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.
It could be argued that anyone who beleives in one of the established religeons has a mental illness. There may be a god but how can it all be explained by a man made fairy tale? If you start from this position then even inteligent people with religeuos convictions should be viewed with caution. Brown is just one such person.
Jon:
With the successful attack on smoking, it was only a matter of time before something else hit the health fascist radar.Drinking is the new smoking. What next?
Jon | 07.03.09 – 10:05 pm
eating meat
-Just watched the BBC 2, hour-long documentary on ‘The Satanic Verses Affair’.
As usual with the dhimmi BBC, on issues Islamic, the political line is filtered through a Muslim or Muslims.
In this case, pride of place in the credits goes to Professor Mona Siddiqui. The same Ms. Siddiqui who presented ‘Thought for the Day’ on BBC Radio 4 earlier this week:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/programmes/thought/documents/t20090305.shtml
DEJA VU -from 5 March, here, General Thread, on Ms. M .Siddiqui:
George R:
A rather discursive BBC ‘Thought for the day’ this morning, was presented by Ms. M. Siddiqui.
She seems to begin vaguely by mentioning banking, Sir Fred, and within a minute or two, she was quoting approvingly from Voltaire on money, before leading us gullible infidels to the wisdom of her Prophet.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ pr…t20090305.shtml
But, hang on, wasn’t Voltaire critical of Islam, and don’t Muslims want to ban his works? No mention of this by Ms. Siddiqui:
‘Jihadwatch’ (2006):
“Muslims ask French to cancel 1741 play by Voltaire”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmi…ives/ 010527.php
Instead, Ms. Siddiqui makes a vague veiled offer for us infidels to appreciate the wonders of (unnamed by her) Sharia, and Sharia-compliant finance, with no reference to the following critique of Islamic intentions, of course:
‘Shariah Finance Watch’
“Muslim leaders call on Islamic banks to perform ‘missionary work’ to spread Shariah-Compliant Finance”
http://www.shariahfinancewatch.o…pliant-finance/
What a coincidence that Ms. Siddiqui’s BBC ‘Thought for today’ seems to dovetail so nicely with global Islamic directives.
And thanks BBC for furthering your dhimmi cause for Shariah, at the expense of infidel licencepayers.
George R | 05.03.09 – 5:47 pm | #
d
if you just dismiss all people with religious views as mentally ill you not only dismiss a significant proportion of the earth’s population, you insult them and you make yourself a stupid exremist who almost no one will listen to. It is just this sort of ridiculous position that makes the likes of Dawkins not listened to even when they have valid points. It infests the ‘vigourously’ atheist scene, particularly on the net, and just makes them come over as intolerant bigots who can not be trusted with any power. So go on accusing so many of the world’s population as mentally ill, and go on being utterly marginalised, fine by me.
Anon,
A significant portion of people believe in UFOs – doesn’t mean they exist though
U2, the BBC and job for radio boss who left over Ross
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1160146/U2-BBC-job-radio-boss-left-Ross.html
When will this hit the BBC?
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hzxMIm4EJQJddvV_ZHPkN1pw8nJwD96P7RC80
I fear never.
I do not deny the existance of higher beings but people in positions of authority that beleve in man made fairly tales. No wonder the world is in such a mess.
As most people here know I opposed the invasion or Iraq and Afghanistan ( I really don’t give a shit about Muslims) but the treatment of our nation by the American media really does make me wince.
On Fox News last night on the Fox panel some Democrat woman accused the British of not stepping up to the plate in Afghanistan in terms of soldiers.
Now, perhaps the US media don’t give a shit about dead or injured British soldiers but to accuse us of not doing our part when c**ts like France Germany Spain Italy Canada etc. have committed no soldiers to the real fight in Afghanistan is a joke.
Of course the blame lies with Gordon Brown and the BBC. They totally underplay the war in Afghanistan.
