview anyway. Ask a solicitor for details.
CHECK WHEN THE SUMMONS WAS ISSUED.
The Magistrates’ Courts’ Act 1980 allows the TV Licence authority 6 months to tell the magistrates’ clerk they want a summons issuing. If they are too late its just too bad; they cannot prosecute you.
I WANT TO PLEAD “GUILTY” WHAT CAN I EXPECT?
There are two ways of pleading guilty. You will have received a form with your summons that you can return to the court, saying that you want to plead guilty, or you can attend the hearing.
DOES IT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE IF I TURN UP?
Television licensing courts expect get through 60 • 70 cases in a court session. They do not expect many people to turn up and they expect most of those who do not come to plead guilty by letter. If they don’t do that, and don’t attend, the TV Licensing officers will ask to have the case “proved in absence”. This means that the statement that the TV Enquiry officer made when he visited you and his “interview” will be read out. The magistrates will then find you guilty, and you will normally be fined £150 to £200 and ordered to pay the TV Licensing officers costs (currently £45.00). If you turn up and plead guilty, the magistrates must listen to what you have to say. They will probably fine you about the same amount and order you to pay the costs, but it will take them longer and they will have to consider your case in greater depth.
CAN I PLEAD NOT GUILTY?
Yes; you can either use the form to tell the court you are “not guilty”, in which case the magistrates will adjourn the case to a trial date, when you must attend, and the trial will take place. You should plead “not guilty” if you do not have television receiving equipment installed, or if you had a licence when the enquiry officer called. If you were promised you wouldn’t be prosecuted, or if you have any doubts what to do, you should see a solicitor.
I HAVE HEARD YOU PAY LESS IF YOU PLEAD GUILTY. IS THIS TRUE?
You are supposed to be given a discount if you plead guilty, but the magistrates will still fine you, and they will fine you more for not having a television licence than they would have fined you if you had stolen something or hit someone in most cases.
I HAVE HEARD THAT IT IS AGAINST EUROPEAN LAW TO BE FINED
FOR NOT HAVING A TELEVISION LICENCE. IS THIS TRUE?
The power of the TV Licence agency to prosecute people is being challenged in a number of test cases, which are based on European law. The result will not be known for some time. A solicitor can advise you how you can have your case challenged in the same way.
‘Sunday Express’:
“Why are many rebelling against the sneering BBC?” (by Patrick O’Flynn):
“..a popular uprising is mounting against the poll tax that funds the BBC. What the Corporation does not want you to know is that a licence fee strike is spreading across Britain.”
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/71730
Mr. O’Flynn’s article is both critical of the BBC poll tax, and its politically biased ideology.
Kill the Beeb –
Yes, I am afraid of what the state will do to me if I fail to comply with the BBC Tax. I have a lot to lose, my job, my house and probably my family. This is because I am a middle class middle income person. On the other hand if I were a labour client, a welfare chav illegal immigrant or similar, then I would know that I had nothing to be lose and consequently fear nothing.
BBC tax gestapo know very well that the middle classes cannot afford a criminal conviction. How many middle class persons refused to pay the Community Charge? The only protesters were those who
a) had noting to lose and b) objected to paying for that which they believed to be theirs by god-given right, utterly free.
I would guess that the posters on this site are not militant fanatics, waiting for martyrdom (unlike some of the chosen interest groups supported by the BBC). They are simply pissed off by the blatant pro government bias, self serving leftism and contempt for the nation shown by the BBC. I find it patronising to imply that people are cowards for not participating in a mass protest which will end in the magistrates court following automated data base driven prosecution. (remember the Gatso cameras)
Middle class individuals are very easy to convict – they are fully integrated into the government machine.
Usual fare on Marr today
Cable bashes Tory policy and not a word about the government that actually got us into this mess.
Mandelson bashes Tory policy. Marr nods and doesn’t say a dicky bird (where’s Sophie when you need her?)
Sheila Hancock reviews papers and laughs at the very valid points about the Brussels menace made by Digby Jones.
Different Sunday, same garbage
NBC Fires Weather Channel Environmental Unit
Some on-camera meteorologists also let go
* The Capital Weather Gang’s Winter Outlook *
NBC Universal made the first of potentially several rounds of staffing cuts at The Weather Channel (TWC) on Wednesday, axing the entire staff of the “Forecast Earth” environmental program during the middle of NBC’s “Green Week,” as well as several on-camera meteorologists. The layoffs totaled about 10 percent of the workforce, and are among the first major changes made since NBC completed its purchase of the venerable weather network in September.
Yes We Can!
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitalweathergang/2008/11/nbc_fires_twc_environmental_un.html
Apparently not reported by BBC;
Foreign Secretary, Miliband and Muslims:
“Miliband calls for Muslim support”
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/Miliband-calls-for-Muslim-support.4721752.jp
Apparently not reported by BBC:
“Muslim fanatics ‘hijack British prison'”
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/72509/Muslim-fanatics-hijack-British-prison-
Reported by BBC:
“BNP members held over leafleting”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/7744332.stm
There is a legal way to reduce how much you pay to the BBC. Use a black & white television. I still use one and have never had a colour TV since I do not wish to subsidise the so-called celebrities and the morally repulsive elite who push their extreme socialist and anti-white views.
I will have to admit that another reason I only have a black and white TV is that the reception is so awful, I do live in a rural area with mostly white population, it would pointless buying a colour one.
The politics Show.
Gordon Brown interview. Gives the appearance of being less than totally spontanious.
Brown usually poor without a script, sounds like he knows the questions before they are asked and then goes off on party political speech mode. His very first sentance was ‘its all Americas fault’
In a proper interview he would have then be asked about his own regulation of banks and our huge debts. Instead he was allowed to go straight on to ‘The tories want us to do nothing as the country collapses’ then was given a few easy questions that let him attack the tories again.
We don’t have a bust he claims because interest rates are not 15%. And back to ‘it’s all the Americans fault’
‘Im going to lead the world…’
Then finishing on more party political sound-bites.
And on to the local bit of he politics show.
Apparently there are very few forced marrages in our asian comunity. And any laws banning them will upset the asian community.
Then on to an interview with a woman who’s husband does not let her show her face in public. Telling us that Islam absolutly does not allow forced marrages.
Re Previous comment – The BBC and the grauniad are, indeed, like the two ends of a pantomime horse – both the arse end!