As the weekend beckons, I reckon we will need one of these! Hope you can tune in to Sunday Morning Live on BBC1 and you will see if I can counter BBC pro-Jihad apologia…I will certainly try.
OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir Nov 17, 21:25
Start the Week 18th November 2024
From Japan, of all places, we have to rely on a foreign news service 6000 miles away to tell the… - Lucy Pevensey Nov 17, 21:21
Weekend 16th November 2024
Reform is over. A shame, they had/have some good men but Farage is pissing it away. “”If we politically alienate… - Zephir Nov 17, 21:05
Start the Week 18th November 2024
I made my wife’s dream come true and we were married in a castle. But you wouldn’t have known it… - MarkyMark Nov 17, 21:01
Weekend 16th November 2024
One last sniff [img]https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/ace/standard/1024/cpsprodpb/fbc0/live/f5c59e40-a515-11ef-8ab9-9192db313061.jpg[/img] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cjdl98dk40gt - MarkyMark Nov 17, 20:59
Weekend 16th November 2024
“Harrods has launched a pop-up charity shop in support of children’s charity the NSPCC. Fashion Re-told opened on Friday (13… - non-licence payer Nov 17, 20:46
Weekend 16th November 2024
Just a thought on Al Fayed’s sexual disposition. Harrods are currently looking at the issues from a corporate perspective. That… - atlas_shrugged Nov 17, 20:35
Weekend 16th November 2024
Importing into the UK: Mass murderers Child nail-bombers Drug smugglers Single mothers Hate preachers Jew haters Rapists Anyone might be… - Up2snuff Nov 17, 20:34
Weekend 16th November 2024
Pug, the PM is the First Lord of Treasury so the 30 October 2024 was really TwoTier Keir’s Budget. Rachel… - non-licence payer Nov 17, 20:34
Weekend 16th November 2024
Z thanks for posting that exert. It was an important clash between left and right but given no air by… - MarkyMark Nov 17, 20:21
Weekend 16th November 2024
If we use Net Zero bombs will it reduce out carbon emissions?
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
by hook or by crook…2
just found out that when we go digital our relay station wont be ready,what a waste of time the beeb is….but as i have sky it doesn’t matter,I know i’m paying twice for the beeb but will continue to email Mr Hunt moaning about the beeb…
Anyone hear Rachel Burden on 5 Live Breakfast this morning interviewing the Chief Executive of Birmingham University hospital about PFI? Despite the CEO stating on numerous occasions that they had cut waste in other areas in order to budget for the PFI payments over the next 35 years without affecting patient care, Rachel kept pushing for the “what if the nasty Tories cut your budget” story that wasn’t there. “Could the CEO be 100% certain patients wouldn’t be affected?” was something “she had to know”. It was a pathetic non story – you could hear the desperation and disappointment in her voice when the CEO (a former nurse) stated that PFI would ensure well maintained buildings as opposed to gradually decaying ones if the hospital had funded the build themselves. Nothing short of a transparent and pathetic attempt at creating an NHS/nasty Tory scare story.
What about the real story – NHS PFI contracts to cost six times more than the original estimates. Sixty five billion pounds. All to avoid Gordon Brown making capital spend that would appear as national debt rather than revenue spend. That blatant manipulation of statistics has cost us £1,000 per person. Why can’t the BBC investigate that rather than pursuing the ‘all tories are bastards’ line. PFI is always more expensive as private capital costs more to borrow, PFI firms need a margin and the Govt gets screwed by forgetting to specify stuff like ” we want to be able to walk through doors” and end up paying ‘access charges…..’
Private Eye have had this in every issue for the last fifteen years, come on BBC how about a Panorama public scandal – Labour couldn’t give a sh*t about debt and found ways to hide it. We will be finding felt tip scribbled multi-billion pound invoices at the back of Gordon’s battered and foam spattered desk for decades to come.
I totally agree – Burden never mentioned this was a Brown policy. She just came at it from the point of view that this annual mortgage has to be paid therefore when the nasty Tories make cuts there will be an inevitable impact on “fromt-line services”. No mention that Gordon has built up a huge off balance-sheet debt that we’ll be paying for years to come. All about cuts, cuts cuts! Nasty evil Tories!!
Also don’t forget that, while Chancellor, Mr. Brown was able to rewrite the budget rules and shift PFI expenditure off the official budget so it doesn’t count when they quote figures about debt and spending.
The vile Burden also had a total strop on this morning about a survey that shows most people think men make a better boss than a woman, this of course angered the vile Burden, after all women are saints and men eat babies, so it’s ‘we’ the public who are wrong and SHE is right.
