Here is a new open thread to keep you all going. I am sure my fellow writers will provide you with plenty of new material in my absence..
OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- atlas_shrugged Nov 15, 12:58
Midweek 13th November 2024
Village Christmas Fair axed because of looney irrational council elf an safety conditions about terrorist attacks. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14085105/Small-village-Christmas-fair-Canned-terror-attack.html Wonder if my… - Lefty Wright Nov 15, 12:57
Midweek 13th November 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9kcQBVo5Kk Is this the copper who knocked on Allison Pearson’s Door on Sunday morning? - Solomon Grundy Nov 15, 12:50
Midweek 13th November 2024
George Osborne suggested this as chancellor in 2015. Since then, a number of LGPS’s have merged and it looks to… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 12:17
Midweek 13th November 2024
“You really couldn’t make this up. Just days before the 1,000 day anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, we have… - JohnC Nov 15, 12:09
Midweek 13th November 2024
I agree because the UN is too valuable as a ‘meeting place for all Nations’ which otherwise would not exist.… - JohnC Nov 15, 12:07
Midweek 13th November 2024
Have you EVER heard of a ‘hate crime’ from a woman or a BAME against a white male ?. Me… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 12:00
Midweek 13th November 2024
HATE CRIMES …. https://youtu.be/myjEoDypUD8?si=yyYfR8sFEAG0_Yu2&t=37 - Eddy Booth Nov 15, 11:55
Midweek 13th November 2024
“Tyson slaps Paul during final face-off” https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/boxing/articles/cly03n4r1keo [img]https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/ace/standard/800/cpsprodpb/5cae/live/a414d290-a2f5-11ef-b299-f9ebab4415b5.jpg.webp[/img] “Novice boxer Paul, 27, will take on 58-year-old Tyson at the AT&T… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 11:50
Midweek 13th November 2024
THE END …. IS SOON …. “Iran’s morality police, also known as the Guidance Patrol or Gasht-e Ershad, is a…
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
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2010/06/is-the-bbc-more-biased-than-the-guardian.html
Is the BBC more biased than The Guardian?
“…We also have a system of public service broadcasting including requirements of political impartiality which the BBC routinely disregards with a mindset much the same as The Guardian….
The odd thing is given that The Guardian is perfectly entitled to have a left wing allegiance, while the BBC isn’t, is that often The Guardian takes more trouble to give Conservatives fair treatment than the BBC.”
Hard to keep up, but is ‘climate warming’ the next GW>>CC incarnation, as a sort of combo hybrid?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_environment/10335587.stm
I just sent in the following comment to this BBC article about Israel easing their end of the blockade on Gaza:
Israel must ease the blockade to demonstrate to the world – and the BBC – once again that this won’t ease the hatred coming from Gaza. The Palestinians and Hamas wanted to destroy Israel and kill Jews before the blockade, so why should this change now? The blockade was started in response to rockets and violent attacks on Israel civilians and border areas from Hamas and Palestinians in Gaza, but the BBC never seems to remind anyone of that fact. Instead it’s always “to weaken Hamas” or some such. There’s never any context of why they might want to weaken Hamas.
This idea of “collective punishment” of an allegedly innocent Gazan population is a ruse, and it’s disappointing that the BBC has bought into it and promoted it for so long. It’s generally presented as an attribution – “which has been criticized as”, etc. – but it’s always without the larger context of a Palestinian desire to destroy Israel, a desire that existed even before 1967 and any of the Israeli actions which supposedly cause it. Have the BBC ever asked a Gazan how they felt about Israel in 1966 when the region was under Egypt’s control? No, of course not, because that would detract from the Narrative.
The impact on the people of Gaza will be mostly negative. Hamas already takes the lion’s share of international aid and smuggled goods (a fact generally hidden from the public by the BBC), using it to tighten their grip on the people of Gaza and enforce their brutal Islamism. Easing the blockade will strengthen them even more, and will inevitably lead to more violence against Israel. This in turn will have negative consequences for the people of Gaza.
Unfortunately, the BBC has suppressed this point of view, so it’s no wonder that most of the British public think the opposite. Until the truth about Hamas, its Charter, and the true desires of the Gazans before the blockade even started is openly discussed in public, there can be no honest debate.
It will probably be deleted after the Beeboid assigned to read these gets through the first couple of sentences, but I had to try.
Thank you, David, for sending such an apt and appropriate message to the BBC. I listened in despair (again!) today to the World At One when every single facet of Israel’s “flotilla wrongdoing” was explained by “peace activists” and other useful idiots. Israel’s position and methods of dealing with the criminals who violently siezed power in Gaza were repeatedly condemned by the usual mob.
NEVER, EVER, ONCE, EVEN A SINGLE TIME!!! have I ever heard the B-bbc ask the simple question of a single “Palestinian” supporter:
“WOULD IT IMPROVE THE SITUATION IF HAMAS DROPPED IT’S WISH/DESIRE/STATED AIM/THREAT/ – whatever anyone wants to call it – TO TOTALLY DESTROY ISRAEL AND REMOVE ISRAEL FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH?”
*Until* that question is asked of “Palestinian” supporters I will never, ever believe a single one of them, *EXCEPT* I will continue to hold the belief that every single one of them holds Judenhass in their heart.
p.s. I am not a Jew. I lived and worked in the Middle East oil patch for a very lengthy spell of my life. I remember being granted temporary Israeli visas stamped on a card and slid into my passport ready for me to dispose of/remove when my holiday was over. Proper visas would have ended my working life in the mid-east oil patch.
I lived in Arab countries; I lived in Israel: I KNOW which way of life is right without Lauren Booth or George Galloway pointing the way.
The BBCs favourite fanatic Chris Guness just on air to declare that the Israeli move to ease restrictions isnt enough,what a surprise there?
The shiny eyed fanatic isnt challenged or pressed even when he makes the ludicrous statement that because a small amount of building supplies has been allowed in and it hasnt been stolen the unlimited suppling of Gaza should go ahead. The utter stupidity of such a statement beggars belief, as long as a tiny amount is let in then hamas would keep their hands off wouldnt they? But the second large amounts came through they would steal it. Of course Guness claims that couple of months and a tiny pilot scheme proves his case, possibly unaware of what a twat he appears.
Of course Guness in his fanatical exitement came across as a bit of a loony tune to say the least with bullet speed rambling and tired old cliche drivenshite and he just had to squeeze the “collective punishment” bullshit. The controls were never about punishment but to save lives, but when you have lies and propaganda to spread the truth doesnt matter I suppose. I hope the mossad nail his arse good and proper, he alone is doing more damage to Israel than ten thousand rockets.
Cassie,
Great post again.
You are so right to describe scum like Guness as “shiny-eyed fanatic”. But he has a big salary, stays in the best places, eats at the best restaurants, has his driver and servants. What a sleazebag !
No surprise to see that paid Jew Hater Guness, has the words GUN & SS in his name.
How apt, as I’m sure he would love to line up Jews next to a ditch they dug themselves and machine gun them into it.
To any Guness lawyers, this is meant to be a satirical suggestion in the style (if not the talent) of Jonathan Swift and his modest Irish proposal
Here’s a nice put-down of “empty suit” obama which I saw on another blog – “the clothes have no emperor”.
BBC News Channel lying right now about projects set up by the last Government being cut or suspended by the new Government.
The BBC is lying about it because they’re not reporting that many of these projects were UNFUNDED. Instead, they’re allowing the focus to be on a hospital project and something else which actually have been cut. Totally false representation of the situation.
