A new mid-week open thread for your delectation and delight.
Open Thread….
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- MarkyMark Dec 19, 08:40
Midweek 18th December 2024
650 MP’s expense to go up? 650 MP’s pay to go up? 805 Lords pay to increase? [img]https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/03/14/12/55334663-0-image-a-7_1647262311709.jpg[/img] - Fedup2 Dec 19, 08:38
Midweek 18th December 2024
Excellent news – water prices to go up from April at the same time as council taxes … pound down… - Zephir Dec 19, 08:34
Midweek 18th December 2024
[img]https://i.postimg.cc/RFvZwdSr/Capturezxc.jpg[/img] - Zephir Dec 19, 08:33
Midweek 18th December 2024
RE AsI above, some alternative suggestions for bbc tattoos or cubical signage: [img]https://i.postimg.cc/4N0yjp5t/karlkraus1.jpg[/img] - MarkyMark Dec 19, 08:33
Midweek 18th December 2024
“Mao did more good than Harm” comment will end Diane Abbotts career….. 2024 … Mother of the House is now… - MarkyMark Dec 19, 08:32
Midweek 18th December 2024
“No information as to Nasen Saadi’s immigration status is given in the Sky report”….. …. OLD CASE …. “Bournemouth: Asylum… - MarkyMark Dec 19, 08:30
Midweek 18th December 2024
“Your daily reminder that foreign funding to U.K. political parties is illegal.” “Labour donor Lord Alli breached Lords rules” “Developing… - MarkyMark Dec 19, 08:24
Midweek 18th December 2024
Electric Green Car I hope – even Ed Miliband cannot afford one! - MarkyMark Dec 19, 08:23
Midweek 18th December 2024
“A BBC spokesperson said music track decisions are made “with the relevant audiences and context in mind”. In that case,…
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
Love how on the bBC web-page reporting on the Palestinian “militants” killed yesterday, the “RELATED INTERNET LINKS”
are almost all to “human-rights” activists. Can’t they find any websites that speak out against these “militants”? There are more than a few sites that document the terrorist atrocities these “militants” carry out and aspire to. Just as well, as the bBC ignores them.
Haaretz
HaMoked Betselem Association for Civil Rights in Israel Rabbis for Human Rights Also note that the bBC can translate its web-pages into over 30 languages, but not Hebrew of course….funny that.
I see that the “independent” review into the Climate Change fraud by Lord Oxburgh, has come out, as expected with a sort of limp-wristed whitewash. And the BBC are lapping it up, needless to say.
Is there nobody with the guts, stature and scientific kudos to stand up against this travesty? We seem helplessly doomed to be plunged into economic goom, governmental control, more stealth taxation, and a countryside covered in useless windmills.
http://tinyurl.com/y28g299
Danfer – denier site. Parental Caution Advised
The bbC the fifth column inside your living room
Has anybody else noticed how the bBC when it reports collateral damage as in civilian deaths will report with much fanfare when its NATO,US,Israel or even Pakistan. But when its terrorists doing the killing the reportage is much subdued Contrast the bbC coverage between
Police forces and terrorists:
Nato firing kills Afghan civilians in Kandahar
At least four civilians were killed and 18 others wounded when Nato forces fired at a bus in southern Kandahar province, sparking angry protests.
Somali civilians killed by shells
Twelve civilians have died in the Somali capital as government soldiers retaliated to mortars fired at the presidential palace by insurgents.
Pakistan ‘army air strike kills dozens of civilians’
At least 73 civilians were killed when an army jet bombed a remote village in Pakistan’s tribal region of Khyber, a local official has told the BBC.
And these:
Pakistan mosque bomb kills dozens
A bomb has exploded at a mosque in north-western Pakistan during Friday prayers, killing at least 38 people and wounding dozens more.
Afghanistan blast ‘kills 10’ in Helmand province
Ten people have been killed in an explosion in southern Afghanistan’s Helmand province, officials say.
Notice how when its the people who are combating terrorism, then the bBC contrary to its ‘no emotive words policy’ is more than happy to cry foul play by claiming civilians have been killed . Usually from the mouthpiece of the very terrorists who have no problem killing civilian. But when terrorists are killing all and sundry then the bBC uses less emotive language. You know like bomb explodes, people killed and the Taliban say it wasn’t them.
The bbC the fifth column inside your living room
If only we had a clue about the mysterious “militants” (SIC) setting off these bombs.
I wonder what, for instance, religion, they practise? It’s all so mysterious and unknown.
Who can blame the BBC for not identifying those involved.
I suspect the Mormons.
Animal rightsists Jack. Haven’t you been watching your BBC drama?
Tut tut, Jack – they are Climate Change Deniers. Everybody knows that.
Buddhists !
With the general election campaign underway, here are some ideas for questions to ask candidates about Common Purpose: http://tinyurl.com/yj6gtqm
Stop Spamming.
What’s spamming about that?
EUSSR
Common Purpose
NWO
Wibble! Wibble! Wibble!