She also has the most awful voice for radio.
They’re interviewing some LibDem doctor about it on the News Channel right now. He’s saying the whole thing is a crap idea, there’s no evidence to the contrary, and even mentioned that it’s also bad to keep PFI expenditure off the official books. Female Beeboid continues to read from the Labour script, but the doctor easily smacks down all the bogus challenges. “But buildings will be maintained under the PFI scheme whereas all private institutions let things decay.” Uh-huh.
After three failed questions from the prepared script, she gave up. “Well, we’ll have to leave it there.”
Another big dose of propaganda on the Today programme, interview with an anthropologist who is off to live with some Innuit – are they under dire risk of losing their nomadic hunter-gather lifestyle through global warming – all within 20 years, apparently. A total non- story – except for the global warming angle. Ceri Thomas pushing his usual bloody nonsense ?
Meanwhile Richard Black’s “error correction” on the rice yields story looks a sham – if it is only the rate of growth that might be affected, he has no cause to carry on with the headline suggesting rice output will fall.
And apparently, suddenly, the ice is thinning and disappearing. I seem to remember, very recently, reading the opposite on a well-respected scientific website…
Mr rent seeking ‘scientist’ fellah needs some grant moola to swan off like a Livingston Mk2 HOWEVER Mr ‘scientist’ knows full well that he has zero chance of getting his hands on any folding UNLESS he tags on some sh*t about global warming, it matters not is the link is weak, it matters that AGW is mentioned and then hey presto just like magic the money fairy sprinkles cashola from her shiny ass.
The central control of research grants and the utterly jealous nature of the guardians of the funding stream means all scientists have to toe the party line or get no funding, the monkeys dance to the organ grinders tune or else.
The Inuit are suffering from a lack of interest by their young who wish to travel and be educated and get good jobs, they dont wish to live out in the freezing arsehole of nowhere eating raw blubber washed down with Aboriginal quantities of white mans fire water.
In reality the histories of the Inuit are many and detailed and there is little point in going there to record stuff that is already available, but todays ‘scientists smell grant money and jump around for scraps like the good little doggies they are.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC) excludes anyone from the vast non-Muslim majority of British people from criticising this Islamic, apartheid behaviour which INBBC propagates:
“Halal holidays in the sun”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/fast_track/8901976.stm
Good catch – propaganda for Islam on the license fee.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100050412/the-stunning-decline-of-barack-obama-10-key-reasons-why-the-obama-presidency-is-in-meltdown/
It’s been flagged before, but boy is this worth a read. I’m sure Mr Gardiner’s phone is red hot with all the BBC producers trying to book him to talk more.
Good stuff. I’ve been saying this since October 2008 š
In this news item http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-10882522 about the 65B PFI debt it says:
‘But the government said the 103 schemes were providing value for money.’
I can only find NAO statement about PFI deals during the credit crunch. But no single statement abot being good.
PA who used the bBC story curiosly did not contain the above line; but ‘The 103 schemes were valued at a total of £11.3bn when they were built’. So what gov dept said PFI was value for money or has there been mis reporting about the PFI deals setup by labour?
Radio 5 did a piece on the proposed defence review and possible cuts. Short sound bite from Fox followed by THREE anti Tory voices, one from the Unions, Bob the Knob Ainsworth and some other bloke I’ve never heard of.
Not once did John Inverdale bring Ainsworth to book about the shit way the forces were treated underLiebour, the HUGE black hole that has built up in the MOD budget under them and the wasteful spending on kit that doesn’t work.
Either Inverdale (I’m sure normally he’s a sports knob) didn’t do any research or he simply peddled the normal BBC soft on Liebour approach.
Did anyone see the item on Newsnight last night about the Govt trying to reduce the country’s social security benefits costs? In between the obligatory repeated excerpts of Peter Lilley making his “Lord High Executioner’s Song” speech from a Conservative Party Conference 18 years ago, they quickly got on to an equally pressing problem facing the nation; the fact that not all available benefits are claimed, and asking what can be done to help those people are who are not aware of the benefits they are entitled to (the fact that some people may choose not to claim benefits they might be entitled to was overlooked, although you may have taken that as read). I can only expect that next week they will be focussing on what can be done to help people organise their affairs to reduce the amount of tax they are paying.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC), and its propaganda for RAMADAN.
