150 Responses to OPEN THREAD

  1. Martin says:

    Radio 5 what a depressing place today. More and more I feel that the only solution for our state education system is a flame thrower introduced into staff rooms.

    Teacher after teacher coming on with their left wing rants at the female teacher who appeared at the Tory party conference.

    One moron used the word “fuck” live on air and wasn’t cut off (you just know a Tory would have been)

    The reason our state education system is a mess is down to 40 years of liberalism and crap left wing teachers.


    • Andrew Mars says:

      The inability to communicate without the use of swear words is a common trait amongst left-wing parasites. If you watch any video of a loony-left ‘anti-just-about-everything’ demonstration (especially UAF) there is always some sad pathetic moron on a megaphone effing and blinding in the middle of the day whilst women and children are passing by.


      • Dez says:

        Oh my flipperty. An uncouth fellow using foul language whilst in the presence of ladies. However would they manage to survive; what with their consumption and excessively weak ankles. I fainted several times just at the very thought.


  2. David Jones says:


    Hypocrite Gore – bBC keeps quiet.



  3. George R says:

    A non-BBC NUJ article on housing benefits reform:

    Some perspective on housing benefit



  4. Bert Rodinsky says:

    On the Toady show this morning the bloody sports commontator Rob Someprat or other was talking to a chap about the upcoming ashes cricket series.

    One question the beeboid drone asked was wheter it was appropriate for Andrew Straus to say that the series would be like a war when there is a real war going on in Aghanistan. The chap being asked the question was obviously flabbergasted at being asked such a stupid question.

    They can’t even talk about cricket without pushing the lefty agenda. Impartial? Yeah sure.


    • john says:

      “War” has been used as a  sporting metaphor in journalism well before the cack-handed BBC was formed.
      The trouble with these lefty BBC reporters is that they open themselves up for ridicule (Good).
      No mention then that the dreaded series is call the “Ashes” and the offence that might cause the decendents still living with the nightmare that is Auschwitz ?


    • Oliver says:

      They never miss an opportunity.

      Yesterday on Radio 5, Victoria Derbyshire was chatting to someone who had just been kicked off ‘The Apprentice’ – more BBC self-promotion that certainly doesn’t qualify as ‘news’, but at least it would be a break from the usual “cuts, cuts, cuts” and “we’re all doomed” etc…

      Well Vicky went to the phones and the first callers’ well-observed slice of satire went something like “When you see the quality of contestants on ‘The Apprentice’, it’s no wonder we are heading for a double-dip recession.”

      I wonder which part of the text/e-mail he sent in resulted in him getting on air? 


  5. Dr A says:

    I wonder if there is an official Beeboid manual instructing comrades how to report all Sarah Palin stories? I have noticed 2 house style requirements:   
    1. The report must start with Palin on a microphone sounding shrill and “extreme”…  
    2. There MUST be a moose-hunting or gun angle.

    Hey, without these lefty cliches, how can our 974549748 Beeboid Jocastas and Ruperts feel culturally and intellectually superior, right?  
    This morning’s report on the Today programme dutifully conformed to these “impartiality is in our DNA” dictats. There she was, predictably yelling about “Liberty” (how funny!). And there were the Palin supporters… on a moose hunt (how droll!).   
    Well it doesn’t really matter. Whatever the stinking BBC says, thinks or broadcasts, old hopeychangey Obama is going to get his lefty arse kicked by Palin next week.  
    Hell, it might even put Fatty Mardel off his breakfast. Every cloud, eh….


  6. Umbongo says:

    On Today Polly Toynbee (ex Social Affairs correspondent at the genetically impartial BBC) withdrew the phrase “final solution” to describe the Coalition’s modest housing benefit proposals (no, these haven’t been implemented and will not be implemented fully – if at all – until 2014).  A rather lacklustre Tim Mongomerie pointed out – with marked lack of passion (had he just woken up?) – that while they spoke taxpayers who work for a living were in the middle of a commute up to 90 minutes because they couldn’t afford to live nearer to their workplaces.  Why is that commenters called into the lion’s den of Labour love that is the BBC so rarely exhibit any indignation or fire when commenting on the latest BBC supported crapola?  I have yet to hear a reasoned discussion of the policy itself.  I have yet to hear an anti-benefit cut activist/commentator genuinely challenged (or allowed to be challenged) by a BBC interviewer as to why poor working taxpayers in the sticks have to support poor non-working (or even working) non-taxpayers to live in Knightsbridge.  The question has been asked certainly but, significantly, AFAIAA never pursued.  The premise – as on Today – is always that the cuts (all the cuts) are a priori wrong and will cause enormous suffering.  The BBC approach is always “Who loses out?” as per this piece of BBC analysis http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11637928 .  Thus Montgomerie started on the back foot and never recovered.

    While I’m on, I note that we can thank Boris for the stupidity of using the Kosovo analogy and coining the “social cleansing” phrase to describe the policy which phrase will be used interminably and linked indissolubly with the “Conservatives” whether or not the cuts are implemented.  He thus joins the equally stupid Teresa May who we can thank for talking of the “nasty party” – if only!


    • Abandon Ship! says:

      Polly is even something of a figure of fun at CiF, if you read some of the highly rated comments after her articles. However at the BBC she is the voice of reason.

      Tim Montgomerie was somewhat disappointing, as was Hague etc etc

      I think that when Conservatives are exposed to the Beeboid bubble, they get a skewed view of where the reasoned centre ground is on issues. It’s a bit like assuming that the Question Time audience really reflects UK opinion, rather than in reality being stuffed full of the local vegans, greens, as well as members of the SWP and the local mosque. 


      • Charlie says:

        I heard Polly Toynbee and also Lauren Booth on Sky News earlier this morning, she was wearing her new Muslim uniform and really laying into housing benefits cuts. I await Polly’s conversion also. Silly women.


    • Backwoodsman says:

      Umbongo – the way the interview question is framed and manipulated, is generally why the token comment from the person not signed up to the beeboid line, seems lacklustre.  They get asked to comment on a peripheral point , then the person peddling the house line gets free rein, then its ‘sorry we are out of time’ !


  7. dave s says:

    AS I have been very busy recently I have only caught the odd TV or R4 broadcast. Every time it has been the benefit cuts to the high earners or the London claimants and the Boris row,
    Why? 95% of us are just not that interested., London as always has the mayor the dump deserves and the 44k plus single mothers have been done to death.
    Give it a rest beeboids and look for some other coalition bashing story. You know you want to .
    I caught the Palin moose segment on Today. As you would expect the hunters were courteous to the snivelling beeboid and probably baffled by his inane comments.
    Poor stuff as usual from our friends at the BBC.


    • Dez says:

      “95% of us are just not that interested.”

      Is that 95% of the “us” living on your head, or are you speaking on behalf of your 18 pet rabbits?


