Taking us gently towards the Easter weekend….
Open Thread
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir Dec 23, 00:37
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
bbc’s bloody outrageous fixations with muslims, black people, Elon Musk and Donald Trump, for a publicly funded and impartial organisation.… - StewGreen Dec 23, 00:32
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
BBC “Elon Musk’s curious fixation with Britain ” by Mike Wendling is rightly double ratioed and CCBGB’d When someone has… - Guest Who Dec 22, 23:11
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
There might be a smidge of irony here. https://x.com/rrrrnessa/status/1870495794236977278?s=61 You people are deeply, dangerously unwell and evil. The majority of… - JohnC Dec 22, 22:54
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
I always go to the user reviews then sorth them by date so you get the ones after the initial… - BRISSLES Dec 22, 22:49
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
Also a non white detective in new season of Death in Paradise. The diversity directive that has infected the drama… - JohnC Dec 22, 22:44
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
Children among dozens killed in Israeli strikes, Gaza officials say https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz9g4yl8j17o Here’s a new low: The BBC went from telling… - Deborah Dec 22, 22:22
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
I used to be a Covid numbers junky, from watching Valance asking for the next slide please to still regularly… - StewGreen Dec 22, 22:14
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
BBC presenters “we are IMPARTIAL IMPARTIAL IMPARTIAL” BBC presenter Paul Lewis Money tweets An interesting list of broadly good things… - Deborah Dec 22, 22:12
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
I am reading John C’s first post, and I am watching Wolf Hall at the same time. Cromwell’s daughter has…
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
Hope you don’t mind as I just posted this on the old board.
The bbC and what they aren’t reporting about Captain Pugwash,Master Bates ,Seaman Stains and Rodger the Cabinboy.
Navies Struggle with swarming pirates.
The British admiral in charge of the EU naval force countering the Somali pirate threat off the east coast of Africa has said there has been a huge surge in activity by pirates in recent weeks to try to flood the area.
While the bbC is more than happy to push the view that the Pirates of Allah are happy pious people defeating the nasty westerner with ease. Has anybody here read about how the pirates lost big style these past few days to the Seychelles coast guard. No. In a nutshell they hijacked a fishing boat with 6 men and then transfered them to an Iranian boat with another 21 hostages and later ignored a call to stop by a coastguard vessel sent to investigate. The CG vessel then pumped 10,000 rounds into the engine room and rescued the prisoners. A few hours later while on route back to Mahe , it transpires the pirates had sent out an SOS and in order to avenge their honour attacked the CG vessel with 3 armed boats. One gunfight later with 2 pirate boats sunk and the other running off . The CG vessel contained homeward bound.
I wonder why the bBC forgot to mention this very news worthy story.
“The British admiral in charge of the EU naval force… off the east coast of Africa has said there has been a huge surge in activity by pirates in recent weeks to try to flood the area. ”
Hang on.. can people really flood water?
Isn’t it the other way around?
Come on Admiral Pugwash … you should know better.
As a seperate note: since when did the EU get a frackin’ navy?
The bBC, playing the victim card over those peaceful people (Yet) again.
Muslim Students in London uni prayer room row.
Some Muslim students at City University in London are praying in the street in a row over prayer room facilities. The university closed a prayer room after Muslim students were attacked in November, before opening up a new multi-faith room the following month.A group of Muslim students now refuse to use the facility as they say they cannot pray in a multi-faith room.The university says it goes against its philosophy to provide a room for just Islamic students.
Reading the above, do you get the impression that the Islamic students were moved because of that attack? Do you get the impression that rather than Islamists pushing an “we demand equality but we are more equal than others agenda” the University is to blame? Do you feel the bBC has imparted to the reader the full story? Why has the bBC inserted into the side a link to the Queen allowing a Muslim prayer room from 4 years ago?
Here is how I wrote on the very subject almost 3 weeks ago.
Green grow the rushes…oh…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/01/edinburgh-airport-trees-carbon-emissions
Meanwhile, in other narrative-compliant PR as news (or maybe it’s all just a joke) this fine, fun day….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/susanwatts/2010/03/uk_attempt_to_push_world_beyon.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/susanwatts/2010/03/why_climate_science_must_becom.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/2010/03/the_first_of_the_numerous.html
Meanwhile…
http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/96869/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+instapundit%2Fmain+%28Instapundit%29
I wonder if either of these two stories will see the light of day on BBC.
Two Labour MPs have accused the Conservatives of being too closely associated with — and funded by — Israel
Vox pops are always doubtful. One can never know how the interviewees were chosen; how what they say was edited; whether the layouts of the interviews was deliberate, for example, to display the chosen narrative first and last or if indeed these people exist.
Will Peace talks: Palestinian views ever be followed by a Peace Talks: Israeli views and if it is will carefully chosen anti Zionist Israelis be given a prominence way out of proportion with their numbers?
A few things grated. ADEL HASSAN RASHED, 81, UNEMPLOYED, NABLUS Duh! How many employed eighty year olds do you know?
None of the Palestinians making threats of violence is asked the obvious follow up question. What if you lose?
Saudi move to execute ‘sorcery man’ sparks protest
What is the legal and moral basis for these executions? If all we do is follow the BBC, we will never know.
I guess the Harry Potter movies don’t play in Saudi, then?
Bad old Israel hiring Thai labourers when Palestinian labourers are just down the road.
The Thais working Israel’s farms
Palestinians want war with Israel and jobs with Israel and don’t see the contradiction. Neither does the BBC.
There are many reasons for why hiring Thais and not Palestinians is a good idea for Israel.
Thais don’t kill Israelis or even make threats to do so.
Thais don’t sabotage their work to damage their bosses.
