Here’s a new old open thread for your use – bumped to the top for your latest thoughts.
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Eddy Booth Dec 26, 09:55
Christmas 2024
“Whisper it – alcohol-free wine has arrived in France” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp31lpv0zzjo BBC’s latest in it’s Muslim themed prohibition drive. “Most 20-somethings… - Fedup2 Dec 26, 09:05
Christmas 2024
Stuff I heard their advert for ‘editors ‘ – which is just another excuse to pump out more tickbox propaganda… - Zephir Dec 26, 08:54
Christmas 2024
You can’t beat a few apostrophies to desperately cast doubt. Unfortunately for the media, the video shows no doubt. - Zephir Dec 26, 08:37
Christmas 2024
English Defence League founder Tommy Robinson published a video on his YouTube channel in which he appears to be ‘attacked’… - Zephir Dec 26, 08:34
Christmas 2024
Well, with diversity giving us strength, I’m just exhausted with the hate and violence. Previouly displayed upon twitter and when… - Sluff Dec 26, 08:27
Christmas 2024
For a high spot example of woke, look no further than the absolutely execrable special Toady edition today. - Zephir Dec 26, 08:20
Christmas 2024
No one hates like the far left..and now they have found a nicer, kinder platform [img]https://i.postimg.cc/5NbyZcwT/Captureqqqq.jpg[/img] - Zephir Dec 26, 08:13
Christmas 2024
Do the far left do irony ? [img]https://i.postimg.cc/0NQJhgqP/Capture-ffs.jpg[/img]
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
The BBC, with its blatant Labour-'Guardian' daily political agenda, and a complicit 'BBC Trust', is abusing the rights of the mass of licencepayers.
Stephen Glover is basically correct, as are you, David, in your conclusion.
Above comment (8:46 am), refers to thread below,
'On Cue form the Left'.
Classic BBC. The queen of breakfast radio is doing the phone in "Which sports should be free to air"
So the BBC an organisation that is based on a compulsory tax thinks that other people who have a gift shouldn't be able to make money from it.
The BBC is the most arrogant bunch of drug users alive.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/gordon-brown/5836465/Gordon-Brown-swaps-seaside-for-Lake-District-holiday.html
is he going by helicopter?
The latest trendy cause for the BBC comrades is the 'plight' of the roma criminal gangs recently booted out of NI.
A whole sob story about how honest and hardworking the roma criminal gangs are and how industrious they are as they search for 'JOBS'(yeah right) around the EU, all the stops are pulled out to make the roma appear innocent victims of racism, the lies and deception pour forth because the roma criminal gangs are a favoured cause!
When the BBC adopt a trendy cause it gets the full treatment, unlimited and uncritical airtime and a sympathetic ear.
Manmade global warming.
Cuba.
hamas & hezbollah.
PIRA & tamil tigers(LTTE).
Windmills and 'green energy'.
Socialism everywhere.
Approved terrorists everwhere.
Jew hating antisemitism when applied from the left/islam only.
Women abusers/killers/rapists ONLY when applied by allied trendy groups.
Criminals of every type EXCEPT those who are considered political enemies.
Eco terrorism and sabotage.
US democrats get the full on express no holds barred unstinting
support.
Left wing dictatorships however evil and cruel.
All the above and more require only BBC corporate political approval and they can enjoy perpetual political,moral and active support, the kind of support only a multi billion pound empire can give.
word ver is demons FFS!
'Gordon-Brown-swaps-seaside-for-Lake-District' yes i heard the lakes are great ,especially if seen from the bottom of one mr brown!.
How the Beeb just parrots the Gov stats. Never looks at them analytically, just parrots the Gov line. Take the helicopter numbers, quotes verbatim the 60% number, not compares with the US or that Brown cut the helicopter budget £1.6B
Martin @9.02 – What sports should be free to air
Sorry but what's wrong with addressing that issue when certain sports are ringfenced as being free-to-air (International football, the FA cup…)
A valid debate about an issue that already exists, if no sports were protected I could understand your point
An interesting example of bias (and or rubbish journalism) was evident on the 10pm BBC news last night. Stephanie Flanders was doing the piece on the unemployment rise; and she mentioned the higher jobless numbers, but then spoke about how there wasn't an equal rise in those claiming job seekers allowance. The implication was that somehow that meant government was doing better than the public thinks. It missed the whole point that what the two stats show is that the govt. isn't even helping out those unemployed who need benefits! The BBC failed to point out that thousands, millions maybe, cannot claim job seekers at the moment – mostly older workers who have been made redundant in the current crisis – due to stupid regulations. The BBC needed to ask why there was a gap between the no. of unemployed and the no. of those on JSA, and they didn't.