If fucking Obama thinks he can stick two fingers up to the British then fine. I really don’t give a shit about this Socialist c**t.
But lets take our soldiers away from Afghanistan and see who the fucking yanks can rely on then.
Not a lot I suspect.
It is arrogant to assert that “your” religeon is the only answer. Religous people just beleive they do not question. It is the opposite of arrogance to say that there may be a god and that my intelignence is probably too feeble to really understand the nature of the universe and how it was created. That is my position. To simply beleive and viorously defend only one out of the many religeons is illogical and worrying.
The BBC is buncing up its employees £46 grand to move North.
Classic liberal bias. On Fox New the awful vile piece of human shit called Jane Hall talking about Muslim scum who throw acid in the face of girls.
“…Well it’s something we should really do something about, I’m not sure what..”
Classic liberal crap.
Next Muslim men will be beheading their wives in the USA.
Whoops!
Custard Attack v Father 4 Justice
I’m suprised there hasn’t been a post highlighting the differences between the bbc’s reporting of the mandleson custard attack compared to how they reported Fathers 4 Justice protests.
The current headline is “Pride at Mandelson custarding”, describing how the women’s mother was proud of what she did etc.
Without getting too much into the merits of both causes, Mandleson hasn’t really been in the job very long at all, whereas someone like Harman persecutes men and fathers 24/7.
I’m not against them finding people to say nice things about the protester – it’s just the lack of consistency – i.e. they only say these nice things when they sympathise with the protester’s cause.
Where’s the corresponding pride in someone such as Mark Harris – who was once jailed for waving at his children yet they now live with him and he fights to change the law so no one else has to suffer what he’s been through?
Just how long has it taken the BBC to put this story up on the front page?
“Button gaffe embarrasses Clinton”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7930047.stm
Not for the first time, the BBC gives the impression that it has to be dragged, screaming and kicking to publish a story critical of its heroes – and only does so when it would look absolutely ludicrous not to, because of the coverage elsewhere.
The bBC. headline news and more important stories.
Here is a screen dump of the current bBC frontpage. You’d think the story which is in 3rd place should really be at the top. But according to the bBC it appears they feel more for failed terrorist aslyum seekers than they do British soldiers who have died. (Strange how the bBC hasn’t added how many soldiers have died in NI like they do with Iraq and Afghanistan)
http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/9947/captureytv.jpg
The bBC. headline news and more important stories.
So the IRA are at it again. What shock. Not!
No doubt Gus Haynes will be wanking himself off over this.
The bBC, newsupdates and still an anti British angle.
I see Al Beeb have updated their front page. Reading just the headlines you’d think the nasty British army are acting as the bBC promotes them;
Two die in ‘barbaric’ Army attack
I mean shouldn’t the headline read;
“Two soldiers die in ‘barbaric’ attack on British Army”
Then they have the gall to add underneath it an angle from MeGuinness which kind of substaniates for the bBC just why the British are getting attacked.
“Forces are a threat – McGuinness”
http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/9184/capturep.jpg
The bBC, newsupdates and still an anti British angle.
Martin –
Yes the piece process which really only amounted to the Labour buying them off with higly paid noddy jobs in the Northern Island assembley did not last very long. The gravy train is coming off the rails.
I promise to use a spell checker more often!
“No doubt Gus Haynes will be wanking himself off over this.”
No,someone else.
SF refused the chief constables request for special forces recon units.
http://www.sinnfein.ie/news/detail/37763
the SDLP also opposed it
Tweets by SDLPlive
“The SDLP said today we believe that MI5 fingerprints are all over the deployment of Special Forces after a meeting with the Chief Constable
5:08 PM Mar 6th from web “
I am always moderate, one should reflect community values.
Which I translate as :
“You are a splinter IRA group?
Give up now. or die.”
Binyan still top headline on Radio 4/ World Service at 4.30pm
Can someone tell me what’s the connection between the Upsy Daisy doll and the BBC? Are there multiple ‘ethnic’ models or did the original ‘Caucasian’ doll become darker over time?