Thais are not engaged in widespread theft.
No Thai has taken advantage of the permission to work in Israel in order to conduct a terrorist act.
Thais make no claim to the land of Israel.
Thailand is not at war with Israel
Dale Carnegie had it right. If you want honey don’t kick over the beehive, or in this case the greenhouse.
Deegee. And Thais work harder than lazy Palestinians !
Thais work harder than lazy Palestinians
They make better shemales too. Or so I read. It’s the beards.
Hi, I think you’re overreacting to this piece. If anything its an indictment of Palestinian terrorism. The Moshav farmers by their account and that of a former Gazan employee had a great relationship with their Palestinian workforce but the Moshavim accept that because of terrorism the border has to be closed.
Spotted on Guy Fawkes blog;
http://twitter.com/charliewhelan/statuses/11424169989
Nicky… over to you.
Ask Richard Bacon for tweeting tips.
Okay — I’ll bite. Who is this ugly tosser Whelan? Reading his twits and he sounds like a demented gerbil. Fox hunting? Who gives a frack?
Charlie Whelan was one of Brown’s hatchet men when he was at the Treasury – a “Special Advisor”. Got mixed up in many shenanigans, in the end he had to depart, is currently Head of Communications or some-such at Unite – the trade union running the British Airways cabin-staff strike.
Unite has given many millions to Labour – is the biggest donor by far, I believe.
And the taxpayer has ‘given’ millions to Unite.
http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/media/2010/03/daily-express-strike-union-gets-18m-of-taxpayers-cash.html
Whelan seems to be jetting to and from the Highlands on a regular basis. Doesn’t he know there is a planet to be saved? Doesn’t he realise that Unite’s political wing, New Labour, frown on this type of behaviour? Sorry, my mistake. Modifying behaviour because of climate change only applies to the little people, and not to important people like Charlie Whelan, The one thing the left do exceedingly well is hypocrisy.
BBC’s chum, Peter Kellner, its ever-present pollster (husband of Labour’s Baroness Ashton):
“YouGov pollster ‘gives Labour an unfair advantage’ ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7546322/YouGov-pollster-gives-Labour-an-unfair-advantage.html
Excellent, muses BBC.
John Humphrys owns a stake in YouGov
Been away for a while but sense a real desperation by the BBC and its media chums to spark any interest at all in this preposterous phoney election to come.
The BBC are as quietly and subversively hysterical about the prospect of anything other that Labour winning power…as if their very perks and salaries might depend on it ( God/Dawkins forbid!).
That the Tories are useless and no real threat to them in the end is neither here nor there…we MUST have Labour in( or at worst sharing power with the Liberals!). Sense after 13 years that these fetid phoneys have supped at the same swamps for too long-and the BBC need cleansing every bit as much as Parliament.
Cameron is no threat at all but seems to personify an imagined bat up the nightdress of Auntie that threatens their air miles,school fees and civil partnerships out in Stow on the Wold!
So enjoy the spectacle and learn to turn your voting paper into an origami crane in the meantime. I`m voting Alexandr Meerkat-at least he wouldn`t try to sell us “kveek car insurance” unlike our slimescum MPs and their political bagmen with lavender oil greaseguns at the ready for no apparent purpose!
Muck out the barn citizens!
Anybody see the 11O’clock news last night on Pravda 24?
Featured the one, single business ‘leader’ tht thinks the NI rise is good – a Mr.s Waterstone.
Then it emerged that he was a Labour supporter and donor.
He was allowed to have a go at the Tories on all subjects – why was this cheap stunt allowed or is that just another silly question?
He was also on last night’s Newsnight and yesterday’s PM with Eddie Mair. He did exactly the same there too. The BBC are getting their money’s worth out of him.
Craig
re. your estimable records in numerical form of BBC pro-Labour/Lib bias – as the election is approaching is it worth keeping a count of the number of times the BBC defaults to Labour spin or Labour defence notes. ie the number of times the BBC fails to report the story straight – “Labour criticised for XYZ” but instead leads with the Labour response/Mandelson spin.
Partly as info. during the election – but also for use AFTERWARDS – if the Tories win, they must urgently get a grip on the BBC’s bias. Your stuff gives undeniable chapter-and-verse of the BBC pro-Lab/Lib stance.
The more the BBC plays this one up – the more heavyweight business leaders will join the attack on Labour over the NI increases. So in the election all the old NuLabour/Mandelson claims about being in step with modern business Britain will look like a busted flush.
The BBC is just digging itself deeper on this one. And it is yet another blatant example of BBC bias – surely some of the dimwits in the Tory party can see this is pure Labour spin ?
“..surely some of the dimwits in the Tory party can see this is pure Labour spin ?”
I doubt it – the conservative leadership really think the BBC will work for them if they win the election. I wouldn’t be suprised if the conservatives water down this NI policy if they get too much stick from the BBC. Just as “cast iron” Dave did on the EU referendum.
It is obvious from the US polls that Obama has failed to achieve any bounce from the passing of ObamaCare. The health legislation remains deeply unpopular – partly because people are angry about the way it was bulldozed through in spite of all Obama’s claims to be “post-partisan”. And now that people can actually read the fine print (Pelosi said we can read what is actually in it AFTER it is passed) – lots of new bad things are becoming apparent, damaging to people’s existing health plans and damaging generally to the US economy.
Obama and ObamaCare had a very slight dead cat pounce. All now gone, his position looks worse than ever.
Naturally the BBC is bringing us all this news of the state of US opinion – NOT.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20001629-503544.html
Good for John Humphrys standing up to the unpleasant Bob Crow this morning. I can’t even think of a good excuse to say he was only trying to save Labour by bashing the unions. Crow didn’t get away with much doublespeak for a change. Humphrys didn’t nail him, really, but at least there was a real challenge as opposed to letting Crow spout his defense unquestioned.
