Here’s a fresh one for you all…please share your observations!
OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Mustapha Sheikup al-Beebi Nov 19, 20:23
Start the Week 18th November 2024
Volts and Amps ? (Off the top of my head.) - pugnazious Nov 19, 20:20
Start the Week 18th November 2024
The BBC backs Starmer….and Starmer is happy… ‘Sir Keir told reporters: “All of you can check out what that means… - Lefty Wright Nov 19, 20:13
Start the Week 18th November 2024
By definition illegal immigrants ARE criminals or has the law changed so that an illegal act is no longer a… - Docmarooned Nov 19, 20:13
Start the Week 18th November 2024
Rajan is a perfectly obnoxious BBC shit! Have not watched it since the Bamber days. Seem to remember the questions… - Zephir Nov 19, 20:10
Start the Week 18th November 2024
I’m disappointed Eddie, I started reading your post and thought it was going to be a joke…. Anyway, I went… - Eddy Booth Nov 19, 19:57
Start the Week 18th November 2024
“A soldier, a nurse, a lorry driver and dozens more: who are the men accused over rape and assault of… - Sluff Nov 19, 19:52
Start the Week 18th November 2024
Agree with most of that, Fedup. There was one brief glorious moment when Boris, against lest we forget the doom-diatribes… - pugnazious Nov 19, 19:50
Start the Week 18th November 2024
The BBC finally admit that farmers are angry about Rachel Reeves’ rural raid….they ignored it for ages even as the… - Sluff Nov 19, 19:41
Start the Week 18th November 2024
Last week the Captain of a team answered St Kittis instead of St Kitts. Rajan disallowed it. But later in… - Eddy Booth Nov 19, 19:33
Start the Week 18th November 2024
Shouldn’t let it play automatically on your device Auto Play – off- In browser site settings permissions.
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
Radio5 is a joke. The BBC seem to want to “move on” in the epxpenses row. Funny that when Tory MPs were being outed with duck houses aand moat cleaning the BBC were happy to cover it. But now a lot of Labour MPs have come out very badly the BBC are not so keen to attack the MPs now.
If loads of Tory MPs were having to pay back money or dAvid Cameron owed 13 thousands punds I’m sure the BBC wouldn’t be “moving on”
Agreed Martin.
R5 seems to be brushing this off as though nothing has happened – now comparing the salary of David Beckham and the PM.
I didn’t realise there was so much sympath for MPs out there.
Radio 5 ought to be put out of its misery.
Then the rest of the BBC.
R5L is absolutely unlistenable. From Martins mate to the Derbyshire woman onto Mayo, Allen and Dolan.
I find the whole experience verbal torture. If I was a terrorist locked in a cell all the authorities would have to do is pump R5L 24/7 and 10 minutes of Victoria Derbyshire I would tell them anything they wanted to know.
Muslim terrorists would like Radio5, they have plenty of sympathisers working there. I just love the Labour types that came on trying to defend politicians (really defending Labour) one bloke ranted about how unfair the public were being to politicians and the PM, then admitted he admired Gordon Brown.
Another leftie came on in full thick mockney voice going on about “aw all politics waz da same, propping up the Tory capitalist sytem”, so another member of the SWP getting on Radio 5 spouting crap.
Sounds like the DG of the BBC has been let near the phone again….
Sorry – that should have been ‘Nolan’
Islamic jihad in Pakistan.
The BBC must recognise that it cannot responsibly censor out references to Islamic jihad, as the concept is intrinsic to the nature of Islamic politics, as shown here in the essential story behind this bromide BBC headline:
“India unease over Pakistan cleric”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8304003.stm
More on Jamaat-ud-Dawa:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/08/we-want-the-occupation-of-islam-in-the-entire-world-islam-does-not-permit-democracy-or-election.html
Not much on the BBC about the gagging order put on a paliamentary question. Said question now all over the blogosphere now anyway.
The only way that I found out was thanks to the last bastion of common sense found in the MSM – Sarah Kennedy.
anything happening with the ‘recent comments’ tool?
So Geert Wilders has won his appeal to enter the UK, the BBC are not happy bunnies. Radio 5 continual references to FAR RIGHT MP and ATTENTION SEEKER (repeated several times), unlike those extremist Muslims who the BBC just LOVES coming here.
Sad news for anti-free speech dhimmi Labour: court ruling ends ban on GEERT WILDERS, MP from visiting UK; BBC silent, so far, online.
‘Jihadwatch’:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/10/uk-court-overturns-home-office-decision-barring-geert-wilders-from-the-country.html
Are the BBC-Guardian really interested in free speech?