INBBC is barely in full swing on this, and already there is this INBBC page:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/search/ramadan
In contrast, the laudable ‘JIHADWATCH’ has an article doing what INBBC would never contemplate: criticising BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA on ramadan:
Spencer: Obama’s Ramadan Delusions
I like how this BBC business summary of how various economies show that certain European countries were actually improving, while the US is going further and further down the toilet. Notice how the exact policies – spending insane amounts versus austerity – which brought us to this point are kind of swept aside. Lumping in a successful Germany with a floundering Spain and Greece allows the BBC to avoid talking about Germany’s successful policies and instead focus on Europe as a whole, which makes it appear less favorable.
The Obamessiah’s difficulties are not His fault, of course. It’s the Fed who has an obstacle now, not Him. He’s not involved when there’s trouble. The “stimulus has come and gone”, but no mention that it was a bust in the first place. For all you know, He needs to do more of it rather than stop. Also, the BBC is dishonest (again) about the $26 billion in state aid. It went to bail out union pensions and is not stimulus.
Funny how it was only recently that the BBC was telling us that Europe and David Cameron were wrong about what to do with the economy, and we should really be listening to The Obamessiah and Labour. Well, who is in the sh!t and who isn’t now, BBC? Any idea why that might be? Any astute business or economic analysts who will dare say that The Obamessiah and Labour made the wrong choice this time?
Orla Guerin had an egregious bit of Islam promotion in the latest report about the situation in Pakistan. After a theme and variations section about how large the country is and how difficult it is to get help where needed, Guerin said she ran into a few people who hadn’t eaten or slept in three days.
Then she said this was a real problem because it’s now Ramadan, and it’s Islamic law that they must break their fast at sundown.
Awesome priorities there, BBC.
If people are that stupid, they deserve to die, I see that the media are bleating again that we’re not giving aid to Pakistan, well tha’ts because unlike the people of Haiti the people of Pakistan like to denounce the west and train terrorists. So go to hell.
I’m pretty sure it’s only Orla Guerin and her producer who are that stupid.
Are all the rich Arab oil states not gining all the money required?
Whenever the begging for British infidel cash comes on the screen I am instantly reminded of the massed Pakistanis rage mobs burning the Union jack flag and calling for the death of British people, kill the infidels screeched the poster, death to the unbelievers and islam will dominate the world screamed the rage mobs.
I think most right minded British people wouldnt dream of giving a penny to people who so obviously hate us.
Yes you don’t see the bushy bearded twats that protest at the homecomings of our troops raising money for their fellow Muzzie’s do you? Stuff them.
Not for INBBC:
Rich Arab Muslims and Ramadan in London:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/motors/3093501/Playboy-Arabs-turn-London-into-50m-supercar-capital.html#ixzz0wU1jR5zG
Spot the missing word in this BBC News Online report about the WikiLeaks issue.
Intelligence experts weigh the impacts of Afghan WikiLeaks revelations
Despite the headline, the real goal of this article is to shift the focus of the story from any negative effects to blaming George Bush for creating the intelligence-sharing environment which somehow made this “inevitable”.
However, the missing word isn’t “Bush”, because even though they don’t call him out by name, the BBC News Online sub-editor is very clear more than once about making the case that all this intelligence sharing started after 9/11, which was of course when Bush was in charge.
Today’s missing word is the same one missing from all other BBC reports about this WikiLeaks story: “hacked”.
Emily Maitlis got in a gratuitous “nasty party” slur last night on Newsnight in an item about controlling State benefits waste when she referred to the Conservatives’ policy on this in 1982, when, she said, they were known as the nasty party, and added for good measure words to the effect that they hadn’t changed much since then.
Who is being nasty there, Emily?
The BBC always seem to manage to dig up some old film of those ‘evil Tories’ from 30 years ago, funny they never run tapes showing fat boy Healey begging for money off the IMF. When was the last time the BBC ran anti Union films like the winter of discontent?
It almost makes you think the BBC may be biased.
On Monday 16th August – 8:30pm BBC1, Panorama has a programme called “Death in the Med” about the Marvi Marmama incident in which a number of Turkish activists died. It is to be presented by Jane Corbin and Panorama claims to have exclusive new video footage and interviews with Israeli soldiers and activists involved.
I’m sure it will live up to the usual BBC standards of neutrality (not).
Oh, goodie. Another opportunity to have that painted clown O’Keefe on to promote his cause and sell his book.
Jane Corbin. She’s done some good stuff. I would hold out hope it wont be produced by the Orla Goering and Jihad Al Bowen production team. Let’s see …
Jane Corbin? The Cookery expert? I sincerely hope she has done some good stuff, because when I see her miserable visage with its remarkable resemblance to Clare Short’s, I also get a heart-sinking flashback to this.