Nurse Nurse! stopcp is out of bed. Get the horse tranquiliser and a syringe with the extra large needle
There seems to be at least a grain of truth about Common Purpose, though.
There’s more than a grain..
I notice that the Swine Flu fraud is getting a whitewashing from the BBC.
While even the Grauniad realised belatedly (April 7th 2010) that the academic community, the WHO and numerous governments had been duped by the pharmaceutical industry, the BBC will venture only that the WHO is to review its handling of swine flu “once the pandemic is over”.
The whole point is that there was no pandemic!!
Fear is a political weapon, fear and uncertainty in the population is esential for a budding totalitarian state.
A fearful and worried population is far more maleable and can be manipulated to follow the wishes of the state, keep the population nervous and worried and they can be persueded to do almost anything.
Common purpose and the shadow state.
The explosion of QUANGO nonjobs in recent years that serve no discernable purpose or add any value to society has been a hallmark of recent years, they now account for tens of billions of pounds every year.
The jobs as advertised are not meant for ordinary people, the places have been filled long before adverts are placed in the guardian.
Notice the wording of the employment terminology and you find it a garbled meaningless word swamp. The logic goes that those who apply will tie themselves into knots trying to interpret the job requirements and all will look like tools and so can be turned down, a kind of plausible denial for employment.
These thousands of jobs open for handpicked common purpose recruits have a job description that enables them to open up multiple communication channels to all the other common purpose placements ranging far and wide in the state/semi state sector.
Voila, you have a shadow state in the making, a kind of modern day freemasons if you will.
You do not apply for common purpose, you are approached quietly if and when your expertise is required and based on fellow traveller reports after which you are sent on an induction course.
The EU red tape requirement to stuff industry with paperclip shuffling nonjobs spread the influence of common purpose to industry and all areas of government and private activities.
The shadow state works as a semi autonomous arm of the government at the moment, as it builds its strength and influence so it will take over more and more of the actual running and control of the state until the real government is simply a hollow shell staffed with puppets.
Common purpose has access to all the goverment databases, they have full and ready access to all the sensitive information they need to build their powerbase, they are the cancer eating away our society from within.
When they are ready and only when they are ready they will reveal themselves and by then it will be too late.
Welcome to the post democratic era where from birth to death the system has you marked for what the new state wants you to be from drone to apprentice to overseer to peasant to overlord.
Well put though I don’t agree the job descriptions are intended to tie applicants up in knots. I think the over all wording is vague but with precise keywords thus allowing the hirers to exclude anyone who hasn’t done the same job before – and is already deemed “common purpose” (I love that phrase).
These keywords are often listed under ‘Competencies’. Note that competence is not one of them 🙂
Only 67 vacancies at the BBC today, though Country Director, Nepal, for the BBC World Service Trust is my pick for non-job of the week.
Good point well made. However the keyword method of selection is too longwinded and unreliable IMHO, we know that the newlabour edyucayshuun system is churning out chimps who know all the buzzwords/PC slogans of the PDA and the incentive to learn a system of words could lead to an unwanted influx of substandard human material. Far better to select an appointee first, induct and train that appointee and then simply place him into a tailored readymade job, its more reliable and economical and prevents accidental enrolment of substandard persons. I think the job is created simply tailormade to fit the CP member.
I could be wrong of course.
Country Director for Nepal ? Nepal, which gets handful of reports each year – but needs a “Country Director”. What the hell does this person do ?
Excellent question from Nick Robinson to Nick Clegg about offering a huge tax cut based on nothing more than “a wing and a prayer”. Clegg’s answer was as weak as could possibly be, especially since the LibDems don’t offer much more in the way of revenue increase than a bank tax. It’s a valid, fair question as Clegg is trying to portray his party as the only one who’s being honest about the country’s financial state. They cut away from that immediately, and haven’t touched on it since.
Now Laura Kuenssberg is talking to a London School of Economics professor about the three different manifestos. Rather than discussing any content, though, she asks about superficial appearances of the cover and layout of the booklets, as if this was a fashion show. Labour’s is best, naturally. Fascinating insight, yeah.
Peculiarly subdued BBC TV report from Barking of BNP fame. Do they know something we don’t? That NUlabour really are losing the white working class vote.
The unreal world of the middleclass liberal left is suddenly facing reality and it looks as if they are beginning to see just what harm their lunatic theories have done to this country.
When changes ,real changes happen , they happen suddenly and are completely unpredictable.
All the trouble we will soon face could have been avoided if we had been led by truly conservative, cautious people who understood that nations are not to be played with by schoolboy social theorists in pursuit of a world that will never exist.
I noticed that the BBC continues to portray it as a bunch of people who are frightened at the rapid change they’ve seen in their neighborhoods because they’re simply scared of “change”, full stop. Except for when Nick Griffin opens his mouth, there is zero discussion of exactly what those changes are, any possible negatives, or who is responsible for them. The Beeboids always leave it as the most generalized, vague way possible: “change”.