  8. Autonomous Mind says:

    Please God, spare us from this self serving insanity…

    ‘Sir Martin Sorrell, the chief executive of WPP [advertising giant, surprise surprise], has said it is right that the BBC takes a substantial cut in its funding and that he has “no problem” with the prospect of government advertising running on the corporation’s TV channels.’


    How many new ways will these people find of liberating our hard earned cash to service their own interests?


  9. BBCwaste says:

    Read this http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live/2010/10/5-lives-rajar-figures-quarter.shtml and then check out the comments.

    The rhethoric and the reality is so far apart.

    Pure spin.


    • David Jones says:

      Fascinating figures. The comments are well worth a read; people are getting really fed up.


  10. Martin says:

    The BBC are now peddling the myth that this child benefit cut to the rich will be impossible to implement due to nasty men not telling their wives what they earn or slappers sleeping around with so many men they won’t know how much they were earning at the time.

    Why is it that Countries like the USA manage to get people to do their own taxes quite easily but we can’t?

    If you claim for a benefit you know you’re not entitled to that’s called fraud and you should be prosecuted for it.

    Some dumb male beeboid claimed that a man married to or living with a woman could be penalised if she earns the 44K or more and then loses it he’s paying for kids not his (or something, to be honest it sounded like a personal rant from this male beeboid)

    The BBC don’t get it, if ONE of you is a top earner you won’t get child benefit as you don’t need it. How hard is that to work out?


  11. Pounce says:

    The bBC and how it defends the 7/7 suicide bombers by attacking the emergency services.

    Aldgate firefighters were ‘hostile’, 7/7 inquests hear 

    Firefighters at the Aldgate terrorist bombing were “hostile” and “quite upset”, the 7/7 inquests have heard.Paramedic Anthony Kamner was in the first ambulance to arrive at the Tube station after the 7 July 2005 attack.He told the hearings that firefighters “did not understand the role” of the initial ambulance which was to report the situation back to the control room.

    Get that according to the bBC the firemen were hostile in the bBCs opener, I wonder why?

    Well further on you read….
    Mr Kamner said the firefighters were “demanding” that he take some of the injured patients to hospital. 

    So the reason why they were hostile was with lots on injured people on the scene, they couldn’t understand (or accept)  why a paramedic refused to use his ambulance to ferry the injured to a hospital. If anything quite understandable. But why would the bBC try to shift the blame away from Allah’s little helpers onto people who are actual helpers, oh silly me they are a religion of peace and understanding.


    • Natsman says:

      “…oh silly me they are a religion of peace and understanding….”

      Are they buggery…


  12. Pounce says:

    The bBC, its hatred towards israel and the case of the disappearing lake, sorry town.

    It seems the bBC is rather concerned about how a lake in the Golan heights has shrunk. According to the bBC, its because of the jew. But for some reason the bBC has left quite a lot of infomation out of the story.

    Picture 1)Hundreds of Syrians in the occupied Golan Heights have staged a protest march over concerns that a lake could dry up due to pumping by Israel’s national water company.

    So according to the bBC the reason why the lake is shrinking is due to excessive use by the jews (Well they are hooknosed and greedy)  But hang on what’s this I find from the bBD archives:

    The United Nations says Syria urgently needs help to tackle the devastating effects of the worst drought the Middle East has seen in decades. Iraq, parts of Turkey, Jordan and Syria have all been affected, with more than a million people affected in Syria alone.

    Strange how the bBC leave out that Israel is juxtaposed between Jordan and Syria.


    • Pounce says:

      Part 2
      Pictures 1,3,4 and 5
      According to the bBC that lake is in the middle of nowhere other than the nearby Syrian town of Majdal Shams and Jewish settlers. The pictures the bBC posts of the lake show it to have no human habitation nearby. But hang on what this view from google earth. Why its a bloody town right on the edge of the lake, the druze town of Mas’ada. For some reason the bBC have cropped the town out of their article as well as out of every photo. Why is that? Here is a picture I’ve screen captured and hosted of the view from above. It tells a somewhat different story than all those bBC pictures.


      • sue says:

        It seems as though you’ve spotted another example of the BBC spinning a story purely to make Israel look evil. Geological facts about crater lakes like this are beyond me, but I’m sure many factors contribute to the diminishing water levels. Obviously drought is one, but if there are as many Syrian residents as Israelis using this water is it reasonable to blame Israel?
        You can tell that the writer has an agenda by the way she describes the Golan as the mountainous region which was ‘captured and occupied by Israel in 1967’.
        She could have added that before Israel captured the Golan heights in 1967 the kibbutzim below were constantly under threat from Syrian gun emplacements overlooking them, and that  the 1967 war of aggression was started by the Arabs.

        It begs the question – who is Raya al-Deen who wrote and produced the story?


        • Pounce says:

          Sue wrote:but I’m sure many factors contribute to the diminishing water levels. Obviously drought is one,

          I posted a screen dump of Google earth of the top half of the Golan heights in which to point out the druze town that the bBC kind of forgot to mention. But if you have the time have a butchers across the border into Syria and the state of their pools of water. Why all show extreme shrinkage, but something tells me that Israel cannot be blamed for that.

          Degree in his post mentions an e-mail to the Israeli waterboard. I did a bit of reading up on the Israeli waterboard when the bBC attacked the jews for not giving Arabs enough water.  Mekorot understands only too well the situation with water and as such 17% of the water it provides is reused water which has been treated so as to be fit for agricultural use. Which is why only 64% of the water it uses is from fresh water sources . I’ll put pound to a penny that no other country in the region gets 64% of its water supply from a fresh water source. More like 100%. Where the rest waste water (You really should see how the arabs still water their crops as they did 2000 years ago to understand what I mean) The Israelis use state of the art drip irrigation in which to water its crops because they understood years ago that water is a precious commodity. Something no other country in the region has accepted but instead like the bBC points the finger of blame at the jews.
          As for those so called Syrians,like the liberals in this country who hate everything about the Uk. Not one of them would swap living under the Israeli flag for a Syrian one.
          Funny that.


      • deegee says:

        Actually I find the captions on the photographs as aggravating as the concept accepted without question that the shrinking of a water source is Israel’s fault. BTW I’m far from sure that Lake Ram is used a Mekorot source but I can’t confirm or deny as the Mekorot PR department will have left for Sabbath and my email won’t be read until Sunday morning at the earliest.

