Oh dear – read this and then feel so sorry for all those working for the Foreign Office. Do you feel their pain? This article is loaded from start to finish with pro-F.O. spin and yet the same rotten BBC that report this blithely dismiss the worries of British business that is being crippled by the same falling Pound vs the Euro /Dollar by pretending that our “exports” will more than compensate for the devastation caused by Brown’s financial incompetence. The F.O. always get a sympathetic press from the BBC and I put this down to the fact that it, like the BBC, is infested with traitorous vipers who loath everything great about Britain.
HYPOCRITES
Bookmark the permalink.
The F.O. always get a sympathetic press from the BBC
Could that be because CFO subsidizes a good proportion of the World Service?
The FCO pays good money(ours)to have its message/agenda/narrative prddled by the BBC!
Just look what their(our)cash buys, narrative, setting news manipulation and a whole lot more, Gaza gets the full on flogging while afghanistan gets the back burner treatment so the islamist rage mobs pick on Israel instead of the government.
The droids at the FCO are probably having a great laugh about all the attacks on British Joooos while ordering it to be kept secret or at least off the BBC airwaves!
As far as the FCO are concerned the British Joooos are just collatoral damage?
” This article is loaded from start to finish with pro-F.O. spin”
No it isn’t; it’s a rather turgid piece about a MP’s views.And on the face of it, it’s probably true.
“and yet the same rotten BBC that report this blithely dismiss the worries of British business that is being crippled by the same falling Pound vs the Euro /Dollar by pretending that our “exports” will more than compensate for the devastation caused by Brown’s financial incompetence.”
You just made that up. One example of such blitheness? And it’s one hell of a non-sequitor.
“I put this down to the fact that it, like the BBC, is infested with traitorous vipers who loath everything great about Britain.”
So from a very bland article, you derive this hyperbolic nonsense.
V poor.
From an entirely one sided article, I suggest bias. Deal with it.
I think that David has finally turned. He’s become more spin than substance.
With all due respects, the pound is not actually falling, but rather seeking its natural purchasing power, or lack of it. Therefore, in its present, non-propped up mode, it is a truer reflection of our dire UK eonomy. But the bbc is too pig ignorant to grasp this. Nuances? From the beeboids! Ha.
But David, no serious person could take your hyperbole seriously. It is presumably your intention to have some sort of influence through this site? Well over the top nonsense like this confines b-bbc to the attic of the blogosphere reserved for mad uncles.
DAILY MAIL:
HOME SECRETARY BENDS LIVING EXPENSES RULES
BBC
-IGNORS STORY
BIAS BBC BLOG
-IGNORS THIS BBC BIAS OF OMMISSION
WAKE UP!!
Times are hard for the FO – just like the rest of us.
They need to make a whole bunch of economies, some painful – just like the rest of us. And quit with the begging bowl stuff.
MWL,
I think you will find that given the surge in the readership of this blog in recent times there are either a large number of mad uncles, as you put it, or an increasing number of folk that see through the propaganda dressed up as news that the BBC passes off on us each day. I also think you misunderstand my purpose here, I assume deliberately. This is all about providing issues for our readers to express their view, and maybe they will disagree with my interpretation of the items blogged! I am happy either way – but I would point out that in the main, they appear to see things from a similar perspective, sometimes with really interesting caveats, as Velvel illustrates so neatly.
When I see that they all agree with your unique point of view, I know my work is done. Until then – deal with it.
Does MWL work for the FCO? MWLs posts sugest to me that rather than engage with the topic at hand he focuses instead on attacking DVs style.
Come on MWL, stop the sneering and engage a rational argument please, DV has made a clear position and argument so why not respond with facts?
I really think you demean your postion by refusing to engage in a subject like this.
“hyperbolic nonsense” and “bland nonsense” in your opinion BUT what you seem to miss(and I dont know why)is substance and reasoning, we have all been warned about childish name calling and ad hominem insults so come on, you are a better poster than that.
I dont recall you being elected as the uber critic of B-BBC writing style.
I think MWL is an artificial construct – dreamed up by David Vance as a kind of straw man.
Becuase no-one in real life could be as pathetically and predictably knee-jerk as MWL.