I thought Humphrys was his usual overbearing, boorish self. If anyone was standing up to anyone I would say Bob Crow was standing up to him and his insinuations and interruptions.
I really doubt Humphrys would have conducted such a biased interview against a Trade Union leader if its strike intention didn’t stand to lose Labour votes.
Agreed
I thought about that myself, but I don’t see much evidence of this hurting Labour’s chances outside of the pages of the Spectator, nor do I see this as an overt BBC effort to play on that theme.
If the BBC really wanted to do something to squash the idea that Unite controls Labour so much that they’re powerless to stop these strikes, giving Crow a hard time over a dodgy vote certainly isn’t going to help that. They shouldn’t even have had him on to defend himself if that was the real goal here.
James Naughtie spells out the BBC Narrative on Israel very clearly. Gazans are “kept there, effectively in prison, for a very long time”, and Israel should not retaliate on the scale that they do. In fact, Naughtie suggests, many of these missiles and terror attacks on Israel aren’t done by Hamas, and retaliation just makes peace more difficult.
Any chance Naughtie sees to discredit Israel, he takes. Gaza is a prison, Hamas is trying to control these other factions so that they don’t interfere with the peace process (I can’t stop laughing at that one), and Israel is just making it worse by saying that they’ll retaliate if soldiers are killed. In other words, Hamas is really trying to work for peace and Israelis need to roll over and die in greater numbers before they should retaliate.
Now that George Bush is out of office, no other government in the world is challenged so aggresively by the BBC.
I notice that the polls appear to show the Tories idea of scrapping the NI rise is popular with the proles, so the BBC has decided to try to kill the story now, unlike the Ashcroft story where the BBC kept that going for days.
Once in a while the BBC doesn’t work for the defense of Labour policies, and that’s when it conflicts with their own internal interests. This time it’s a very minor issue that won’t affect the election, so they can get away with it.
Government advisor Eric Carlin quits over mephedrone
The Beeboids have been going the extra mile to cover the controversy over this drug. I’m sure some at Broadcasting House know Eric Carlin from the club scene, and are just as concerned as he is. He doesn’t like the Government’s intent to make mephedrone a controlled substance, claiming he’s worried about the “criminalisation of young people”.
This is also the mentality at the BBC, as reflected very clearly in the recent Have Your Say feature on it:
Should mephedrone be banned even if it means some children getting a criminal record?
Keep drugs legal: it’s for the children!
How many other things should be decriminalized to keep children from getting a criminal record for doing them, BBC? Knifing someone? Mugging? Shoplifting? Or is this because quite a few Beeboids enjoy drugs and are sympathetic to keeping it legal?
The Home Secretary is just trying to appear tough on drugs in the run-up to an election, says Carlin. He says the Government is criminalizing the drug more or less against his group’s advice. No word from anyone else there if that’s the case.
No excuse to keep it legal is too weak for them, and they’ve gone the extra mile on their coverage of the drug’s issues. They even use the Tories’ criticism to support their agenda that the drug shouldn’t be criminalized.
Re Mr Waterstone on Newsnight – he wasn’t even there as a business boss – the company he founded has today joined the pro-Tory NI ranks – the BBC were just using him for his name. The really annoying thing was his slavish following of the Labour line. He pretended he was arguing for the Labour NI hike on economic, not, political lines, but he repeated again & again that a VAT increase was the only possible compensation for the loss of the NI revenue. He couldn’t countenance that £5bn pa could be found in additional public spending reductions.
On a different tack when is the media going to ask St Vince or Cleggy how they are going to finance the £16.5Bn pa loss of tax revenue from raising the tax allowance to £10,000 (something I would welcome if a) I could believe it & b) it didn’t come with the rest of the Lib Dim policies)?
Here’s some pure, unadulterated Socialism from Matt Frei, for his BBC World News America broacast:
Hedge fund managers roll in cash
The headline says it all, really.
Frei begins by telling us that some hedge fund managers have made billions of dollars this year. He provides a nice chart to show how their profits were down last year but then went up again this year. When he reads out the earnings, his tone of voice is dark and damning. We are meant to feel that earning this much money is a bad thing, full stop.
Frei Boy goes on about bank bailouts, saying that these nasty hedge fund managers made profits off of it. Yes, they did, Matt. But that’s because they invested correctly, not because they exploited anything or anyone. We’re then shown emotionally manipulative footage of closed business, driving home the Socialist point that not all outcomes have been equal. Frei’s implication in all of this is that somehow they shouldn’t be making this kind of money, simply because others aren’t. His deliberately dramatic tone of voice is intended to combine with the emotionally manipulative video to create a specific emotional reaction in the viewer. This is agenda-driven propaganda, not journalism.
But it gets worse. Some economics talking head starts babbling about how we need to fix the system so these guys can’t make so much money. Why? The answer seems to be in the Obamessiah speech immediately following his statement, one in which the President says that the system needs to be fixed so that we can get bankers back under control and they don’t do the reckless things that caused the financial crisis.
Which is completely irrelevant to hedge fund managers making money now.
Attention Matt Frei and all other idiotic Socialists: The hedge fund managers weren’t the ones doing the reckless banking. They’re investors, not bankers. They didn’t get too big, didn’t underwrite loans based on faulty debt packages, didn’t need bailing out, and weren’t making money by cooking the books. They’re making money now because TARP sort of worked, and they made the right bet.
So it makes no sense whatsoever to say that because these hedge fund managers are making loads of cash now we need to fix the system that caused the financial crisis in the first place.