And who do they have on to comment? Blunkett on behalf of Labour.
The BBC are so pathetic now, they are still interviewing corrupt , failed politicians , like the odious Blunkett.
What about the new Tory intake ?
The Beeboids still can’t accept that their bumchums lost the election.
BBC Radio 4 7pm news gave a headline figure for cuts, two examples (hospital & steelworks) and some criticisms from Yvette Cooper. No Coalition spokesman to explain why the cuts or eny context from the news bulletin.
And a resounding silence from the Conservative Party on such remorselessly outrageous bias.
Worldwide belief in The Obamessiah is still generally strong. Whew!
It’s very, very important for the BBC to report this. Belief in Him is always of paramount concern.
Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
I Corinthians 15:1-2
I wonder if anyone at the BBC has any part of their ample pensions invested in BP?
They may care to wonder why BP has a girly-man called Tony Hayward in charge, as Obama and his evil minions plunder their investments.
I expect the guy to cry at any moment as he cravenly agrees to let the US administration shake down BP for untold billions, into a re-elect Obama slush fund.
Obama needs a “whipping boy ” !
Grant
Obama needs a “whipping boy ” !
pace Martin… they’ve got so many to choose from at the BBC.
Staring with leather lad Evan Davis.
Ha ! Ha !
As the BBC continue to peddle their politically correct, Socialist line, that Barry is perfect in every way, shape and form, and we are not worthy, I beg to differ.
Crook? Gangster? Charlatan? Communist? Islamist?
Just like every other God damned Socialist on this planet, everything about him is shrouded in misinformation….
This video (Something you would never see on the BBC in a month of Sundays), is absolutely gob smacking in it’s entirety.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHxb_vZe7Ao&feature=player_embedded#!
Dazed,
Thanks for that link. Even if half of it is true, surely Obama must be impeached ?
I don’t think there is anything that was not known – by those who wanted to know.
But hidden from most people by a compliant media – especially the craven BBC
@ Grant:
It’s good job that Barry’s not a Communist. I’m glad that the BBC have put me straight on that. I mean who knows what a “Trot” could do with powers as mentioned in the link below.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1287695/Obama-given-right-shut-internet-kill-switch.html
Grant re: impeachment.
For articles of impeachment to pass the House of Representatives, they would need a majority vote, which is impossible under the present large majority of Democrats.
But even if they did pass, then for a conviction at the Senate trial, it would need a two thirds majority of members present. Again, the Democrats have a 57/41 majority at present.
It is very difficult to remove a President from office.
Generally, the political ‘liberal left’ (inc. BBC), avoids criticism of BP’s links to Islamic Republic of Iran:
“BP’s ties to Iran”
(‘Fox News’ 3 min video)
http://video.foxnews.com/v/4245544/bps-ties-to-iran?playlist_id=86857
CRAZY CUTS???
So the loan of £80m to Sheffield Forgemasters is axed.
BBC Radio 4 6 o’clock news said “no workers leaving the plant today would comment”. *BUT*, they had a comment from the bloke who runs the local pub!!!
Are these BBC people for real? YES, THEY ARE! There are simply no depths to which they will not stoop. A comment from a local pub landlord is as valid as … I don’t know what! I give up!
The only GOOD THING to come out of tonight’s BBC menu is Israel got pushed down the list. And then the BAD THING was Biased Bowen relating President Assad’s dire warnings about wot is going to happen. (And them bliddy Israelis caused it all! As usual! singed – Jeremy B)
I see the bBC is continuing its anti-Semitic message by informing the world and its dog that Israel isn’t liked in Ireland. The same message is promulgated by how on hearing the news that Israel is going to allow in more goods into Gaza the bBC headlines reads that Hamas don’t like it. Then (while not anti-semitic) the bBC promotes a story about how Turkey bacon designed for Islamic consumption has earned the wrath of the bBC mullah.
Tell me people what is the bBC playing at?
Weeks after Israel slotted 9 people the bBC is still crying foul play and ensuring that, that story is still front page news. Meanwhile an Islamic civil war in Kyrgyzstan which has seen over 100 deaths and over 400,000 people displaced gets very little play. In fact the bBC would rather you heard the moans of an Islamic terrorist about how his rights have been abused in the UK, How 167 car licensing capture cameras set up in predominately Islamic areas in Birmingham suddenly become ‘Terror cameras’ Err bBC maybe there is a reason why so many vehicle licensing cameras have been set up in the area and I don’t refer to the activities of so called militants and in order to get the Muslims up in arms before Friday mosque, the bBC informs the world that one of the 5 Somali pirates had to this say at the end of their version of events;
One of the defendants told the court the decision was unfair.”Netherlands don’t like Muslim people,”
And the bbC (and the guardian) wonders why people in the UK are becoming polarized in their outlook towards Muslims. I wonder how long before somebody goes all taxis and decided to teach the bBC a lesson. but then no doubt the bbC would only blame the jew.
Oh, Turks producing bacon ? As they always have from Poleznakoy.
The Kirghiz/Uxbek atrocities will never be reported in detail by the BBC
A great article on this from Mark Steyn here:
http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/06/17/the-lesson-of-a-jewish-cemetery/
RCE — superb as usual from Sir Steyn. Note the vile Jew haters out en masse in the comment’s section
You’d imagine Beeboid heads exploding rather than report this story about Tea Party activism spreading around the world…including to Israel. It ticks all the right boxes for leftist apoplexy.
They’ll have a hard time making those Tea Party activists out to be racists, so it’s a condundrum indeed for BBC editors.
BBC still promoting the Narrative that it was only nasty bankers who caused the housing collapse. In this news brief about the de-listing of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the BBC sub-editor puts it this way:
The two lenders, which provide mortgage finance to other lenders, were placed under government control in September 2008 after being severely hurt by the collapse in the mortgage market.
Wrong, BBC. What the BBC either doesn’t want you to know, or actually doesn’t understand (which I doubt, seeing as Robert Peston knows better) that the Clinton policy of forcing banks to lend to people who couldn’t pay it back (under the aegis of helping black people become home-owners) actually fueled that fire. And Democrats like Barney Frank kept pouring taxpayer fuel on it long after it was a known disaster by defending it with charges of racism against those who complained.
But the BBC has always kept this information from you. And now they’re pretending it never happened by portraying the organizations as innocent victims of the housing market collapse.
Don’t trust the BBC on US issues.
I just watched “Frost on Satire” on BBC4. Unbelievable programme but not “surprising” to use Frost’s own word. It should have been called the History of Liberal satire since there was no acknowledgement that conservative satire even existed.
Of the interviewees, only Rory Bremner emerged with any credit. Of the rest, Sir David gurneyed in admiration at a long list of ‘liberals’ ie Chevy Chase, the cast of Spitting Image, Bill Maher, Tina Fey etc. as they satirised MacMillan, Gerald Ford, Thatcher, W Bush and Sarah Palin. No mention of Harold Wilson, Ted Heath, Jimmy Carter or (apart from Bremner and then only in passing) of Clinton and Blair.
A startling moment was when the liberal conformist Maher trumpeted himself as anti-establishment. This was unchallenged by Frost. We then cut to Maher ridiculing ‘tea-baggers’ ie the opponents of big government. Quite how picking on little people is meant to represent satire, whose traditional targets are the rich and powerful are not questioned.
No was there a mention of why the current president is off limits to these satirists, or indeed any mention of the recent episode of South Park (a true equal opportunity offender) which was censored.
Its hard to see what this smug programme was trying to achieve apart from to pat itself on the back.
