Join the party!
QUESTION TIME LIVE
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Sluff Nov 24, 22:22
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
BBC 10 pm news A long feature by Feargal Keane in the Republic of Ireland. Initially there was some apparent… - Deborah Nov 24, 22:20
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
It looked as though one of the police officers kicked the man on the ground. - G.W.F. Nov 24, 21:58
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
Any news of the incidents at Gatwick, Euston, Chester etc? - non-licence payer Nov 24, 21:43
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
Any of those cops at Manchester airport! - non-licence payer Nov 24, 21:41
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
I noticed that the bBC managed to bury the Reeves lies in an article about a difficult week. Job done… - StewGreen Nov 24, 21:41
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
The Manchester George Floyd did step forward and for 2 seconds his hand was in the officer’s personal space but… - Fedup2 Nov 24, 21:38
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
Someone on the X suggested the petition might make 2 million by midnight Sunday … it might well make it… - Fedup2 Nov 24, 21:37
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
Deborah – yes – and there my idea fails . One day – when /if sense returns – they’ll look… - StewGreen Nov 24, 21:27
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
BBCnews have a habit of tweeting a story when a petition reaches 1 million 10 examples eg the ban fireworks… - Northern Voter Nov 24, 21:19
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
Latest from Springsters Petrify :- Rachel Reeves actually said she read the Economist, whilst making the morning tea at the…
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
Is there a problem? My PC is stuck on the ‘reminder’ screen.
Nothing showing here yet either
BBC Ha !
These transcripts are fantastic. I’ve never seen so much condensed proof that the inhabitants of this site are deranged, misogynist, racist lunatics.
ipreferred:
“These transcripts are fantastic. I’ve never seen so much condensed proof that the inhabitants of this site are deranged, misogynist, racist lunatics”
whereas you are a bastion of free thought and intellectual riguor.
nope your a lefty self hating prick.
thank god were not all as stupid as you.
ipreferred 9:59
There may be 1 or 2 racists posting on this website , but any racism here pales into insignificance when compared with the institutionalised pro-black, anti-white and anti-semitic racism in the BBC, which is a cancer in British society.
ngg: actually I am a bastion of free thought and intellectual rigour. I come here and try to make my points backed up with evidence, instead of reactionarily insulting those who think differently to me..
Grant: really, honestly, do you believe that white people are hard done by?
For those who missed QT, here is a summary:
The audience was, strangely, 99% white (heads will roll at the BBC). Compulsory teaching of Welsh in schools seems to have slowed down the process of Islamification of that country, as no extreme muslims to be seen anywhere.
The live commentary was entertaining but the panel had nothing to say of any interest. The editor of the Sun knew his big boss was watching.
Winner of the ‘Most Right-on comment of the week’
(Last week’s winner was – ‘listen to the kids’)
This week’s clear winner, which was repeated more than once, re high rate of teenage pregnancies: ‘give them hope’
Best euphemism goes to the Lib Dem (Kirsty Williams in red). She paused before thinking how to describe young single mums on benefits and then came up with ‘having a family quite young’
Best euphemism translation to HHH:
11:34 Hard Headed Hero: “having a family quite young” = Shagged behind the bus station and got up the duff
Funniest comment winner
11:03 DJ: No wonder Hain got off on the dodgy donations. Can you imagine being the guy who had to interview him? You’d top yourself
And
Saul 11:18 when a bulb went bang:
Religion of Peace alert!
Moment of greatest anticipation:
Lady in red, Kirsty Williams: ‘I take… I take… I take…’
Person least likely to be invited to QT:
David Vance: Steve – they NEVER mention the success in Iraq – counter to the agreed narrative
Person most likely to be invited on to QT • Shirley Williams, of course! She will be back next week, with Germane Greer (Why not just go all the way and have Shami Shami on too?)
Here is Shirley Williams getting sorted out by Christopher Hitchens on QT:
Quote from the clip: ‘And I can see that whatever I say, there is a sort of sullen resentful boring atmosphere in this room.’
Caveman 10:55
Great summary, thanks. I have seen the clip of Shirley making a complete fool of herself and then realising her mistake. It is a classic !
ipreferred 10:48
I didn’t say I thought whites are hard done by. I just make the point that the BBC is institutionally racist.