The default position is that change is good, full stop, and anyone concerned just needs to open their minds a little more and get with the program.
The Mail had a long article on electioneering in Barking this week – very hostile to the BNP.
But the bottom line appeared to be – the BNP could be on the verge of winning control of Barking Council, £600 million pound budget and all. They already have a bunch of seats on that Council
I noticed the hostile article as well. The BNP really seems to unsettle the power structure. The old English working class getting a bit uppity I suppose. Curious that the Mail gives a platform to Littlejohn who is nothing if not populist.
A licensed jester like poor old Jeremy Clarkson.
I think the hostile piece in the Daily Mail was just the sort of reaction Nazi scum tend to induce from any half-decent human being.
The fact is the white working class is bearing the brunt of the insane libleft experiment in creating it’s dream society. They will turn to the BNP because it is unfortunately the only party that is prepared to listen to them without denigrating with patrician aloofness their concern. A truly conservative party would have never allowed things to come to this pass and the BNP would have never have risen to the position it has. WE can huff and puff all we like but we will not change this reality nor will the Daily Mail’s ritual condemnation which likewise does not address the real desperation now being felt by those who fear they are losing their land and their way of life.
I dont think the Mail piece was at all unsympathetic to the resentments of working class voters, although they were hugely over-sympathetic to Margarat Hodge, who as the Islington Council Leader who presided over systematic abuse of children in her care due to her Correctnick policies is not a person worthy of sympathy.
I certainly dont judge working class people driven into the arms of the BNP by the national disgrace of our main parties of failing to address the cultural suicide of multiculturalism, but I dont delude myself about the Nazi scum that the BNP are.
Who are the nazi scum?
The UAF/searchlight street thugs use the methods of the nazis, they happily use the methods of the brownshirts.
The BNP is a legal democratic political party that seeks to protect the British people from the anti democratic and anti British state.
Few people now believe the ‘nazi’ smears anymore, the policies of the BNP are popular and BNP support is growing fast, just how fast will become clear after the election.
BTW the poisonous smear campaigns launched by the media is having the exact opposite effect, every poisonous lie and smear by the media is boosting BNP support, the NUJ/UAF fixation with attacking the BNP is actually helping the BNP prospects.
The BNP leadership must be rubbing their hands with glee, the British people have learned the truth and all the smears and dirty name calling propaganda in the world will only help the BNP cause. The worm has turned, the cry of nazi and racist by the screaming fanatics no longer enjoys the power it once did. The pig headed bigoted arrogance of the UAF/searchlight/NUJ axis will be their downfall.
The leftists can no longer scream racist and nazi and expect it to have the desired effect, the story of Peter and the wolf has passed them by it seems?
The pathetic axis is a one trick pony, the trick being ugly dirty politics, its all they have and all they know and more importantly WE now know.
You delude yourself about the BNP the way Government Ministers who engage Muslim extremists to advise them on how to deal with Muslim extremism do. The same question that can be posed of Muslims can be posed of BNPers. Are there moderate Muslims? Yes. Is Islam moderate? No.
Desperation can lead to all sorts of dangerous delusions, and you Cassandra are extremely desperate.
As much as I loathe multiculturalism, I’d rather see my country destroyed by that than Nazism. It is suckerdom beyond belief that you fall for the strokes that Griffin’s Goosestep Goons pull.
it is for this reason that the conservatives of this country need to reclaim their party and present a clear alternative to the liberal left. Under Cameron this will not happen. At best we will buy a little time.
I repeat there has never in history been an instance of a people voluntarily giving up control of their land and way of life. It is a measure of the liberal unreality that this is what they actually propose to happen to this country,
The demographics are against the indigenous population and to allow this to happen has been the greatest betrayal by a ruling class in our long history.
People will cling to the BNP because they are truly afraid of what is coming.
I read the comments on their website from time to time. It is real fear and resentment and it is from people just like my neighbours and perhaps is the authentic voice of old England.
Yeah, the Nazi BNP is tapping into a pool of deep and legitimate resentment that I certainly share. I can understand the desperation that can lead lots of native Brits to vote BNP, but at the end of the day a Nazi Party is a Nazi Party.
In the Daily Mail report if I remember right the BNP’s best councillor has now left the BNP because of the ‘Nazi-esque nature’ of a lot of its key members, and is standing as an independent against BNP candidate Simon Darby. From the horses mouth about the BNP.
I wish you would take the time to meet and talk to ordinary BNP members and activists before you use such terms to describe them.
I know very little about anything really but I do know from my own experience that you have to get to know people before you can judge them.
BTW I can promise you that BNP members do not engage in goose stepping and dressing up in black uniforms, if you took a little time to speak to ordinary members you would be surprised at just how ordinary we are.
There are Jews and Sikh members and now the membership rules have changed we have a black Christian preacher just joined and making a mark on the campaign trail, there are mothers and bakers and candle stick makers and now the nationalist community can rally regardless of colour race or creed.