Why? Because it is clear that the reason is that the govt. is screwing people who need JSA etc out of benefits they need, and also because it brings back the main story of 'government is broke, but we are supposed to believe things are improving'.
RE: Nick Robinsons’ News blog
I see Nick Robinson has done a disappearing act again. Last week he posted three blogs in one day – all about Andy Coulson. But since then – nothing. No mention of Peter Mandelson’s or Sir Gus O’Donnell’s respective admissions that cuts in public services will happen, whoever forms the next GVN. No mention of PMQ’s – the Afghan helicopter debate – or Gordon Brown’s less than impressive performance, before the Select Committee Heads this morning.
He can’t be on holiday – because he always leaves a post to this effect on his blog. So where is he? And why does he always seem to disappear when the going get’s tough for Labour?
‘Do as we say (not as we do)’ alert\; Church Leaders Accuse British Govt. of Favouring Muslims.
Could that be because Mandy hasn't decided what "line to take" yet.
Loved the Traktor stats issued by the PM today, especially is oft repeated "killer fact" (if I can use that hideous term in the circumstances) '60% more helicopters'.
Pa Broon didn't feel able to confirm the numbers of helicopters for 'security reasons', even though they are published in the Times today and the enemy have a man (perhaps even a student on his 'gap year') at every airbase who phones in the departure time of every helicopter.
60% sounds a hell of a lot better than "8".
Typical management by distortion of figures and the BBC feels unable to question this! It is what we have come to expect from an administration and a public broadcaster who are incapable of telling you that Thursday comes before Friday. 60% of what? Is this good given that the number of troops has doubled?
What are the views of folks here on the 'Thought for the Day' shenanigans? Personally, I think inviting atheists like Richard Dawkins is refereshing and a welcome (and rare) bit of balance from the BBC, considering that after Christians, atheists form the second largest (non)faith group.
Anon: Sorry but for example the BBC were suggesting that the test Cricket should be free to air. But the BBC didn't even bid for the live Cricket.
For example, the BBC is always banging on about womens sport, yet what female sport does the BBC ever show?
Sky covers womens golf, cricket, netball, tennis, cycling, football and so on.
The BBC seems to think it should be able to cherry pick the best events for free.
Why? We live in a free market society, You should pay for what you want to watch.
The BBC has no right to show sport for free.
The problem with the debate was it was one sided, with the usual anti Murdoch scum ringing in.
Why can't we debate the licence fee instead?
'For example, the BBC is always banging on about womens sport'
Examples?
James Macintyre is political correspondent for the New Statesman [NS] and a former producer of the BBC’s Question Time. Here is an extract of his work from the current issue of the NS…
If a man is judged by his friends, a political party can surely be judged by its supporters. The New Statesman’s senior editor Mehdi Hasan had a troubling encounter on the Tube last week. “Are you Indian?” demanded a leering, apparently well-oiled skinhead. When Hasan confirmed he was of Indian origin, there followed a sinister tirade: “Your time has come. You’ll be out when my boys get into power.” Whom did he mean, Hasan wondered, the BNP? Then came the answer: “The Tories.”
http://www.newstatesman.com/law-and-reform/2009/07/murdoch-brown-blair-iraq
Wow – what an incisive political story that is no way intended to slander one political party by playing the race card. I mean does Macintyre really believe that the Labour Party hasn’t got a few racist supporters of its own? Remind me again, in what area of the country has the BNP made the most ground – Answer: Labour heartlands. And to think – the BBC employed this guy as a producer of Question Time! Still why am I not surprised….
Hat-tip: Coffee House – http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5188628/the-new-statesman-tries-to-play-the-race-card.thtml
Oh! And I nearly forgot.
If "a man is judged by his friends" then I've just got just five words to say to Mr. Macintyre – Damien McBride & Ed Balls.
Now which senior politician are these two men very friendly with?
I thought the Tories were usually portrayed as the old blue rinse brigade by the Lefties.
Are you sure it wasn't William Hague after a few pints?
BBC seems to believe the 'British Isles' no longer exist.