Hi Grant,
How is the BBC institutionally racist? Earlier you claimed the BBC is ‘anit-white’, I just wondered again, what you basing this claim on? I am white, and the BBC does not offend me, my lifestyle, nor is it racist towards whites.
I think you may getting swept up in the hysteria that has been created in recent years of ‘white Britain under threat’. It’s a line peddled by the Mail and the Express, and a lot of people like the idea of it, yet no one can explain it in a logical way. It helps provide people who are fed up with the changing demographics and mutli-ethnic Britain with a good platform to stand on. Problem is, it’s a platform contructed of no substance whatsoever. Unless you would care to prove me wrong.
ipreferred – I think you’re missing the point of these live feeds: it’s used to make an almost unwatchable programme watchable again through the medium of taking the piss.
It’s called banter, wit, satire, sarcasm or humour. All claims of racism are wide of the mark.
Have you eer kissed a girl?
Gunter – here is an example of how the BBC are racist:
Victoria Woods said on BBC History programme re tribes which colonised New Zealand before the British did:
Question to Maowri representative:
‘Why were you unsuccessful in repelling the invaders (ie British)?’
This is racist because they feel free to call white British going to New Zealand ‘invaders’ but this term would not be applied the other way round to muslims who come here and who are openly hostile to us.
And here is another example of how the BBC are racist:
They are racist because they turn a blind eye to the anti-gay and anti-women practices of a certain race, which they would make a huge fuss about if practiced by people of a certain other race.
They grovel and creep to people from hostile races who are obsessed with a medieval 24/7 religion, and who love war, virgins, and the number 72, and who want to blow us up and introduce Sharia law.
They grovel and creep to people who believe gays should be killed, and who like to bury women up to their neck, gather round in a circle, throw stones until the head cracks open, and then chant ‘Allah be praised’
The BBC grovel and creep to a group which FORBIDS their followers from making friends with people of other religions, (and kills them if they want to marry one) and yet at the same time call the BNP racist.
OT: Is BBC reporter Robert Peston a government stooge?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1156848/Is-BBC-reporter-Robert-Peston-government-stooge.html
Dick, there’s taking the piss and then there’s a diatribe of misogynist analysis whenever a different woman appears on the screen. There’s mocking jokes and then there’s calling people towel-heads and declaring that any war opposition is ‘dhimmi’. Have I ever kissed a girl? What kind of a question is that? What’s the relevance? Does one need to have kissed a girl to understand your ‘humour’? Are you assuming I’m male?
caveman, well, the difference there is we literally invaded with ships and guns and then settled on their land, as opposed to being peacefully welcomed (by most).
A-b-p-BBC, yes, I think I could take extreme Christians and apply the same logic. I know more of them than muslims who are forbidden from having a relationship with a non-believer. Can’t you see how selective and extreme your view is?
What evidence is there that mass immigration was peacefully welcomed in Britain ? Sure, it was peaceful so far – but it was imposed on us. No-one can say that we welcomed it all, indeed all the evidence is that we objected to a great deal of it.
And when did we invade Muslim lands to any extent ? Quite the contrary, Islam is an historic invader, it is core to Islam.
re New Zealand – the Maoris had not been in New Zealand all that long before the Brits arrived. So how is it “their land” in any real sense ? The land was mostly unpopulated, undeveloped.
Go study some NZ history. The Brits’ arrival was not resisted by the majority of Maoris.
Hi Caveman,
I think your example of NZ is a terrible example and does not illustrate your point at all. As ipreffered said, the British did invade NZ, and we imposed our values/culture on the country. How is the BBC report of that evidence of an anti-white culture? Or put a different way, how else could they have reported it? I’m sure you have a better example, because that one was hopeless.
Hi JohnA,
mass immigration to Britain has been peaceful, of course it has. Have there been attacks? Or riots? One significant one in 10 years at most.
Gunter
But it has not been WELCOMED. There is a crucial difference. It has been imposed, willy-nilly.
ipreferred:
there’s a diatribe of misogynist analysis…
But at least no-one who made those comments thought we should:
a) Put women in black bags with slits
Do you think this is reasonable/excessive/barbaric?
b) Stone women for being raped
Question – do you think they are reasonable/excessive/barbaric?
c) Have Sharia law which means a woman’s vote is 2/5 of a man’s or something similar. Imagine in parliament if each woman’s vote was only 2/5 of a man’s?