This is an utter disgrace. Matt Frei and his BBC producers clearly think it’s wrong for certain people to make a lot of money, for no reason whatsoever – other than because some people aren’t making any money at all right now. That’s schoolboy Socialism. It’s all biased reporting, and not even based in reality.
Frei featured comment from someone from the Center for Economic and Policy Research. I just knew they’d be a left-wing outfit. Here’s Discoverthenetworks take on them:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7226
Big surprise, they’re cosy with Chavez.
Classic BBC news. WE got the usual BBC attack on the Tories NI policy, with them YET AGAIN highlighting that a small number (8) of the companies now coming out against the NI hike have donated to the Tories in the past (the vast majority haven’t but that didn’t stop the BBC spinning it). Then we got the BBC going back to 1997 and claiming that Labour (with pics of Bliar) were the real party of business. Talk about trying to spin crap.
This is working for the Tories and the BBC/Liebour/Unite alliance knows it.
Why can’t the BBC work out that the ONLY real growth comes from the private sector and if you hike up taxes that will put small businesses off recruiting.
Regarding the comments about Meow Meow, we all know a very large number of beeboids take drugs, their mindset is to make the lot legal.
I’d like to see random drugs testing of all beeboids.
Rick at Reflecting Light brings this
An Islamic state school in Britain has been told it is breaking the law by favouring Sunni pupils over Shia ones in giving out places.
England’s schools adjudicator says the Madani High School in Leicester was set up in the state sector as a school for all Muslims. But she says the school’s admissions system favours four schools of Islamic law which belong to the Sunni sect.
The school transferred to the state system in 2007.
Got that? England has set up a state school to teach Islam. And of course — what did they expect? — not only is it turning out classes of children with heads full of a total-immersion politico-religious system, but they have imported a millennium-old tradition of sectarian feuding.
It’s poetic justice, really. Race replacement justified by the U.K.’s Marxist government on the grounds of all cultures being equal now runs aground because two branches of Islam want priority.
The school was also found to have failed to honour its stated intention of making 10% of places available to non-Muslim pupils.
Who’d have imagined that?
The school’s mission statement says that it wants to help “learners to become confident in their identity as British Muslims”.
When a state-sponsored school — I presume that means paid for out of taxes on non-Muslims as well as Muslims — can’t be bothered to enrich its diversity with a token 10 percent non-Muslims, I’d say the “learners” are quite confident enough in their identity.
http://reflight.blogspot.com/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8588083.stm
Dont whether to laugh or cry.
“The school was also found to have failed to honour its stated intention of making 10% of places available to non-Muslim pupils.”
Well that’s one piece of good news. Imagine sending your kid into this tax-payer funded Islamic hell hole.
This country is run by a-holes who have lost what little is left of their collectivist minds.
Eff them all.
Jack, the Nu Liebour drug taking rent boy using scum would expect the white working class to use this school, but of course the likes of Hattie Harman, fattie Abbott those schools are not good enough for their kids, Grammar schools and the private school system is the only way to go for a true socialist.
Martin — true.
As a working class lad who passed the 11 plus, and attended Grammar school; I constantly surprise myself that I loath all members of the lumpen Marxetariat…
From Nu Liebour, al-Beebajera, Grauniad, Daily Mail. Habitat, et al.
Cry. It isn’t funny – it’s dangerous
I was talking to a ‘refugee’ from Leicester yesterday. He fled to the west country quite a few years ago. Because of language problems the local school was unable to teach in English and expected the pupils to learn Punjabi. If parents objected they said it was a multicultural school and if they didn’t like it they could go elsewhere.
His children, educated in west country schools now call him a racist if he ever brings this up.
As multicultural tyranny has overwhelmed traditional values in areas of high immigration, political correctness has overwhelmed common sense in areas where liberal Guardianistas rule.
the west country
That’s West Bengal, right? I watch NDTV quite often. The Indian TV channel via Sky, that’s in ALL ENGLISH.
You’ll often hear some poor, penniless schlubb on a Bombay street who speaks better English than you hear on a Brixton bus.
Yes I watched a programme on NDTV a while back which had a studio audience and the debate was about the use of texting destroying the English language in India.
Indians seem to value English as a tool far more than the average Wayne and Waynetta do.
Labour’s (BBC approved) policy on Afghanistan now includes bringing to Britain – at UK taxpayers’ expense -groups of Islamic people from Afghanistan, to pontificate on whether Britain is sufficiently dhimmified now is in its treatment of the three million or more Muslims here.
Note the opening language used here by BBC to support Labour in this:
“Their faces etched from years of conflict in the war-torn deserts of Helmand Province, four senior Islamic scholars step into a pod on the London Eye.”
-Gushing propaganda provided by BBC’s Ms. Buchanan:-
“Afghanistan Mullahs in London to bridge cultural divide”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8588527.stm
3 million Muslims? I think the figure is nearer 6 or 7 million. Remember this vile Government only counts the head of house on immigration and take no count of the multiple wives, kids and hangers on that arrive later on.
Martin
Yes – the Census figures are wholly unreliable, and there are no real checks of entries and departures. Labour has pulled every trick in the book to try to minimise the apparent extent of immigration.
Local councils – who ought to have a reasonable idea of how many people they are serving – are demanding much bigger Government aid because the Govt. stats are way under actual numbers.
I reckon that at the next Census there should be some zones selected where the Census is much less passive, letting heads of households fill in anything they like. There should be a rigorous head count – say one street per city, unannounced, to get a picture of how far the Census returns understate the actual numbers. It would not be hard to design some sort of sampling approach, not very expensive either, from which to extrapolate a reasonably accurate national view.
