17 Responses to Open Thread

  1. George R says:
    November 12, 2009 at 7:11 pm

    Labour’s Mass immigration, continued:

    PM Brown now does mention ‘immigration’ gingerly (following BNP electoral success opposing immigration) in Election year; and the BBC even mentions ‘Migrationwatch’ these days. But the result is obfuscation:

    “PM to ‘tighten’ migration rules”
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8356226.stm

    ‘Migrationwatch’ fills in the important gaps:

    “PM misses the big picture on Immigration”

    http://www.balancedmigration.com/

       0 likes

  2. Pounce says:
    November 12, 2009 at 7:26 pm

    Anybody read this bBC article;
    US troops: Obama’s Afghan options 
    Deploying another 40,000 troops is the option pushed for by the top US military commander in Afghanistan, Gen Stanley McChrystal……
    For the UK, the question would be what proportion of these forces would be committed to Helmand to relieve British overstretch.

    The UK typically has been reluctant to bargain over its responsibilities with the US and is inclined to follow the mantra “tell us what to do and by God, we’ll do it” – noble, but an aspiration too far.

    Can somebody please point out since when has the US being in charge of Afghanistan.   Yes its C in C is a Yank but he wears a NATO hat and so comes under the command of Jaap de Hoop Scheffer. So instead of pushing the news, the bBC promulgates a leftwing opinion in which to bring a very anti-American bias  to its news coverage.

     What next from the bBC that the American Ambassador to Afghanistan is opposed to sending more troops. Silly me they have.

    But if you read the story he isn’t opposed he just wants Obama to hang slack until  Karzai sorts his act out  when it comes to corruption.

       0 likes

  3. Martin says:
    November 12, 2009 at 7:36 pm

    Wow Brown’s speech about immigration passed me by, Radio 5 didn’t cover it live and it got hardly a mention on the BBC news.

    If Cameron had done a speech on immigration we know what would have been the BBC headline that day “Tories move to the right on immigration” or “Tories show their nasty party side again”

    So Brown is going to stop civil engineers and doctors from coming here? Wow, that will really hurt them at the local shithole in Calais won’t it?

    There is too much immigration, in particular from one eyed halfwits from Scotland.

       0 likes

    • John Horne Tooke says:
      November 13, 2009 at 12:32 am

      Funny how he wants to restrict highly quilified immigrants but not the ones selling the “Big Issue” on every street corner. Highly qualified immigrants might just vote for the Tories.

         0 likes

  4. George R says:
    November 12, 2009 at 8:35 pm

    BBC: ever the apologist for Islam –

    Even this evening the BBC has:

    “Maj Hasan was said to be unhappy about a possible deployment to Afghanistan”

    -Who, at the BBC, writes these apologetics still?

    And: “amid fears of a possible anti-Muslim backlash after the attack..”

    And the BBC’s studiously vague headline:

    “Murder charges over US killings”, NOT

    “Muslim Hasan charged with mass murder”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8357661.stm

     In contrast, ‘Jihadwatch’ has:

    “He didn’t just snap: Fort Hood jihadist to be charged with premeditated murder”

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/11/he-didnt-just-snap-fort-hood-jihadist-to-be-charged-with-premeditated-murder.html

       0 likes

  5. David Preiser (USA) says:
    November 13, 2009 at 2:44 am

    So now China is manipulating their weather so much that they’ve given themselves overly nasty snowstorms.  Don’t expect the BBC to report this anthropogenic weather problem.

    Many people here will be well aware that the BBC ignores and even tells little white lies about China’s pollution and contribution to greenhouse gases.   If I could find old comments, I’d link to several complaining about the BBC reporting that the US was the number one polluter long after China had officially become the worst one.  They often ignore the way China destroys the environment, always choosing to cast their harsh glare on the US.

    Of course, now that we’re in The Obamessianic Age, that criticism has strangely decreased to almost nothing.  Meanwhile, the BBC still ignores what China does.  Sure, they briefly admitted that China had seeded the clouds in order to cause a rainstorm to clear out smog and yield clear blue skies for the Olympic ceremonies in Beijing.  But that was just cool, because it was, you know, the Olympics and they had a batallion of Beeboids over there.

    Why does the BBC continuously ignore and cover for China’s environmental crimes?  Because they are neo-Marxists and are relentlessly focused on the economic element.  China is not a Capitalist society, and therefore cannot be as evil as anything in the West, especially the US under George W. Bush.  The endemic political bias at BBC News prevents them from being honest with themselves or with any of you.

       0 likes

  6. Philip says:
    November 13, 2009 at 8:01 am

    Perhaps I’m mistaken, but has the BBC News website had an Obama top-slot headline every single day this week? 
     
    They are so in the tank for The One –  stuff he’s done/not done/said/doing/intending to do/thinking about doing/dreaming about has become like some amorphous, default über-bulletin.

       0 likes

  7. Will says:
    November 13, 2009 at 10:36 am

    The BBC’s denial about our economic plight chimes with that of their hero McBust

    But the UK economy unexpectedly contracted by 0.4% between July and September. This meant Europe’s second-largest economy had contracted for six consecutive quarters, the first time this has happened since quarterly figures were first recorded in 1955.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8358227.stm

    As they are referring to the UK, that should now be 4th largest, behind Germany, France & Italy

       0 likes

  8. George R says:
    November 13, 2009 at 12:43 pm

    Islamic jihad “Bombers hit Pakistan spy agency”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8358109.stm

    Why?