On the BBC News they are bleating on about the tragedy of scrapping the Audit Commission and when they do this piece they play a bit of spliced together library footage of our valued public servants emptying dustbins and putting books on shelves and whatnot with a big headline of AUDIT COMMISSION over the top. But wait a minute the Audit Commission don’t empty bins and work in libraries so this background footage is there just as a reminder of cuts to public services, like the way that we the Tories have stopped rubbish collection and closed libraries. What this really shows is that in the eyes of the BBC all public sector jobs are created equal – binmen, teachers, bureacrats, millionaire executives – so any cuts whatsoever you have to show this footage of binmen and the rest. But I’m going to go out on a limb here and defend the BBC for this decision because I defy anyone to find any footage whatsoever of people doing work in the Audit Commission.
The BBC made me aware of this disaster all afternoon. I was under the impression that there was no no one left to hold the government accountable. Further, if there was anyone ever again hired to check into government accounts, hiring a private firm would cost far more than this Audit Commission did, and so was a disaster as a cost-cutting measure as well. Imagine that.
Funny š
What is the National Audit Office for anyway? It wouldn’t be auditing the government books would it?
I don’t know if they are allowed into the BBC, mind. Mr Thompson wouldn’t like it.
Yesterday’s online article about the scrapping of the Audit Commission has been re-written to ratchet-up the attack on Eric Pickles.
Yesterday Mr Pickles was given a decent amount of space but his views were outweighed by those of the Audit Commission’s Michael O’Higgins and an anonymous ‘source’, and significant space was also given to Labour’s John Denham and Clive Betts.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-10970008
Still. at least the criticism by John Denham then included this:
He added: “I had warned The Audit Commission against excessive wage increases and their fate seemed to be sealed when they ignored this but the commission needed reform – not abolition.”
The new version puts Mr O’Higgins first, cuts Mr Pickles even more down to size, while leaving in the ‘source’ and the two Labour MPs.
Because it wouldn’t do to concede any ground here, the BBC cuts out John Denham’s criticism of the Commission’s excessive wages, leaving just his attack.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-10973323
For a different take on the story, try the Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7944639/Audit-Commission-scrapped-as-austerity-drive-intensifies.html
This tells us something the BBC’s version forgets to tell us:
Earlier this year it emerged the body, which is supposed to the politically neutral, paid nearly £60,000 to lobbyists who advised it to “combat the activities of Eric Pickles”, then the Tory party chairman.
Funny how the sidebar with Laura K’s comment ahd the words ‘independent watchdog’ but a wee while later when the Labour boys started saying it was a political fix becuase there were many Labour boys enjoying days at the races on our money…it had now disapperared! Funny that. So the BBC agrees that the Commission is NOT independent then. No update of the fact that Ken Livingston has supported Eric Pickles in this decision!
Good catch. Laura K is very sharp but also very biased. And can’t keep still in front of the camera.
Here’s a story yet to be caught by BBC radar. ‘Audacity of Hope’ vs. state of Israel: The battle begins
The gist of the story is that a bunch of people with Obama connections are equipping a ship to break the Gaza blockade. Are any of these names familiar? Columbia Professor Rashid Khalidi, Weather Underground terrorist organization founders, Naomi Esther Jaffe, William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, CODEPINK leader Jodie Evans? In case the Obama connection may not be clear the ship is to be named Audacity of Hope, the title of Obama’s bestseller.
Don’t worry, the BBC will expose this as soon as they find out about it.
BBC ‘Today’ (with Scot, Naughtie) excludes ENGLAND from 2-hour show.
BBC ‘Today’, politically guided by Scot, Naughtie, in a LABOUR direction, includes as the only politician on the programme, Labour’s Mr. Darling.
Naughtie and ‘Today’ also decides that Edinburgh, and the annual Edinburgh festival in particular, is the most important news item of the day, and so there is no reference to ENGLAND in the entire programme.
There is reference to Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and to Sierra Leone, but no reference to England, except to say that Premier League starts to day.
It is as though England, where the vast majority of British people live, does not exist; and it’s as though the Scots don’t already have their own Scotland-centric BBC Scotland programmes on Edinburgh, paid out of the licence fee.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8913000/8913837.stm
Edinburgh is always the most important news item, George. What’s your problem? š
Quite !
As an Englishman, I’d just like to add my ‘quite’ as well. The Edinburgh festival is a cultural bonanza like Glastonbury. It should be celebrated. Och aye the noo to that old boy, the utterly appalling Naughtie notwithstanding!
Actually, Hippie, I would move it to Glasgow. All that unwashed riff-raff clogging up our streets. I would move Glastonbury to Glasgow as well.