The roving hairdresser in last evening's 'The One Show' was despatched to cut hair in gale force winds, in a sparsely populated community on the northern most tip of Scotland. He, however, referred to it as 'the most northern tip of Europe'.
As bizarre as wasting licence payers money sending a hairdresser and film crew to the most northern tip of SCOTLAND to trim two heads of hair.
On the issue of 'fish farms', the presenters made no mention of the disastrous impact of EU regulations on Britain's fishing industry or the need for amendments.
Definitely Brown's Broadcasting Corporation.
Surely the only sports that are "free to air" are those shown on commercial channels (especially if, like me, the viewer is highly resistant to advertising)? If I want to watch other sports I can choose to subscribe to Sky or whatever, and pay what that costs, or they may be shown by the BBC, to which I have to subscribe under threat of criminal sanctions. Having to pay for something by law does not mean whatever small part of the product you actually consume is then free.
Word veri = frail, a bit like the BBC's gasp of economics (and every other science)
Anon
Was the Scottish community the northernmost part of mainland Scotland (Cape Wrath I think), in which case the BBC was insulting the (British) Shetlanders, or the northernmost part of the isles, in which case a few Norwegiqans and Icelanders might have something to say about it. Of course they are not in the EU, so they are not real Europeans in the BBC mindset. I suspect the BBC considers such poor, benighted beings who have rejected the perfection that is the EU as not even real people (please Icelanders, don't let a little temporary difficulty influence you enough to sacrifice your independance).
HE'S BAAAACK!!!!! Matt Frei returns with a blog that beggars belief. Among his assertions, in a re-imagining of history worthy of President Obama, he gets so much wrong, not by fact but by emphasis.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/world_news_america/8150914.stm
Let's leave the Falklands, Iraq, Kosovo and the current conflict in Afghanistan and look at how a creep like Frei can twist history itself to his own ends:
He writes: "In 1842, 16,000 men and their dependents evacuated Kabul after a disastrous occupation. Only one of them, Dr William Brydon, a military surgeon survived. The rest were killed by winter, hunger and Afghan tribesmen who resented the presence of armed foreigners and infidels on their soil."
Even after 150 years Frei has to justify the murder of 15,999 people (British, Indian and Afghan) by explaining that tribesmen "resented" the presence of armed foreigners on their soil. Of course "winter" and "hunger" are placed above murdering Afghans. The sentence should read: "They were murdered by Afghan tribesmen who broke their word".
What Frei omits from his report is the fact that an agreement for free passage of the defeated British army force had been agreed with the "resentful" Afghans before the trek began. However, the "resentful" Afghans picked off the column of men, women and children returning to the safety of India one by one in a series of attacks and ambushes. And just why were they hungry? Why did winter take it's toll? Because of the 'resentful" Afghans harassment of the returning Brits and their supporters. But Frei, white post-colonial guilt seeping from every pore, blames "hunger" and "winter" before the Afghans for the extermination of a disarmed retreating column of 16,000 men, women and children.
If you examine his assertions about the more recent conflicts the same attitude is seen. And it's in his small words one can see Frei's world view. An example:
"Britain relishes a just war. Lady Thatcher egged on President George Bush Sr to dispatch troops to Saudi Arabia after Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait."
Please note: "Egged on"? Not "argued" or "convinced" but "egged on".
Another example: writing about British deaths in Afghanistan: "Everyone is watching whether the beast of public outrage will stir once again. It has done so often enough this year, most memorably over the MPs' expenses scandal."
1. Pray, tell us Matt, who is "everyone"?
2. To liken the mood of sadness and mourning and even anger in a war to the public outrage over the MP's expenses scandal is deeply insulting to both the military, supporters of the war and, frankly, anti-war advocates too.
Frei ends with: "The last thing that the British government now needs is for the public to start re-reading the history books." The last thing we all need is for Matt Frei to start re-writing them.
BBC: "The BBC has agreed to pay £45,000 in damages to the head of the Muslim Council of Britain over a libellous claim in the Question Time programme"
Muhammad Abdul Bari claims he will give your TV license money to "charity" – which he doesn't name – perhaps one which assists the relatives of suicide bombers? Why so shy?
The BBC is not only paying YOUR£45,000 in damages to Mr Bari but also you are paying his legal costs (sum unspecified). And of course the BBC's legal costs, which of course they forget to mention.
