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.
News 24 a few minutes ago: Peter Sissons forcefully putting the anti-consensus view of Global Warming to Caroline Lucas (greenie) and sticking to his guns. I think this shocked her. It certainly shocked me – I haven’t seen a BBC journo do anything other than roll over on this issue before. Amazing…even encouraging.
JohnT – I just saw that too – ASTONISHING!!!!!
I assumed it was all the anti-manflu drugs I’m on at the moment, so I’m relieved to hear it actually happened.
She was given a fairly comprehensive and patronising bitch slap!
Does News24 make it to any ‘watch again’ sort of channel?
Who knew it – a BBC journo with balls!
Chuffer – You might find it on digital if you have that facility. Or they may repeat it in a later bulletin. However I think it’ll disappear never to see the light of day again…
BBC ‘sport’ report:
Nowhere does the following BBC report suggest that ‘Islamophobia’ is not illegal, and is not racism:
“Two arrested over Mido chanting”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/m/middlesbrough/7758089.stm
This is the headline which an unofficial Newcastle United website gives to the issue:
“Mido claims Toon chants ‘Directed at Islam’!”
http://www.newcastleunited-mad.co.uk/news/loadnews.asp?cid=TMNW&id=420266
The Football Association and the BBC really need to read this:
“‘Islamophobia'”
(by Hugh Fitzgerald)
[Extract]:
“The word ‘Islamophobia’ must be held up for inspection, its users constantly asked precisely how they would define that word, and they should be put on the defensive for waving about what is clearly meant to be a scare-word that will silence criticism.
“So let us ask them which of the following criticisms of Islam is to be considered ‘Islamophobic’:”
Hugh Fitzgerald then proceeds to give TWENTY SEVEN criticisms of Islam –
http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/11102/sec_id/11102
The F.A. and the BBC give no reference to the activities of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference which is actively campaigning for a global prohibition of any criticism of Islam:
‘Jihadwatch’:
“International Islamic organization attempts to criminalize criticism of Islam at the U.N.”
[Extract]:
‘What race is Islam again?’
“The draft declaration recommends that local, national and international laws and human rights covenants be reviewed and amended as necessary so that ‘defamation of Islam’ is made a criminal offence, losing the protection it has long enjoyed under the ‘pretext’ of ‘freedom of expression, counter terrorism or national security’. It recommends that legal instruments be established to punish offenders — that is, those who “defame” Islam by associating it with violence, human rights abuses or terrorism….
“I trust, then, that among the first to be prosecuted for ‘defaming Islam’ will be the likes of al-Zawahri, Omar Bakri, Anjem Chaudry, Abu Bakar Bashir, et al.” (Robert Spencer).
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/023569.php
Who knew it – a BBC journo with balls!
JonT | 06.12.08 – 1:54 pm |
Peter Sissons was an an ITN anchorman for ten years so maybe he still has some integrity left?
Doesn’t this make you want to vomit?
“Sidney art fuses art with islam”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7769028.stm
Apart from the fact that they think we’re all morons, there’s also the egregious statement that this harks back to a time when “Lebanese were targeted on Sidney beaches”. Correct me if I’m wrong, but by that I think they refer to the period a while back when white Australian women were being “targeted” (ie raped) by muslim immigrants – although at the time, our beloved state broadcaster didn’t tell us they were either muslims or even “lebanese”. The euphemism of choice? That’s right, they were “youths of mediterranean appearance”. It just gets worse!
Speaking of BBC’s anti-Israel stance. On youtube there’s this story they did about a tourist attraction campaign to Israel that feature sexy IDF girls posing in bikinis. Low and behold they then had on some bimbo from feministing which is an amateur website with feminist college students bitching about this and that. How can an amateur blog be considering a reference to authority by the BBC? Oh yeah, they didn’t even have a counter argument to it.
Dunno if any of you guys have seen this short clip of the Danes sinking a Somali pirate boat.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7768204.stm
(Unfortunately they took the pirates off the boat before destroying it.)
Robert | 06.12.08 – 4:01 pm,
I remember that. The BBC will do anything to minimise the crimes of its Muslim friends.
Phil | 06.12.08 – 4:18 pm,
Yes, they don’t need anyone to be an authority to be on the BBC – just to have a BBC point of view.