Missed it.
I am sure it will be around on iPlayer, but as i tend to prefer watching TV to be entertained rather than seeking problems, as one evidently who risked and was indeed less than impressed, may I repeat a question I posed as a result of the Rory B story (him feeling threatened) about this show a few days ago:
Needless to say beeboid David Frost is “surprised” by this ‘
One wonders if the redoubtable Mr. Frost summoned all his BBC journalistic heft and offered any factual substantiation for this opinionated ‘surprise’.
Did Mr. Frost actually try and explain, or just dismiss a view he didn’t fancy? If it hadn’t been a satirist of Mr. Bremner’s stature I’d hazard it would have ended up in the edit suite trash file.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/7836274/Frost-on-Satire-BBC-Four-review.html
Probably more upsetting in the media bubble world: Mr. Frost was simply not very good
@guess who, actually the Bremner remark (the last thing in the show) passed without comment. I guess Frost was only surprised later. Frost did not challenge anyone’s comments, he merely pulled odd faces which were trying to show pleasure but made him look in pain.
The bremner remark did come at the end of a series of glib liberals blathering on about how daring they were and how there was nothing they would satirise, so possibly the editor had the common decency to think “well hang on there a minute”. Frost certainly did not.
Ta very much.
Why, oh why, am I not surprised, even though it is ‘worse’ then I had 1st imagined if Mr. F felt the need to ‘follow up’.
The bremner remark did come at the end of a series of glib liberals blathering on about how daring they were and how there was nothing they would satirise
Whoops. That should have read would not satirise.
Yes; Frost (of Islamic Al Jazeera TV now) was totally anti-Tory, and anti-Republican in his political propaganda; and this continues on the BBC now with easy, one-sided ‘jokes’ still against Bush (but not Obama) on unfunny BBC2 programmes like ‘Mock the Week’ – including last night’s edition.
A startling moment was when the liberal conformist Maher trumpeted himself as anti-establishment
This establishment dope head is so confused.
He actually thinks he’s a “libertarian” — while at the same time begging for more government control over his life.
He mistakes libertarianism with what he actually is: a LIBERTINE socialist.
Cross dressing twat John Simpson spouting utter shit on This Week right now about the so called bloody Sunday shootings. Don’t bother about impartiality tranny boy (he likes dressing up as a Muslim woman, but only for work purposes.. of course John I understand).
Plenty of use of ‘Derry’ whatever the f**k that is.
BBC report:
“Israel and the Palestinians: The Irish connection”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/10294057.stm
-Yes, BBC; historically, Irish government support for the wrong side is well known.
just watching crimewatch roadshow,BBC love in with the police.chums sticking together
God tell me about it! seems to be made by the drama department or the lot that make the worthers ad’s.
The Hugo Chavez of North America
Obama shakes-down the BP oil company for 20 billion to prove he’s “handling the situation” in one of the most gross over reaches in US presidential history.
http://tundratabloid.blogspot.com/2010/06/shakedown-president.html
Obama Most Hated American President in Great Britain Since Nixon
Instead of adopting a constructive, statesmanlike approach, Barack Obama’s decision to launch a ‘boot on the throat’ campaign, while adopting a thinly veiled Brit-bashing agenda, has generated significant bad blood in America’s closest ally. At the same time, the president has inexplicably rejected offers of help from the UK and an array of European countries, no doubt out of both pride and protectionism.”
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5496850/obama_most_hated_american_president.html?cat=9
Its amazing that despite Obama’s obvious hatred of Britain, the BBC and Leftists continue to fawn on Obama.
Unfortunately BP’s executives are apparently precluded from adopting other than a supine attitude to this persecution because of their (very real) fear that they will be prosecuted (for personal gross negligence) and end up in gaol for the next 15-25 years. Of course, it’s easy for me to say they should fight this one – I’m not in the firing line – but a less abject response would probably see the issue blow up in the faces of Obama, the politicians and the bureaucrats. Mention could be made, for instance, that election contributions to Obama and other politicians have not yet been handed back to BP – or, indeed, refused in the first place. Instead BP and its hapless shareholders are taking it on the chin by themselves. The evident joy of the BBC commentators concerning Hayward’s crucifixion is almost as unedifying as the conduct of Obama and the other Freisler* wannabe’s in Congress.
* yes yes – Godwin’s Law and all that.
Umbongo,
Quite right. The BBC smell blood. It is worse than fox-hunting !
Good point.
On Today this morning there was a perfect example of the BBC method of smearing a government policy it doesn’t like: in this case the coalition policy of “free” schools. First – by way of setting the agenda – Humphrys interviewed the head of the trade union for head (state school) teachers. The message – virtually unchallenged – and repeated at least three times was that money for free school pupils will mean less for other pupils: quite how is never explored. Then Humphrys interviewed a pro free-schools teacher and the (unfortunately non-fluent) spokesman for the “BBG Parents Alliance”. Instead of allowing the free school supporters an immediate chance to rebut the money message, Humphrys meandered into the byways of the idea behind such schools. In the end (since the money aspect, although mentioned, is not further explored), the impression is given that free schools are all about selfish middle-class parents indulging their spoilt children and of teachers indulging themselves at the expense of those left in the unfree schools. It’s brilliant: the BBC can claim an “impartial” treatment of the free schools policy while, in effect, propagandising against it.
There is good reason for the BBC dislike of ” free schools ”
They will inevitably lead to some form of selection by ability. Nobody wants to mention this but the reality is that such a school will, by it’s very nature, want the best and most able children otherwise what is the point of the school in the first place.
The destruction of the grammar schools was carried out by a vengeful and fearful elite under the guise of egalitarianism. This same elite , well entrenched at the BBC and in the media, can see where the new schools might be heading. The last thing this elite wants is a meritocratic education system.
The comprehensive school is designed to keep the elites in a privileged position by denying the very best education to those without money.
These ‘free schools” might be the start of the restoration of reality to our schools. They will be opposed by the elites to the bitter end.
dave s
“destruction of the grammar schools was carried out by a vengeful and fearful elite” and stupid as well. The justification for comprehensivisation of schools was that 20% of schools (the grammar schools) were good and the rest were rubbish. The policy adopted was to wreck the 20% good schools and expand the crap. This, together with the crapola of “child-centred” (ie non-authority) teaching, the non-training of teaching (as against pervasive indoctrination through instruction in educational “theory”) by teacher-training colleges and the downgrading of examination standards have resulted in the largely unemployable lumpen-ignorati who graduate from the state system today.
The policy adopted was to wreck the 20% good schools and expand the crap.
That’s the “socialists” answer to EVERYTHING in life.
Destroy the good as punishment for the crap. It makes them feel virtuous and good instead of the venal, thieving cretins they truly are.
Quite agree with all the posts here on this subject.
Coincidentally, the exact same Narrative was pushed during a segment on the News Channel. Groupthink or editorial agenda?
Tonights Radio 4 7pm news had a short headline about Michael Gove’s education plans and then a Trade Unionist soundbite about how bad this would be, No explanation as to why Michael Gove wanted to implement this policy, just the opposition stated.
Just like yesterday the BBC have nailed their colours to the Labour mast.
A story on the radio news this morning about a miscarriage of justice was headlined with somethimg like, ‘Cuts have lead to an innocent man…etc etc’. Of course, in the actual story on the BBC itself and in no other reporting of this story have these ‘cuts received a mention.
Expect an unremitting diet on al beebeezeera of stories beginning, ‘Cuts have lead to…’.