Because a panellist said something libellous. Law being an ass mostly, but isn't that the same as DV paying out for something someone else wrote on this blog? Why is it OUR problem?
Why is it worth "£45,000" – two years average salary, probably six years minimum wage? Why couldn't the BBC just apologise for what they didn't say? Haven't they paid out money to Muslim Council before, quite recently?
BBC doesn't have any money of its own – it only has money taken from you. Why do they rush to pay it to their mates I wonder?
The BBC and its political propaganda against the FAMILY:
'Telegraph'
" Absent fathers and social breakdown go together like smoking and cancer"
(by Ed West)
[Extract]:
"Imagine that the argument over smoking was debated like this – every time a possible link with cancer was discussed on the Today programme, the BBC would bring in someone from a tobacco industry-funded lobby group whose spokesman explained that any suggestion of a link was motivated by prejudice against smokers, who are among the poorest and most disadvantaged members of society. That every drama on the BBC focused on those smokers who lived long and healthy lives. And that every time a medical professional said there was a link between lifestyle and disease, some outraged smoker replied, unchallenged, that his uncle smoked 60 a day and had just received his telegram from the Queen that morning.
"Well, that’s almost exactly the way the BBC deals with single-parent families and social breakdown, the only difference being that Gingerbread, the single-parent family charity and lobby group, also receives funds from the taxpayer.
"Of course plenty of children grow up without a father and turn out to be delightful and well-rounded people, but then plenty of smokers do live to a ripe old age. There are many factors involved in deliquency, but, everything else being equal, as Civitas were saying years ago, fatherlessness is a massive cause of crime, drug abuse, poor educational achievement and an early death. It helps if your mother is middle class and educated, just as it helps your chances against the Big C if you exercise and eat well; but, all other things being equal, fatherlessness and smoking both carry social costs."
And to underline the BBC's political prejudices in this key social area, tonight is the night for the screening of 'the programme to BBC tried to bury, on family breakdown:
'Daily Mail'
"Yes family breakdown IS behind broken Britain"
By John Ware
[Introduction]
"Last month, one of Britain's most senior Family Court judges described family breakdown as a national tragedy and argued marriage should be promoted by the Government to help stop 'social anarchy'.
"ir Paul Coleridge also took the extraordinary step of attacking the BBC for suppressing debate over the relationship between family breakdown and social ills by burying a TV series on the subject in a late-night slot.
The documentary series had already been put on hold until after May's local elections because of its sensitive political nature.
The Mail, which for 20 years has passionately argued that the breakdown of the family and marriage have been hugely damaging to society, invited the respected BBC journalist behind the series to reveal his findings. . . "
[The programme which the BBC tried to bury, 'The Death of Respect' in on BBC at 11:20 pm TONIGHT.]
As an ex muslim all I see from the BBC's fawning towards Islam is a huge march in the UK towards the odious far right. The BNP must be laughing all the way to the Bank.
If anyone can work out what John Healy the Housing Minister is talking about ref the new eco towns, I'll give them a shiny new fiver.
What a load of confusing tosser , couldn't find his arse with both hands!!
Priceless headline from the 'professionals' at the BBC:
"Flu risk 'still low' after death"
Wouldn't you expect it to be?
Hello!
It’s good to be back in the saddle and see old friends again…….I’ve had a rather an ‘interesting’ 18 months which I’ve had the opportunity to see first hand the ‘darker’ aspects of the political process;)
So without further ado I would like to throw my hat into the ring and pose a hypothesis:
I believe that significant elements of the Labour Party (and by some extension the Liberals) are now the political wing of the BBC.
Since 1997, the increasing interplay between Government/BBC/Guardian has now become so powerful; that the “Communication Office” is no longer under the control of “the centre” and is now pursuing its own agenda, especially now the Tory’s look odds on to win the next GE. It is not inconceivable that with the event of modern political propaganda and media that eventually the “machine” eventually takes over aspects of Governance and policy.
Re-reading Robin Aitken’s seminal “Can We Trust The BBC?” (An essential “field manual” for any media watcher) it is becoming clear how much influence al Beeb has. Since that book we have seen increasing collusion between the BBC/Guardian and a number of “progressive” politico’s-along with an increasing number of dirty trick operations (McBride and The News of the World tapping being two examples) involving the same faces. In particular Kevin Mcguire from the Mirror, who is a well known for his “hands on” approach to the dark arts of politics- hangs around Al Beeb studio’s like a bad smell.