Now here’s a funny one.
The Pew research center has done a survey which looks at how politically informed Americans are and broke the results down according to where they get their news from.
Interestingly enough, the audiences of both Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh are more politically knowledgeable than viewers of the BBC. Make of it what you will.
Compare and contrast:
BBC – “Two die in ‘barbaric’ Army attack” (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7930837.stm)
to
“Washington Post -“2 British soldiers killed in N Ireland gun ambush”
or
Guardian Unlimited – “Soldiers killed in N Ireland ambush”
It astounds me (or really does it?) that it so unclear in the BBC headline that the Army is the victim and not the perpetrator of this barbarism.
Anon | 08.03.09 – 8:07 am | #
I guess it was just too tempting for them to bolt the words ‘barbaric,’ ‘army’ and ‘attack’ together in that order, wasn’t it?
Anon you spot on.
“Two die in ‘barbaric’ Army attack”….says to me the Army has been made a ‘barbaric’ attack.
Really it is not hard to clear up the misunderstanding
“Two die in ‘barbaric’ attack on Army”
Anon, sorry that should be your’re
bugger. still can’t spell
When I first saw the ‘Two Die in Barbaric Army attack’ headline the first thing that I thought was that there had been some kind of fight by some off duty soldiers on a night out or something like that.
It’s a very obscure headline.
I can join the dots, but can very highly paid BBC journalists work out the connection? This week the Seinn Feinn leadership denounce in apocalyptic terms the deployment of a small recce section to NI. A few days later, low – their prediction comes true, there is a cowardly drive by shooting of troops. Could it be that there is some connection – perhaps a reminder to the population and our ‘government’ that the weapons put “beyond use” may have only been stored in nice oily rags somewhere? Dare the BBC ask the question?
Top this off with a deliberately misleading headline and you have the BBC position: the ‘North of Ireland’ has to be ‘returned’
The BBC is an utterly vile organisation. Cameron, break it up and privitise it as soon as possible
Don’t know if people in the rest of the UK had it but here in Scotland yesterday afternoon we were subjected to two hours of the Scottish Labour conference in Dundee. Interesting camera angles probably designed to ignore the fact that the Caird Hall wasn’t exactly bursting at the seams. I could only stand it for 10 minutes.
Then later at 5pm I switched on the TV for the news. Sky News ran an interview with George Osborne on the latest government cock-up with Lloyds but over on the BBC, guess what? Vince Cable of the Lib Dems was featured. Could it be that if the BBC can’t persuade us to vote for Gordon ‘Saviour of the World’ Brown, let’s persuade the punters to go Lib Dem?
“The attack comes shortly after Sir Hugh Orde, the chief constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland, requested the Special Reconnaissance Regiment’s help to gather intelligence on dissident republicans.”
‘After’, as in ‘as a result’, BBC?
The BBC News channel showed the most blatant lie this morning claiming that women are more likely to be made redundant during the depression-recession than men. Thereby following Harriet Harperson’s claims.
It’s a complete lie.
The independent Office of National Statistics said “The economic downturn in 2008 has impacted less on women in employment than men.” Their figures show that employment among women was 0.3% down in the last quarter of ’08 compared to ’07 whereas male employment was down 1% over the same period. Women were made redundant at a rate of 6.6 per 1000 whereas for men the rate was twice as high at 13.6 per 1000. The ONS said women are less likely to be made redundant because they are disproportionately employed in the public sector where job security is much higher.
Anonymous | 07.03.09 – 8:36 pm
Although it is a disgusting lefty rag, the Guardian does appear to employ competent journalists who generally don’t shrink from reporting the news in full, and not only the bits of the news they approve of.