The BBC is giving lots of publicity to its chums at the Guardian on this:
“Guardian claims victory on ‘gag'”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8304483.stm
But the ‘liberal-left’ is more concerned with Gitmo Ethiopian Binyam Mohamed than it is with supporting Dutch MP, Geert Wilders, against Britain’s anti-free speech Labour government:
“Jacqui Smith week gets worse as Geet Wilders wins appeal”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/philipjohnston/100013440/jacqui-smith-week-gets-worse-as-geert-wilders-wins-appeal/
If the BBC-Guardian were really supportive of free speech, they would, e.g., outrightly oppose the efforts of the Organisation of Islamic Conference to ban all criticism of Islam globally.
What’s wrong with the BBC reporting this attempt to legally suppress free speech? Just becuase it’s the Guardian? Now, if the BBC would just stop doing all that internal censorship and withholding of information from the public…..
George is pointing out the hypocrisy of the BBC editors; he is not saying that they shouldn’t report on the Guardian case. If all cases of free speech were given equal prominence and weight, all very well, but they are blatently not.
Note how Alan Rusbringer of al-Guardian is given plenty of space to promote himself as a free speech man, while in the Wilders story the Home Office is given most space to do the opposite.
Okay, fair point. I just thought that this is a major deal, even taking into consideration the BBC’s acknowledged self-censorship and minor bias in favor of the sitting Government to preserver their precious prime access. They may or may not see the irony.
Oh my God, the BBC News 24 channel has schoolkids in the UK and in Gaza talking to each other live on webcams. “And what do you want to be when you grow up Mohammed?” “A doctor, so I can save people’s lives” lol
Check youtube for the reality.Kids who want to kill Jews, who think jews are pigs and apes.
We also see images of school children in Gaza and Katty Adler going on about Israel’s bombs….
“A doctor, so I can save people’s lives” lol…
“I would particularly like to work in Glasgow, as near the airport as possible… I loves the scotsish… death to America, Jews and infidels. Oh and Christians.”
BBC TV 1 o’clock news reported the Goren murder case.
A big problem, because the BBC is fanatically pro-EU and supports the case for Turkish membership. But, in any dispute between the Turks and Kurds, the BBC supports the Kurds.
So the report failed to mention that the Goren family is Kurdish.
To make matters worse the ignorant reporter managed to mispronounce the names “Tulay”, ” Goren” and “Unal” .
Not only biased, but totally unprofessional.
Apologies to Turkish and Kurdish readers, I don’t have a Turkish keyboard !
Something for OMTE:
More on your ‘not even sure it’s Jihad’ lone ‘disturbed person’ theory… 😉
Which the BBC is dutifully reporting.
I think it’s your theory that’s up in smoke, Philip. (Sorry, I don’t do silly yellow faces)
I see this OMTE idiot is still here standing up for terrorism.
Actually, i was referring to you not the Beeb, this time:
I notice that the agencies are still not identifying the man as a Jihadi – indeed the Mayor of Milan is suggesting that he might be a disturbed individual. Plus the stories all seem to indicate that it was a poorly-made weapon, and therefore unlikely to be a major terrorist attack.
Apology for offending you with the the smiley. I must remember that there is no fun in socialism – unless of course, it’s the socialists making the joke.
It seems the more the BBC sticks to Italy’s ‘ansa’ reports, and the less to BBC dhimmi editing, the nearer we’ll get to the truth:
“Milan bomb cell ‘do-it-yourself'”
http://www.ansa.it/web/notizie/rubriche/english/2009/10/13/visualizza_new.html_987590242.html
Martin:
Interesting to see that the Grauniad is also fond of using this bizarre ‘attention-seeker’ meme, with respect to Wilders.
What politician doesn’t seek attention for a cause they are trying to raise awareness about?
Having said that, he hardly needs to seek attention as the head of the most popular political party in the Netherlands – and it’s this popularity that is the real reason for the leftoid media’s venom, in my view.
Nice big piece on ITV news at ten regarding the Iraq inquiry and how many parents of dead soldiers are calling Blair a war criminal and want him indicted.
Not heard much on Al-jabeeba about this today. Too busy sucking on the teet of left wing and liberal luvvies I imagine.
I’m hoping that Guy Fawkes will have some spare left over from the Houses of Parliamnet and take it to the BBC centre.
“US school to punish six-year-old for using own cutlery at lunch”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8305987.stm
Can anyone tell me why this is earth shatering news?