Question – does Sharia law offend you or not?
Gunter
Do you know any Maoris ? I know lots, I visit NZ every year They and the other islanders in NZ very much maintain their own culture. Indeed the culture of, say, the Cook Islands is just as much alive in NZ that it is back in Rarotonga.
caveman, those principles do offend me. I don’t defend them. I also don’t declare that every muslim inherently agrees with them and should be slandered so. You really need to disentangle your beliefs that liberals and left-wingers are pro-Islam without any thought.
Hi ipreferred,
I think you hit the nail on the head there. The idea that any ‘dissenting’ voices here are blindly ”pro-Islam” is a frustrating aspect of this site, and reflects a lot of the prejudice that lies beneath the surface.
Hi JohnA,
Yes Maori culture is still prevelant as a tourist industry, and yes it is booming in some areas – because the white government has helped it (out of guilt for attempting to eradicate it before).
Gunter & ipreferred:
ipreferred says ‘settled on their land’
When you say ‘their’ land, do you mean a representative of their genetic group set foot on the (large)island first, so that genetic group, or race, now have more rights than others of different genetic backgrounds?
And if this is correct, does the same apply in the UK the other way around?
You see, the BBC can be as racist as they want. It is just a case of which race, which land.
Another example – blacks own every inch of Africa, even those parts which were uninhabited before white settlers arrived. That is not me saying that, but it is clearly the BBC position.
Another example – separate development and lands for different races in former White S Africa – shudder – muslims forbidding members of their own community to inter-marry – ‘we must respect their customs’
Gunter says we should not assume:
‘dissenting’ voices here are blindly ‘pro-Islam’…
I do not know about you personally, but I think it is a fair generalisation to say the left are more pro the Islamification of Britain than the right are. Not too long ago, anyone in the Conservative Party who even suggested the immigration rate was too high was shouted down by Labour and called a racist.
Now this particular point is no longer taboo, but it is a clear example of the divide between the left and right on the issue.
Gunter/Gunnar/Hillhunt/Colin Chase or whatever personality trait you have this week.
The BBC has a pro left pro Islam bias by a mile.
The BBC itself has admitted that it would do things to the Bible it wouldn’t do to the Koran.
The BBC will always give a Labour Minister the benefit of the doubt in any wrong doing, whilst a Tory gets slaughtered (take Peter Hain, Jacqui Spliff & Mandelson as examples and compare that to the way Spelman and Osborne have been treated).
We have Robert Peston acting as a Liebour stooge along with Andrew Marr who Brown used to announce to the Country there would be no election. Even Marr looked embarrassed and that is saying something.
Finally, could yo uplease make YOUR position clear on Islam?
1. Do you think Islam really is a religion of peace?
2. Do you think women and gay people get fair treatment under Sharia law?
3. Do you think Sharia law should be written into English law
4. Do you think it would be acceptable for a female newsreader to wear a veil on screen?
I’m sure you won’t bother to answer as the drugs will be taking effect my now.
ipreferred, I meant – get a life. You’re not the arbiter of what passes for good taste & certainly not good humour. The right honourable Tory Poppins seemed quite inclined to share in the jokes (for that is what they were) about women.
And the claim that I or any other are racist because we’re inclined to consider the effects of mass immigration – both legal & not is wide of the mark.
Ofcourse we should stand up for minorities – ofcourse we should, but conversly we should also protect the majority from excessive taxation, irresponsible planning, social unrest, crime etc – where there are examples of many schools where English is a 2nd language for the vast majority.
Your liberalism is nothing of the sort. Your pique at offence petulant and your rule over how people interact non existent. Get off your home made pedastle and stop the bloody preaching – there are some bloody serious issues going on at the moment and your bullshit faux outrage makes you seem like a idiot.
Can I get back to the programme?
Did anybody notice that the EU was not mentioned once in the debate about the Royal Mail sell-off? Can the BBC prevent a mention or do the Question Time panel and audience live on a different planet?
ipreferred:
I also don’t declare that every muslim inherently agrees with them and should be slandered so
ipreferred | 27.02.09 – 12:51 pm |
No, all the muslims don’t agree with the extremists, like you say.
I imagine the women up their necks in sand waiting to be stoned might be questioning just how wonderful the religion is.