        The new BBC slant is the use of the word Syrian. Located near the Syrian Arab town of Majdal Shams Majdal Shams is the largest of the four Druze villages in the Golan. It has not been under Syrian control since 1967. Few Druze would accept being called Arab – they are definitely not Muslim.
        Syrian activists blame increased water pumping by Mekorot. Most of the Golan Druze have not accepted Israel’s offer of Israeli citizenship so technically they are Syrian. Intriguingly, the Golan Alawites (Yes, Assad’s religion) in the village of Ghajar accepted Israeli citizenship in 1981In practical terms this has little meaning. As Israel has occupied the area for the past 43 years and there are no diplomatic relations with Syria, no person born since June 1967 have any Syrian documentation or records. If a Golan Druze wishes to travel, except in the rare event of travel to Syria, they are forced to use Israeli travel documents.
        Some 20,000 Syrian Arabs and 20,000 Jewish settlers live in the occupied Golan Heights. From an Israeli POV the Jewish residents of the Golan are not settlers as Israel annexed the Golan (cf. Gaza and the West Bank). As mentioned before the majority of non Jews are Druze not Arabs.


      • deegee says:

        Apologies if this is a double post.

        Actually I find the captions on the photographs as aggravating as the concept accepted without question that the shrinking of a water source is Israel’s fault. BTW I’m far from sure that Lake Ram is used a Mekorot source but I can’t confirm or deny as the Mekorot PR department will have left for Sabbath and my email won’t be read until Sunday morning at the earliest.  
        The new BBC slant is the use of the word Syrian. Located near the Syrian Arab town of Majdal Shams Majdal Shams is the largest of the four Druze villages in the Golan. It has not been under Syrian control since 1967. Few Druze would accept being called Arab – they are definitely not Muslim.

        Syrian activists blame increased water pumping by Mekorot. Most of the Golan Druze have not accepted Israel’s offer of Israeli citizenship so technically they are Syrian. About 10% have accepted. Intriguingly, the Golan Alawites (Yes, Assad’s religion) in the village of Ghajar accepted Israeli citizenship in 1981

        In practical terms Syrian citizenship has little meaning. As Israel has occupied the area for the past 43 years and there are no diplomatic relations with Syria, no person born since June 1967 has any Syrian documentation or records. If a Golan Druze wishes to travel, except in the rare event of travel to Syria, they are forced to use Israeli travel documents.  
        Some 20,000 Syrian Arabs and 20,000 Jewish settlers live in the occupied Golan Heights. From an Israeli POV the Jewish residents of the Golan are not settlers as Israel annexed the Golan (cf. Gaza and the West Bank). As mentioned before the majority of non Jews are Druze not Arabs.

        To label them as Syrian Arabs rather than Golan Druze is a political statement from the so-called neutral BBC.


    • Buggy says:

      Nice to see that piccie described by our ever-so-impartial-National-Treasure-and-the-envy-of-the-world-just-like-the-NHS-of-a-state-broadcaster as “a protest march.”

      To my eyes (which are obv. genetically inferior ‘cos I wasn’t blessed with the ‘liberal gene’ which is a necessity for being super ‘n’ wonderful in all things incl. health) it looks like a lot of people vaguely wandering in the direction of a smallish knot of people stage left. 

      Still, it fulfills the “Liberal Media Crowd Size Ratchet” as applied to protests that are molto simpatico ;

      A few thousand marchers = “Several hundred thousand peaceful protesters”.

      A thousand or so = “Thousands of peaceful prots.”

      A few scattered waifs and strays (as here) = “Hundreds of Syrians

      Some of them have balloons though ! PARTAYYYYYY !!!


      • Buggy says:

        Oh, and if you care to scroll through the pictures of dead fish etc etc to the end you’ll find a group of “local Syrians” pouring waetr out of plastic bottles “in a symbolic effort to restore the water supply”.

        Take a look.

        For people whose water supply is threatened they seem awfully happy don’t they ? Grinning like loons the whole bloody bunch of them. 

        And I bet there was one heck of punch up amonst the women, too. Just imagine, you get up in the morning, have a bit of brekker and carefully select your wardrobe for some tasty pouring water into a lake action.

        What to wear ? It’s so hard to choose! I know ! How about a black t-shirt (a design classic !) and an aqua baseball cap ? Why! That’ll look great, won’t it ? I’ll look stylish and committed too !! Yessss !! Result !!

        Imagine the disappointmenT, then, when you roll up to the rapidly disappearing lake-ette, bottle grasped tightly in your clammy little hands and feeling smugly stylish-and-commited, only to find that just about every other woman has turned up in an identical outfit.

        Quelle horreur ! “We look like a cult !”

        D’you know, it’s almost as though the gathering wasn’t so much “local Syrians” so much as the professional anti-Israel brigade. How suspicious I am.

        (Obviously, if my ignorance has blinded me to the fact that the National Dress of Syria consists of black t-shirts and aqua baseball caps, that the Sassanid Empire was mostly founded on the quantity manufacure of these garments and that the national anthem of Syria includes the lines “Bring me my cap of burning teal, bring my sable t-shirt of desire”, then I can only apologise unreservedly to all our Syrian readers for any offence caused, and hope that their lake fills up again soon). 


        • matthew rowe says:

          Great post ! 😀


        • deegee says:

          Something bothers me about the dead fish. When a lake gradually recedes the fish don’t swim to the shore to expire (like whales) they swim to the deeper water.  


  13. Guest Who says:

    People are talking..

    @krishgm How many BBC people are at this Cameron press conference??! 

    But in some places, I’m guessing the reply will be… ‘Never enough!’ .

    To the twittercades, comrades!!!!


  14. Martin says:

    Oh how the BBC loves to spin. On aircraft taxes that are going up when Liebour were in power the BBC always got a rent a quote from the Green lobby saying that these taxes were essential to reduce flying and cut CO2.  
    Yet on the BBC 1 news not once did we get a rent a quote from a sandal wearing wet leftie saying what a good idea what raising these taxes is. Now it’s all the fault of those nasty evil Tories.  
    So to help the drugged up rent boy molesting beeboids can I suggest they contact Caroline Lucas (her with the odd eyebrows and normally loved by the BBC). I’m sure she could happily provide the BBC with a left wing green comment on how good these new taxes are.  
    Caroline’s campaigns also include a ban on night flights and calling for the aviation industry to pay the true environmental and social costs of flying.  


    • Guest Who says:

      Anyone know if this tax dosh is going into reducing GHGs with sensible initiatives, or is it mainly to fund some slapper’s LCD in her Knightsbridge ‘Des Res’?

      There would be a certain Yumin-rightist Kosovan irony in our family being separated tangibly by financial hostage methods from seeing the in-laws overseas, so Richard Black can shuttle to and fro to chatfests in Nagoya and interview fellow climate expert Indy Jones, while some 200kg breeding machine can be funded to gaze wistfully at the job centre lest she, one day, seek employ in the vicinity to the extent of range the council will fund her minicab fare.

      Pretty sure it won’t be cramping Lauren Booth’s gig much on the Pally Shuttle each week between her new ‘home’ and the warm embrace of the nation’s broadcast studios. Now, who is very much at one with this sista and her new homies? 



  15. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Just caught a segment on the News Channel about how the majority of the public no longer want murderers to spend too much time in jail.  The message was that more and more of the public think that punishing murderers too severely does no good.