I’ve been complaing for some time about the BBC’s willful dishonesty in reporting on the political situation in Honduras. Starting here (last comment in the thread, can’t link directly to it), and a couple others, which seem to be unsearchable. In essence, my complaint is that Zelaya attempted to violate the Constitution, with the backing of the BBC’s beloved Hugo Chavez. The Supreme Court of Honduras ordered his arrest on that grounds, and had the army remove him.
The BBC, however, reports it as a “coup”, and tries to create the impression of an evil military action, even talking about his arrest at gun point. They try to make it sound scary, and present Zelaya as a sympathetic character. The Beeboids always refer to “his opponents”, making it seem like a real political coup, when in fact he attempted to violate the Constitution which he has sworn to uphold, and the Supreme Court and the Legislature voted to defend democracy rather than allow Zelaya to try to do a Chavez-style eternal President deal.
Yet, the BBC will not report it like this. Instead, they report it as some illegal coup, for purely partisan reasons. And it’s because of their pro-Chavez and pro-Obamessiah bias. After all, the President of the US has embraced a world leader no more warmly than he did Chavez.
Here’s more information about how the language and Narrative of the BBC comes from their support for Chavez and President Obamessiah:
What Does the State Department Not Want Us to Know about Honduras?
Yet another instance where the BBC actively supports the US President, at the expense of telling the truth to the viewers.
I’ve just heard the interview – and I use that word very loosely – with Humphreys and Harperson.
The easy ride that she was allowed was beneath contempt – is she his mother or something?
I heard that there was a spat between Humphreys and Paxman on who was the hardest interviewer, sounded like Humphreys was waving the white flag this morning.
He allowed her full reign to get her non-points across, evade the questions and never followed them up.
There is a pattern emerging here and it was immediately obvious with Mr. Marr.
That is, ask the key questions that the proles want to hear but never follow them up, never push and allow them to talk out the interview. This way, they cannot be accused of not asking the right questions and then the onus is on us to use a subjective method of arguing bias.
November the 5th, let’s hope Guy Fawkes can spare some for BBC central.
BBC’s dhimmi Ms. Deryshire now turns Radio 5 phone -in into:
‘Islamic population of Britain v. Geert Wilders’.
In the interests of free speech, BBC version.
Islam to ban free speech; political ‘left’ complicit.
Much of the political ‘left’, including much of the BBC-Guardian grouping, seems to be either opposed to allowing free speech for Geert Wilders, or they are very reluctant about it.
At the same time, this political ‘left’ makes no criticism of that global Islamic group which is planning the end of free speech – the Organisation opf the Islamic Conference:
“The UN’s Jihad against Free Speech” (by Robert Spencer):
http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34589
Is anyone here sick of the BBC’s continuing reports on the issue of the Democrat’s plan for Socialized health care in the US? They constantly present only the Democrats’ and White House’s side of the issue. Nearly the only time they let you know that not everyone is in favor of it is when they call us racists or insult us with a sexual innuendo.
I have a very hard time believing that the health care “debate” in the US is of much interest to the UK public. Certainly not enough to warrant all this “reporting” the BBC has done on it. I use scare quotes because the Q&A section is essentially the White House propaganda in another format. They rarely provide an opposing view, and never in depth. There has never once been even a news brief about the very real concerns that this plan will actually make us worse off and will cost more money.
But the BBC doesn’t want you to know any of that. Actually, I bet they aren’t aware of this themselves. I submit that they are too wrapped up in the HuffingtonPost and The Nation and the Washington Post and certain far-Leftoid blogs, and actually believe the propaganda, and believe that people like me are in fact greedy haters who don’t want to give others what they believe is a basic human right.
The thing is, why is a Q&A section even necessary? It’s a domestic issue of a foreign country that has no effect on UK lives whatsoever. However, I can think of a couple reasons why the Beeboids are pushing this story.
It parallels the debate in the UK about their beloved NHS, and Socialist values. It’s also part of His Plan For Us, so must be covered in depth and explained to the masses. The Beeboids are so wrapped up in their emotions that they don’t realize that this is your state broadcaster issuing what are essentially propaganda reports on the domestic agenda of a foreign country, which has no bearing on your lives in any way whatsoever.
Credit where credit’s due. John Humphrys really gave Harriet Harman a tough time on Today about the expenses scandal. She kept dodging and weaving, simply repeating her claim that she was fixing the problem, refusing to answer his questions, especially about Labour support for Jacqui Smith. He even called Smith “corrupt”, and several times pointed out that she had broken the rules, and kept asking Harman what Labour was going to do about it. Humphrys kept interrupting, trying to get her to answer genuinely tough questions for a change.