And then move Glasgow to Rockall.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC) is no doubt pleased to support Barack Hussein Obama’s pro-Islam stance:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10973459
Although INBBC briefly says that the building of mega-mosque at Ground Zero is ‘controversial’, INBBC does not go on to give any significant space to any anti-Obama arguments on this, such as:
‘JIHADWATCH’ on Ground Zero –
http://www.jihadwatch.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/br0nc0s/managed-mt/mt-search.cgi?search=ground+zero&IncludeBlogs=1&limit=20
70% of Americans oppose the mosque – the BBC tried to give the impression it was just a few family members. BBC lies, as usual.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/12/AR2010081204996.html
Interesting light cast on the man behind the Cordoba cultural centre, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, in one of Charles Krauthammer’s links – an extract from an interview with Ed Bradley on CBS’s 60 Minutes on Sept 30, 2001, referring to 9/11:
Bradley: Are you in any way suggesting that we in the United States deserved what happened?
Feisal: I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened, but united states policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.
Bradley: You say that we’re an accessory? How?
Feisal: Because we have been accessory to a lot of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA.
That’s the sort of background information the sloppy propagandists at the BBC so often fail to provide.
Seriously, if you’d been in a coma since Sept 10th 2001 and just woken up to read that article, you’d have absolutely no idea why this project is controversial at all.
Of course He supports it. He’s also sending the imam in charge of the victory mosque on some meet-and-greet tour of the Middle East. The Obamessiah works in mysterious ways.
Sometimes we have to remember that B-BBC exists to critique the BBC’s coverage of Obama (among many other issues) and not to oppose Obama. In the same way it is the BBC’s duty to neutrally report on Obama not to be his British marketing arm.
The BBC report is interesting in itself because Obama said some interesting things in a hostile environment and the BBC ignored them. Even the BBC editing of the video is interesting. We heard the predictable cheering when Obama spoke of freedom of religion but did not hear the reaction when he directly supported the war in Afghanistan.
Given the time and place of the speech – a Muslim Iftar dinner at the White House – it’s hard to think how he could have spoken differently without offending his guests, creating a major diplomatic incident and in the process admitting his entire foreign policy had failed.
As POTUS he has absolutely no power to stop the building of the Islamic Centre and it will take some very devious legal manoeuvring for even the New York authorities to find a legal loophole. Such a trick probably wouldn’t stand in court and cost the city of New York a fortune in defending it.
I invite responses from the group. What and how could Obama have said differently, considering the time and place?
The mosque building has nothing to do with Federal government – it is a local matter. Obama’s spokesmen had previously said he was not going to comment.
Obama has chosen to jump in on this one. He COULD have taken the line of commonsense – that building the mosque near Ground Zero was open to criticism for insensitivity, that the Governor of New York State had offered to help find an alternative site – and that would be the best solution all round.
Instead, Obama chose to back the mosque, and to patronise his fellow Americans, implying they are bigoted.
His claim that 9/11 was an act of “nihilism” – not an act inspired doirectly by Ialamism – is absurd. He lays claim to being an intellectual, but he has warped reasoning – and he ends up being an offensive buffoon.
Barry should have kept his gob shut, simple as that. The twat put his foot in it last year over the cop who arrested the black guy in his own home, Barry shot his gob off without knowing the facts and we ended up with the beer in the garden stunt, something Bliar would have been proud of.
No one is saying that a Mosque can’t be built, the issue is WHY THERE? It’s clearly upsetting a lot of the families involved in 9/11, ANYONE with half an ounce of decency would respect that, but of course Muslims never do, they don’t give a shit about the feelings of the infidel, why not ask why there are no churches in Saudi Arabia? Why not ask why Muslims persecute non Muslims in every Country they dominate?
I think all religion is bollocks but this is not about religion as such but a statement from the Muslim world.
That Mosque is the Muslims marking their territory just like a dog pisses up a lamp post to mark his.
Sometimes we have to remember that B-BBC exists to critique the BBC’s coverage of Obama (among many other issues) and not to oppose Obama.
=======================
Since the BBC slavishly worships him and promotes uncritical admiration for everything he does or says, maybe they amount to the same thing. š
There must be lots of things he could have said without giving offence and without imposing grand arguments and grand rhetoric about a principle of religious freedom on a specific local instance of insensitivity or downright calculated provocative triumphalism.
He might have thought to speak for the families, for the mass of the population of the city and he might have enjoined respect for them. Surely he has a duty not to give offence to them. Offence cannot refer only to the people at the dinner. And of course he could have refrained from saying anything at all about the specific case.