Its interesting that Ben Bradshaw (Minister of Culture Media & Sports and former Al Beeb reporter) recent suggestion of “sharing” the telly tax, and the placement of Michael Lyons on the BBC Trust as Brown’s watchdog, suggests that there may well be a power-struggle of far more significance than the Brown/Blair spat, bubbling underneath the surface. That Parnell (also former Al Beeb) got left out in the cold by the Guardanista/Al Beeb may well indicate that these forces are “clearing house”-and strengthening their own position.
The BBC in the last 13 years has done everything from the non-reporting of the murder of Garda Officer Jerry McCabe by PIRA (and those know PIRA’s “Green Book” know how heretical killing an officer of the Republic is) right through to its involvement in the Blair “coup” and the Gilligan/Kelly affair. It is not beyond the imagination that Al Beeb is now subverting the whole political process-and will stop at nothing (including discrediting a socialist PM) to maintain its lead position in the market-too much money/influence has been invested.
The Tory’s must approach the destruction of Al Beeb with caution and be willing to play the “long war” as Maggie did with the miners.
You have to feel sorry for the Journo's sometimes. One minute the World Health Organisation (bunch of quacks swanking around the globe on consultant's fees) say we have a "Pandemic" (Whats a pandemic? Quick,panic,Google it!)
The current mortality figures for flu are meaningless as vulnerable people die of opportunistic infections including flu in their thousands every year, regular as clockwork.
The politically-motivated latch on to the "there's not enough vaccine, we're all going to die! line. The Journo's are terrified of being shown up for what they have become: press-release repeaters.
Large numbers of people are catching a harmless -to-healthy people condition and refusing to die in large numbers (remember the "worstcase" 80,000 deaths government planners figure a few months back?)
So there's no line to take. Journo's twisting in the wind. If only they could link swine flu to climate change life would be so much easier.
"I reject Mr Brown's claim that the war in Afghanistan is being waged "to prevent terror coming to the streets of Britain". If that distant country were cleared of al- Qaeda and Taleban fighters tomorrow, Britain would still harbour many home-grown threats. Three of the London Underground bombers came from Leeds; one of the Glasgow Airport attackers was born in Aylesbury. What's more, al-Qaeda has plenty of options beyond Afghanistan, including Somalia and Yemen. Are they next for the Welsh Guards?"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/5845163/We-have-a-moral-duty-to-our-troops-pay-up-or-pull-them-out.html
Has Jeff Randel been reading Martins posts here?
I agree with Jeff Randel, and fail to see how any intelligent free thinking individual could not also.
The reasons we were given at the time of its starting, and continue to be given, for this conflict, are clearly completely illogical nonsense.
Not withstanding the obvious fact that 9/11 was an inside job, carried out with the express knowledge of as little in power as possible. Very possibly even George Bush himself, had little idea what was really coming, or precisely where or when.
To suggest that our troops hanging pointlessly around some distant hell-hole, periodically getting their balls blown off. When not periodically and equally pointlessly blowing some other idiot macho mans balls off. Is somehow protecting us from Al-Qaeda, or indeed terrorism in general, would be laughable, if it were not so murderously counter-productive.
If we did not so obviously live in a forever more FASCIST one party dictatorship in the past. Surly it is now obvious that we most surly do today.
What can we offer any other part of the world that we can be justifiably proud of. Surly not any of the following.
Ever growing amounts of one parent families.
Rampant, forever more institutionalized, racism, sexism, and other forms of anti-conservatism.
Repressive and viciously illiberal government, that does not listen to anyone or anything other then the Bankster that put, and keep it in power.
Higher taxation,on just about every act of human existence, with plenty more to come very soon.
Failing small business.
Record repossessions.
Record unemployment.
Endemic knife and gun crime.
Footballers earning more then film stars, and film stars earning more then then chairmen of some of our largest private companies.
The BBC, and other forms of establishment mind control, that make the Koran, and the Bible, look positively tame by comparison.
Need I go on?
OK, I will then.
A government that actually invades other sovereign countries, with murderous intent. This against all reason, or logic, and the express wishes of even its own voters.
We have been conned. Please face this clear fact of life.
Even if 9/11 was not an inside job, ( which it most surly was, only some of the details still remain a mystery ) we could have solved this problem within a few short months, if it really was our RULING elites intention to do anything of the kind.