    Some wet, smiling academic told how his survey showed that more than 50% of respondents said that someone who committed murder during a bank robbery shouldn’t get a life sentence.

    The only vox pop who wanted a life sentence for murderers was the mother of a boy who was beaten to death by bullies.  This wasn’t a particularly gruesome or horrifying kind of murder, and I wondered about the BBC producer’s choice here.  Why didn’t they find the parent of some little girl who was brutally raped and murdered by some sicko, or something similar?  That would have carried more emotional weight with the viewer.  As it was, it was less effective when the mother said that she believed that when a judge says “life”, it meant that the criminal went in to prison and came out only in a wooden box.  Had it been the parent or relative of some seriously nasty business, the kind of murder which gets national attention, it would have been a more effective advocate.  I think this choice was deliberate by the BBC, in order to remove weight from one side of the argument.

    The other vox pops said that putting murderers into prison didn’t do anyone any good, or maybe 25 years would be the limit.  The wet academic was smiling when he said that attitudes were changing, and the BBC Narrative here was that the public didn’t want murderers punished too harshly any more.

    Sickening.  If some other survey showed that more than 50% of the public wanted Muslim fathers sent to prison for life when they beheaded their daughters, does anyone here believe the BBC would make a report trying to support that?  Hell no.

    The BBC is engaging in a little social engineering here, trying to encourage people to go softer on criminals.  Again.


    • Martin says:

      What they should ask is those who think these arsehole scumbags should be let out how many of them would happily have a murderer living next door to THEM?

      I think we know the answer.


  16. David Preiser (USA) says:

    There’s a doom and gloom segment on the News Channel right now about scientific efforts to save and even revive extinct species via DNA colelction and cloning.

    A female advocate, nearly in tears, stated that they had to do it because “species were going extinct like never before.”

    Never before?  The BBC has found a line and is sticking to it.


    • Martin says:

      Even though more new species are being found than ever before. That’s what happens, species either adapt of die out and new ones take their place.


  17. David Preiser (USA) says:

    So contrary to Gavin Hewitt’s sneering, Cameron does have some allies in the EU: 12 other countries joined him in reducing the increase of money flowing to the EU.  It’s victory, but “not everybody thinks that”.  Of course.

    Angry backbenchers, the BBC takes care to point out, say that this is not a victory for Cameron because the EU extortion fee is still going to rise by like £400 million.  Now some Beeboid is saying that the public will also be upset and won’t think it’s any kind of victory for Cameron.

    Funny how the one time the BBC deigns to mention that the public doesn’t want to keep throwing money at the EU, especially when the money is needed back at home more than ever, is when the Tories try to take credit for reining it in.

    It’s no victory for Cameron, nobody is happy that you won’t be paying even more money to Brussels bureaucrats.  According to the BBC Narrative.


    • Roland Deschain says:

      Call me a cynic, but wasn’t 2.9% what most EU leaders wanted for a budget increase anyway?  But thought that in all the cutbacks it was difficult to get away with?

      So, get your stooges in the EU Parliament to ask for a 6% rise, say how awful that is and come away looking like you’ve won a victory when reducing it to what you wanted in the first place. 

      I for one give Cameron no credit for this – he could have mobilised popular support throughout the EU for a freeze, or even a cut had he been minded to.  But he isn’t, and never will be.


      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        6% is the figure which was being bandied about as what would happened if Cameron hadn’t rallied his allies against it.  I realize that’s the story he tells, and I ought to be suspect, but the BBC sure seems to accept that it’s accurate and not just political propaganda.  If it was, surely Hewitt and Price et al. would be pointing fingers and slamming it as a bogus claim, rather than pushing the narrative that it’s not a success after all, backbenchers unhappy, etc.

        Just now Price ended his report by saying that this highlights the divisions within the Coalition!


        • Roland Deschain says:

          But the BBC can’t reveal it as a bogus claim.  That would reveal to the general public how they’ve been hoodwinked and might lead to a groundswell of opinion against the EU budget.  The public here is in no mood to pay extra with all the “cuts” taking place and right now the EU is vulnerable on that issue.  This has been entirely about news management to avoid just such a scenario.

          It’s one of those cases where the BBC narrative (pro-EU, anti-Tory) causes a conflict.  When that happens, the EU wins every time.


          • Martin says:

            What we do know is that the EU wants as much money as it can get. I detest the EU and also accept Cameron can’t fight too many wars at once, his first priority has to be here at home sorting out the economy.

            The EU can wait, luckily the Germans seem to be getting as pissed off with the money wasting as we are. Cameron is pushing at a bit of an open door at the moment.


            • Cassandra King says:


              As usual the euroslime are busy creating a fog to hide their intentions and its working like a charm, we are not even in the euro and yet our budgets and finance plans are going to be subject to EU approval and we will be paying into a fund to help euro client states, the bastards covered that up with the fake nonsense about a supposed cameron victory over the budget.

              The aim is federal state, the mechanisms are being put in place to enable a federal state, the meeting was in order to make changes to the EU constitution in order to faclilitate a federal state without recourse to any referendum threat which changes to the constitution may demand.

              Dave was bought off with promises of a 3% increase and fake support for that IF he assured the EU commissars that the promised EU referendum lock crapola would be kicked into the long grass.
              The whole charade was about trying to create more EU executive power without recourse to any referendum, they want to change the EU constitution and they do not want to be bothered by little things like electoral support and democratic accountability.

              The whole thing was a sham and a charade where the usual deception and cynical manipulation beloved of the euroslime was used to the full, the MSM was mislead and taken for morons and the showboating about the EU budget increase merely hid the real agenda, a further MASSIVE transfer of executive power to the Brussels vermin.


        • Cassandra King says:

          There is a tiny flaw in the Cameron claim of victory of course, its a load of horse sh*t.

          He cannot influence the budget and negotiations have only just started, there WILL be a rise and all the waffle and bluster by Cameron cannot change that.


          • Martin says:

            Cassandra, I accept what you’re saying but I think blaming Cameron for this is unfair. It was a Tory PM that took us into the Common Market and even Maggie Thatcher didn’t really make any effort to get us out of Europe at the time. Bliar and Brown sold us down the river and if Bliar had had his way we’d have been in the Euro as well.

            Cameron is stuck with a coalition Government, people say he should have done better in the election, but the last two elections the Tories made very little inroads into the Liebour majority and that was with two right wing leaders.

            The shame is finally we’ve got to leaders of Germany and France that both realise what a mess the EU is, it’s bleeding Germany to death and both of them understand that multiculturalism is a failure.

            I still maintain the most important thing at the moment is sorting out this Country. Cameron has a lot of turds laid by Bliar and Brown to clean up, billions wasted on crap and immigration out of control.

            I’d rather see the BBC sorted out before the EU.