I have see some of the recent debate on here as to whether this type of ‘mistake’ is bias or bad journalism – what it is actually is just pig-thick.
BB —
‘Cuts have lead to…’.
Using that logic must mean that…
Unlimited Funds lead to no Innocent Person EVER being wrongly convicted.
“Cuts lead to suicide “. Although not at the BBC, unfortunately.
Ha ha.
“Hello, this is the BBC Suicide Hotline.
If you are a BBC employee who wishes to end it all, please press one…. then jump…”
BBC News attacking the idea of creating new schools not controlled by the government. All issues are 100% misrepresented when someone isn’t telling an outright lie. Class war has its usual pride of place as well, naturally. Once again the “two-tier system” is the main line of attack, and the BBC never has anyone on to challenge the accusations that the poorest will be left behind in poor schools controlled by…er…the government.
I’m having a good laugh at the Beeboids clucking their tongues over today’s execution by firing squad in Utah. Leaving aside the debate about whether or not we should even have capital punishment, quibbling over the methodology is very silly as this is more painless and instantaneous than lethal injection or anything else. Of course, since Beeboids tend to focus on the superficial, dramatic aspect of everything, it’s not surprising that something so exotic as a firing squad piques their interest.
However, as it’s the BBC reporting on a US issue, there’s something they get wrong. Contrary to what the BBC reports here, Gardner chose the firing squad option because he and his lawyers figured that they could sue to challenge the practice and thus get him off death row. Obviously that plan…um…backfired.
Obviously that plan…um…backfired.
Ha ha.
They should have gotten The Apprentice’s Donald Trump to give the order to the executioners with a …
YOU’RE FIRED
The BBC reported that there were “protests” at the execution. However, the reporter admitted that abolition of the death penalty in the US “wasn’t coming sometime soon”. Mind you, this guy had been on death row for something like 25 years which seems a mite excessive. As I recall, when the death penalty was applied in the UK the time from sentence to execution was rarely more than 3 weeks.
I think the condemmed was allowed two Sundays before execution for time to repent
We have this endless, expensive appeals process built into the system. The condemned can string it along for years and years if they want to. All part of making it “fair” and “just”, possibly preventing an innocent man from getting executed, etc. Outcome of all this depends on which state it’s in as well.
Just read from the cape times of South Africa, 54 yes 54 records broken for extreme cold/snow/freezing weather.
Yet the BBC with its massive presence cannot be arsed to divulge what is news by any standards.
One more example of BBC reluctance to disclose information that contradicts their narrative and agenda as in the global warming fraud, mind you as their pensions are heavily invested in the global warming fraud its not surprising is it?
Cassandra King wrote:
“Just read from the cape times of South Africa, 54 yes 54 records broken for extreme cold/snow/freezing weather. “
I must admit I’ve been wondering about everybody covering up down south and I don’t refer to the man who had a shower after raping his friends HIV positive daughter.
TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) – A concert by Elton John has given Israelis a boost after a string of cancellations by other world-famous artists.
Oh dear… after annoying the professional gayers by playing at the wedding of Rush Limbaugh (who is not “anti” gay, by the way).. old Elton has gone TOO FAR!
AGAIN.
Expect the BBC to give loud voice to all its raving Jew haters — and that’s just the ones who work there full time.
They will demand Sir E be stripped of his Knighthood – and his Gayhood.
Oh, and Elvis Costello. Screw you and Alisin too.
This is funny, pity its true.
Charlie,
Coming to the BBC any day now !
I await in anticipation ?
Good for Elton, he has gone up in my estimation.
I see from the comments at least one person here caught the return of the predicatably lefty Daily Mail bashing, hurf durf Tories are posh, middle-class people are scum, white people are racist, wankfest that is Mock the Week. What I felt warranted not a comment but a question was the odd remark that the wanky leftist student comic Russell Howard made about the phone call our Dave made to Barry and how objecting to the use of the phrase British Petroleum was “playing the race card”. I know it’s asking a bit much that the jokes won’t be typically leftist and largely unfunny but they can at least make sense. My question is what the hell does this even mean? Cameron is playing the race card? Is America black now since they have a black(ish) president and Britain is white because Cameron is pasty faced? So objecting to the use of and emphasis of the word British is telling a black man to stop being racist because it’s white or Britain is black and Obama shouldn’t say something something I haven’t got a clue. I guess it just comes down to a desparately unfunny comedian desparately grasping at the slightest chance to knock the Tories and showing just how obsessed with race the PC crowd are, but seriously I don’t get it.
Don’t worry, it’s The Now Show, it’s not meant to make sense just push the right PC buttons for the audience and team.
Now Show, Mock the Week, News Quiz….. What’s the difference ?
I haven’t seen it (nothing would induce me to watch that rubbish) but from your telling of the joke, the “race” is Britain vs America,(not white vs black) and is satirising the well-known charge of “pulling the race card” – which is usually used in a skin colour context.
I can’t stomach mock the week but caught most of its Radio 4 equivalent the now show yesterday. I find it amazing that in just a few years we have gone from the point where everything a US President (Bush) does is a huge joke to the point where no jokes can be made about Obama and everything he does is saintly.
The thing is the humour potential in Barry is enormous. Not only is there his amazingly high self regard but he is odd birth certificate , draft registration and just this week I have been reading (via link on this site) the amazing story of Barry’s social security number.
A quick question for the forum members in the USA – Is Barry a subject for humour on the US MSM or is he untouchable over there also ?
He’s still untouchable. There are now acknowledgments that He’s struggling a bit in the polls, but little else. The MSM – with the exception of ABC”s Jake Tapper and the LA Times’ Andrew Malcolm – sold their souls to Him long ago. They’re nearly as stalwart in their defense as Mark Mardell and Matt Frei.
Only Jon Stewart has dared to make even the smallest joke at The Obamessiah’s expense. It only took 17 months, and the Daily Show writers are a far-Left a bunch of postmodern champagne socialists who are attacking Him for not being far enough to the Left. But hey, at least they’re trying to hold Him accountable, even just a little bit.
Jon Stewart on Obama’s broken civil liberties promises
Jon to Barack: Get Back to the Motherf?*#ing Spill!
Gaving Esler hosting a discussion on historic political speech-making just now. While the talking heads are saying some interesting things, Esler’s premise was that today’s politicians just don’t come up with great stuff these days, “even Obama, who’s a great speaker”. Of course, the female talking head mentioned that she swooned when seeing The Obamessiah’s campaign speech in Denver.
Esler’s premise is idiotic, and shows a great lack of perspective and comprehension from his BBC producers. Except for one brief mention by the other talking head that De Gaulle had a fantastic grasp of the French language, at no time did anyone mention that today’s politicians have a completely different kind of speech writer, completely different criteria, and a completely different level of sophistication at which they’re allowed to perform.
Churchill wrote his own speeches. The Obamessiah uses an uneducated child to write his. Enough said.
(Also, part of Churchill’s place in speech history is surely due to the great Norman Shelley doing a couple of them on the radio in his place.)
Esler IS 100% idiotic
People at the BBC would not bat an eyelid at this, would not see the irony. Thyey are such squeamish appeasers they see nothing wrong with the 3 stooges in the video.
I sometimes get the feeling that Mark Mardell is angling to replace Scott Gibbs as the White House Spokesman. At the very least, the White House should be paying him instead of the BBC.
Just look at this latest bit of shameless shilling. Mardell denegrates Rep. Barton’s objection to the whole proceedings. He contrasts Barton’s statement and apology to Hayward with Rep. Markey’s statement that is was just the US looking out for “the most vulnerable citizens”. Mardell sums it up with this:
The exchange is a timely reminder that for many American politicians big business is always preferable to big government.