We are not who you think we are, we are nothing like those who came before us, we are the new modern nationalists and we are getting stronger by the day and the shadow cast by those before us now recedes, we are in control and we decide the future, we no longer hate anyone we simply love our country.
Yours respectfully
Cassie K.
Try telling me with a straight face that you’r e not aware that the BNP leadership is full of people steeped in a Nazi past.
To take what they now say about that past being behind them at face value is like believing that Mo Begg and Binyam were merely tourists in Afghanistan. They are terrorist scum and the people who lead your party are Nazi scum, that simple.
You say you’re a Zionist Cassandra and I believe you, which makes your powers of delusion about the BNP that much more staggering.
Like so many upper-crust English names, Oxburgh –is not pronounced in the manner you may erroneously think, given the spelling.
The correct pronunciation is Lord OxBERK.
Nice one !
Slightly OT – and shhhhh.. don’t say it too loud – but OMTE hasn’t made a blog post for over a month. Has he run out of steam? Or perhaps got a few of his imbecilic commenter mates together to write a generic 6.30pm comedy for R4? 🙂
It is ironic that Cameron is always going on about “Change” .
The elites use the word as code for unsettling us and imposing their will on us.
It is the very opposite of true conservatism which is why Cameron is so mistrusted by so many of us.
Personally I regard his defeat as essential if the country is to be restored.
I think it is called Morton’s fork – choice between various unacceptable (or unelectable) alternatives.
Paper review by the fragrant teleprompter review Sian, who intones about the forthcoming leaders’ ‘debates’, with which the BBC is obsessed (surprised they haven’t flown the entire staff around the world 3 times to a purpose-built studio in Shangri-La made from Llama tongues) :
‘A furious row has broken out between David Cameron and… the Labour Party’
As read out, it seems he may have a point in that it has been so structured that it will have the spontaneity of a hymn sheet recitation.
However, I was intrigued at why it was decided to ‘report’ this as an individual of one party vs. another party in its entirety.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/douglasmurray/100034138/if-you-support-amnesty-international-stop/
One has to wonder if the BBC will report this, or at least acknowledge some controversy around this organisation.
Or… have on various spokespersons of this ‘charity’ as guest commentators of unimpeachable authority whose provenance is no concern of viewers.
Hmm, poll shows a tory lead of 12% in the key marginals and the BBC sayszzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Be fair Martin, old chap–
Polls show Labour leads by 90% with the lumpen Marxetariat working at the BBC — and they never report on that either.
“As much as I loathe multiculturalism, I’d rather see my country destroyed by that than Nazism. “
Wow. PC suicide. Presumably you’d have a Health & Safety officer on hand were you to throw yourself off Beachy Head.
Excellent ‘Today’ this morning: not so much pro-NuLab as helping the Westminster establishment get the wagons in a circle eg asking the usual suspects in the radio car if they think the electorate feels excluded from the Political Class and Media Class’s mutual award-nomination panels and why in cliches of no less than 100% stupefaction why that might be.
Toenails was excitedly talking up the charade of the leaders’ TV debate: “people will get to see a clash of ideas”. Yeah right – this superficial Americanisation of the political process will serve at best to show which of the three is the most telegenic and/or who’s interacting most fruitfully with their meeja chums in the construction of narrative that presents the deliberate stupefying narrowing of the campaign as some kind of battle for the nation’s soul.
Well spotted Simon…trust you heard the withering grilling by Evan Davis of `azel Blears…and I am being sarcastic just in case the BBC quote me.
The political class and the media camp followers clearly need each others flatulence and halitosis to generate their debates over who best cops expenses at the public trough. Two combover merchants who share the comb and pretend it`s all worth a candle!
Has anyone noticed how the first two words of so many BBC news reports are ” Gordon Brown….. ” ?
As in Gordon Brown concedes defeat after vote counting …?
Any predictions on how the BBC will handle that?
Any predictions on how the BBC will handle that?
Like sore losers…
CAMERON’S BROKEN PROMISES…
And that’s only Day 2 after the election!
As Pounce might say, “the BBC and half a story”.
Jewish settlers suspected in West Bank mosque attack
What is missing is any reference to consistent Palestinian vandalism of Jewish sites, whenever they get a chance. You could make a reasonable assertion that destruction/ appropriation of sites holy to other groups is typical of Islam up to today.
Iraq cleric slams plan to turn Jewish tomb into mosque
UK watchdog bans Israel Western Wall tourism advert
I’m collecting photos of celebs at the wall for Five Minutes for Israel <5mfi.com> can anyone put me onto some British ones, Blair, Brown, etc?
Have you tried googling eg “Blair Western Wall” – and clicking Images at the top ?
The ASA ban is PC authoritarianism gone mad. I hope they are told to go get stuffed.
I wonder if the ASA has pronounced on the advertising for Tibet tourism?
Many of us dispute the legitimacy of the thugs running commie China which invaded and overran Tibet.