(No support from the BBC for them)
Others try to burn themselves do death when they cannot stand the religion any longer.
We will never know how many are moderate as ‘the community’ exert control over their members that makes the SS look like Girl Guides.
Hence there is no spontaneous army of 10,000 moderate muslims marching on parliament demanding that Banham Mohammed should not be allowed in the country.
Gunter
You are typically condescending towards the Maoris.
They keep their own culture going, thank you, without the government having to support it.
ipreferred:
The BBC is racist in the same manner as Lord Longford who once said on air that “…if I see a black person on the tube, I will make a point of sitting next to them”
There are many labels for this, basically he represented what some would call ‘the liberal establishment’ or ‘hampstead socialists’ Latterly the BBC has actively continued with the basic assumption that ‘racial minorities’ require special platforms or that certain religious groups must be protected in some way from any form of serious critisism. The subliminal (perhaps unintended)assumption is that anyone who is non-white requires assistance from those who are better placed (ie superior) and somehow face exactly the same issues irrespective of background, culture, personal attributes etc. Examples abound, and are properly highlighted in these threads of the overt and covert way the BBC progresses an agenda that is very far from the majority view of the license payer. One may buy the Guardian (or the Mail for that matter), this are a matter of choice – and not mandatory ie the licence fee. The purpose of this blog as I understand it to highlight current positions where BBC output is hopelessly lopsided in one direction. Labels abound ‘left / liberal/ etc – it doesn’t matter. A very brief and in no way comprehensive list of bias would include the BBC presumptions that:
UN beyond criticism
Public Spending – more is better.
Euro good
Traditional Christian values -bad
Muslims – misunderstood
US Democrats good
US Republicans bad
English history/ tradition bad
Devolution good.
NI loyalism bad.
Comprehensive education good.
Recruitment: Left wing think tanks/ Labour PR strategists, Labour MP’s and hacks / BBC – all interchangeable
One could go on ad infinitum, but there is a pattern here not just discernable to racists and fascists.
As one Liberal councillor aquaintance and an ex BBC accountant once remarked many years ago – “it’s where old socialists go to die”. Unfortunately he overlooked the phoenix factor within an institutionalised leftist organisation.
PeterN – good analogy – Lord Longford was a dude and a half and a true gent. Unlike the BBC he had the brains, the heart and the dignity to do his job his own way.
How the hell the BBC can attempt to be righteous when there are programmes like ‘fat teenagers find love’ or the gushing insouciance of their USA election junket on £4 billion of our cash beggars belief. They should report the news rather than editorialize it but it’s the unique way they’re funded!
The Maoris, like JohnA says, keep their own culture going – and good luck to them.
They must be so relieved they were not colonised by muslims.
And good post by PeterN
If I may…
There seems to be a bit of a dilemma fallacy going on here, people think that you are either PRO ISLAM LEFTIE COMMIE DIRTY SOCIALIST, or white christian middle-class Daily Mail readers. This is false, and there are many people in between those two points. Just because someone may disagree with, say, Israel’s attack on Gaza does not make them a fanatic Islamist who wants to blow up everyone in the UK.
Martin, of course no sane person could answer yes to any of your four questions, and yes, the BBC is biased somewhat, for fear of ‘a fence’. What many on this site seem to be advocating is that the BBC move sharply back in the other direction and become fanatically pro-christian and right-wing.
In my humble opinion, the BBC (and the government) should become a strictly secular organisation, and should also stop sheltering any group, whether they be Muslim, Christian, atheist, homosexual, left or right-wing etc. from criticism.
Open and reasoned debate is needed, not cries of OH NOES RACISM!!!! from every quarter.
Of course, when this happens, everyone will be flying to work on pigs flown by Elvis…
(I know that many will probably disagree, but so be it. That’s just my 2p’s worth.)
Leftists defending the BBC against accusations of leftist bias? Whatever next?
Fewgwer – cheese that can fly – I’ve been working on it for a few years now and am almost there: calculations go wrong when pickle added – complex.
centre-right | 27.02.09 – 3:18 pm |
“There seems to be a bit of a dilemma fallacy going on here, people think that you are either PRO ISLAM LEFTIE COMMIE DIRTY SOCIALIST, or white christian middle-class Daily Mail readers. This is false, and there are many people in between those two points. Just because someone may disagree with, say, Israel’s attack on Gaza does not make them a fanatic Islamist who wants to blow up everyone in the UK…….What many on this site seem to be advocating is that the BBC move sharply back in the other direction and become fanatically pro-christian and right-wing………”
……………………………….