Trust Mardell to get it wrong again. Naturally his partisan bias makes him interpret the news for you this way. Barton’s own statement contradicts him. Unless, that is, Mardell is calling Barton a liar. Here’s a more intellegent and honest appraisal of what Barton said.
What Mardell doesn’t want you to know is that there is already a system in place to make sure any company pays for damages in cases like this, including setting aside a fund. Barton and others object to what amounts to an overreach by the Executive Branch. Chavez and Putin have used their power to seize funds from corporations and personally give commands regarding internal business operations. But because Mardell blindly agress with why The Obamessiah is doing it, it’s cool.
Instead of defending the US President at every turn, it would be better if the BBC reported what I’ve been saying for weeks: people are angry because the President has screwed up the clean-up process.
Florida Panhandle County Takes Oil Matters Into Its Own Hands
The Obamessiah is too incompetent to wave the 1920 Jones Act, something George Bush was able to do in his Administration’s response to Katrina.
The Obamessiah’s personal pick from the Coast Guard to run things is incompetent, and tells lies to cover it up.
Former NOAA oil spill cleanup boss says Obama waited too long in Gulf disaster. It seems He’s too incompetent to organize people to engage a plan that’s been on the books since 1994.
The Obamessiah didn’t even visit the region for nearly two weeks. He is the top recipient of BP donations. I could go on and on. As long as the BBC focuses exclusively on plugging the hole and BP’s credibility and financial dilemma, they can continue to hide the fact that He has failed miserably in the cleanup organization, increasing the environmental and economic damage many times over.
Don’t trust the BBC on US issues.
and of course the new “Czar” appointed by Obama to oversea the Federal response is the US Navy Secretary.
So running the response – and running the Navy – are just part-time jobs ?
Any culpability for the oil spill lies with BP and the US companies running the rig or organising the original cementing of the well. (But you might include the inefficiency of federal regulatory oversight.)
But prime responsibility for protecting the coastline surely lies with Obama working in conjunction with State Governors. Obama’s lack of executive attention have made things far worse. And that is why he tries to deflect all criticism to BP.
That’s the kind of incompetence I’m talking about. The BBC would be highlighting such a move if it was Bush. But now they have other editorial priorities.
I am finding it hard to resist the temptation to wave at America and say “I told you so”. Who ever thought Obama had any experience or qualifications or would be any good at the job? He was always “well dodgy” in more ways than one.
Oh, well, they elected him and it is up to them to elect whom they please. (I am only too aware of some of the numpties we have elected.) It’s not my business. Although you wouldn’t think that, going by the BBC output.
Here’s another analysis you’ll never hear on the BBC:
Obama v BP
America’s justifiable fury with BP is degenerating into a broader attack on business.
Somehow I don’t think Mark Mardell would understand….
Another view the BBC avoids on this:
“An Oil Spill Is Not a License to Suspend the Rule of Law”
(‘American Thinker’)
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/06/an_oil_spill_is_not_a_license.html
This is the kind of thing the BBC would jump at if it was Bush under similar circumstances:
Hundreds of Workers Forced Into Unpaid Leave to Accomodate Obama Photo Op
More ‘Black’ humour…?
It’s on the BBC, so it must be true, right?
I like this bit:
‘You mistake the reason why journalists are asked to undertake such roles. It is precisely because we are practiced at being impartial’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/2010/06/celebrities_are_joining_the_fi.html#P97407315
I think I might have to evolve one of my list of BBCisms to ‘facilitating the narrative’.
Mr. Black is actually a main source for many, having come up with ‘watertight oversight’ for selective shutting down any reporting on an inconvenient bit of news until it either blew over or could be spun better.
Dateline London with Gavin Esler was another wholly left-liberal affair today: A couple of liberals (one from the LA Times, the other from the Times of India) and two from the Left (a far-left Portuguese writer and Yasmin Alibhai Brown – again).
The first topic was ‘cuts’. They all agreed that the government was wrong to be cutting now and competed with each other to see who could present the government – and the free market system – in the worst possible light:
Yasmin Alibhai Brown – “I hope you are right that there are going to be some increase in taxes, especially for those who have done rather well”, “a model that should actually be declared bankrupt, the global economic model that was foisted on the whole world…”, “This is an ideological position” on the part of “the Tories”, “They’ve exaggerated this”.
Eunice Goes – “an ideological commitment to cuts”, “not so much a question of necessity”, “an economic policy that has proved bankrupt”
Ashis Ray – “a little hazardous to withdraw the money that’s been there or to make savage cuts at this point of time”, “it’s more a political presentation that’s taking place rather than being based on economic facts”
Mr Ray went on to say “It is correct to say, and there’s a consensus around this table, that it may be a little risky to cut too soon and too much”. There certainly was a consensus around the table and Gavin Esler did nothing to counter it – indeed, he backed up the consensus by chipping in a few supportive comments of his own. There was no-one on the programme to defend the government’s policy.
Then they move on to Israel and Gaza (inevitably) and moaned about the blockade, and talked about the “killings on board an aid ship” (Esler). Yasmin Alibhai Brown said that the people on the flotilla “weren’t the usual suspects…they were amazingly respected, respectable people”. She approves of a boycott of Israeli goods. Eunice Goes wants Europe to threaten to withdraw Israel’s access to the European Single Market. Mr Ray thinks “it’s becoming embarrassing for India to sustain this relationship” with Israel. There was no-one on the programme to defend Israel.
Finally, and in the hand-wringing spirit of Mark Easton, there was a segment on the World Cup, and Esler posed this question: “Unusually for Britain there are a lot more English flags flying this year than 4 or 8 years ago. Is this a good thing?” (Unexpectedly, Yasmin Alibhai Brown thinks it is.)
A typical edition of Dateline.
‘a consensus around this table’
LoL. And a good addition to my ‘Aunty Knows B.. All’ compilation.
When you send out the invites to stuff the table setting, getting a consensus is, indeed, not too tricky to achieve.
Next up you get the Guardian to report it as such in their paper,and then quote that via a few degrees of separation on the main broadcast news as ‘The BBC has learned/understands..’ or ‘Global leaders oppose UK cuts’.
Dateline is the most consistently biased programme on the BBC – now that takes some doing !
There may be some point in having a bunch of London-based foreign journos having a chat – but why is the wretched Alibhai-Brown there ?
Gavin Esler seems to have lost all sense of impartiality. He has jumped the shark, is more bien-pensant liberal than his panellists.
Exactly. Many editions completely exclude right-of-centre opinion. Others feature one right-of-centre guest (usually Janet Daley). Very rarely are there two right-of-centre guests on a single programme (on just 3 editions between June 09-May 10). The table is nearly always set so that the liberal-left has a large majority and that’s not even considering Gavin Esler, who almost always sides with the liberal-left in his questions and comments.
Among the representatives of the British press, the pool of left-of-centre journalists drawn from is significantly larger than the right-of-centre pool – and, for the latter, it really is usually Janet Daley. Of the 15 invites handed out to right-of-centre UK journalists between June 09 and May 10 she received 8 invites, more than all the rest added together.