Oh dear…The World at One today on Radio4 manages to get some wallah called Will Straw to pontificate on Browns chances in tonights “debate”.
Apparently he speaks for “Left Foot Forward” and no-one(least of all Martha Kearney of course) seems to inform us if this objective policy wonk might well be the same son of Jack Straw-even the lad that his dad shopped with some drugs way back?
Ah…the BBCs legendary balanced broadcasting with us again! Any comment from “Opinionated beyond my intelligence?” I wonder? No… thought not!
So the big debate is set for tonight. The Beeboids are both excited and nervous, and it’s going to be very amusing to watch their reactions. Since most of them are more concerned about superficial things and emotional manipulation, naturally they’re most concerned about Mr. Brown’s performance. He’s by far the least telegenic of the three, and comes across the worst when speaking and laying out his ideas. The substance of those ideas are unimportant to the BBC, except maybe for Nick Robinson. The rest of the Beeboids will be harping on superficial stuff, I bet.
Deputy political editor James Landale has made this helpful guide of things to watch for. Note how many points are entirely superficial, and things that would concern Mr. Brown more than the other two. Not a single thing about whether or not one of the party leaders says something coherent and convincing about policy.
I have no idea if there’s actually going to be any real debate betweeen them, but it’s a unique occasion when the public can listen to all the party leaders spell out some policies without being interpreted by reporters. Unlike the rest of the election, they’re all doing it at the same time, in the same place, and there’s no chance for the BBC or anyone else to get in rebuttals to instruct the audience how to think about what they’ve just heard before moving on to the next one. The Beeboids have no control over this (until the third debate hosted by Dimbleby), so I bet they’re very nervous indeed.
“it’s a unique occasion when the public can listen to all the party leaders spell out some policies without being interpreted by reporters.” A double amen to that.
Ha! Just as I posted my last comment, Kirsty Wark is talking to John Curtis about the debates, and Curtis correctly points out that the most important thing is going to be the “secondary reporting” about the debate. The real result will be if there’s a moment or two that will be revisited over and over which will be seen by people who didn’t watch the debate.
Wark then says, yes, “What we can’t control” is what people put on Facebook and other things. What a giveaway.
Oops, it was Emily Maitlis. Sorry.
Should there be any doubt:
Why a ‘Robin Hood’ tax is a good idea
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/worldhaveyoursay/2010/04/why_a_robin_hood_tax_is_a_good.html#207756
About what, I guess that’s another story.
Involuntary paying of a tax is “good publicity”? What a load of nonsense. It’s “social responsibility” to “give back” because rules and regulations have existed which have enabled banks to make money? More nonsense. May as well say BBC employees should “give back” because the License Fee enables them to make a nice living with gold-plated, private health care. But the nomenklatura never think that way, do they?
Bashing bankers has been done to death, he says. So he just renames it. It is socialism, and this Beeboid is lying when he says it’s not. This is the twisted, illogical mentality endemic at the BBC. I can’t stop shaking my head.
It will be interesting to compare the audiences for all three debates. I suspect the one that cheers the most for the one eyed idiot will be the BBC audience.
Supposedly they’re not allowed to cheer. And the questions have been pre-sourced and pre-selected. So I’m not sure what the point of a “balanced” audience is. I guess you’ll have to watch the behavior of the different moderators.
Peter Allen on Radio 5 (helium-)Lite doing his own debate-lite with a political from each of the main parties on Crime.
He started by reading out a prepared spiel that went along the lines of, ‘The figures show us that crime is falling and that we are safer now but the perception is that crime is rising blah blah blah.
What figures would these be Peter? The British Crime Survey that excludes crimes committed on under-16s, excludes murder, excludes crime against property, vandalism, shop-lifting. The British Crime Survey that if you have a crime (such as harrassment) committed against you a 100 times in a year will only count the first 5 occasions.
Point is we cannot say that crime is falling. It suits the narrative of the government (of course) to maintain this, but we don’t pay the BBC £3.6 billion a year to read out press releases from Peter Mandelson.
tactic of the government whenever it is faced with clear evidence of its own failure is always but always to respond with a) it’s better than last year or b) it’s better than France/Germany/Iceland/Zimbabwe.
So Peter next time you debate on Crime, how about entitling the debate ‘Crime in Britain is too High: Discuss.’
You all pride yourself on being journalists.
How about (just for once) trying to do the job properly.
This following report doesn’t read like a typical bland piece from the BBC ‘Today’ programme. This is the BBC’s ‘Today’s Mr Humphrys writing in the ‘Daily Mail’ and he is ‘shocked’ by the violent, drunken crime he sees in Cardiff. Perhaps he (and the BBC) need to get out in the real world which Labour has created more often:
‘Daily Mail’ –
JOHN HUMPHRYS:” How I was horrified when I went back to my home city of Cardiff to assess the effects of 24-hour pubs… and found the women as bad as the men”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1266119/JOHN-HUMPHRYS-How-I-horrified-I-went-home-city-assess-effects-24-hour-pubs–women-bad-men.html#ixzz0lBxUv3MC
He’s seeing typical Liebour voters in action.