Please ask yourselves this.
Is it credible, that an allied force with the fire power and technologies available that would have made Montgomery cream his pants. While being in possession of enough money to bribe out of existence any threat coming its way. Can not sort out a few thousand rag heads in pick-up trucks, armed with no more then an AK47 and an RPG, within 5 years?
Remember there is one very important difference between the Russian-Afghan conflict, and this current Allied-Afghan one.
The Russians had to contend with The Americans backing and sending the Talliban and others, literally $BILLIONS worth of arms and plenty of military training, in how to use them.
They were also supplying them with military intelligence, and supporting them with direct help from groups such as The SAS and Delta Force.
The Talliban these days however, we are constantly told by our OH so independent and honest BBC, are apparently on there own.
Please don't believe for one second, that they are getting assistance from either the Russians, the Chinese, or indeed the Cubans. For these are as much in the pockets of the Worlds establishment as this country is, if not even more so.
Atlas shrugged.
The BBC finally uses the word 'murder':
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/terry-trippany/2009/07/16/bbc-dogs-foxes-murder-vulnerable-penguins
You couldn't make this stuff up!
It's disturbing when Jeff Randall and Atlas agree. The former is usually so sensible – the latter so mad.
I believe they are both wrong. And so is Brown.
Just because we need to clear-out the Islamist cesspit that is Afghanistan (not least before it subverts Pakistan and gives the Taliban their very own Junior Nuke playset to enjoy) doesn't mean we don't also need to similarly sweep the streets of Britain.
This is war against a crazed, evil enemy. It is not a game of inconsequential options.
Oh, and please add to the list. The Iranians and the Saudis. For they are also in the pockets of the worlds establishment, whether we are being told that they are, or not. Or indeed whether, they themselves are fully aware that they are, or not.
Put another way, world events are orchestrated at the very highest of levels.
All has only one end, and one end only. Which is the formulation or should I say the perpetuation, of a one world Fascist Dictatorship, against the expressed wishes and divine or otherwise interests, of absolutely ALL of this planets common people.
What we can do about it, is quite a different matter.
However the first step must surly be to finally wise-up, if nothing else.
Atlas shrugged
G Cooper
Which is a pity. I dont think you are mad, just not a very nice person, and very miss-guided, by among other things The BBC itself.
Why do you not try, for once, to actually start thinking for yourself for a change. Or indeed find research some real history, in stead of the bullshit they inflicted on you at school or university? You will find that being far from mad, I am possible the only sane person contributing to this site.
If you were not so ignorant of myself, you would know me as almost boringly stable and highly rational. As some chap on the BBC once said. "I did not get to where I am today," by being MAD.
Go on give it a go. Or are you scared of what you might actually find out for yourself, if you started properly looking?
Atlas shrugged
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443821498&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Has al beeb given this any coverage, perhaps with a heading like "Hisbullah breaks geneva convetion"?
No, thought not.
Mailman
A strangely objective piece on the BBC World front page. "Message to Iran" discussing increased Israeli naval activity in the Red Sea and beyond.
Enormous psycological pressure being but on Iran by Israel at the moment, including yesterdays Times piece.
Has the beeb been "advised" to produce a piece with that tone at this time? My usual wild speculation.
No polemics. Its just a straightforward report. Amazing.
excuse typos.
For BBC, and its chum, Gitmo Shami:
'Telegraph view' (11/7):
"BINYAM MOHAMED: In the wrong place"
[Extract]:
"Mr Mohamed's story is obscured by conflicting versions of his behaviour and treatment. His own account begins with the curious claim that he left London for Afghanistan in order to kick a drug habit. The heroin capital of the world was a strange place to do that; but it was the perfect location for terrorist camps. In Guantánamo, Mr Mohamed admitted to receiving training from Osama bin Laden and said he was destined to explode a 'dirty bomb' in America. But the charges against him were dropped because he claimed that his confessions were extracted under torture.
"We shall probably never know the truth about this man, whom the Left have attempted to turn into a martyr."
Sure, Atlas, you are right and everyone else is deluded at best, complicit in a vast, international conspiracy, at worst.
I just wish you'd get some help.