Here are the number of appearances for the representatives of the British press on the programme between those dates:
Janet Daley (R) – 8
Yasmin Alibhai Brown (L) – 6
Polly Toynbee (L) – 5
Isobel Hilton (L) – 4
Steve Richards (L) – 3
Ann Leslie (R) – 3
Ned Temko (L) – 3
Adam Raphael (L) -3
Sir Michael White (L) – 3
Johann Hari (L) – 2
Bruce Anderson (R) – 2
David Aaronovitch (L) – 2
Peter Oborne (R) – 1
Michael Gove (R) – 1
Another of your superb analyses, Craig. Utter bias in the guest-lists for anyone with eyes to see.
“There was no-one om to defend Israel”
From the BBC perspective Israels actions were indefensible, there is no middle ground and no shades of grey with the BBC. This prejudice is self reinforced with the exclusion of anyone who would wish to defend Israel with friends of the BBC narrative pitched questions designed to reinforce their view, enemies of the narrative will be isolated by pitching questions that appear to isolate that guest and give the appearance of a minority opinion.
The BBC are experts at denial of right of reply, they adhere to an absolute minimum to give the appearance of impartiality only and as they are to all inttents and purposes its own moral arbitor they can and do get away with it.
The ‘we are the consensus and we represent that consensus’ attitude is clear.
The producers are experts in framing the narrative and then supplying the framework to reinforce that narrative, Israels actions cannot be defended in their minds so they build a programme with guest who will give that view the appearance of solidity.
If the BBC were impartial they would have allowed someone like Melanie Phillips to appear but that would interfere with and pollute the narrative of universal consensus, BTW the BBC do this with regard to climate change with guests strictly vetted beforehand so no possible polllution of that narrative can occur.
Each show is crafted by propaganda experts with great care and foresight down to the questions asked that conform to a news timeline and matched to each guest perfectly.
You have to hand it to these scum sucking pigs they know their business!
Spot on Cassie.
I would love to see Melanie Phillips take on the odious Abdel Bari Atwan. Atwan is one of Dateline‘s regulars, despite being known for such remarks as these:
On 9/11: “The events of 11 September will be remembered as the end of the US empire. This is because all empires collapse when they pursue the arrogance of power.”
On Saddam Hussein: “(He) will go to the gallows with his head held high, because he built a strong united Iraq without sectarianism.”
On Israel: “If the Iranian missiles strike Israel, by Allah, I will go to Trafalgar Square and dance with delight.”
He described a massacre of Israeli students in 2008 as
“justified”.
That’a all from Wikipedia – so all this will be known to the BBC!!
Also, in the wake of the bloody crackdown on opposition supportes in Iran last year he said (on Dateline itself) “I admire the Iranian authorities”, blaming the trouble there on US sanctions.
All this and yet Abdel Bari Atwan appeared more than any other guest on Dateline from June 09 to May 10 – appearing on 12 editions of the programme.
The BBC have no ‘moral compass’ when it comes to Israel. It’s IDS again. Only people suffering from severe IDS would think it acceptable to invite this vile man onto the airwaves more than anyone else.
Yes, the BBC seem to have a penchant for rabid nutters like Ole Swivel-Eyes.
The BBC don’t have a moral compass. Their view is Jews are bad and should all be killed. I wonder how many beeboids would have happily worked as concentration camp guards. Most I suspect.
But surely no one takes Yasmin Alibhai Brown seriously, do they. She is off her trolly, probably related to Dianne Abbot.
That’s an insult to poor Diane Abbott
She’s a Muslim, so being barking mad is normal. Luckily she doesn’t own a gun.
I have just read a “DIARY”, supposed to be Mark Maddell’s whitterings, in the latest print edition of “The Spectator”. I’m not quite sure how to take it? It is just so absolutely OTT re ObamaMan that even a B-bbcmong could never have seriously written it for public consumption. Has the Speccy now started posting “satiric/sarky” diaries of the great & the good a la Craig Brownn? I could not see any sub claim to authorship, so just what the heck is going on?
Venezuela asks Interpol to arrest openly critical TV station’s owner
The BBC version;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/latin_america/10355929.stm
The CNN version;
http://us.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/06/18/venezuela.interpol.warrant/index.html?hpt=Sbin
In the BBC version no discription of the alledged criem. Also no mention that human rights groups have criticized the legal action against Zuloaga and other Chavez critics.
The BBC and their love for left wing dictators.
Breaking News:
BBC almost criticises South Africa’s Zuma:
“Aid agencies and economists have long argued that defence spending in Africa runs directly counter to development.
The ANC’s decision to spend $4.6bn (£3.3bn) on an arms buying programme in the mid-90s caused a political storm, not least as it led to bribery charges against now-President Zuma, which were later dropped.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10352001.stm
More forthrightly, and correctly linked to spendthrift donor countries like Britain, Melanie Phillips has this today:
“Why, with public spending cuts, is MORE being lavished on foreign aid which perpetuates war, tyranny and mass murder”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1287838/Why-public-spending-cuts-MORE-lavished-foreign-aid-perpetuates-war-tyranny-mass-murder.html#ixzz0rLDnsB4E
South Africa under the ANC regime is a prime example of misspending on unnecessary military equipment.
SA’s neighbours have neither the will nor the capacity to mount any meaningful threat and yet the ANC insisted on buying expensive fighter jets.
Perhaps they didn’t want to seem to be outdone by the “apartheid regime” (cue boo hiss) which actually needed such things to fight against Soviet/Cuban/East German air forces stationed in Angola.
Another stupid article by Roger Harrabin –
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627645.300-take-the-political-heat-out-of-climate-scepticism.html
There is abundant sciewntific argument against AGW. It may not be correct – but it is out there and easy to find. Yet Harrabin pretends it is all driven by special interests – so why should he look for it and report on it.
Plus – libertarians are evil.
It is hard to rationalise that opinion piece with the reasonable expectations of any objective reporter on an aspect of science.
‘Analyst’ seems to be another BBC weasel term.
Exactly. Harrabin is not an analyst. He is a propagandist, whose costs are forced to pay for – probably a quarter of a million pounds a year counting expenses and overheads.
There’s a few of them about at the BBC!
Among the propagandist’s tricks of the trade is the ‘you can’t handle the truth’ ploy. Here Roger Harrabin insinuates that the ‘right-facing’,’libertarian’ ‘climate doubters’ are motivated by fear – being afraid to face “uncomfortable questions”.
Then he uses mockery to belittle them – “they wouldn’t accept human-made climate change if the grass under their feet caught fire.”
Next he strongly implies that they are extremists, by calling those who he doesn’t label ‘libertarians’ at the Heartland Institute’s conference “moderates”. He quotes from a few of these “moderates” but only so he can highlight their criticisms of the ‘libertarians’.
And, as you say John, he smears the motives of the Heartland Institute: “That meeting was arranged by the Heartland Institute, a think tank which has taken money from oil and tobacco firms over the years” – as if the Global Warming scientists haven’t received VAST amounts of government money over the years (which, of course, he doesn’t mention), and as if he himself isn’t paid a huge salary.
The only link he provides is to a New Scientist special edition called ‘State of Denial’. He’s even got a silly neologism to describe the point of view he dislike – ‘denialism’.
BBC and electric cars, again.
BBC licencepayers are currently paying for the BBC’s latest piece of expensive non-eco self indulgence (on Radio 4, starting today and for the next month, around Europe):
“Electric ride”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/features/electric-ride/map/
Coincidentally, the ‘Daily Mail’ has this:
“Electric cars – it gets worse”
http://hanlonblog.dailymail.co.uk/
The Electric Car Guy is taking a 4000 mile trip. Most people can cover 300 miles a day easy on a long journey across Europe – I have often done much more. The journey should not take more than 10 days or so.