It’s Tax Day in the US today, and once again there are many Tea Party protests being held all across the country. It was the hundreds of thousands of people protesting on this day last year that finally forced the BBC to acknowledge our existence. Unfortunately, Kevin Connolly misrepresented us, describing us with racialist slander, hinted at dark forces behind the movement, and insulted us with a sexual innuendo.
I’m unable to join in today due to work constraints (stuck indoors by the phone), but my support is with them in spirit.
I assume tonight’s party leader debate in the UK will push all other stories to the margins tomorrow, and maybe the BBC won’t even bother reporting on the Tea Parties at all this year. Don’t want to give the proles any ideas about standing up to their betters.
DP…
Isn’t it fantastic at how truly IRRELEVANT Big Media has been in the growth of the Tea Parties?
First, they IGNORED the movement.
Then they MOCKED it.
Now they settled on full-on DENIGRATION, by any and all means. Because they are SCARED.
Yet, as Obama’s approval numbers continue to drop… the Tea Partiers go from strength to strength.
Totally agree. And, except for one blog post by Mark Mardell, the BBC has steadfastly refused to inform you of any real effects the movement has had on actual local elections and council votes.
I’ve noticed a kind of spiritual connection between Cameron’s pledges to restore that kind of power to the people in the UK. He’s talked about giving citizens the power to affect council votes on taxes and recalling MPs. Yet, the BBC keeps misrepresenting this as the nasty Tories shutting down public services.
BBC ‘reports’ mass immigration into USA/Arizona, (written in not very good English) from the viewpoint entirely of ‘US immigrant rights groups’:-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8621853.stm
‘La Raza’ means ‘the Race’. If they weren’t brown-skinned, the Beeboids wouldn’t touch a group with such a racist name with a ten foot pole. This organization has long been an advocate for, among other things, total amnesty of all illegal Hispanic immigrants. The new law, if enacted, won’t make them any more a target for immigration raids than they already are. But the BBC wouldn’t be interested in what’s going on now.
This is very amusing because it essentially legalizes what Sherriff Joe Arpaio has been doing for years. Until now it was beyond his remit, and he’s been using resources best used to deal with actual criminals to instead round up and mess around with illegal immigrants. He does it becuase he’s a publicity hound, really, and he knows it’s a popular issue. All the usual organizations have been crying about it for ages, and even the BBC has done one or two reports frowning on his actions.
What’s always left unsaid – and isn’t mentioned here – is that there’s been a large criminal element in this illegal immigration. Border towns in Arizona and Texas are effectively war zones, and it’s become a real local security issue. Actually it has been for at least 20 years, since before I left Arizona for New York. But the BBC will never inform you because they are focused on the racialist angle only.
Emily Maitlis cannot stop bigging up Gordon Brown leading into this debate. Every single conversation she has with all the various talking heads – including the ludicrous Laura K – keeps going back to Mr. Brown and things we need to give him slack on and things that he does well. No matter what they’re saying, the theme is that Cameron is only superficially more appealing, it’s an unfair advantage, and it would be wrong to judge the debate based on that. Right now they’re going on and on about how to interpret what we’re about to see, and it’s all trying to make Mr. Brown come off better.
C-SPAN3 will be carrying it live in the US.
Can, and will the BBC make the connection between these two examples of Islamic repression ?:-
a.) SOMALIA –
“Somalia’s al-Shabab bans ‘Christian’ school bells”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8623240.stm
b.) BRITAIN –
“Muslims in U.K. press for imposition of dhimmi laws silencing Christian worship”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/01/muslims-in-uk-press-to-impose-dhimmi-laws-silencing-christian-worship.html
Considering the fact that the BBC censored the religious identity of the complaining neighbors, and instead lumped the Walthamstow church in with a couple of other churches receiving noise complaints, I’d say not very likely at all. There is no Islamic connection to the story at all, as far as the BBC wants you to know.
I had to laugh at the statements from the SNP and Plaid Cymru ladies complaining about the party leaders’ debate being anti-democratic. The reason they discussed issues that don’t affect Scotland and Wales is because of devolution, yet people living in Scotland and Wales can affect England. What kind of democracy are they talking about?
Nothing new, every question started with “This subject is devolved to Scotland and Northern Ireland”. So why is a Scotsman like Brown allowed to bring in legislation that the people who vote for him in Scotland are not affected by? That whole issue of devolution is ignored by the BBC.
They ignore only the politicial and democratic ramifications of devolution. Otherwise, it’s the one kind of nationalism the BBC celebrates. Scottish and Welsh and Irish nationalism is their cultural right. English nationalism is racism.
I have just seen Laura K for the first time.
Is it me – or is she really that awful ?
The full weight of the BBC spin machine in force.