Perhaps pro-Islamic Labour (with the usual BBC political support) will take the Afghan Mullahs to Dewsbury to show them Labour’s Minister of Justice, Muslim Shahid Malik’s campaign for an Islamic Britain:
http://israeltheviewfromhere.blogspot.com/2010/03/this-is-britain-today.html
I’m guessing the drugged up arseholes at the BBC won’t be bigging this story up about Arctic ice.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1263207/Increase-Arctic-ice-confounds-doomsayers.html
In anticipation of BBC hatch-job on English Defence League (EDL) protest in Dudley this afternoon:
“An interview with Trevor Kelway of the EDL”
http://europenews.dk/en/node/31024
Yes, predictably – BBC censors: that EDL peaceful demonstration physically opposed by UAF
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/8601520.stm
Alternative:
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2010/04/interview-with-trevor-kelway.html
Meanwhile, a few miles away from Dudley, the Shropshire MP says:
“UK MP: Sharia Councils in Britain are fractious, discriminate against women, and are incrementally establishing a parallel legal system“
Where’s Blair Peach when you need him?
For the discouragement of les outres, doncha know.
The scum-bag fascist anti-fascists haven’t had so much free publicity for 30 years,
No surprise that on “Today”, Naughtie who would interupt to challenge every half sentence from a Tory, allowed Geoffrey Robinson free rein to rubbish NI opposing business leaders & Conservative policies.
He was of course again allowed to declare that a VAT rise was the only possible alternative to a rise in NI (Naughtie presumably thought that it didn’t need pointing out that self interested retail bosses would not oppose a NI rise if they would instead suffer a VAT rise, so he didn’t. Perhaps he agrees with Mandelson that the bosses are such simple souls that they have been deceived by the evil Tories).
There followed a friendly policy-lite chat with Charles Kennedy.
Be interesting to see how it might be viewed in some quarters, if at all…
http://www.ihatethemedia.com/fcc-adviser-public-media-filter-megaphone-for-government-funded-journalism
Disgraceful. I’m well aware of this dangerous thinking in the US. To start with, the President Himself said this about approving government subsidies for news media:
Obama said that good journalism is “critical to the health of our democracy,” but expressed concern toward growing tends in reporting — especially on political blogs, from which a groundswell of support for his campaign emerged during the presidential election.
“I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding,” he said.
But I was called paranoid when I said before the election that this is how He would act.
On top of that, because far-Left programs can’t compete commercially with FOX News, Limbaugh, Beck, Boortz, and other non-Left shows, the Democrat leadership and many Leftoid activists want to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. Even though the FCC itself already said it would damage freedom of the press.
So has the Labour Party paid the BBC for the use of intellectual property? If not will BBC act to protect its copyright?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7086530.ece
Labour have unveiled a new election poster depicting David Cameron as TV detective Gene Hunt, claiming he will take “Britain back to the 1980s”.
The poster, designed by a member of the public, shows the Conservative leader’s head super-imposed onto the body of the popular character from BBCs Ashes to Ashes.
….and is it just me whow would prefer the 1980’s to the 1970’s or the 2000’s?
Yes, I preferred the 80’s. Oh the 80’s – a period the BBC has done its best to portray as hell on earth.
Personally I would swap some of the evil attributes of the 80’s:
falling national debt and srinking PSBR
Return of national identity and a degree of pride in our nation
A society where you do not get arrested for putting your bin out on the wrong day, and where holocaust survivors didn’t get manhandled out of political debates for being ‘off message’
Where anti terrorism laws were just that and not used to catch people who let their dogs crap on the pavement or to ensure that the district councils parking fine revenue target is ‘deliverable’
A society where ‘celebration’ and ‘tolerence’ were voluntary
Wholesale reform of industrial relations where ‘democratically elected’ (in the East German sense) ‘presidents for life’ of unions were defeated in their attempted coup-d’etat
economic growth
Leadership with a strong and rational intellectual backing
for the feacal state of the nation now, and excreta that ‘manage’ and ‘administer’ us for our own good.
Mind you you could keep the badge ridden whining, fellow travelling, CND member, ‘Maoist’ well off middle class student ‘activists’ who infested my university and who all now work for the BBC….
Glorious !
Just sending in a complaint:
Radio 4 news at 4pm reported on a new Labour Party election poster. The newsreader told us that it was to remind people of youth unemployment. This was read directly as an objective fact. It was not attributed to any source. There was no comment from any external source.
There is no mention of youth unemployment in the poster, therefore any comment regarding its purpose is a BBC interpration which is remarkably similar to comments made by Labour Party at the launch of the poster.
Why was this deemed to be news?
Has the BBC ever reported a Conservative election poster, and provided the spin as fact, and not had a Labour rebuttal.
The poster uses a BBC character, so Labour must have paid for use of intellectual property rights. Why did the BBC not declare a commercial interest?
Good luck but all you’ll get is some rambling rely from a doped up beeboid.
all you’ll get is some rambling rely from a doped up beeboid… with an Afghani accent.
Read this if you can bear it – “journey up te M1 in searc of Englis identity (I don’t want to give too muc away, but the conclusion is that there isn’t one)
As the general election nears, the major parties are courting the ‘middle-England’ vote.
<!– S IIMA –> <img src=”http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/47580000/jpg/_47580339_100329113540_m1_sign_bbc_466-1.jpg” border=”0″ alt=”Komla Dumor”/> <!– E IIMA –>
But who are these middle-England voters and how do they view their identity?