But the Electric Car Guy is taking 30 days. Accompanied by another car with 3 or 4 BBC staff.
How much is this little jolly costing us ? And at the end, I bet he says it was all a great strain for him, but conducted for the good of us all.
Here’s a classic example of just how pathetically biased the BBC is in favor of the President of the US.
BP CEO Tony Hayward criticized for yacht trip
BP CEO Tony Hayward has faced fresh criticism for taking time off to go boating with his son instead of dealing with the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
The White House said the move was one of a “long line of PR gaffes and mistakes” by Mr Hayward.
A PR gaffe, eh? Well, fortunately for the White House, they have the BBC do hide any potential PR problems from the British public. Problems like this, which the BBC failed to mention anywhere:
Obama hits golf course with Biden on another hot, humid weekend
President Barack Obama hit the golf course Saturday with Vice President Joe Biden.
The White House pool report noted that Obama left at about 1 p.m. for the course at Andrews Air Force base, and his golfing parters included White House Trip Director Marvin Nicholson and David Katz, the energy efficiency campaign manager at the Department of Energy.
The BBC is hiding this from you. And they do know about it, as Drudge has this at the top of the page:
BP CEO GOES SAILING
OBAMA GOES GOLFING
But not the official national broadcaster of the UK. Your license fee once again hard at work, keeping the truth hidden from you to protect the leader of a foreign country.
It is AMAZING that the BBC is headlining Rahm Emanuel’s criticism of the BP CEO while failing to draw attention to the endless non-work activities Obama has indulged in since the oil spill started. Golf, fundraising for other politicians, parties, more golf, vacations, basketball, and yet more golf.
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/06/16/new-rnc-ad-how-many-rounds-did-you-golf-while-the-oil-was-leaking-champ/
Maybe the most extreme example of sucking up by the BBC to Obama ever ?
BP carries much – but not all – repasonsibility for the spill itself. But dealing with the effects – trying to stop oil getting ashore – is clearly shared between BP and Obama. Obama’s administration has failed to focus properly, has failed to mobilise all possible resources, and has even prevented some of the remedial actions.
Spot on, Barry has played more rounds of golf in his 18 months in power than Bush did in 8 years. but don’t expect to see fat twat Michael Moore poiting it out in a crap film soon.
Like I said, your license fee hard at work. They have literally hidden an entire side to the story from you.
‘Telegraph’ –
[Opening extract]:
“Lord Mandelson may have lost power, but he appears to retain a remarkable degree of control over the BBC. ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/7840775/Lord-Mandelson-given-veto-over-his-friends-BBC-film.html
‘nuance the final version as much as possible’
LoL. No wonder Aunty empathised.
That must be a poster in all BBC edit suites.
Has anyone else noticed the total re-writing of history by the BBC about that awful Froggie twat de Gaulle? Sorry but this arsehole was about as helpful to the allies as a dose of piles after a hot curry.
He tried to screw up the D-day invasion, at times Churchill would have put a bullet in him and the Americans trusted him even less.
Most of France either co-operated with the Germans or happily lived with the German invasion. For every so called ‘freedom fighter’ thousands worked with the Germans.
The Frogs still haven’t forgiven us for sinking their navy after it refused to join up and fight with us and wanted to work with the Germans. I noted the BBC have done the same over Ireland, ignoring the huge support this supposed ‘neutral’ Country gave to the Nazi’s.
The BBC must think we’re idiots.
BBC rewriting history ? Impossible ! They have always bee scrupulously accurate, fair and complete in their reports – for instance on the EEC, Ireland, Obama, Israel, climate warming, Sri Lanka, Cuba, Venezuala, South Africa ……….
The BBC analysis of everything begins and ends with the superficial and the emotional elements of any story. They don’t care about the stuff you mentioned, Martin, because to them de Gaulle’s success lies in the fact that he gave a great speech.
That sounds familiar somehow…
I can’t stop laughing at how the drugged up beeboids are sucking up to Nu Liebour. Alistair Darling (he that helped run the UK economy into the ground) is now treated like some great sage. Oh and where is the one eyed mong in all this? Still tied to a bed in a hospital ranting loudly I hear, why no reporting of this beeboids? Don’t want to admit we were run by a man more barking mad than Hitler and YOU LOT backed him?
Then the BBC have Ed Millipede and his halfwit brother all over the news telling us the Tories are wrong (just how many MP’s do you have in England now Labour?) and that they were right.
Had to laugh, on News 24 the very very very camp male beeboid presenter was talking about “Tory Cuts”. I was half expecting the queen to talk about “Labour investment” next.
Oh and why isn’t anyone asking Darling what makes him such an expert on the economy? He got us into this mess in the first sodding place. Forgot that camp beeboids did we?
I laughed at Norman Smith’s report, where the huge word ‘CUTS’ floated over leafy suburbs like some alien warship.
Not so funny was his characteristic pro-Labour spin that ministers were pressing ahead with cuts because of “their belief that not only are cuts unavoidable but better to get the pain out of the way now, well before the next election”.
That makes the government sound deeply cynical and dishonest. as if (despite all it’s ever said) it’s cutting now purely for reasons of party political advantage.
The Conservatives were pressing long before the last election for action to tackle the deficit this year or risk the consequences from the international markets. That has, so far as I know, been the only reason they have ever given for beginning the cuts in 2010.
Has any minister really said what Norman Smith reports them as believing, or has he just made it up? Is he just lying for Labour?
(Incidentally, Smith’s piece ended with the words “Tory cuts”.)
The BBC seem to forget that outside of Scotland and the shitholes in the north of England Liebour have been wiped out. There’s a reason for that, those of us that don’t suckle off the teat of the public sector are fed up paying for millions of useless wasters sponging off us. I want the public sector decimiated, I want the Guardian put out of business when the Government no longer offers any jobs on 50k a year for 5 a day gay condon co-ordinators.
Don’t forget London. Too many Labour luvvies and bigoted voters in London kept the Tories from getting a majority.
True David, but a lot of that is because of the rigged voting system, in particular the postal voting scam and the fact that Liebour have smaller areas. The Tories will fix that and Liebour should lose at least another 20 seats or more.
We could see Liebour almost wiped out in England, that would be fantastic news.
BBC News Channel doing yet another segment on BP’s Tony Hayward going to some yachting event. They replayed Rahm Emanuel’s criticical remarks, and now yet another BBC Washington correpsondent (how many do they need to repeat White House talking points?) telling us it’s a disaster and everyone wants him to go.
Still no mention whatsoever that The Obamessiah went golfing at the same time, and has done absolutely nothing to improve the clean-up. The BBC still hasn’t said one single word about the anger that the President has been inept in organizing the cleanup.
Your license fee hard at work, carrying water for the leader of a foreign country.
Also no mention of Barry taking BP oil money and that many Democrarts take lots of oil money.
But the Democrats’ attacks on Republicans gloss over a more complicated picture. The largest beneficiary of campaign donations from BP in the 2008 election cycle, for instance, was President Barack Obama, who took in $77,000 from company executives and its political action committee. This year, Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Blanche L. Lincoln, D-Ark., leads all candidates with $286,000 in donations from oil and gas companies.
And while Democrats have pounced on Mr. Barton for accusing Mr. Obama of conducting a “shakedown” by demanding that BP set up a $20 billion fund for oil spill claims, a number of Democratic lawmakers — especially those from oil-producing gulf states — have struggled to balance their criticism of BP with support for the industry.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10170/1066770-84.stm?cmpid=nationworld.xml
If there’s a beeboid not in South Africa at our expense or out screwing rent boys on Hampstead Heath any chance one of you could put you Cocaine down long enough to point this ‘double standard’ out for once?