    ‘Jihadwatch’ comment:

    “Here, jihadist warfare imitates Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Commando: ‘I like you. That’s why I’m going to kill you last.’ In other words, collaborating with the jihadists has not spared the ISI, but only somewhat delayed their becoming a target.”

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/11/pakistan-suicide-bomber-kills-7-at-inter-services-intelligence-headquarters-in-peshawar.html

       0 likes

  9. Roland Deschain says:
    November 13, 2009 at 1:24 pm

    The comments on “A Balanced Approach to Climate Change” seem to be showing just a tad of scepticism about that!

       0 likes

  10. Grant says:
    November 13, 2009 at 2:12 pm

    Radio 4 news at  11 am gleefully stated that the Eurozone countries were recovering more quicky that the UK from recession ( conveniently forgetting Spain ). 
    The subtext is that the UK’s poor position is not because of Brown’s incompetence, but because the UK is not in the Euro.
    The problem is that Norway and Switzerland have performed even better and they are not in the EU.  So, by the BBC’s logic, the UK would be better off outside the EU.
    Bias ?  Surely not !   

       0 likes

  11. Pounce says:
    November 13, 2009 at 3:52 pm

    The bBC and its ongoing quest in which to paint the Taliban as Supermen.

    Explosion at Nato base in Kabul 

    A car bomber has struck outside a Nato base in the Afghan capital Kabul, injuring three foreign soldiers and three Afghan civilians, officials say.

    If you actually follow the new from much more reliable sources you would find out that actually the bomb went off on the main road  and from the bBC video where you see the bBC reporter point out the camp you see it is over 300 metres away from the road. But that doesn’t stop the bBC from promoting a “we are all going to die” message. If we don’t pull out and leave Afghanistan.

       0 likes

  12. David Preiser (USA) says:
    November 13, 2009 at 4:01 pm

    More Warmism nonsense on the World Service right now.  This time we’re hearing from various scientists in Arctic regions discussing changes in the environment up there.

    As the ice in the earth melts, the earth sinks in a few places.  The horrible result is that streams are muddied and fish can’t see the insects they feed on above the surface.  Is this a temporary situation, as water, you know, flows, and generally clears itself up over time?  We aren’t told.  This is presented as a permanent condition.

    Then we hear more about this phenonmenon, and the female Beeboid narrator puts on her ominous voice as she tells us that things start to shift around and this “can affect us all”.  How?  Apparently a few buildings, roads, and pipelines sink or shift a bit along with the earth.  We aren’t told how this will affect us globally, although presumably there’s an important oil or gas pipeline up there somewhere that may be affected.  And never mind that they didn’t get around to mentioning how that affects the weather.  Once again, this is presented as a permanent condition, as if nothing will be fixed and things will continue to shift and break eternally.

    Then we hear from a marine biologist with some positive news.  It seems that the ice melting has opened up some space for some microflora which will not only eat some of that nasty carbon dioxide that is dooming us all, but in turn can feed more sea life.  The scientist even says that they’re seeing more whales, as their food source is increasing due to this phenomenon.

    But the Beeboid talking to him doesn’t hear it.  So what started out “as a bad thing,” he says, has turned into “something positive”.  Not only did this Beeboid just talk complete garbage – ice melting is a bad thing, full stop – but didn’t even bother with the idea that sea life might be on the upswing.  No, all he cares about is that nasty carbon dioxide.  Myopic BBC.

    Totally, utterly biased, presented from the perspective that AGW is incontrovertable fact, and that all “Climate Change” is like entropy.  Judging from this religious broadcast, one would think that streams don’t clear themselves, there is an eternal amount of ice melting under the Arctic, and micro-flora are more important for their carbon consumption than their place in the food chain.

       0 likes

  13. George R says:
    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm

    In Mark Mardell’s article:

    “A triumph of justice?”  (Note that question-mark), it is not clear which is the most important issue for Mardell; is it:-

    1.) The inmates of Guantanamo?

    2.) Closing Guantanamo?

    3.) Criticising ex-President Bush?

    4.) Praising President Obama?

    5.) Rejoicing that alleged perpetrators of 9/11 are to stand trial?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/a_triumph_of_justice.html

       0 likes

  14. David Preiser (USA) says:
    November 17, 2009 at 12:44 am

    Warmism presented as fact just now on Matt Frei’s BBC World Propaganda America.  Discussion of the upcoming Warmism Synod in Copenhagen with Frei Boy and some mouthpiece from a Warmist activist group.  “Is this going to be another Kyoto,” asks Frei, worrying that it will be another toothless agreement.  When the Warmist mouthpiece says it’s a possiblity, Frei frets, “Where did we go wrong?”

    The whole discussion is based on the premise that Warmism is fact, and carbon is the cause.  The usual demons are trotted out – Big Oil, automakers, Big Coal – and are blamed for attempting to obstruct the President from saving us all.

    The BBC has not only taken a position on Warmism, but actively prosletyzes.

       0 likes

  15. David Preiser (USA) says:
    November 17, 2009 at 12:50 am

    Now we’re onto a segment about the Australian goverment’s apology for the British children brought over and mistreated.  They were referred to as “child migrants”.   This re-definition of the word is part and parcel of the BBC’s – and the mutli-culti postmodern relativist fascists – biased editorial policy on what sane, honest people call “immigration”. 

    At least the bias is consistent.

       0 likes