I see that Obama is backing the “Ground Zero” mosque. That will be a field day for the Beeboids !
So Obama backs the islamists as they spit in the faces of the dead and injured and their relatives.
The monstrosity of a mosque is just a smirking slap in the face for the victims and I just cannot believe that it will not hurt his and his partys poll ratings at the midterms.
How bout a nice new cathedral in Riyadh?
Nah!
or a small church or chapel ANYWHERE in Saudi ?
Can I suggest a running count on this site of BBBC references to “THE HOLY MONTH OF RAMADAN” Sick of it already. Tell me, does the BBBC speak of “the Holy week of Easter” at every trumped up opportunity during that festival? Yom Kippur? No, but we do get “Holi”.
I suppose that there is BBBC “good” religious nonsense and “bad” religiuos nonsense.
Cripes, I think someone down the street is an adulterer
Good point. They don’t say “The holy season of Lent” either; they just say Lent. Same with Christmas, Advent…no holy seasoning at all. After all, Beeboids don’t like religion and wouldn’t want to be caught sounding pious, would they? Or have I missed something? A Pauline like conversion to religious belief and worship?
BBC1 News reports on a bomb in N. Ireland injurying 3 children. Not a hint or word of criticism or condemnation of the bombers. Just the message that it is time for the UK government to make with the appeasement
I see that hundreds of Israelis have been protesting for the right of illegal immigrant children to remain in Israel.
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=184747
Can you imagine a similar protest anywhere else (let alone the Islamic world)? I can’t.
So why don’t the stinking anti-semite Beeboids report this? Of course, because it undermines their mission to creating a climate of hatred against Israel. Can’t have that, now can we?
The BBC will report it when Barry Obama talks about it.
Why is the BBC madly pimping its fire’N’floods narrative I wonder?
Something is happening at the north pole…no…Santa has not been mudered in a drive by shooting by a disgruntled dwarf.
The Arctic sea ice melt season may well be coming to a grinding halt and this is most distressing for the BBC.
The NOAA pole camera recording daily images of the ice is showing melt ponds frozen over and if the melt ponds in fromnt of the camera are frozen then you can bet other melt ponds are now freezing up early.
Why is this important? Well AGW positive feedback theory dictates that open water melt ponds will accelerate the melt but this is not happening, the DMI temperature plot is showing a free fall in temperatures well before the mean average, its now freezing up at the North pole and that dear reader is why the BBC are moving into Der Sturmer hysterical mode.
The Antarctic sea ice is running way above normal and that is why the BBC have imposed a news BLACKout, the region ceases to exist in the minds of the beeboid scum.
Interesting times ahead I think, I wonder how the BBC will respond to a rebounding Arctic sea ice?
Hmm anyone seen this one on the bbeb at all ?
“NOAA 16 Satellite problems ”
“According to NOAA at least part of Lake Michigan reached that temperature, while other parts had temperatures in excess of 100°, 200°, 300° and 400° F. I saw this a couple of days ago and at first thought it was a hoax being perputrated to try and discredit skeptics, and I still had a nagging suspicion that was the case when I saw the data myself from the Michigan State University’s CoastWatch archives (CoastWatch is a co-operative effort between NOAA and MSU). Then yesterday I saw something about all the data for the NOAA-16 Satellite going bye bye!”
My guess is that the NOAA staff have been adjusting the data to show higher temps and so perpetuate the AGW fraud, the tax funded organisation is head over heels in love with the AGW theory and they pimp it at every turn.
The ground sensor network has been adjusted/tortured so much for so long it is now meaningless junk.
I see the BBC are smearing Alan Milburn over him being asked to work with David Cameron. Notice how anyone who works for Cameron is smeared by the BBC (they use any halfwit on Twitter to do it on their behalf) but when the one eyed jock mong had his ‘goats’ the BBC loved it. Gordon the man who includes anyone was the cry from the BBC.
Different story now, I don’t remember the BBC parroting any negative voices then.
The website article highlights the criticism of Milburn by Mascara Man Burnham:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-10977806
Now if true this is very interesting ..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1303097/Dragons-Den-winner-reveals-80k-promise-fact-loan–26-500-emerged.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
I wonder if the Beeb know what is happening on their own show ? Its funny because I had heard some rumours about the Dragons but not this.
There’s more. It’s a bit of a long story. I’ll write up what I know when I get a chance. Have to go and do other things right now.
OK Millie thanks I look forward to reading what you have.
The BBC hates non-Doms (Remember that Conservative Lord they were always bleating on about?) Oh, yeah.