This made up for the earlier segment about depressed MPs all feeling sorry for themselves about the latest round of expenses noise. This was right in line with the buld of BBC reporting and “analysis” from Nick Robinson, focusing on how MPs felt, trying to evoke sympathy for them rather than being advocates for the public.
The first segment seemed like yet another attempt by the BBC to aid in the public rehabilitation of MPs, helping to turn public opinion away from anger at them. Humphrys’ tough interview with Harman made up for that. But only for today, and not in the overall scope of BBC reporting on this issue.
BBC campaigns for unlimited numbers of ‘asylum seekers’/ illegal immigrants to become British residents. The result, unreported online by BBC?:
“France: Rachid Ramda, mastermind of 1995 metro bombing jailed for life after 10 years’ asylum in Britain”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/10/france-rachid-ramda-mastermind-of-1995-metro-bombing-jailed-for-life-after-10-years-asylum-in-britai.html
“Panorama-Migrants, Go Home!”
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/23607
Atlas Shrugs site:
“Geert Wilders was on BBC radio this morning and almost all the callers allowed to speak were angry Muslims.”
The radio broadcast is available to download there too…
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/10/geert-wilders-bbc-radio.html
And this was the experience of Andrew McCann (of ‘A Tangled Web’) with the BBC’s pro-Islamic bias, re-Geert Wilders on Radio 5:
http://atangledweb.squarespace.com/httpatangledwebsquarespace/radio-gag-gag.html
Even though I am what Matt Frei and his BBC colleagues think of as an ignorant, parochial United Statesian, as a long-time follower and commenter on this blog, I am well aware of most people’s concerns about how the relentless drive towards the imaginary ideal of “multiculturalism” has made them feel alienated and marginalized in their own homeland. Mark Easton has done a report on this phenomenon, and I bet you won’t be pleased.
Map of the Week: Forgotten white working classes
Yes, Easton sure seems earnest and genuinely aware that his subjects feel unhappy about what has happened to their country, and really do feel that their rights and needs are ignored and trampled upon in favor of immigrants from other cultures (read: non-whites). The portrait Easton paints of these people isn’t pretty: poorly groomed, illiterate, ignorant, unemployed, easily “exploited by the far Right”. These people are presented as “white working class”, when it’s pretty clear that they’re mostly unemployed and at the lowest end of that category. And they are the ones whom the BBC chooses to be representative of you all and your genuine concerns.
Just watch the video. The one quesiton they show the council worker asking a white resident is how happy he is living in the area. Since it’s totally out of context, the only interpretation one can make of this is that he is unhappy because there are non-whites living there now.
Some may take the most offense at what happens at 2:10 in. Notice what the camera does while following Easton and some local councillor as they walk past a council estate. The camera leaves them and pans over to a Flag of St. George hanging out a window just as Easton’s voice-over solemnly intones, “at the last election, the BNP polled almost 800 votes here.” So the Flag of St. George is now a racist symbol. I wonder which other national flag the BBC considers a racist symbol? (apart from Israel, obviously)
Sorry, forgot to include the link to Easton’s report:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/10/map_of_the_week_forgotten_whit.html
Here’s a little Titbit, ooops, I mean TidBit about yet another BBC Blooper:
<h2>Beeb’s Carla Bruni coverage hits rock bottom</h2>
RSS feed delights schoolboys worldwide
(continued from above)
Then he reveals his personal bias and total cluelessness on the issue:
This interesting article argues the world would be different if LBJ had listened to writers, not generals, and that Obama should be listening to free thinkers.
And there you have it. “Free thinkers”. Total personal bias and editorializing there to give a positive label to those opposed to the war in Afghanistan. It should come as no surprise that Mardell links to an anti-war polemic dredging up the wonderful world of anti-Vietnam protesters. This is what Marell finds “interesting”. He is suggesting that we shouldn’t listen to people who have experience and knowledge of military and intelligence affairs because they are too close to their subject. Instead, he thinks we should consult the wisdom of artists.
The BBC mentality in a nutshell, I think. And zero self-awareness.
BBC continues to omit mention of the Islamic Jihad PAKISTAN.
The BBC simply censors its report from Pakistan to exclude discussing the inspiring role of Islam to the jihadists in carrying out their mass murders in Pakistan.
Instead the BBC uses words like “audacious,” “militants” and “gunmen” to inadequately describe the nature of the jihad (a word banned by BBC, virtually).
E.g. Radio 4’s ‘PM’ programme has spent 10 minutes on the Pakistan crisis without the words “Islam” and “jihad” being used once. And the BBC claims to want to understand the motivation for the violence!