“Well over the top nonsense like this confines b-bbc to the attic of the blogosphere reserved for mad uncles.”
Amazing you bother to rebut then MWL.
“DV has made a clear position and argument so why not respond with facts”
He really hasn’t though has he? in what way is the article objectionable. It’s a bland and factual report. And yet DV sees in it all manner of perfidy. My first post engaged at all levels.
MWL: Utter crap. It’s not ‘an MPs’ view its the view of a Committee. Oh and why has the pound gone down the pan?
Because McFatty One Eye has trashed our economy. Why can’t you EVER get your thick simple brain to actually READ a post?
“The F.O. always get a sympathetic press from the BBC and I put this down to the fact that it, like the BBC, is infested with traitorous vipers who loath everything great about Britain.”
Oh dear indeed, but it’ll take quite a bit to top the ‘sodomists charter’ post. I don’t think you can be naive enough to assume an increase in web traffic necessarily means that a site is more likely to be taken seriously.
Richard Lancaster writes: “I don’t think you can be naive enough to assume an increase in web traffic necessarily means that a site is more likely to be taken seriously.”
Are you suggesting that your little friends at the BBC shouldn’t be interested in viewer figures and shouldn’t use them to justify their programming?
My, my, whatever next?!
Richard Lancaster.
Have you had any dealings with our wonderful FO? My comment is based on my experiece, what is your based on?
DV, I would agree that the FO seems to get an easy ride from the BBC, I am not sure that it is infested with traitorous vipers, it would be unfair to stereotype all FO employees as being traitors, if as I think you were alluding to the politicized management, then I would agree that their is some truth in your labeling !!.
My dealings with the FCO confirm that in the main, like all the civil service, it IS a nest of traitorous vipers.
If the employees of the Foreign Office are paid to do the best for the British taxpayer then they are taking money under false pretences.
Is there an example of this viperous treachery?
Burgess Philby and Maclean
TPO
Touche !
Except that Burgess worked at the BBC, not the FO.
David Vance | Homepage | 08.02.09 – 11:30 am |
I think you will find that given the surge in the readership of this blog in recent times there are either a large number of mad uncles, as you put it, or an increasing number of folk that see through the propaganda dressed up as news that the BBC passes off on us each day.
What’s wrong with mad uncles? I’m one. Ask my nephews.
JohnA | 08.02.09 – 6:08 pm |
Your correct in that he worked for the BBC, but in 1938 he joined the FCO, he later became secretary to the Deputy Foreign Minister and then moved to the British embassy in Washington where he seriously upset the Americans.
I forgot to add that even in the 30s the BBC was stuffed with fudge packers.
Mikewineliberal,
One good example of the viperous civil service is on the roads.You`ll see an increasing amount of foreign lorries, not paying for their “track costs “.You and all the other (British) road users are.
Conversely go down to Dover and se the dearth of UK registered trucks going to the continent, where they have to pay in every country they are in.
you can buy the foreign taxes at Dover and other ports, but for some strange reason, the Department against Transport thinks its impossible to charge our European competitors here.
They have their excuses, but the real reason is that they are indolent,bullying,self serving half wits.
TPO
You are correct about the spy Guy Burgess, of course – my memory is slipping.
I think he worked for the BBC from the late 1930s until nearly the end of the war.
(Was the subject of Alan Bennett’s quirky play “An Englishman Abroad”)
Original Robin | 08.02.09 – 7:28 p
so nothing to do with the FCO.
It has lots to do with the Foreign Office – they coordinate along with the Cabinet Office our representation in Brussels.
My experience of FO staff is that they are happy to sell the UK down the drain at every turn, seldom stand up properly for UK interests in the fights in Brussels. Especially when there are wet Foreign Secretaries – and you don’t get much wetter than Banana Boy.
MWL,
The FCO are civil servants with an even more stuck up attitude than the domestic ones.
Go round the worlds capitals and you`ll find most embassies are in a particular area – except the British embassies, which are near the shopping.
I daresay the FCO is full of arrogant, self-serving, self-righteous parasites just like the rest of the public sector, including its broadcasting and political wings (i.e. the BBC and the Labour Party).