The BBC’s Komla Dumor has been travelling up the M1 motorway for the World Today programme to find out.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8599367.stm
It starts well…
“In the three years that I have worked for the BBC I have racked up the air and road miles on journeys around the world – Botswana, Tanzania, Spain and recently Nigeria, just to name a few.
But what about England?
To be honest the only locations I am familiar with are Bush house in London, home of the BBC World Service; Television Centre in Shepherd’s Bush and my home in Hertfordshire.
Frankly the only time I stray off this path is when I am heading to… well Heathrow.” [Komla has a big carbon footrpint, but that’s OK as he is a journalist]
In my reading of this article, and I could be wrong, but Komla does not seem to be able to find or meet any “middle Englanders” at all, he meets every other nationality race or religious grouping, and he does meet some quasi racist white women gambling in a bingo hall (It is clear that they are closet racists as they mutter “Political correctness has gone too far”. This is diagnostic)
Seems to me that Komla is a crap investigative journalist as he didn’t bother to speak to the people he is supposed to be canvassing, and whom of curse – the BBC is systemattically airbrushing out of existence
Poor and meretricious rubbish like this will only make things worse.
Look where he goes- Leicester, Leeds, Peterborough, Sheffield and Luton.
Hardly typically English any more.
His lack of curiosity is staggering. He makes no comment or enquiry as to why Leicester will soon be majority non English.
Where have the natives gone? Why have they left? Why is this happening ?. Is what is now a colonisation of certain areas desirable or sustainable? Is this what multiculturalism has lead to?
Read carefully and what you read about is a deluded and , to be fair, an idealist’s dream for a new England.
I could show him a different old England. He wouldn’t like it very much and would never understand it. If , by chance , he did then he may take a much darker view of a future that has been wished on us by a stupid and uncaring elite. That future is now so bitterly resented by a, for now, silent and sullen majority that I really fear us all.
In the end it is always about land and power. it has been so from the beginnings of human society.
No people ever voluntarily gives away both these defining attributes of a culture or civilisation.
sorry “fear for us all”
sorry for bad typing, sticky keyboard with a reluctant “h”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/apr/03/today-programme-women-presenters-bbc
So much more explained, so little still excused.
BBC has neither the humour, nor the fairness to include, re-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8601781.stm
‘Spectator’:
“Labour didn’t think this one through”
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5886663/labour-didnt-think-this-one-through.thtml
“Back to debt, decline and the 1970s with Gordon Brown”
(Scroll down for poster)
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/leftwatch/2010/04/cameron-will-take-britain-back-to-the-1980s.html
The BBC misses the joke; the ‘Daily Mail’ doesn’t:
“Labour poster of Cameron as 80s TV cop Gene Hunt scores own goal as Tories say: ‘Fire up the Quattro, it’s time for change'”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1263244/Cameron-80s-TV-cop-Gene-Hunt-new-Labour-campaign-poster.html#ixzz0k3qR2Zxz
The BBc media bulletins line up the old Church and child abuse links for their lead stories this Easter.
Any chance of the churches getting up off their knees to take the BBC on-or are they so craven and punch drunk now that they will take any old pretexts to shaft them without the wit to counter.
1. No doubting that abuse went on and was covered up in many cases-this is an evil and all who did these things must be held accountable in a court of law.
2. That said there will no doubt be many abusers or groomers in the media and surely the Churches need to look at stories involving journalists in mercy killings etc and fight fire with fire.
3.The church really needs to stop dealing with the BBC etc-the media are simply the States lapdogs who want Christianity eviscerated. For the Church to feed these hate-filled and rabid atheists is sheer stupidity.
Need no lessons in child abuse and grooming from the BBC who actively promote it in their own ways…but it is called “informing””enabling sensible choices” or “thought provoking” when THEY do it!
I have an abiding memory of John Humphrys interview with Labour Minister and ex-leader of Islington Council Margarat Hodge, after an official report held the Political Correctness of her Council responsible for systematic sexual abuse of children in her care.
Under-arm bowling throughout.
Despicable.
There have been earlier posts about scum at the BBC using Good Friday as the pretext to criticie Israel for enforcing proper security for Christians wishing to follow the Via Dolorosa to Golgotha – the Way of the Cross.
As this article points out – Israel is the ONLY country that has always tried to guarantee full and free worship by all religions. As it suggest – try having an Easter Sunday service in Saudi.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/apr/02/the-protection-of-easter-in-jewish-jerusalem/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_must-read-stories-today
Does the BBC ever portray this tolerance of other faiths in Israel – as compared with the intolerance elsewhere in the Middle East, the persecutions, the vilification of Christians and Jews, the violence against them, the seizing of their property etc ?
Answer – the BBC will NEVER do anything to portray Israel in a fair light. Warts and all would be fine – accent on the “all”
The BBC gives Labour the upper hand in the battle over the silly Cameron “Gene Hunt” poster.
Gene Hunt poster sparks row
Cameron gets only a brief retort – and not a very good one, although that’s his fault and not the BBC’s – while the bulk of the news brief is devoted to Labour’s campaign talking points.
They quote both Milibands spouting the usual “we remember the horrible Thatcher years” and class warfare spiel with which BBC listeners will be familiar, as these are all commonly heard out of the mouths of BBC reporters and presenters on air in other contexts. The News Online sub-editor even managed to get two redundant lines in explaining what the poster is supposed to represent: civil unrest and youth unemployment. They get one in at the top of the article, before the lame Cameron quote, and then again between Miliband talking points, just to help drive the point home.
The Beeboids know perfectly well what the poster means from Labour’s perspective. After all, their fellow travelers made the show on which the poster is based. I remember very well the smug “be careful what you wish for” from Sam Tyler at the end of the previous series when somebody suggested that one day there would be a woman prime minister.