BBC:OTHER TOP STORIES
Obama ‘to rebuild crumbling US’
Obama’s Bob the Builder now. “Get out the way everybody, the US is crumbling! (SFX:Crash! Collapse! Crumble!) Rolls up sleeves. “I guess I’m just going to have to do some rebuilding. Good job I was passing by. Just in time.” cue music “Superman the Movie”
Laughable.
Obam-0nanism
BBC:Risky business
“Will Team Clinton cast a shadow on Barack Obama?”
Burlusconi moment. How would you tell?
Predictably, within days of the Islamic jihad massacre in MUMBAI, planned in Pakistan, the BBC turns out a self-described ‘diplomatic correspondent’, Mr. Marcus, to deliver some apologetics for the Pakistan government:
“Pakistan’s dilemma as pressure mounts”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7765265.stm
Marcus makes no worthwhile analysis of the Islamic jihad threat inside Pakistan, nor of the role of the I.S.I. In defending the role of the Pakistan government, he uses a strange ‘argument’:
“Pakistan cannot devote sufficient attention to dealing with domestic extremists along with Taleban and al-Qaeda sympathisers in its border region with Afghanistan unless the historic tensions with India are resolved.”
On the contrary, if the Pakistan government were seen to be more forcefully destroying the Islamic jihadists, then the threat to India would lessen.
A non -BBC ‘diplomatic correspondent’ view:
“Calling on Pakistanis: Fix Islamic terrorism”
http://islamicterrorism.wordpress.com/2008/12/06/calling-on-pakistanis-fix-islamic-terrorism-do-not-amplify-ignore-glorify-justify-or-explain-it-away/
How many unemployed Americans does it take to replace a light bulb? Clearly lots.
BBC: The new administration, he (Obama) added, would launch a massive effort to make public buildings more energy-efficient by replacing old heating systems and installing efficient light bulbs.
Obama the plumber, making not just “an effort” but an eyewatering “massive effort”
Why are we contantly handed out recycled Democrat press releases? Isnt there some more “energy-efficient” way we could be lied to?
World Have Your Say had a programme on Tuesday titled Should Muslims accept Islam has a problem with terrorism? They did a Question Time trick, except they went much further with a panel consisting exclusively of three Muslim academics who spouted unanimous propaganda with “balance” being offered by a somewhat skeptical host, Ros Atkins, a few contradictory e-mails and Robert Spencer, of Jihadwatch, who was impressive in the time allotted to him, which was an on and off fraction of the last third or so of the programme.
Worth listening to this exercise in appeasement of Islam from the BBC, if only to hear Spencer talk of the “moral myopia” of one of the Muslim guests.
Link’ll only be good for the next few days:
[audio src="http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/whys/whys_20081203-0951a.mp3" /]
For BBC’s Harrabin and co., and their ‘Greenie’ lobby chums:
‘Wind power targets unrealistic, say critics’
[Extract]:
“Researchers and parliamentarians warned that a heavy reliance on wind energy would place Britain’s energy supplies at risk.
“A report by the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), published last week, maintained that wind farms could play a major role in helping Britain cut its harmful carbon emissions by 34 per cent in 2020 and 80 per cent by 2050.”…
“But sceptics say this is far too ambitious because experts have not yet been able to devise effective ways of capturing and storing electricity generated by wind. That means a backup system, in the form of nuclear or coal- or gas-fired power stations, would always be needed.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/3569875/Wind-power-targets-unrealistic-say-critics.html
Very puzzled by Boris Johnson’s programme on Islam and the West. BBC2.
He sounded confused as to the line he was required to take – it being the BBC in case you ask.
Christians bad? Moslems good? Or vice versa. Mostly the former.
He did dwell overlong on the wonders of Moslem Spain. The architecture etc.
It might have been a good idea to mention that Northern Europe was building the great cathedrals at the same time but somehow this was never mentioned.
I suppose Salisbury Cathedral is really only a second rate building put up by those ignorant northern Europeans
Cue S.Chakrabarti, cue BBC:
“‘Architect of 9/11 to go on trial”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/3628457/Architect-of-911-to-go-on-trial.html
A man in Sydney has brought out a range of Islam-themed surfboards and the BBC thinks this is “news.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7769028.stm
I would have thought the only waves Islamists were interested in were of the violent variety.