            • Mailman says:

              The thing is this, the Frogs understand how to manipulate the EU and when push comes to shove they will do what they want to do (ie. kicking out foreigners who they dont want in their country…against the EU’s wishes).

              Britain is yet to work this out but if they can figure out what the Frogs have figured out then we would at least be in a better worse position than we are now.



            • Cassandra King says:

              I am really sorry Martin and I truly hope I am wrong but the evidence is mounting up that Cameron is playing newlabour style games, government by press release…I have in my hand a piece of paper, peace in our time…the tragedy is that it really is looking like Cameron is part and parcel of the biggest political fraud in UK history.

              He is playing political games as he prances around pretending to be a sceptic champion while nodding through the biggest and most dangerous power transfer to date.

              I really do hope I am worng but the evidence suggests otherwise, if the EU monster is not stopped now then any domestic problems will look like molehills in comparison.


          • David Preiser (USA) says:

            Cameron can’t stop the whole thing, no.  But he can instigate a rebellion against the EU vampire sucking life out of Britian and everyone else.  And it does seem as if the increase is going to be kept lower than it would be otherwise.  It’s not a triumph, but it’s a start, which the BBC wants to deny.  The BBC – especially Hewitt – reports from the perspective that the EU is a good thing, the best thing, and you should all give in to it.

            Hewitt said Cameron had no allies, but that’s clearly not true.  Hewitt said you shouldn’t be paying attention to what’s going on, and that’s also not true.


        • Guest Who says:

          ‘..ended his report by saying that this highlights the divisions within the Coalition!’

          I think it’s actually now a signature block that gets added top all BBC scripts. 


          • Samantha Vickers says:

            The best and most amusing explanation of this Euro farce came on the notayesmanseconomics web blog. Here is an excerpt.

            “However there is a darker thought. Are we being played Sir Humphrey Appleby style? Propose an increase of 6.9% which you do not really believe you will get,but  Jim Hacker, excuse me Europe’s politician’s can appear fiscally austere by restricting you and you end up with a still much too high 2.9%%!”

            More of this can be found at http://notayesmanseconomics.wordpress.com


  18. Chuffer says:

    And using the Old Journalists’ Rule that ‘The answer to a headline in question format is always “No!” ‘:



  19. gordon-bennett says:

    Someting of an irony overload on R4 “Feedback” just now. The “Desert Island Discs” producer was on to defend her choice of Nick Clegg at this time. Listeners were apparently incensed that NC was given a chance to ameliorate the effect of the CUTS announcements.

    Sadly, the beeboid wasn’t able to play her trump card in her reply – ie that the the beeb would never do anything to help out the Coalition in any way!


  20. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Good grief.  I haven’t been watching BBC News all week, so didn’t realize they’ve set up shop in the US to cover the second-most important election in human history after the manner in which

    Once again the only people disappointed are the critics from the Left. He hasn’t done enough, etc.  This is not the kind of criticism that would encourage someone to vote against Him, of course.

    Clive Myrie is set up in DC as a sort of emcee for the BBC News team in the US.  It’s the same setup they had for the UK election with Laura Kuennsberg standing the Westminster common, passing things over to a field reporter, then back to her for a brief comment, then back to the studio, then back to Laura for a short interview with someone, and so on.  Substitute Myrie (one of the least offensive Beeboids to sit at the News desk) for Laura, and you get the idea.

    Sadly, Myrie is using the White House’s language in his reporting, which is what the BBC has been doing for weeks now.  He talks of the President’s plans for “reform”.  Wrong.  It’s not reform: it’s transformation.  Not the same thing at all.

    What about the financial reform scheme He got through a few months back?  Even Robert Peston admitted it was basically a huge tax hit.  That’s more wealth redistribution than reform.

    Health Care reform?  Nothing was reformed.  More penalties put in place, premiums rising, doctors opting out of providing care they can no longer afford to give, insurance providers getting out of the business altogether, Medicare and Medicaid already existed, still exist, waste not addressed at all.  This isn’t reform:  it’s transformation.

    Instead, the BBC uses White House language, and toes the Party line.  Not a single critic allowed on air to provide the viewpoint that the Democrat’s deeds have in fact made things much worse than they would have been, and will prolong the Depression we’re in.  All we get are inarticulate vox pops who are simply dissapointed in the economy, which is Bush’s fault anyway.

    It’s going to be a very long weekend, I can tell.


    • Buggy says:

      Yes, but with a bee-yoot-ee-full Tuesday to look forward to ! 😀

      Does anyone know if the News Channel or BBC Parliament are going to fulfil their public service remit by providing extensive coverage of “An Ungrateful Populace Rejects The Messiah”?


      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        It seems inevitable. If they do go for some sort of silly live coverage Tuesday night, I wonder if it’s possible to live blog it?


        • Mailman says:

          It will be Wednesday morning our time before the last voting station closes on the left coast.

          Probably just be better tuning in to the news first thing in the morning instead of waiting around trying to watch what ever car wreck al beeb can pull together.



  21. Guest Who says:

    johnprescott John Prescott Going on @bbcnewsnight to discuss housing benefit and social cleansing. Who’d have thought me and Boris would agree on something!
    Um, Newsnight for one. Rather clearly. Many wet dreams come true in guest booking suite.


    • Guest Who says:

      Have to say the choice is inspired.

      If anyone knows about freeloading massive Central London cribs on the taxpayer’s back, Lord Creosote of Grace & Favour does!


    • Martin says:

      Prescott and Boris can talk about extra marital shagging as well.


  22. Gerald says:

    According to an “interview” between Justin Webb and a BBC Correspondent around 6.35 this morning on Today the government could get a kicking from the BBC’s favourite party for ending the principle of separate taxation with the requirement to own up if your wife / partner is receiving Child Allowance.

    With many beeboids’ lifestyle, as frequently alluded to on here, and / or their salary levels they obviously do not get involved with filling in HMRCs form relating to child tax credits, as introduced by the abolisher of boom and bust. which requires the income of each parent to be separately inserted on the same form and the tax credit being assessed on the joint income!


    • Guest Who says:

      According to an “interview” between Justin Webb and a BBC Correspondent’

      I love the way they feel this confers some odd notion of objectivity to what is essentially a pre-planned tag-team mugging.


  23. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Here’s the BBC engaging in a little White House propaganda about how nasty corporations are donating money to the Republicans, even though The Obamessiah bailed them all out.

    Bailed-out companies give campaign cash to Republicans

    After reading the article, I think a title which more accurately reflects its message would be “Corporations bite the hand that feeds them”.

    The message of the piece assists the White House in telling people that if the Republicans win next Tuesday, the country will go back to being run by nasty corporations in bed with nasty Republicans.   It’s an old chestnut peddled by the far Left, and now in the Washington Post (from which the BBC sub-editor paraphrases for most of the piece).