The BBC, on the other hand, no longer resembles a news organisation, if it ever did, and its “editors” are a fearful, PC bunch who carefully minimise or ignore news that doesn’t suit their prejudices. BBC “journalists” must get to know very quickly what is expected of them and, even if they are inclined to do their job, no doubt soon bend to the iron PC rules and give their editors what they insist on.
I have Googled around and can’t find anything on this story from the BBC though their are tons of BBC references to the Bush shoe thrower. Jon Leyne, one of the BBC’s typical pro-Muslim, lefty hacks, is currently in Iran. No doubt he’s avoiding the story like the plague, especially this bit from the Guardian:
However, Ahmadinejad has been on the receiving end of flying footwear before. A shoe was thrown at him during a students’ demonstration at Tehran’s Amir Kabir university in December 2006.
Urumiye News said the latest protest came when a disturbance broke out after a vehicle in the presidential convoy struck an elderly man who walked onto the road to try and hand Ahmadinejad a letter. People became angry when the driver failed to stop to attend to the injured man. Eventually an ambulance in the motorcade was forced to take him to hospital after jeering crowds blocked its path.
The BBC is on the side of the vile “religious” oppressors in Iran, and doesn’t give a damn about the people under their yoke. The psychotic Mullahs can do no wrong in the BBC’s eyes. After all, they must be the good guys since they deposed the pro-Western Shah and they fund, arm and train terrorists for attacks on Israelis and American soldiers in Iraq.
BBC attempts to ignore the ‘t’ word, avoid upsetting the agenda etc is reaching hilarious proportions. In a way which I’m used to correcting in my son’s homework – newsreader on the A Marr show begins “Two soldiers were shot dead in a NI ‘gun’ attack…. —Not with bows and arrows? Slingshots? maybe peashooters. Cue a surrealistic Harry Hill like piece with actors in a variety of ‘gun’ uniforms ‘attacking’ some actors in army garb. Interesting to see who is responsible for the attack and how soon the BBC will join the rest of the media in naming the culprits.
The BBC headline ‘Two Die in ‘Barbaric’ Army attack’ is not as ridiculous as the Sky News ‘breaking news’ Two Pizza delivery men are among those seriously injured in attack on Northern Army army base.
Small mercies? 🙂
Not sure if it’s been mentioned previously but I was wondering why Prof Jim al-Khalili was so omnipresent on the BBC when it comes to science (e.g ‘Atom’ and ‘Science and Islam’). Was he just really informative or was he ‘favoured’ due to his beliefs?
I need not wonder any more…
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/science-museum-accused-over-links-to-israel-1635887.html
‘Jim Al-Khalili, a professor of physics at Surrey University and a television broadcaster, said that he was perturbed by the “insensitive timing” of the events, which come “at a time now when government can best rebuild the devastation of Gaza.” ‘
Such an enlightened soul, wishing to ban a Science fair…
Re-BBC 2’s ‘The Satanic Verses Affair’ (last night), given the BBC’s reliance on Islamic advisers in order to portray a ‘politically correct’ line, issues like the following, pointed out by Bruce Bawer, 2008) were neglected by the BBC:
Bruce Bawer:
‘An Anatomy of Surrender’
“Motivated by fear and multiculturalism, too many Westerners are acquiescing to creeping sharia.”
“What has not been widely recognized is that the Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1989 fatwa against ‘Satanic Verses’ author Salman Rushdie introduced a new kind of jihad. Instead of assaulting Western ships or buildings, Khomeini took aim at a fundamental Western freedom: freedom of speech. In recent years, other Islamists have joined this crusade, seeking to undermine Western societies’ basic liberties and extend sharia within those societies.