I see the BBC is bigging up the Observer/Guardian story about Chris Grayling saying that it should be OK for B&B’s to turn away gays. Watch the BBC try to make this the BIG story tomorrow, especially as two new polls show the Tory lead well up now and the BBC will want to bury the screw up of the Ashes to Ashes poster.
funny that Grayling was secretly recorded, yet when all those grubby Liebour ministers were filmed secretly the other week the BBC got very angy about the secret filming. clearly secret filming is OK to hang a Tory with but not a good old Socialist.
Eugene Terreblanche killed in South Africa
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8602347.stm
The little I saw of him didn’t endear him to me but the Beeb’s concern seems to be that the great Rainbow Nation project’s image might be momentarily tarnished.
A few weeks ago, sue posted here about the Justin Webb’s interview on Today with Gita Sahgal, who was dismissed from Amnesty International after criticizing the organization for supporting jihad-monger Moazam Begg and his ‘Cageprisoners’ organization.
A couple weeks after that, a group of ‘human rights’ and ‘women’s rights’ activists sent a ‘Global Petition’ to AI, complaining about Sahgal’s dismissal and their continued support for Begg and his fellow jihad-mongers. I’m pretty sure the BBC made every effort to make a comprehensive report on such an important human rights story. Or not, as the case may be.
It seems that the Director General of Amnesty International has responded, saying that:
Begg and Cageprisoners’ advocacy of “jihad in self defence” is not antithetical to human rights and that Begg is the victim of “many distortions, innuendoes and ‘guilt by association’ ” charges.
The people behind the Global Petition are not impressed, and have asked AI for clarification. As in, do they seriously mean that they condone jihad in certain circumstances?
I’m pretty sure the BBC will make every effort to give comprehensive coverage of this important human rights story. Or not, as the case may be.
As in, do they seriously mean that they condone jihad in certain circumstances?
Why yes old boy. So long as it is Jihad against the Judeo-Christian foundation of sophisticated western civilization in the arts, political thought, philosophy, humanity, women’s rights, et al.
We have it coming, after all.
Any reports from the BBC about the Labour MP who has had to apologize for saying that there are “long tentacles of Israel” seeking to influence the upcoming election?
“There are long tentacles of Israel in this
country who are funding election campaigns and putting money into the British
political system for their own ends.”
He added: “You must consider over the next few weeks, when
you make decisions about how you vote and how you advise constituents to vote,
you must make them aware of the attempt by Israelis and by pro-Israelis to
influence the election.”
Martin Linton, Labour MP for Battersea.
Imagine if either this had been said by a Tory, or – far worse – a Tory MP had made a similar comment about the MCB?
Seems to me that this is pure old fashioned anti-semitism. Long tentacles eh, strait from the ‘protocols’. Nasty Jews with money buying votes, what next, claiming that ‘they’ own the press… Could it be that he is pandering to an undelying layer ofanti-semitism that is making its presence felt in britain?
Click to access CST-incidents-report-09-for-web.pdf
I find this very offensive, but no air time.
I also find the lack of symmetry between the zero air time for this racist tripe and the blanket coverage of Chris Greyling being excoriated for saying that a person can decide, based on their religious beliefs, who comes into their house. You see it was an irrational christian belief he was defending. Had he been supporting the rights of atrenchant ‘minority’, religion – one that believes that homosexuals should be killed out of hand simply for existing – then it is entirely possible that he would have been ‘approved’ by the BBC/Guardian axis for his enlightened ‘tolerance’ etc.
What or who is behind the selection of topics the BBC deems newsworthy ?
Popularism? Someone must be sitting there thinking ‘give ‘em what they want’ or ‘give ‘em what we think they want’ or ‘give ‘em what they ought to want.’
Could anyone believe it’s impartial to headline news bulletins with Chris Grayling’s gay B&B remark yet not mention Martin Linton’s?
Doesn’t it seem a bit fishy that the BBC ignored the disruption to the Jerusalem Quartet concert at the Wigmore Hall? It was being recorded for goodness sake, on Radio Three.
Makes you wonder whose tentacles we should really be questioning.
The BBC have brought the full forces of their journalism to attack the Tories, wheeling out the usual left wing cretins. Of course an awful lot of ordinary non gay people are sick and tired of how a tiny tiny minority in society seem to demand a lot of airtime.
I guess when you think probably 80% of the men at the BBC are homosexual you understand why they spend so much time on a subject 99% of the population doesn’t give a stuff about.
Reaction of a BBC official about the requirement to give airtime to minority parties during the election :
“The idea of having to interview Nigel Farage of UKIP,let alone Nick Griffin, is turning people’s stomachs”
But they are plenty happy with the Green Party ?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7549570/BBC-plunged-into-BNP-election-row.html
A counter to the BBC’s anti-EDL report:
“UK: Muslim stabs EDL member in neck with broken bottle, police do nothing“
In the BBC world, is it not possble for it to describe the murder of white people by blacks, but only the murders of black people by whites?
Take the case of the murder of white person, Eugene Terreblanche in South Africa, who was clubbed to death in bed.
According to the BBC, he was murdered by ‘two males’. The colour of the victim (white) is mentioned by the BBC, but NOT the colour of the killers.
Apparently for the BBC, only whites can be ‘racist’ killers?
Note too, how the BBC provides the biasedly presented pretext:
‘a dispute over unpaid wages’. How does the BBC know that the wages were ‘unpaid’?
The BBC laregely avoids the problems of white people in South Africa, instead the BBC merely pushes the Zuma political line.