    On the surface, it must seem like a very confusing concept:  companies get saved by the government, but are suddenly anti-government, just like those idiot Tea Partiers who don’t want the government to do anything ever.  Then the misinformation sets in.

    The BBC sub-editor writes that the auto industry bailout has become “unpopular”.  This is makes it seem as if it’s just more of that stupid anti-gummint nonsense from the Tea Party people.  There’s no detail as to why that might be, so the reader is left with the wrong (but desired) impression.

    The auto industry bailouts benefited the unions, who have extremely close ties to the President.  No mention of that ever from the BBC.  Except for the highly un-Constitutional act of the President forcing out the CEO, precious little changed at GM or Chrysler to make them profitable in the future.  Other than shoring up the union penions, what benefits are there?  GM still owes the taxpayers tens of billions of dollars, with no relief in sight.  Worse, the carmaker has basically been forced into putting all its eggs into an electric vehicle-shaped basket.

    The BBC quotes GM as claiming that they donate equally to both parties, and aren’t trying to shift things to one party or the other.  But it’s left as just that: a claim.  Five seconds spent on a search would reveal the fact that the “Big Three” gave loads of money to the Democrats, including one Rep. whose wife was a GM exec.  But actually, as of 2008, they gave a lot more money to the Republicans who in turn had the integrity to vote against the bailout.  The BBC didn’t mention that part, did they?

    As much as I think GM is run by orangutans and is ultimately unsustainable, they have to think and act like a business and go with whomever they think is going to create a strong enough economy to support their business.  No prizes for guessing which way that wind blows.  Unless you work for the BBC, in which case you actually would deserve my congratulations.

    In sum: corporations think the Republicans will do a better job with the economy than the current lot in charge, but the BBC sees only low-brow anti-gummint activity.  Actual information clouds that Narrative, so is left out.


    • Mailman says:

      What all these so called mfm outlets have completed ignored is the fact that Barry raised nearly a half BILLION dollars to buy the Presidency in 2008.

      Funny how that kind of silly money doesnt raise any interest from the MFM isnt it!



  24. Bupendra Bhakta says:

    Earlier in the week Radio 5 On-A-Life-Support-System had an ‘expert’ on who may (or may not, I forget) have been Professor of Government at Leeds Metropolitan U.

    He was allowed a fair old uninterrupted monologue on the subject that the cuts shouldn’t happen because the economy needs stimulus rather than anything else at the minute.

    Of course everyone in the media these days seems to be an expert on how to avoid a double dip recession.  Everyone on the pretrendy left seems to be a Keynesian now we’re in a slump despite not having been Keynesians when the economy was roaring away.

    I don’t particularly have a problem with the good professor’s argument – he may be right, he may not be right.  But of course he is given a free ride by the BBC because his views echoes exactly the views of The Brothers (and I’m not talking Panda and Hilary’s toyboy).

    These people don’t end up on the BBC by accident.

    I suppose it went something like this.

    ‘Brrr brrr, brrr brrr, Hi, is that Mark, this is Dave/Brendan/Derek/Bob/Len here, only we have this Professor of Government…


  25. Bupendra Bhakta says:

    By the way I forget to congratulate Radio 5 The-Iron-Lung-Is-Rusting-Through on a sparkling set of Rajar figures.

    In the same way that Radio Two is a pension fund masquerading as a radio station, Radio 5 Beep-beep-beep-beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee is a branch of the BBC’s in-house social services where they slot people they don’t want anywhere else.  I mean Peter Allen and Jane Garvey apparently had the same show for ten years – where was the public demand for that.


    • Gerald says:

      Steady Bupendra.

      Surely Jayne Garvey has the status of MVP (most valuable presenter – a play on American football’s most valuable player) on BBBC  with her all time favourite comment about the corridors of the BBC being littered with empty champagne bottles the day after the 1997 election. And I claim to have actually heard it live.

      Garvey and Allen in tandem have been the only thing worthwhile on Radio 5 to date.


  26. Martin says:

    Right so a week before the US elections we ‘suddenly’ have a terrorist plot against the USA.  
    Yet I’ve not heard one voice on the BBC suggesting this could be something made up by Barry Obama to boost his poll ratings.  
    Anyone want to bet if Bush were still in charge, the BBC would be giving airtime to the nutters and trying to drop hints that this was made up?


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Yes, Michael Moore seems to have gone silent as well.  And if he and his kind aren’t crying foul, the BBC won’t either.


  27. George R says:

    ‘Newsnight’s Crick (3rd up BBC ‘reporter’), in special pleading for BBC-NUJ, makes his bid to be the next Prime Minister: (BBC NUJ video clip)



  28. Umbongo says:

    The BBC Flagship News at 10:00 on BBC1 devoted 5 minutes of its 25 minutes to a blatant advertisement for the re-release of Springsteen’s  “Darkness” plus his “surprise” appearance at the London premier of his new documentary.  Surprise surprise Springsteen then gave an unchallenged (natch) left-wing political message that the economic situation today is the same as it was in the late 70s when the record was first released – unemployment, cuts etc etc – but please don’t mention that St Jimmy Carter was the then president or Callaghan PM.  First Bono, now Springsteen plus the ever present Billy Bragg are treated as the sages of the age by the BBC – is there a pattern here?


    • Trifecta says:

      I may have been dreaming but as I awoke this morning I am sure I heard some Beeboid on Radio4 describe this album in gushing tones as “a work of art” I did have a few pints last night so probably just some weird after effects of the brown ale.


  29. Martin says:

    Phew! A couple of Muslims now on the BBC thinking this is a put up job by Obama and Cameron.

    All is still well in the world of the drugged up lunatic left.


    • George R says:

      Announcement needed now by British ‘political elite’:

      ‘No more immigrants from Islamic countries will be allowed into Britain; the risk and the cost is too great: we cannot allow our society to be destroyed further.’


    • james1070 says:

      Strangely, Michael Savage (who is banned in Britain for insulting Muslims) believes it is a put up job. This is the first time the Democrats have admitted an Islamic terror threat and mentioned the word Al Qaeda. Obama was silent on the Fort Hood Massacre, underpants bomber and Times Square bomber. Savage believes that Dems faked this to make Obama popular in the upcoming Mid Term Elections.


      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        The Democrats in charge aren’t that clever, and this isn’t the kind of October Surprise they’d come up with anyway.  They’re relying on the media, Jon Stewart, voter fraud perpetrated by the SEIU and ACORN’s animated corpse, and racial politics to prevent a total disaster.

        The day after His manifestation on the Daily Show, all the Democrats and far-Left types I know here in NYC were acting like Mr. Sulu did after getting zapped by Landru’s minion in that old Star Trek episode.  “Yes, of course….I had doubts, but it’s all clear to me now….He saved us from a second Great Depression and nobody else gets it….we need to get the Word out for Him…everyone should bask in His warmth again….”