“The cultural jihadists have enjoyed disturbing success. Two events in particular—the 2004 assassination in Amsterdam of Theo van Gogh in retaliation for his film about Islam’s oppression of women, and the global wave of riots, murders, and vandalism that followed a Danish newspaper’s 2005 publication of cartoons satirizing Mohammed—have had a massive ripple effect throughout the West. Motivated variously, and doubtless sometimes simultaneously, by fear, misguided sympathy, and multicultural ideology—which teaches us to belittle our freedoms and to genuflect to non-Western cultures, however repressive—people at every level of Western society, but especially elites, have allowed concerns about what fundamentalist Muslims will feel, think, or do to influence their actions and expressions. These Westerners have begun, in other words, to internalize the strictures of sharia, and thus implicitly to accept the deferential status of dhimmis—infidels living in Muslim societies.
“Call it a cultural surrender. The House of War is slowly—or not so slowly, in Europe’s case—being absorbed into the House of Submission.
“The Western media” [not excluding the BBC] “are in the driver’s seat on this road to sharia.”
http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_2_cultural_jihadists.html
From Bruce Bawer article above (11:47 am):
“In June 2005, the BBC aired the documentary ‘Don’t Panic, I’m Islamic’, which sought to portray concerns about Islamic radicalism as overblown. This ‘stunning whitewash of radical Islam,’ as Little Green Footballs blogger Charles Johnson put it, ‘helped keep the British public fast asleep, a few weeks before the bombs went off in London subways and buses’ in July 2005. In December 2007, it emerged that five of the documentary’s subjects, served up on the show as examples of innocuous Muslims-next-door, had been charged in those terrorist attacks—and that BBC producers, though aware of their involvement after the attacks took place, had not reported important information about them to the police.”
I see the BBC can’t be bothered to report the Prime Mentalist’s rant and outburst and dummy spitting session on the plane back home (see Daily Mail link) but of course DOES report his comment on homosexual marriage being outlawed in California.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1160311/Apologise-recession-Browns-credit-crunch-tantrum-30-000ft.html
What the BBC fail to get is that the vote to outlaw homosexual marriage was taken by the people. Of course the BBC like Liebour hate the idea of the people saying or doing something that goes against the leftists.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7928563.stm
Just checked Teletext and Ceefax while having breakfast.
BBC has killings as story 113 and (naturally) includes Brown in the headline, while ITV devotes the 3 top news items to the story.
BBC are vile scum
The Hain story still hasn’t made it to on the BBC.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/hain-breaks-ranks-to-warn-brown-he-is-running-out-of-time-1639758.html
They make a rod for their own backs, they have the ‘tomorrow’s papers’ review which flags up important stories and then the BBC ignore them if they don’t suit their aims. “Impartial” – I’d rather they just come out and be blatant about their affiliations, but please no more hang wringing about “Impartiality”
Sounds like the BBC’s golden boy :
simply cannot hack the job :
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4953523/Barack-Obama-too-tired-to-give-proper-welcome-to-Gordon-Brown.html
Mail on Sunday raise a good point:
Stop the BBC fee rises
In what now seems another age, the BBC was granted a staged series of increases in its licence fee. These increases were intended to protect it against inflation, which has now almost vanished.
They were also there to sustain it against commercial competition, which is in a state of near-collapse, as last week’s ITV results showed.
Why should the Corporation, still arrogantly defying public taste, be immune from the crisis that has shrivelled the incomes of so many? These rises should be postponed until better times return for us all.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/coffeebreak/chat/article-1160307/MAIL-ON-SUNDAY-COMMENT-Nobodys-hero-whos-Binyam.html
martin | 08.03.09 – 12:04 pm |
Don’t forget that The Obamessiah Himself took a position against legalizing gay marriage during the election, and Biden said they both were. Did the BBC ever mention that? Will they mention it now? Of course not. They let that little inconvenient truth slide.
How long can this ‘f’ing nonsense go on?
Heard on friends’ car radio:
Radio 4 World this Weekend 1pm: the NI terrorist attack – background summary from author / jounalist, tiny recorded piece from Protestants (Peter Robinson I think), Sein Fein not available then 10 mins of unhindered views from Shaun Woodward in tame interview.