“Why are Whites leaving South Africa?”
http://llewdlac.wordpress.com/2009/09/06/why-are-whites-leaving-south-africa/
“Terreblanche death brings Zuma appeal for calm”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8602512.stm
BBC “It is a tragic fact that more than 3,000 white farmers have been murdered since the end of apartheid in 1994.” I should have thought that the ‘victims’ could have taken ET to court for any putative unpaid wages, but they rater tought that beating him to death would be a better policy. I wonder if they got their money?
Still, rainbow omlettes can’t be made without someone taking the initative and breaking a few eggs.
Of course the death toll of boers is largely insignificant in a country that averages 21,000 murders per year, not to mention the huge numbers of rapes and violent assaults that do not lead directly to death. The police are completely unable to stem this daily massacre.
I would love to challenge a Beeboid to walk down alone down Commissioner St in Johannesburg at midnight next friday. If they survive I am sure that they would have s*at themselves – twice – during the walk. More dangerous than Baghdad
Not a report for BBC: Labour’s continuing mass immigration-
“Revealed: US firm issues British visas… and MPs were not told”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1263416/Revealed-US-firm-issues-British-visas–MPs-told.html#ixzz0k914NK8C
Regarding the murder of Eugene TerraBlanche.
On BH this morning the general consensus was that he deserved his slow death and that the nation would be waking up to the news that a notorious racist has been killed…and what might this mean for the World Cup.
I have no truck with the man-but was he a father and grandfather and was he still causing trouble…or was it simply another whitey who got his just desserts for not embracing the sainted Mandela muddle that we live with now?
So many questions ,but the BBC prefers to snigger and pose over a pensioners body than report on the real tragedy of South Africa…but as long as the World Cup passes go to the journos in their safe enclaves than we can all embrace the fiction…evil!
Only the BBC could turn a story about David Cameron saying that a hung parliament would be bad for Britain into a platform for Labour.
Hung parliament ‘would damage UK,’ says David Cameron
Cameron doesn’t come off sounding too confident of a Tory majority – not the BBC’s fault, really – but says that the uncertainty would damage the country. Of course, the only Tory policy the BBC brings up is the plan to reduce NI “contribution”.
The rest of the piece is Downing St. talking points, and both Balls and Mandelson get to champion Labour. Mandelson’s statement that Labour is the party of business is gratuitous, and has no place in a news brief about Cameron’s concern over a hung parliament.
Just another Labour platform at BBC News Online. A hung parliament might be bad for Britain, but it would be great for the BBC.
Interesting contrast in the way a story about Afghani asylum seekers and a sexual assault on a 13-year-old girl is reported by the Daily Mail and the BBC.
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=99
As told by the Mail, this is a multi-layered story that is as revealing about certain matters to do with asylum seekers as it is about the primary story of the sexual assault.
However, the way it is reported by the BBC gives no detail about the attackers other than this type of bland statement:
Four teenagers have been arrested after a girl was sexually assaulted in a swimming pool in Kent.
You would have no inkling that asylum seekers were involved or even which country or continent they are from, let alone the background about the asylum centre and the issue about how asylum seekers may be claiming to be younger than they are because minors are treated differently by the authorities.
It’s odd, isn’t it that the BBC censors specific identifying information about the attackers and their origin but gets fairly specific about both the victim – 13-year-old girl – and where the attack took place: Kent. To be consistent, they should merely report that some people attacked someone somewhere in some unspecified country.
Now, that wouldn’t be much use to us, would it, because we humans deal in specifics and we like to be informed about specifics, and as we know all too well, the BBC is most happy to dwell on specifics in certain… ahem…specific cases. Examples abound, including political parties and political figures. Why, the BBC goes overboard about some of these.
So, given that the BBC must have the information about these asylum seeker attackers, why is this being censored? Does the BBC think this is not of interest to the public? Why if they are allowed to possess such knowledge, does it think we should not be allowed to? Does the BBC think that young English girls should pay the price for the government’s actions and policies on asylum seekers?
Want to bet if 4 asylum seekers had pulled a 13 year old girl from a house fire (unlikely I know) the BBC would have had the headline “4 Muslim Asylum seekers save girls life”
An interesting story: Israel ‘using Facebook to recruit Gaza collaborators’ I’m not in a position to comment on its accuracy but it does lead to some questions that appear to have skipped the BBC’s attention.
Does British Intelligence (in its widest sense) not monitor the social networks for evidence of potential crimes? If not, why not?
BBC-‘Guardian’: so uncritical of Islamic censorship on Maldives that they welcome President Mohamed Nasheed to address Hay Festival on ‘building democracy in a Muslim nation’ (!)
(‘Liberal elite’ will also welcome Musharraf, ex-Pakistan President!)
Political ‘left’ -Islamic alliance in full swing!
“Line up of Hay Festival announced”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/mid/8602820.stm
BBC-‘Guardian’ ignores:
“Maldives misunderstands Islam, bans non-Muslim houses of worship“
Apparently critics of Islamic censorship are not allowed to speak at this ‘Guardian’-Sky Arts (Sky-News Corp-Saudi Arabia owned) pro-Islam propaganda Festival.
Sponsors of Hay (inc BBC 3):
http://www.hayfestival.com/m-12-sponsors.aspx?skinid=2&localesetting=en-GB&resetfilters=true
So no speakers from ‘e.g. Jihadwatch’, nor from any of the authors listed at that site are invited.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/recommended-books-to-understand-jihad-dhimmitude.html
BBC Radio 3 is a ‘major sponsor’ of the pro-Islamic ‘Guardian-Sky Arts (Sky-News Corp-Saudi Arabia) Hay festival next month.
So, we British BBC licecepayers are footing this bill of political sponsorship.
How was this undemocratically decided by the BBC?
How much is it costing we British BBC licecepayers?