Radio 5 slaughtering Cameron with it’s ‘balanced audience’, constant northern ‘guests’ calling McBust “Gordon” but David Cameron “Cameron”
BBC 2 slaughtering Cameron as well.
To me the one eyed fool was awful and Clegg/Cameron on a par.
Anyone else notice how horribly white the ITV audience was?
Matt Frei was just discussing the Tea Party movement with some talking head on BBC World News America. The verdict is – surprise! – that those protesters will most likely be out of step with the country in 2012.
Frei just cannot accept that most Americans DON’T want a high-tax, Euro style nanny state.
Apparently actually BEING in the US teaches him nothing about America. He may as well be in a BBC studio in Portland Street.
He lives in the Washington, DC, area, and hangs out with Democrat reporters and media mavens. He exists totally inside the bubble and gets out only occasionally to pass judgment on the great unwashed.
WINNERS of the most expensive coverage of the televised debate: the BBC, which had more than 130 people in Manchester for the debate (source: ‘Spectator’ Twitter);
LOSERS, as usual, BBC licencepayers.
“Can anyone halt the BBC’s gravy train?” (Andrew Pierce)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1266356/GENERAL-ELECTION-2010-Can-halt-BBCs-gravy-train.html
I listened to the Today program this morning on Radio 4. We had Pope Clegg being talked up, a discussion about the Bullington Club – a play – a tinge of tory bashing, and finally we had 4 or 5 people from the (hardly politically well balanced) streets of Manchester talking to Evan Davis on what they felt about the TV debate last night. (I lived in Manchester for many years and its great, but it wasn’t politically balanced).
I hope the BBC are going to examine the communist connections in the Labour party when the candidates were 19 (or even better, produce a play), they do a show somewhere in Buckinghamshire where they invite people off the streets of a beautiful English village somewhere to comment on politics, and finally, stop broadcasting their biased views of the performances last night – Mr Robinson you are the weakest link.
BBC News at 10 was hilarious last night – they had the presenter filmed outside in Manchester – sending questions to Nick Robinson, also being filmed in Manchester. It was clear from the backgrounds that they were probably a few hundred feet from each other.
No wonder they needed 130/150 staff up there.
I heard the Today program again this morning. Evan Davis has moved from Manchester where he interviewed people regarding polical opinion, to another more politically balanced location, Liverpool where he interviewed people in Toxteth regarding their voting tendances.
‘Nick Clegg had good TV election debate, says Cameron’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8624317.stm
Mr Cameron says a lot of things here, and including that Mr Clegg had a good TV debate as he was asked that question by the BBC reporter in the first place. What should he say – no? An unbiased headline such has ‘Cameron found TV debate useful’ or ‘Cameron says TV debates are nothing to worry about’ or ‘ Cameron says TV debates should of been started sooner’ or ‘Cameron welcomed TV debate’.
Instead we get a biased BBC reporter specifically asking him about Nick Clegg (not Gordon Brown or the other two in general). We then have the headline that the BBC wanted to hear – Nick Clegg had a good election debate from an opposition group.
I despair – this is the BBC steering and weighting the article according to their own beliefs. It is not the role of a public broadcaster to put words into peoples’ mouths
So Clegg says that he will only allow immigrants to live in certain areas. Anyone want to take a bet that this policy would be fought against by Shami and her chums under the “uman rites” law?
1 billion out of the 17 billion tax cut by the limps will go to those on less than 10k a year. Who gets the most? Those on 70k or more. Sounds like a good Tory policy to me, but want to bet if the Tories proposed this the BBC would be slaughtering them?
WHY WHY WHY is no one holding Clegg and St Vince to account over their lies?
As the BBC knows, but doesn’t question, two Lib Dem ‘flagship’ policies are:
1.) Britain to be governed by Islamised European Union superstate ( to include 75 million Turks);
2.) mass immigration to the UK to be continued.
BBC reports – forever defending accused Islamic jihadists:
“American’s ‘quiet son’ on terrorism charges in Pakistan”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8618786.stm
More undemocratic nonsense, included by the BBC out of blind devotion to twisted nationalism and devolution at the end of this mediocre report about the debate.
The Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru are not taking part in the debates, although the BBC is to hold separate leaders’ debates in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Which everyone knows because ITV and the BBC reminded everyone a thousand times.
SNP Leader Alex Salmond told the BBC: “You had three Westminster politicians who agree with each other on 99% of issues, and therefore the debate couldn’t really come alive because of that convergence on the things that matter, and also, of course, because the audience weren’t allowed to really participate.”
Plaid Cymru leader Ieuan Wyn Jones said: “In what was a very sterile debate, not once did we hear the word Wales mentioned by any of the leaders. Indeed much of what they said was irrelevant to our communities.”
This is very silly. These nationalists (not racists because they’re not English) wanted devolution in order to make these very party leaders irrelevant to their communities, so it’s hypocritical to complain about it now. They’re going to get their own debates which will by definition be irrelevant to communities outside Wales and Scotland because of the anti-democratic side-effects of devolution, so it’s hypocritical to complain about this debate being irrelevant to Scotalnd and Wales. Yet the BBC continues to support this idiotic notion.