Next up – will the world economic crisis hinder 3rd world aid? 5 minute interview with leader of African Development Bank – from start going nowhere. All questions superficial at best – we learn nothing until surprise, surprise guy says “we must thank GBrown for inviting us to (G8?) summit where at least we can put our case” Job done! done & dusted – quick summing up ‘interview’ abruptly ended. 10 more minutes of Douglas Alexander extolling how wonderfully virtuous the government is on the issue and how Gordon is leading the world.
News summary – “that was the world this weekend!” As a demonstration of one party state broadcasting Stalin must be turning in his proverbial that the boys in Moscow lacked the gall to come up with something like this.
Next up “Stand up with the Stars”: 4 Radio Four presenters – stints as comedians at the Comedy Club for charity. Mercifully ALMOST apolitical and genuinely amusing in places (particularly Peter White who was not only funny but delightfully non PC over the fact of his blindness). I say almost because throughout there were just two political references.
A ‘joke’ from Evan Davies involved him getting a hypothetical letter from a listener complaining that the “the Tory speaker was sexist” A compete misunderstanding it transpired, but point of joke not dependent on any particular party being involved. ED chose to use the ‘Tory’ label.
Laurie Taylor’s routine included “when I heard Mrs Thatcher say there was no such thing as society…….” (as the world renowned sociology prof that he is, he presumably knows that this was not what was meant by her – a ‘play it again Sam’ scenario).
Odd how the only political references were detrimental and aimed at one party.
Another hour of completely unbiased broadcasting.
When is some political ‘heavyweight’ going to make this a serious issue – this lot can’t last for ever. (but maybe I’m being unrealistic)
Speaking of the BBC hiding inconvenient truths from the public, here are two facts the BBC doesn’t want you two, one minor but amusing, the other getting bigger every day.
The lighter one is the fact that, during the recent meeting, Gordon Brown gave the US President a thoughtful, one-of-a-kind, historically connected gift, but The Obamessiah gave him a box of 25 DVDs. Is our President classy or what? It would be even funnier if they turned out to be R1. If Bush had done this….etc. Neither this nor Hillary’s incredibly stupid error is the kind of “smart diplomacy” I was promised on air by Matt Frei.
It was in both the Mail and Telegraph, so everybody knows about it. Yet, not a single Beeboid has mentioned this, as far as I can tell. It hasn’t been reported by Matt Frei or Nick Robinson, not in any video reports I’ve seen, not by Kevin Connolly or Justin Webb, and certainly not on the Obama Worship Diary. Instead, Frei Boy mocks anyone who is put off by President Obamessiah’s throwing Churchill’s bust out the door, and basically ridicules the idea that the lame-ass way the Obama/Brown meeting was handled means anything. Nick Robinson covers for The Obamessiah by saying that the poor President hasn’t even finished unpacking the boxes yet, give him a break.
Much more importantly is this other little thing which the BBC is hiding from you:
The “Tea Party” protest movement
The crowds are starting to get big, certainly bigger than many the BBC will tell you about. The most recent one in Fullerton, CA, numbered in the thousands. This is the fastest-growing (literally) story – directly connected to the most important issue – in the US right now, and the BBC doesn’t want you to know about it.
The two items I’ve mentioned – the gift gaffe and the “Tea Party” protests – are both hidden for the same reason. The BBC is desperately trying not to make President Obamessiah look bad. But why? He’s a foreign leader. It makes no sense, unless one understands that so very many Beeboids have a significant emotional investment in Him.
As Bugs Bunny liked to say, “What a way to run a railroad.”
Excellent comment from PeterN.
And in the run-up to TWTW? The neo-Marxist eco-warriors on the Food Programme led by their harpy-in-chief, Sheila Dillion, grinding their worn-out Lefty ‘organic’ axe for the millionth time.
I gave up and listened to The Early Music Show on R3. Far more enlightening than anything R4 seems able to offer these days.