BBC Today programme and Gordon Brown's inability to answer a straight question. 06:45 this morning – Is Gordon Brown's hold on the BBC over?, who are they going to support next?
some other left wing liberal headcase with a sense of humour by-pass and an obsession with appeasing narrow miniorities,probably
Dianna Abbot is teaching our kids on the BBC website:
"For a long time, even when it was acknowledged that there were people of different racial origin within the British Isles, there was an assumption that the white race and culture was, and should, be dominant."
And…
"The British Empire was built on a theory of racial inferiority."
For other such gems see:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/dabbott_01.shtml
It's a oversimplified and innaccurate idea that I would expect from a child or someone with little to no knowledge of the subject. No mention of the British general public's ignorance about slavery and the outcry to abolish it when it became known? No mention of the British governor of India refusing to impose 'western' culture on the Indians because he viewed them as culturally superior?
Atlas 11:47
"Need I go on ?
Ok, I will then "
An all time Atlas classic !
"When you read in the old textbooks about the supposedly civilising mission of the British, one is reminded of the comment of Gandhi. He was asked what he thought about British civilisation. He paused for a long time and then said thoughtfully 'It would be a good idea'"
I'm never reminded of that quote. It was a glib comment from somebody in a nappy. A man who neglected pushing an ethnic agenda in South Africa because he didn't like the blacks.
Ghandi didn't want immigrants ruling India; and some of us don't like immigrant MPs here, particularly when they teach our kids a revised version of our history.
"To have a genuinely multi-racial society there needs to be genuine economic equality between the races. I do not believe that you can talk about a multi-racial Britain or anywhere else unless there is a measure of economic empowerment for all groups within Society"
So there's a Marxist agenda behind the "multi-culture" facade.
BBC on another Islamic jihad massacre, this time in 'moderate'! Islamic INDONESIA:
"Fatal blasts hit Jakarta hotels"
[Extract]:
"The country of 240 million people has been praised" [by Obama] "in recent years for maintaining a pluralist democracy while finding and punishing radical Islamists responsible for a series of bombings more than five years ago.
"Attacks on two nightclubs in Bali in October 2002 killed 202 people, most of them Australian.
"The Marriott Hotel was the target of a bomb attack in August 2003 in which 13 people were killed."
A non-BBC, contrasting comment on the reality of Indonesia's Islamic society:
'Dhimmiwatch' (Feb 2/09):
"Modern, Moderate Indonesia gets less modern, less moderate as sharia-based laws creep into half of provinces"
[Extract]:
"The injustices inherent in sharia by modern standards of equal dignity and protection under the law are compounded by the fact that sharia knows no concept of limitations on the power of government, except as outlined by divine fiat. In Indonesia as in the West, there exists the substantial risk that an inattentive or deceived populace will simply take it on faith (no pun intended) that sharia encroachment will stop on its own once there is 'enough' sharia and 'reasonable' accommodations are made.
"'Indonesia – Sharia-based laws creep into half of provinces,'" from Compass Direct News, February 2"
And, from 'islamizationwatch.com':
"Mayor forces school children into Arab clothing in creeping Shari'a".
Of course, the BBC takes its totally misguided political lead on Indonesia from Obama, who as he showed in his recent speech from there, has a totally dhimmi view of the situation.
Goog Morning GCooper….long long time and no see!!
"Why do you not try, for once, to actually start thinking for yourself for a change. Or indeed find research some real history, in stead of the bullshit they inflicted on you at school or university? You will find that being far from mad, I am possible the only sane person contributing to this site."
I found this rather amusing….indeed its much funnier than the tripe that you find on BBC 3
But I do need to ask Atlas…what do you define as "real" history?
How do you become educated without going to school or even university? I would hate to think what the scientific or medical profession would look like without higher education?
Am I "brainwashed" because I actually challenge and debate what is presented to me as part of my History studies?
No….the simple fact of the matter Atlas is you are one of the febbleminded who buys into stuff like Loose Change (created by student dropouts) or the Tin-hat rants of Alex Jones.
I can almost picture in my minds eye your nightly obssesive viewing of "Dark Secrets: Inside Bohemian Grove " , "TerrorStorm: A History of Government-Sponsored Terrorism" and "Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement"
And while I sympathise with some of Ayn Rands concepts-Atlas Shrugged (the book) is a piece of fiction,rather like your gibbering rants really.
Still I like you….as I said you provide great value 🙂
Atlas –brevity is beautiful, I do read your postings but they need to be less—exhausting.