As the Tea Party movement goes from strength to strength, here’s the shameless Mark Mardell to tell you that they’re all a bunch of dopes and the movement is going to be on the downturn.
Is the steam going out of the Tea Party?
You wish, Mark. You wish.
A few thousand people had come out to mark the culmination of a day of protests. When I asked why so few, people pointed out, absolutely fairly, that it was an evening in the middle of the week and that their were rallies not just in the capital, but all over the country.
“Why so few?” Classic attempt to create a false perspective in order to downplay the outcome. The whole thing shows just how partisan and biased Mardell is. He fails to inform you that tens of thousands of people joined in protests in cities and towns across the country, so many that The Obamessiah Himself had to publicly denegrate them.
But Mardell’s biased blindness demands that he portray this as a movement running out of steam, so he continues to be dishonest.
Once again Mardell dishonestly plays the racist angle:
Almost exclusively white certainly, but there are many women, quite a few young people and lots of families.
He went to one event, and wants you to think that this represents the rest of the country. What Mardell doesn’t want you to know is the skin color of the host of the New York Tea Party and the Tea Party Express.
Worst of all, he once again openly betrays his political opinions:
So I ask him how he would cut the deficit. Do away with Medicare (free health care for the retired) for instance? Not that. Cut the huge defence budget? No, not that either. So what? He says: “Cut people out of government, get rid of a lot of people. Get rid of all the waste.”
After years covering politics I rather despair when I hear politicians fall back on this, but it is said so often that voters can hardly be blamed for thinking it is a solution.
And there you have it. Mardell “despairs” when hearing a certain polticial view. Biased to the core, and serially dishonest.
Following this comment will be a series of links to photos of Tea Party protests around the country which will prove just how much of a biased liar Mark Mardell is.
Here are links to photos and reports of Tea Party protests held all across the US on April 15 and a few days leading up to it with the Tea Party Express national tour.
Boston
St. Louis
Cleveland
Detroit
Lansing, Michigan
Green Bay
Madison
St. Charles, Missouri
More to follow.
More Tea Party pics, more proof of Mardell’s and the BBC’s dishonesty:
Huntsville, Alabama
Schoharie, NY
Chicago (Obamessiah home turf)
Cincinnati
New York City
Colorado Springs
Tucson
I could go on all day, but you get the idea. Does this look like a movement of dopes that is losing steam? Don’t trust the BBC on US issues.
I forgot to point out one more bit of egregious, shameful, blind partisanship from Mardell’s blog post:
This follows immediately after Mardell’s statement that he despairs of hearing cries for smaller government:
Outside the park a young man sits with a small banner that tries to point this out. It reads “Stop socialized medicine – close military hospitals”. I wonder what sort of response he’s been getting.
“Mostly thumbs up. They don’t get it. It’s kinda funny.”
What Mardell doesn’t want you to know is that this kid is most likely part of one of the agents provacateurs who have been plotting to infiltrate the Tea Parties to prove just how awful and stupid we are. It’s the physical – “meatspace”, if you like – equivalent of a Moby. Mardell knows about it because it was reported in the HuffingtonPost.
The Tea Partiers spotted them instantly. Mardell sided with one. He should be fired immediately. He is biased, dishonest, unprofessional.
It’s odd that whilst Sky are reporting tomorrow’s YouGov poll that shows ‘Cons 33%, Lib Dems 30%, Lab 28%’ the BBC have not menaged to mention this story; are they awaitiong instructions from Peter Mandelson? Looks like the Labour/Lib Dem alliance is the future government of the UK – RUN!
The BBC just can’t help itself. The absurd “Ashes to Ashes” The dreadful Falklands theme, the Union Flag lighter and the ending with a slow handclap for the re- elected Mrs T. What is it about Mrs T? Why does the libleft so hate her?
An interesting study for future historians ( if there are any ) .
I suppose their parents used to frighten them with tales of the bogeywoman as they were tucked into their North London comfy beds.
2 stand-out bits of BBC bias from the last few days;
1. Newsnight on Tuesday or Wednesday (I can’t remember which). A discussion between Peter Hain, the Lib Dems’ Lord Rennard and Paxman on tactical voting. No Tory, and Peter Hain’s repeated speeches about the impending doom of the Tories not being challenged by anyone.
2. The “One Show” this evening. Michael Prick appearing and summarising the debate. Nick Clegg “appeared more honest” than the others (by this stage of the day the BBC had clearly dropped the “most independent commentators are saying” bit) and David Cameron appeared “snooty”. So there you have it – from the guy whose wages we pay to tell us this stuff.
Apparently Mark Easton lives in Islington. That explains so much.
What British taxpayers pay for:
“BBC funds Arab internet series”
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118017893.html?categoryid=14&cs=1&nid=2562&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+variety%2Fheadlines+%28Variety+-+Latest+News%29