Beebers having fun at the World Cup
“Two BBC staff suffered a terrifying mugging at gunpoint at the World Cup.
The Radio 5 Live breakfast show crew feared for their lives as recording equipment and personal items were taken. The duo, who were followed and cornered by at least two gunmen, handed over belongings and escaped injury, but were “shaken and in tears”.
Tuesday’s robbery took place in South Africa’s largest city, Johannesburg.
A Beeb source said: “It was incredibly traumatic. They feared for their lives.”
In a separate incident, breakfast presenter Nicky Campbell had his wallet stolen in South Africa yesterday.”
Will the perpetrators be appearing on Crimewatch?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/06/17/bbc-crew-hit-by-gun-terror-115875-22339168/
Funny that as the BBC hold me t gunpoint every month for my licence fee. Now the beeboids know how it feels.
I’m not even sure why Radio 5 are out there, and I thought it was England that qualified not Scotland or Ireland? Every single voice I’ve heard commenting on the World Cup has been a Celt. Pat Nevin, Colin Murray, Colin Patterson, Nicki Campbell, Stephen Nolan, Alan Green just to mention a few that come to mind.
Anyway surely the ‘blecks’ are simply taking back from their white slave masters what is rightfully theirs? Shouldn’t the beeboids be overjoyed at some wealth redistribution?
Indeed. The poverty in South Africa which we all know inevitably leads to crime is the direct result of racism and oppression from whites, so the Beeboids really need to understand the context and accept their fate.
I’m sure they were thrilled by the sheer vibrancy of the situation.
Heh..yes, it’s such a happening sort of place isn’t it, “the rainbow nation” and all the rest of the cliched rubbish spouted ad nauseam by Beeboids for the indoctrination of the masses. I was mugged a few years ago and heaven knows it was terrifying even without guns (and I wasn’t injured and they didn’t get a penny (Hah!) even though I happened to be carrying a large-ish four-figure sum in cash.) and I wouldn’t wish that on anyone, even a Beeboid, but I cannot help but feel that there is a certain irony about this particular situation.
According to Easton gun and knife crime is on the decline
I see that the BBC body-count Narrative is an editorial policy that is not applied to reporting on the Turkey-Kurdish conflict.
In this latest report on Turkey’s threat to “annihilate” the PKK, the BBC reports deaths this way:
On Friday the Turkish military said it had killed about 120 Kurdish rebels since March, while 43 members of the Turkish security forces had also died.
Funny how, the BBC goes to Turkey as a source, with no corresponding Kurdish casualty figures, whereas when reporting on Israel and Gaza, Hamas figures get pride of place. More importantly, notice the clear labels of “rebels” and “security forces”. Unlike all BBC reports on Israel and Gaza, the BBC doesn’t try to hide PKK fighters under the aegis of “Kurds”. When reporting on Gaza, the BBC always combines Hamas fighters with civilians into one innocent number, while always separating Israeli soldiers from civilians in the body count.
Yet, there have been Kurdish civilian deaths in this conflict, including a teenage girl killed by a Turkish air raid last week. If it had been a Palestinian girl killed by Israel, the BBC would have devoted an entire segment to it. The Beeboids get the AP and Reuters wire feeds, so they know about it.
The evidence couldn’t be clearer: the BBC uses a special editorial policy when reporting on Israel and Palestianians, which it does not use when reporting on other conflicts.
Why does the BBC feel the need to ‘educate us’ at every World Cup programme about South African history?
Indeed Martin I have noticed that just about every day the Radio 4 PM show has to have a segment where some England fans go on a “journey” and discover something nasty done by white folks. Its now going a little beyond tedious. What is funny though are the interviews with the fans afterwards who sound just like children after a school trip desperately trying to sound interested !
YES! Last night I texted that to my bro on holiday in Turkland. It’s SURREAL.
During the actual Brazil MATCH, the tedious commentator PEARCE droned on and effing on about the poverty in SA. I almost kicked in the screen.
Then in the brief after game analysis, get this for a segue from Lineaker…
I paraphrase… ” Of course 1966 was most famous in England for the only time we won the world cup, meanwhile back in the township of Shittholebafwana, it was a very differnt story…” CUT TO frigging mini-movie about the whole history of apartheid
There was a bit the other night with Alan Sherear going to some other SA shithole…
(they have so many. This I know because the BBC is doing a documentary on every one)
… which was actually unintentionally hilarious.
I’ve never seen a guy look so uncomfortable, as if he would rather have a root canal without anaesthetic.
Red faced, stiff as a board, sweating, and looking out for snipers, Al asked the first chap whose tin hut he visited how the world cup was “helping him.”
Unfortunately for Al (but fortunateky for us) he picked on the black Victor Meldrew… he had to be the most hilariously miserable git in SA. Hated the world cup. Did nothing for him, moan moan moan, etc.
Thats the thing about these holier than thou humourless po faced wankers isnt it?
There is always a political message for us proles to learn, of course the message is always one close to the hearts of the BBC, wouldnt want the dumb drones to be thinking for themselves and deciding that the rainbow nation cannot blame the evil white man for their own fuck ups forever.
Africa has to blame everyone else for the absolute cess pit it has become and the BBC simply has to blame the evil white man because admitting the fact that the anti imperialist/colonial political struggle/agitation of the post war period was almost the sole reason for the millions of deaths, the civil wars,the poverty and misery that plagues Africa still. You will never see a BBC report on the tragedy of the leftist agitation to grant self rule to Africans barely out of the stone age and then let the USSR supply them with modern weapons. But as one f*cking leftist prick once said and I quote “better bad self government than good colonial government” well the bastards got their wish and it cost the west hundreds of billions of pounds and it cost Africa millions of dead,utter poverty and misery on an industrial scale.
The BBC will never tell us the truth about the post war history of Africa because if they did their whole rickety smug self justifying bullshit would fall apart.
What a bunch of hypocrites. The BBC spent £1 million on a studio for their World Cup coverage, not to mention the millions spent on expensive hotels and meals and everything else. So a couple of Beeboids could go out to the slums and wind up the poor people for a story, and that gives the Beeboids their feel-good credibility for the day.
How many World Cup tickets for poor black children would that money have bought?
Your license fee hard at work, pampering Beeboids and insulting your intelligence.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/janetdaley/100044210/has-the-bbc-noticed-the-change-in-government/
However, for BALANCE (at least in £ terms), they didn’t get in a bidding war for some bird to whitter on a sofa.
So all is well.
Another misleading BBC article on Israel
Ultra-Orthodox Jews in mass protest over school ruling
Already in the leading paragraph:
Ultra-Orthodox Jews have staged one of the biggest protests seen in Israel, to demand their children be educated separately from other Israelis.
120,000 is a ‘big’ demonstration but one of the biggest?
The children in question are already educated in separate but tax funded schools with a curriculum totally different to the standard Israeli curriculum. The protest was about the right of one group of ultra-Orthodox to discriminate against another group of ultra-Orthodox on essentially ethnic grounds.
The protesters resent state interference in their religious affairs (photo caption. That doesn’t stop them accepting , indeed demanding state funding for their schools.
The protests were triggered by a court ruling sentencing some 80 Ashkenazi parents to jail.One Sephardi ultra-Orthodox parent took his case to the High Court which led to a court injunction to demand integration in the classrooms in one school. If anything the demonstration was about one group of Israelis refusing to accept the authority of the Israeli court system.