        It was a little frightening, but not surprising.


  30. Marky says:

    Oh what a cosy little chat… Plenty swept under the rug here… Bias by omission it’s what the BBC do best.


  31. David Jones says:


    Richard Black has finished his two-week sojourn in Nagoya (I just wonder what that cost; expensive country Japan). This from his latest article:


    Perhaps the most fundamental component of the agreement here is that governments have pledged that “by 2020, at the latest, incentives, including subsidies, harmful to biodiversity are eliminated, phased out or reformed”.


    Wouldn’t a journalist (rather than a trendy lefty mouthpiece) have thought about this a little. What is destroying jungle and wildlife in many countries? Yes, palm oil plantations. And why do we need so much palm oil? Well children, to save the planet we need biofuel.


    From The Independent 2002

    According to the Environmental Investigation Agency, oil palm plantation companies were responsible for 80 per cent of the forest fires in Indonesia from 1997-8. The latest figures from WWF indicate that Indonesia has lost an area the size of the Netherlands to forest fires, and that burning of pristine rainforest continues today.


    The Centre for International Forestry Research estimates that palm oil is now the commodity that has the greatest impact on forest cover in Indonesia. Papua New Guinea has 75 per cent of its original forest intact, but as the seventh largest palm oil producer in the world, and the third largest exporter, this will change. Its forests are home to 200 species of mammals, 200,000 types of plants, and indigenous peoples. The government plans to turn 3,000 hectares of forest into oil palm plantations.


    See also [pdf]


    The Guardian chips in:

    In Nagoya, there has been a concerted attempt to promote, extend and improve environmental economics and to draw more financiers and business executives into biodiversity valuation and protection.


    Another money-maker for Al Gore?



    Incidentally while Googling a couple of things I came across this – note the comments on Jews.



    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Even more interesting to me are the first few comments about Arab Muslims.  Not a viewpoint you’ll ever hear on the BBC, that’s for sure.


  32. Guest Who says:


    The couple also admitted that they would never have a “clear picture” of what went wrong during the attempted rescue on 8 October but said America deserved “credit” for owning up to mistakes.

    Honest and gracious. Speaking of whom…

    ‘Mr Norgrove, 60, told the BBC.’

    The latter being the objective profesional news outfit who rushed to print this:

    ‘BBC diplomatic correspondent Bridget Kendall said the latest developments would raise questions over UK and US relations and the possibility there was an attempt to cover up the circumstances of Ms Norgrove’s death.’ 

    BBC Online URL: 


    This ‘story’ of course, being quickly stealth edited, having gone out in its woeful form, at the time. And being quickly shown as utter pants opinion masquerading as journalism.


    These edits of wild claims in stead of actual responsible reporting are being defended as legitimate at the time and ‘an evolving story’ (with Ms. Kendall’s first stab neatly excised from the record) to the highest levels of the BBC’s risible Complaints system still.


  33. Guest Who says:

    Here comes Mr. Jordan ( of http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/2010/10/new-bbc-editorial-guidelines-l.shtml  fame), now on screen, if pre-recorded and ‘selective’ in his broadcast-only ‘replies’:


    An episode to treasure from the genetically impartial BBC… except for when it isn’t. Which is a lot, suggesting mutations cropping up on par with the cast of the entire Resident Evil series.


  34. ltwf1964 says:

    on “Newswatch”(there’s a joke for a start)on the BBC news channel,final item was on the tv tax freeze and how the BBC would have to start tightening their belts-no more cocaine and rent boy parties then 🙂
    host Raymond Snoddy asked viewers for suggestions on how the “news” channel could save money  
    here’s one for you Ray…….  


  35. My Site (click to edit) says:

    Sorry… messed up URLs..

    Guest Who 
    Here comes Mr. Jordan ( of  http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/2010/10/new-bbc-editorial-guidelines-l.shtml    fame), now on screen, if pre-recorded and ‘selective’ in his broadcast-only ‘replies’:  
    An episode to treasure* from the genetically impartial BBC… except for when it isn’t. Which is a lot, suggesting mutations cropping up on par with the cast of the entire Resident Evil series.

    *Anyone have the technology?


  36. George R says:

    INBBC censors Islamic nature of insults on Maldives.


    The Maldives is a chain of some 1,200 small islands in the Indian ocean, southwest of Sri Lanka. Adherence to Islam, the state religion since the 12th century, is required for citizenship and nearly all of the nation’s approximately 300,000 people are Muslims. The legal system is based on the Islamic code of sharia. 1″


    INBBC (a late entry) report, accommpanied by friendly audio interview with Maldives authorities which deceitfully propagandisies for Islam:

    “Two arrested over abusive Maldives wedding ceremony”


    Of course, INBBC is way behind ‘Jihadwatch’ in its understanding of the nature of Islam.

    Here are recent ‘Jihadwatch’ reports on the Maldives, for comparison-



    • james1070 says:

      The BBC only mentioned the story, because the word Atheist was used in the insult. Notice how they headline Atheist.


    • Guest Who says:

      This story was quite pervasive on the twittosphere (much beloved of Aunty’s finest).

      Amazing how many of the usual suspects, who would be screaming one of their panoply of ‘IST!’ shut-downs/outrages/compos/’when’s the next Susannah show I can get on?’ normally, thought it was a quite ‘funny’ and ‘cute’.

      I might have been on board with the ‘chill, where’s your sense of humour?’ notion had I not read the actual vicious nature these brave warriors hid behind their language to … ‘share’.


      • sue says:

        I wonder who put the explosives in the printer cartridges and threw in a mobile phone, probably so the synagogue could ring to say the parcel’s arrived safely thanks. How else, with today’s unreliable deliveries and hold-ups in customs, would they know when it was convenient to detonate it? I hope the police think of checking out the contacts list, especially ‘home’ and ‘mum and dad.’  Who thinks it was a double bluff by Mossad.
        Funny, too, how certain BBC people (Evan Davis) were too PC to utter the controversial word ‘synagogue’, and went instead for ‘place of worship’.


  37. George R says:

    Islam Not BBC (INBBC), censorship, and YEMEN.

    INBBC sticks to its deceitful and censored vocabulary on Islam in current Yemen case, (as propagandised at its ‘College of Journalism’) describing it not as ‘Islamic jihad’ but as ‘terrorism’, so as not to offend the sensibilities of Muslims.

    Of course, the negative impact on the sensibilities of non-Muslims (who are the people largely under threat here), by not naming the nature of the threat correctly as ‘Islamic jihad’ is irrelevant to INBBC.

    In its lengthy reports, INBBC deviously and completely avoids words: ‘Islam’, ‘jihad’, and ‘Muslim’.



  38. Demon1001 says:

    “It promotes respect for women”.   In what way does Islam respect women?  She is so totally wrong that she doesn’t even try to explain this claim.