“This is an attempt to fuse the Australian beach culture with the Islamic culture, he says. ”
Like grafting an ear onto the back of a mouse.
THE MULTI BILLION POUND BBC MEDIA EMPIRE AND ITS CONVENIENT BLIND SPOT!
Why are the French pushing the EU climate(suicide)pact so hard and why are they trying to strong arm the eastern euro regions into toeing the line?
The BBC are not telling us the whole for some strange reason, hmmmmm, I wonder why?
Let me start by stating the ‘bleedin obvious’, the French view the EU as its own property and empire and the French state does NOTHING but look after its own national interest, the French put the French FIRST. The French have a long history of strong arm tactics based wholly on what they want and what benefits them first, the ‘mediteranean union’ was a prime example of french blackmailing prowess, they either get what they demand or they take their bat home and start up a rival EU that they can control and lead!
France has an obvious vested interest in foisting the suicidal carbon reduction/carbon trading scheme on Europe because france already generates most of its electricity from ‘low carbon’ nuclear stations and will have hundreds of billions of ‘carbon credits’ to sell to euro regions that rely on fossil fuels, France would be in a fantastic position and its industries would not be crippled by the suicidal anti carbon dioxide laws and its industries would have a huge competitive advantage!
The central Brussels regime would also benefit from increased powers and revenues BTW, but France stands to gain hugely, its nuclear industry would be quids in and its other industries would gain a massive competitive trading advantage, industries in the other euro regions would find it beneficial(if not essential)to move their operations to france and the French stands to gain millions of jobs in what is in reality a giant ‘CAP’ style subsidy to the french paid for as usual by all the other euro regions!
The BBC are not telling the whole story about why a right wing French regime would push so hard for a leftist/anti industry pact so hard, in fact the BBC are only telling the story that the French and the EU want us to hear, they wrap up and hide naked self interest(power/money/influence)in grand and lofty ideals and so called moral obligations when in reality the whole climate pact is about grubby power seeking and petty selfish jostling for dominance!
This grubby episode brings into sharp focus the moral sewer that is the EU and the BBC, what the BBC has been promised in return for its collusion can only be imagined!
A further thought to add to my previous post:
Now wouldnt it be very convenient(for the French)if all the euro regions had to cut back drastically on their fossil fuelled power stations and installed crappy useless windfarms and therefore had to rely(which they will)on a large number of nuclear power stations to provide the essential baseload(wind farms need a large continous power backup)and wouldnt it also be convenient if that large number of nuclear power stations just happened to be already in existence ready and waiting to provide that base load(how convenient)? Further, wouldnt it be convenient if the new intelligent supply grid had its base in france and its control hub in a certain place that speaks French as its first language!
Ooooooh yes, the penny(cent)is starting to drop oui?
France ‘generously’ agrees to supply the base load and the regions agree to host the useless renewables(wind farms)France then has the whole of the EU in a stranglehold and all the regions had better doff their caps OR ELSE!
Of course the UK gets thrown a couple of French built and designed and owned nuclear power stations because its a nuclear armed nation(for now)and so needs a few nuclear plants but everyone else has to rely on France for its energy supply and if you thought the Ruskies were using the ‘energy weapon’ enthusiastically then you aint seen nuthin yet folks!
You gotta hand it to the French eh?
Cos if you dont they will grab it anyway!
None of this will ever make it into a BBC panorama investigation BTW quelle surprise!
Vive la france?
I have just watched half an hour of what is laughingly called BBC News 24.
The longest “news” topic was an air- headed BBC Clothes Show presenter talking with infuriating enthusiasm about wardrobe cast-offs.
The second ;pngest item was something called “The Oddbox”, which had another infuriating presenter talking about topics such as sheep dyed red and Peter Sissons making an odd mistake on air.
The only vaguely real news was – surprise,surprise – a glowing item about the advance of the nanny state, councilllors in Newcastle wasting ratepayers’ money on new traffic calming measures. How the BBC loves these stories – every new law is greeted with ecstatic reverence.
Nothing at all in this wasted half hour about topics such as tomorrow’s meeting of the European Council, where our leaders are plotting further stitch-ups on the Irish referendum and ludicrous measures to combat the ebb and flow of the weather.
What a waste!
Apperently Russle Brand has been given some sort of award.
Did ant and dec get one again for most creative illegal profiting from scam phone calls?