===================================
Well, anyway, last April Duncan Bannatyne, who writes a business column for the Telegraph, raised the issue of non-doms and a whole basket of Dragons’ Den dirty linen came tumbling out.
“Duncan Bannatyne has taken issue with Pakistan-born James Caan’s non-domiciled resident tax status and it has now led the fiery Scot to issue an ultimatum to his fellow Dragons – he will not invest alongside any Dragon that does the show using offshore companies.
“I have already decided it would be difficult to invest with James as Hamilton Bradshaw [Caan’s UK private equity company] is owned by a Cayman Island company,” said Bannatyne.
Bannatyne has a company search report that reveals that HB Advisors Limited, Hamilton Bradshaw’s sole shareholder, is registered in the Cayman Islands.
“I am not going to invest alongside anyone on Dragons’ Den if the money is coming from an offshore company either directly or indirectly,” he added.
“I am not feeding the coffers of the Cayman Islands or British Virgin Islands.”
Bannatyne, worth a reported £320m, and Caan, credited with a £65m fortune, had struck up a successful partnership on the show and hold three joint Dragon investments.
But the business relationship is on the rocks. Bannatyne insists he has nothing against Caan personally, but it is clear that the two have fallen out. When they last met, Bannatyne offered his hand but he says Caan just shook his head and walked past.
“I am very angry that James did not take my hand. As far as I am concerned he has said he will not talk to me. It’s his issue,” said Bannatyne. ”
http://dailynewspaper.co.uk/
When this row kicked off, Caan angrily retorted that he wasn’t going to apologise for his country of origin, Pakistan, and besides, what about an investor who has a criminal record? To which Bannatyne’s riposte was that Caan should apologise for having pulled the race card and that he shouldn’t have personalised an issue of principle and furthermore shouldn’t have brought in Bannatyne’s criminal record even though Bannatyne has never hidden it and wrote about it in his autobiography.
(The crime relates to a time when he was young and in the Navy and apparently partly because he was dared to and partly because he wanted out, he threatened to throw an officer, possibly even his commanding officer, into the drink. He got time and a dishonourable discharge. )
Anyway, this unseemly spat was carried on through the medium of twitter, of all things, with Bannatyne keeping everyone updated about every snub, every flounce and refused handshake, while Caan attempted to draw a line under it by issuing a more sophisticated and polished PR statement.
Meanwhile a new edition of the programme was screened, with Bannatyne and Caan sitting next to each other not speaking and not looking at each other!
The best the BBC could come up with in relation to this outbreak of war was a lame statement that Dragons don’t have to get on.
” A spokesman said that the show did not rely on the panellists getting on.
“Dragons’ Den is not a team effort. It is all about entrepreneurs pitching to individual Dragons in the hope of winning backing for their ideas, and five hard-headed investors looking for the best deal,” she said. ”
[to be continued]
The BBC hates non doms Part 2
More on the non-dom tax issue at the heart of the row:
“…[Bannatyne] says he believes that UK-born entrepreneurs are at a disadvantage to non-domiciled residents who have made their fortune in Britain but can fund their lifestyles from monies held overseas that do not attract UK tax. He wants the rules changed.
Non-doms can live in the UK but have affiliations with another country where they were either born or their parents were born.
They do not pay UK income tax or capital gains on income earned or capital generated overseas, although tax does fall due if any money is brought into the UK.
The Government changed the rules on non doms in April 2008, requiring the estimated 65,000 residents here to pay a £30,000 charge if they wanted to continue to keep their overseas assets out of the UK tax net. Some 4,000 paid the charge in the first year, HMRC figures show.
Bannatyne thinks the Government did not go far enough. “They do not seem to have tightened the rules,” he said.
“Someone can come here two years-old and take advantage of our education system and health-care system, then they turn 18 and they can take their money offshore. In my opinion they are saving tax on money earned in Britain. The next Government needs much stronger rules for any new non-doms registered in the UK from the end of this year.”
He added: “I am trying to get people to understand the extent of the problem. I have mentioned it to Gordon Brown and he is aware of the situation.”
Caan declined to comment on the bust-up, but stated: “Hamilton Bradshaw is a UK- registered company, paying UK tax on all its income.”
He has previously confirmed his non-dom status.
With aspiring entrepreneurs preparing to pitch their ideas next week at the start of filming, the timing of Bannatyne’s broadside raises the question whether he wants the BBC to make last-minute changes to the Dragons.
“I have no issue who is on the show and who is not,” he said.