“Are Pakistanis the greatest threat in Great Britain? Yes. Are North African Arabs — mainly from Algeria and Morocco — the greatest threat in France? Yes. Are Libyans and Egyptians and Somalis the greatest threat in Italy? Yes. Are Arabs and Kurds the greateset threat in Norway? Yes. Are Moroccans and Turks the greatest threat in Germany? Yes. Are Moroccans – and now possibly some Indonesians — the greatest threat in the Netherlands? Yes. Are Lebanese and Syrian Muslims the greatest threat in Brazil, or Argenina? Yes. Are there also Bangladeshis — follow the curry takeout trail — all over the place, who are etc. Yes, etc.
“For god’s sake, see things as they are, and not as you would have them be. It is not the ‘nationality’ of being Pakistani that explains the threat. Nor is the supposed ‘underrepresentation’ of Pakistanis in the police, or in the middle class, or in the this or in the that, what causes their hostility, sometimes their murderous hatred, of Infidels and Infidel laws and customs, and the political institutions of any Infidel nation-state, and explains the threat of terrorism. No, it is something else. It is Islam.”
(Hugh Fitzgerald)
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/18420
The BBC is reporting one in eight health trusts…
Else where it was ‘nearly half’ or ‘ two out of five…’
Spot the missing word:
Will ‘Hotel of Doom’ ever be finished?
Infamously ugly and unfinished, the shell of the Ryugyong Hotel dominates North Korea’s capital, Pyongyang. But work on the skyscraper began again last summer after a 16-year hiatus and, as the company behind it tells the BBC’s Matthew Davis, an end may finally be in sight.
It’s a bit lenghty but worth a laugh. There’s a certain word which is glaringly absent. The third paragaph from the bottom is hilarious:
North Korea’s command economy and policy of isolation make international trade difficult, so whether there will ever be enough tourists and enough business to make the Ryugyong Hotel viable is also open to question.
You know, I can think of another C-word to describe North Korea’s system…
The Toady programme item just after 8am had violins in full flow for the poor illegal immigrants stuck living under bridges in Calais and the nasty UK & French authorities failure to let them into England without limit. No counter view allowed!
BBC to stand as Britain’s Pro-Illegal Immigrants’ party at ELECTION?
Such is the BBC’s incerssant propaganda for illegal immigrants that such speculation is bound to grow.
BBC’s Gavin Hewitt, on his blog, modestly entitled, ‘Gavin Hewitt’s Europe’, provides yet another propaganda piece on behalf of illegal immigrants:
“Greece’s immigrants in limbo”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/gavinhewitt/2009/10/greeces_immigrants_in_limbo.html
Hewitt’s latest piece is ostensibly about whether Dutch MP, Geert Wilders, should be allowed to visit Britain today.
Hewitt plays Pontius Pilate, but takes his cues from Muslim lobby groups in trying to answer what is a very difficult question for the dhimmi BBC. Hewitt has searched high and low before using the most unflattering photo of Mr. Wilders obtainable:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/gavinhewitt/2009/10/the_right_to_offend.html
Perhaps the BBC will couple its enthusiasm for illegal immigrants with its disdain for Geert Wilders in its General Election manifesto.
“Another silly Labour spin game from the BBC” (John Redwood):
http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2009/10/16/another-silly-labour-spin-game-from-the-bbc/
An educational revision to BBC’s evasively dhimmi headline:
BBC dhimmi headline: “Sydney terror suspects convicted.”
The necessary revision: “Sydney Muslim jihadists convicted”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8309987.stm
Guys – I don’t know if this is possible (or even desirable) but since the posters on B-BBC can’t cover every instance of BBC bias, it makes sense (to me at any rate) to have the open thread stuck at the top of the page. As I write this thread is in 10th (?) position. Accordingly, no-one except keen B-BBCers (or the trolls, of course), get to comment or even know about items which escape the posters’ eagle eyes.
While I’m on, Professor Robin Alexander was given the freedom of the airwaves on Today to explain the outcome of the Cambridge Primary Review. Since Alexander is, more or less, primus inter pares in the education establishment whose nostrums have brought education in this country to its knees predictably he argued, in effect, for fewer objective measures of educational attainment and that less attention should be paid to actual learning and more to soft skills like socialisation etc etc. and starting education at 6 rather than 4. Since the obviously sympathetic interviewer was not interested in posing anything even mildly critical, the question Alexander wasn’t asked was why start at 6? – why not 16 or never? – and finally get rid of the idea that (part) of the reason we school our children is to instil some objective knowledge and practical skills for life in the real world? – you know, reading, doing sums, learning to reason, maybe even identifying bias in an argument – all that kind of reactionary dross.