On the point made above, about the Shadow Culture Secretary’s “doubtful response to the question of dividing up the licence fee among other broadcasters” :
Conservative Shadow Ministers would be very unwise at this stage to admit to any plans to touch the BBC’s monopoly of the TV licence fee, let alone abolish it.
The BBC already distorts and slanders
the Conservative message. The hint of a threat to its parasitic funding would send the BBC into propaganda-overdrive.
The Conservatives should include a bland general statement in their election manifesto, to the effect that “A Conservative government will ensure fairness in broadcasting.”
Once the next Conservative government is elected, the TV licence fee should be abolished outright, and the BBC should be left to sink or swim in its own effluent.
Marr trying to push that VAT reductions causing increase in shopping? He really is a lickspittle.
Andrew Marr claimed he had to scrape the ice off his car before he could get inro the studio.
Wouldn’t a new labour grandee embeded in the BBC not have a servant or two to do that sort of job for him. Why did the BBC not send a limo for one of their propoganda chiefs.
The ‘multiculturalist’ BBC predictably has:
“In pictures: Hajj pilgrimage”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/7769689.stm
In contrast, the BBC is giving little attention to celebrating the 400 years since MILTON’s birth-
‘New Culture Forum’:
“Some mute inglorious Milton: Milton is going uncelebrated”
[Extract]
“We seem to have lost the capacity to celebrate the greatness of this country. The tercentenary of the Union was shuffled away in embarrassment; the bicentenary of the abolition of slavery was used as an excuse for breast-beating about the slave trade itself; this year we have decided to ignore the anniversary of one of England’s great men. Exactly how are we going to mend our “broken” society or restore pride and social cohesion if we do not appreciate the country’s history? ” (Helen Szamuely).
http://www.newcultureforum.org.uk/home/?q=node/420
Ron Todd:
Andrew Marr claimed he had to scrape the ice off his car before he could get inro the studio.
He should’ve scraped the socialist ice off his brain first.
Silence = Acceptance
From Mark Steyn:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzA2Y2E2MDU2YjQzOTQwZjUzNjcwZDA0OTE3YmFkYzg=
I wrote in my book, America Alone, that “reforming” Islam is something only Muslims can do. But they show very little sign of being interested in doing it, and the rest of us are inclined to accept that. Spread a rumor that a Koran got flushed down the can at Gitmo, and there’ll be rioting throughout the Muslim world. Publish some dull cartoons in a minor Danish newspaper, and there’ll be protests around the planet. But slaughter the young pregnant wife of a rabbi in Bombay in the name of Allah, and that’s just business as usual. And, if it is somehow “understandable” that for the first time in history it’s no longer safe for a Jew to live in India, then we are greasing the skids for a very slippery slope. Muslims, the AP headline informs us, “worry about image.” Not enough.
Et tu BBC.
Another way to pass a manflu-infested afternoon is to enjoy a good film, and The Life and Times of Colonel Blimp was on yesterday.
There’s a particularly good moment when the hero goes to the BBC to do a broadcast, but finds his speech has been banned. He has to deal with the most foul and obnoxious BBC official. Funny how little things have changed in 64 years!
chuffer — Powell and Pressburger!
Blimp is a GREAT movie. If the BBC decided to remake it, Russell Brand would play the lead.
Silly, euphemistic BBC headlines continue, ad nauseum, – notably: ‘militants’ (not Islamic jihadists):
“Militants torch Afghan supplies”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7769758.stm
‘Biased-BBC’ commenters have been here many times, and have referred to this excellent cartoon about the BBC on this, but the BBC’s apologetics for Islamic jihad still runs deep:
http://www.fmft.net/archives/002880.html
Re “Life and Times of Colonel Blimp”: as far as I recall (and regretfully I missed yesterday’s screening) Candy’s talk was banned from the BBC (and he was dismissed from active service) because he wasn’t radical enough – later in the film (as I recall) he is castigated by Kretschmer (?) because he wants to fight the nazis by the laws of cricket (more or less). One of the film’s morals is that to fight evil sometimes you have to do evil things. On this occasion – and in this film – the BBC was on the side of the angels. Mind you, had we been fighting Stalin, things – and the attitude of the BBC – might have been different . . . .