Don’t think many here would complain or even that this blog would exist if the BBC gave proportioate time to ALL points of view whatever side of ‘the fence’ or indeed if we were not forced to pay for it…’not in my name’, etc
centre-right
What many on this site seem to be advocating is that the BBC move sharply back in the other direction and become fanatically pro-christian and right-wing
Hmmm, not really fair. I think even 1 hour per week in a prime time slot to give ‘the other side of the debate’ would make a huge difference to people’s voting behaviour.
Ideally, there would be many different tv & radio stations giving different views so people can watch/listen for themselves to any of them and make their own mind up.
And as for putting people in compartments for their opinions – you are correct in that the compartments are not neat ones.
But one place where there is a very narrow range of opinion, in fact incredibly narrow, is the BBC. On many issues it approaches 100% and on some issues, such as global warming, it reaches the 100% mark and stays there, come what may, even as the planet cools down!
British colonial history is another with 100% bias achieved
And grammar schools is another with 100% bias level reached
Please just one hour a week
It is when they cut off people like Frederick Forsyth, while giving endless platforms to lefties, that you know they are utterly biased.
And it is not “leftie” in terms of working-class Labour. It is leftie in terms of arch-left, verging to the Respect side. US always bad, UN always good – the list goes on and on.
Hi Martin,
1. Do you think Islam really is a religion of peace?
Like all religions, most followers are peaceful, but there are a small minority of extremists. Do you judge all Christians by the extremists who attack abortion clinics? If Islam were a religion of purely hate and terrorism, then millions around the world would be terrorists, would they not?
2. Do you think women and gay people get fair treatment under Sharia law?
No they don’t. And I never claimed they did. I don’t believe any ‘leftie’, as you may call them, would claim such a thing either so I fail to see the point of your question.
3. Do you think Sharia law should be written into English law
No, and again, who ever claimed it should? Aside from the odd nutty Archbishop or Imman.
4. Do you think it would be acceptable for a female newsreader to wear a veil on screen?
Yes, why not? Would you have a problem with it? If so, why?
Gunter –
Muslims are told they are not allowed to be friends with the non-muslim indiginous population, and ‘the community’ enforces this segregation rule. In extreme cases of friendship, such as an intention to marry, death can be the penalty.
In view of enforced segregation, is this going to lead to peace, or conflict?
So is it a religion which causes peace or conflict?
Gunter | 27.02.09 – 7:06 pm
Gunter – don’t be fatuous – how many abortion clinics have to protect themselves against suicide bombers and car bombs. Wear a veil on screen? 80% of communication is through body language/ facial expression – covering up the face is the TV equivelant of the 1920’s radio newsreaders wearing dinner suits.
Christopher Hitchins got into a bit of bother in West Beirut lately:
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/2009/02/christopher-hit.php
Gunter says (11:06):
I think you may getting swept up in the hysteria that has been created in recent years of ‘white Britain under threat’
Although this poster is probably a windup, in case it really is someone who has innocently relied on the BBC all his life for his news before stumbling on this site, or in case it is a young student who does not know anything except what his school teachers have taught him, here are examples of the threat to Britain, not including the obvious terrorist threats:
1) A Muslim ‘Lord’ threatening parliament with a mini-army of 10,000 enemies of Britain, actually living amongst us and therefore ‘the enemy within’
2) British newspapers not publishing cartoons of their prophet for fear of their lives
3) Our soldiers currently being shot at abroad by 4,000 muslims from the UK (these are British people being shot by muslims living here who have gone abroad to kill us)
Apart from threats of violence outlined above, wherever the religion is practiced, it perverts normal ideas of what is right and wrong, eg it is right to stab your own daughter to death for wanting to marry the wrong man, eg it is right to stone a woman who has been the victim of rape, eg it is right to marry a 9 year old to a 60-year old who already has 10 wives, eg it is reasonable that you need 4 male practicing muslims to witness a rape before charges can be brought, eg it is right to start wars for no gain apart from the honour of your religion.