“It’s not my decision. I will work with anybody on the understanding that the [investing] company is a British company and it’s not owned by a company in the Cayman Islands or British Virgin Islands.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/7579134/Dragons-Den-row-erupts-as-Duncan-Bannatyne-refuses-to-invest-with-James-Caan.html What triggered the row? We don’t know exactly. Was it the £32m that I read somewhere that Bannatyne pays in tax, that rankles? Was it something that happened in the course of his business dealings with a Dragon partner investor that led him to look into the background? Or was it sparked by the Dragon in question starting a rival chain of health clubs? Questions to which I have no answers except Bannatyne’s own.
Oh, and to refute the claim in the Daily Mail that his was a loan rather than an investment, Bannatyne has now put his investment offer and contract online:
http://www.duncanbannatyne.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Heads-of-Terms-Talpa-Products-Limited.pdf
Thanks for that Millie it looks like there is a fair bit behind all of this.
I see General Petraeus is saying something different to what Gibbs and Barry O were saying a few months ago about getting out of Afghanistan. If this had been George Bush and Petraeus the BBC would have played it up as a ‘disagreement’ or ‘split’ but with Barry it’s just OK no probs.
Poor old BBC, they keep flogging the Pakistan floods story, but no one is listening.
To any thick beeboid reading, look we don’t give a toss about Muslims, in particular Pakistan, it’s a festering shit hole of haters and terrorists.
If Pakistan wants aid it can sell us it’s nukes at a £1 a nuke.
Paddy O’Connell (Broadcasting House) just can’t stop himself from defending Obama. He does in again and again.
One of his guests on the paper review today was talking about Jeff Greene, the colourful Democrat trying to get his party’s nomination for a senate seat in Florida. He read out some of the stories about him. Paddy leapt in, saying “This is a very political season. We wouldn’t know that the..the…right about that, but you’re saying…”
The guest went on to talk about Obama’s problems in getting his man selected instead of Greene, which brought this completely nonsensical response from Paddy: “And that keeps Obama going with this, this, er, in the height of the money season now”.
There was nothing in what the guest had just said to explain why Paddy said “And that keeps Obama going”.
Was this gibberish just a form of sticking your fingers in your ears and going “na,na,na,na,na,na,na…” to try and drown out something you don’t want to hear? Or of repeating to yourself over and over again something you do want to hear: “And that keeps Obama going”, “And that keeps Obama going”, “And that keeps Obama going”?
This exchange occurs 52 minutes in:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00tcz8t
Oh how pathetic can the BBC get? So Barry Obama says troops out in 18 months, yet Petraeus says something different, but to the BBC this is not a problem, but when David Cameron said something similar the BBC attacked him for it, remember this?
David Cameron has denied sending out “mixed messages” over plans to withdraw troops from Afghanistan by 2015.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-10716938
This is truly AWESOME!!
A paper due to be published by 2 serious statisticians mounts a serious critique – or demolition – of the Hockey Stick pushed by Mann, Jones and the other ClimateFate guys as the icon for all the IPCC attempts to distort the world economy.
They do not query the quality of the paleoclimatic data (tree rings) used by Mann – they state (nice barb) that it is assumed that the data is up to the proper standards of climate science. Instead, they focus solely on the statistical handling of the data – and conclude that there is no support for the tone of certainty in the flat-handle hockey stick, or for any assumption that recent temperatures are unprecedented.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/08/14/breaking-new-paper-makes-a-hockey-sticky-wicket-of-mann-et-al-99/
http://climateaudit.org/2010/08/14/mcshane-and-wyner-2010/
I bet the BBC fails to report this highly significant paper – which is peer-reviewed, by highly capable statisticians. Even though the recent whitewashes of ClimateGate also indicated that statistical prowess was lacking among the climate scientists, the Hockey Team.
If the paper is valid – the infamous Hockey Stick is finally dead in the water, this is the coup de grace.
I should say – I bet the BBC fails to report this paper properly. If it ever mentions it – it will print whatever the Hockey Team decides is the best criticism, probably completely out of context.
There seems to be a growing hysteria in academia as MMGW unwinds. My alumni paper at University of Wollongong begins a 2nd page article by Dr. Helen McGregor, Climate Change is Real, Believe Me
As a climate scientist, I am often asked if I believe in human-induced climate change.I find this a curious question: For me the science of human-induced climate change is not something one believes in but an obvious conclusion drawn from the date.
Basic to Science is the assumption that if someone gathers data under the same conditions, the results must be identical. The same conclusions may not necessarily be drawn but the figures will be the same. if the results are not identical (or at least within the level of accuracy) something is faulty with the data.
I challenge the BBC. Send a team of genuine scientists to replicate the Hockey Stick tree ring results under identical conditions. Surely that would be worse a Panorama episode?