“Who is Kurt Wallander?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00fzbmt/Who_is_Kurt_Wallander/
Lot of Beeb weight behind the new UK Branagh-led adaptations of stories about this Swedish copper (eg last week’s RT cover/lead article & an entire documentary about the stories’ author).
I’m not generally a crime/detective fan but the chance to look into a still-very-attractive-seeming Northern European nation through the genre’s lens pulled me to watch some of this last night on BBC4.
Naive of me to be surprised at what I found: by the account of the writer and the other voices, Wallander is the social conscience of liberal Sweden, aghast at how far short of utopia their ideals have helped make the country but holding to them in spite of all the problems they have created. Indeed this lot seem to regard more of the same as the only possible response to problems such as an extensive unassimilated (and unassimilable?) immigrant pop’n.
What I saw of the country last night still looks lovely, orderly, gentle, spacious. You can see how a good few embattled Indy readers in the UK would feel the pull of such a vision of loveliness: a beautiful land not as obviously fucked up as much of here but where they can continue to espouse what drove them there.
R
There’s more impartial reporting from the 1.)’Sunday Sun’ than from the 2.)BBC on this:
1.)’Sunday Sun’:
‘ Mido case not so clear cut’
“ONE problem with the PC Brigade is that they see neither the bigger picture nor key details.
“Instead, they got hung up on pointless ‘issues’, like the offensiveness of ‘Baa Baa Black Sheep’ as taught by a nursery teacher wearing a crucifix.
“In crusading against anything they believe may upset a minority, they antagonise the majority.
“Context? Perspective? They are invisible from the moral high ground.
“And so, to the holiers-than-thou, Newcastle United’s travelling fans are racist. It’s a black and white issue.
“‘Islamophobic’ chanting against Middlesbrough’s Egyptian striker Mido for a second successive season. The prosecution rests.
“Trouble is, put into context, the case is not quite so clear-cut.
“For while the stick Mido received was deeply unpleasant, is it racist to sing about someone carrying a bomb?
“Distasteful? Yes. Funny? No. Racist? I’m not sure. Not at all sure, in fact, when you consider that the chants aimed at Mido alluded specifically to his perceived resemblance to the “shoe bomber”, Richard Reid.
“More context? How come Mido is the only Muslim footballer who arouses Magpie supporters’ supposedly anti-Islamic ire?” (Neil Farrington).
http://www.sundaysun.co.uk/sport/other-sports/2008/12/07/mido-case-not-so-clear-cut-79310-22420208/
2.) But the BBC’s report is quite one-sided:
“Two arrested over Mido chanting”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/m/middlesbrough/7758089.stm
The BBC report makes no attempt to distinguish any definition of ‘racism’ from that of ‘Islamophobia’.
Robert Spencer video clip on ‘Islamophobia’:
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/10/26/new-jihad-watch-attacking-islamophobia/
Nor does the BBC seem to be aware of the relevance of the international Islamic campaign by the Organisation of Islamic Conference (O.I.C.) to BAN all criticism of Islam:
‘Gates of Vienna’ on O.I.C. –
[Extract]:
“Mention the vile portrayal of the Jews in the Muslim media, or the brutal treatment of women under Islam, or the shunning of Jews and Christians as required by the Koran, and that’s prima facie evidence of Islamophobia, and is not allowed. Such things have nothing to do with intolerance and discrimination, but are in fact further instances of the West’s ill-treatment of Muslims.
“One thing you can say about the architects of the OIC’s strategy: they’re not stupid. This is a diabolically clever use of the West’s finest rhetoric against it. With all this magnificent politically correct folderol, we are hoist with our own petard.
“And we have been so weakened by all these decades of Marxist-inspired self-loathing that none of our leaders has the guts to stand up and call these scoundrels out on what they’re doing.”
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2008/11/fisking-ekmeleddin-ihsanoglu.html#readfurther
,The ‘multiculturalist’ BBC predictably has: “In pictures: Hajj pilgrimage”,
George R | 07.12.08 – 9:33 am
It is news – soft I grant you.
What should the BBC line be? Ignore it – give some exposure (if so how much?) – condemn it – other options?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7769028.stm
“riots in 2005 when Lebanese Australians were targeted on a beach in Sydney.”
“the Cronulla riots, when a crowd of mainly white Australians gathered at a beachside suburb of Sydney and targeted people of Middle Eastern appearance.”
That’s not how I remember reading about them at the time.
“The first large-scale outbreak of violence, on Sunday in Cronulla, had been a widely publicised event. It came a week to the day after two surf life savers had been assaulted in what was believed to be an unprovoked attack by a large group of men of Middle Eastern appearance.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4525352.stm
On the 1943 Powell and Pressburger British film, ‘The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp’, (shown on BBC TV yesterday), there’s a long essay here by James Chapman:
[Extract]:
“The established character of ‘Colonel Blimp’ was perfectly in line with the intention of Powell and Pressburger’s film, which was to show ‘that Colonel Blimp was a symbol of British procrastination and British regard for tradition and all the things which we knew and which were losing the war’. The film was to urge commitment to the philosophy of total war, rather than playing it ‘by the National Sporting Club rules’ (to use Spud Wilson’s phrase). A dedication in the shooting script (though not in the finished film) makes its intentions clear: –
This film is dedicated to the New Army of Britain, to the new spirit in warfare, to the new toughness in battle, and to the men and women who know what they are fighting for and are fighting this war to win it.”
http://www.powell-pressburger.org/Reviews/43_Blimp/Blimp02.html
deegree:
The BBC picks and chooses with its ‘multiculturalism’, and especially in its dhimmitude towards reporting things Islam. The BBC will report the ‘hajj’, but it won’t criticise the activities of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference campaigning to ban all criticism of Islam.[See 2:10 pm above].
And what about Milton?
Thanks for doing the research, a. This is of course another case of the BBC quite simply lying. And did you find the cause for all the unrest? I can’t be arsed to dig out the reference, but I remember it followed the case of a muslim ‘rape squad’ that had been assaulting white Australian girls.
“The established character of ‘Colonel Blimp’ was perfectly in line with the intention of Powell and Pressburger’s film, which was to show ‘that Colonel Blimp was a symbol of British procrastination and British regard for tradition and all the things which we knew and which were losing the war’.
This leaves the impression the movie is some insane plea to carpet bomb civilians. But it was much more than a British version of a hideous Nazi ode to militarism.
The Candy/Blimp character is played lovingly and movingly, and there is a profound sense of the (necessay?) loss of innocence and decency embodied by Candy.
To Robert
I don’t disagree with you in principle about BBC shilling for islam, but there was, unusally, a photo special about the Hindu Rama Pir festival featured last month – and one of the interesting things about this piece (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/7667999.stm) was the commentary under the first picture:
An annual Hindu festival in Pakistan, the Rama Pir, is viewed suspiciously by some Muslims who do not like seeing non-Muslim women going about without a veil.
Even a festival in a vast-majority Hindu country it seems, cannot be mentioned outside the context of their favourite Religon of Peace™
correction: my post should of course have said ‘originating from’ a vast majority Hindu country.
Still you get the idea.
Did anybody else catch the end of the Gabby Logan show today when she and her guests (leftie funsters Kevin Day and John O’Farrell and journalist Andrea Catherwood) were lamenting the end of George Bush’s presidency? They were worried because Bush had given them and the rest of the show’s rota of media luvvies a regular target each week (today they were mocking him for saying that he hoped to be remembered one day for liberating 50 million people.) “We will miss George W, though, in a perverse way,” said Logan before reminding her guests that, “there’s always Sarah Palin.”
It’s a good job the BBC is impartial, isn’t it? God alone knows what it would be like if it was biased.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7765745.stm
As the BBC says it was another soldier killed in operations in Iraq.
Except of course no enemy forces were involved and no evidence to suggest anyone else was either.
If the BBC are including suicides in the 177 what others are they including at the BBC?
Found out and found guilty of their actions they just can’t get the chip off their shoulders and continuosly make up or exaggerate stuff about Iraq, so any genuine concerns disappear beneath their misinformation.
Bias at its worst.
Robert 2.50
If you google “leb style”, you’ll find a link to a relevant SMH article.
What’s with the BBC glow password warning?
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=948663
strange isnt it, maybe Al beeb will one day want u enter ur tv licence number in order to use the site
bit of info here about it
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081206120612AAy86jU
Its something to do with a framework they’ve developed for their new website. See the link below. Something to do with a replacement for jquery.
http://www.nicksmith.co.uk/blog/2008/09/…
not as bad as http://www.bbcgreen.com/
pure left wing looney socialist propaganda