  39. james1070 says:

    This reminds me of the time when David Icke claimed to be the son of god.


  40. George R says:

    For BBC-NUJ: leftist political ideology, and the real world of housing benefits:

    “Ignore leftist hysteria – at last Britain’s woken up to the grotesque irony that so many on welfare are better off than hard working families…”   (Max Hastings).

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1325052/MAX-HASTINGS-Ignore-leftist-hysteria–Britains-woken-grotesque-irony-welfare-better-hard-working-families-.html#ixzz13pfkujE4


    • Dez says:

      Yes, that’s right; let’s make the ‘very-poor’ worse off.

      Will it make the ‘not-so-poor’ any better off?

      Well no.

      But at least we’ve made the ‘very-poor’ worse off.



  41. Pounce says:

    A more informative article ref that bBC hate fest against Israel about shrinking pools of water:
    Golan residents call on government to limit pumping of water for irrigation from ‘Ram Pool; say 20 tons of fish died 
    Thousands Druze from the Northern Golan Heights marched to Berekhat Ram (Ram Pool) on Friday in which to protest agaisnt the increased pumping at the crater lake which is located near the villages of Majdal Sham and Mas’ade. According to the protesters the lake is being completely dried up due to the pumping of water by Merkerot Israels national water company for irrigation purposes.

    The water from the pool is used to irrigate agricultural fields belonging to Druze villages and kibbutzim in the Golan Heights. The residents said they may have to refrain from expanding their fields in order to save the pool.

    So according to the above, the water is being used by the very people who are complaining about it.


  42. Pounce says:

    The bBC has a habit of allowing members of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPACUK) to speak on behalf of British Muslims whenever they feel that Muslims have been maligned by the latest governmental edict. (How they can conflate the British with how the French have banned the burka is beyond me) which since the fall of the MCB from grace has meant that the beeb have the MPACUk boys and girls on speed dial. To the bBc MPACUK is the face of British Islam and here is what MPACUK has to say about Jihad in an article posted today:
    Never Surrender To A Thief 
    A person came to Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wasallam) and said: ‘Rasul Allah, what do you say if a man comes to me in order to appropriate my possessions?
    Rasul Allah said: ‘Don’t surrender your possessions to him.’
    The inquirer asked: ‘…If he fights me?’
    Rasul Allah remarked: ‘Then fight (with him).’
    The inquirer again asked: ‘What do you think if I am killed?’
    Rasul Allah said: ‘You would be a martyr.’
    The inquirer said: ‘What do you think of him, if I kill him.’
    Rasul Allah said: ‘He would be in the Fire.’” [Muslim]

    It is our right to defend that which Allah has blessed us with. Muslims are told not to surrender their lives, properties, families or Islamic lifestyles to usurpers. Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) tells us to defend our families, properties and religion. If we are victorious we maintain control over what is ours.

    Should we die in the process of defending any one of these things, then it is the best death of a shaheed (martyr). This should be a great source of hope for us in these turbulent times when crime is on the rise and invasion of Muslim lands a source of catastrophe.

    and the bBC tries to promote these people as the face of British Islam, I’ve downloaded a screen dump in case MPACUK delete this article.


  43. Pierre says:

    A few days ago on the BBC News Channel (or whatever it’s called nowadays) I caught a bit of a Frank Gardner report in which he described the 7/7 bombings as ‘revenge attacks’.

    Would these nauseating buffoons describe the crimes of a rapist as ‘revenge attacks’ because he hated women? The disgraceful use of the word ‘revenge’ in this context is utterly sickening. It implies that these cowardly murders had some kind of legitimacy.

    What am I thinking? The 9/11 revenge attacks were legitimate responses to the warmonger Bush’s illegal invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan..err..


    • Dez says:

      “He said 7/7 was because of this; but 9/11 wasn’t because of that” is a meaningless argument.

      Regardless, I wonder if you’d describe the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq as a “revenge attack”? And if not, why not?


      • Pierre says:

        None of this addresses my point. In the mind of a rapist, his attacks on women may well be ‘revenge attacks’, just as in the mind of a terrorist the 7/7 bombings are ‘revenge attacks’. Yet no-one would ever describe rape as a ‘revenge attack’ in a BBC report.

        Yet Gardner gives legitimacy to the murders by his language. The expression ‘revenge attacks’ would never be used to describe any other kind of crime in almost any other conceivable circumstance. The BBC are encouraging islamist terrorists with this kind of spineless appeasement.

        As for the invasions  – surely the accepted groupthink amongst the comrades down at the student union is that Bush/Israel was behind 9/11 and did it all to steal oil?


  44. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Mark Mardell just can’t help himself but reflexively defend the President.

    Why politics demand stern Obama reaction

    He’s talking about the latest foiled terrorist attempt by a Mohammedan, which some people suggest is an October Surprise.  I don’t think it is, and Mardell doesn’t either.

    But what Mardell does think is that the President is forced to overreact to this in order to appease His political opponents.

    Still, whenever President Barack Obama has tried to play down a threat or put it in context he has been attacked with breathless horror, as though a stiff upper lip was somehow giving in. So there is no mileage in doing anything but playing it up to the maximum.

    Wrong.  The criticism is that He didn’t say a word until the outcry forced Him to take a break from one of his vacations.  Mardell just lies and lies, and probably even believes it himself.


    • Martin says:

      I noticed on Dateline that the vile pig Yasmin Alibi Brown went onto a rant (or tried to) about how the latest bombings were ‘convenient’ when Gavin Essler shut her up (first time ever). I suspect if Bush were in power he’d have let her carry on.


  45. Will says:

    This story on R5 this morning :-

    People who volunteer to help the elderly or disabled could earn time credits which they could then redeem for their own care later in life.

    the BBC introduce the Minister (8:38) by playing him a soundbite of an earlier interview with Sir Stuart Etherington of the National Council of Voluntary Organisations, who says that all care should be provided by the state. This appears to chime with the BBC presenter who backs it up with texts expressing agreement with Sir Stu & criticism of evil tory cuts & high taxation.

    The Minister should have responded by telling Sir Stu of a further cut – an end to taxpayer funding of his organisation (or at least of his salary).


  46. Pounce says:

    The bBC, black people inside South African jails and half the story.
    Brutal South African jail changes ex-convict’s life 

    The hardships Nelson Mandela endured in prison in South Africa exposed the terrible conditions in the country’s jails. Hamilton Wende met a former convict outside Leeuwkop Prison near Johannesburg  who survived the notorious prison brutality to turn his life around…He was a detective who turned criminal, and in 1993 he and his accomplices ambushed a security van.

    So the bBc knocks up article about how bad prison was in South Africa (hence the Nelson Mandela link) when the whites ruled the roost. But hang on what’s this I find in the South African Mail & Guardian; It seems Sammy didn’t get sent down during the dying days of white rule in 1993. But 3 years later as he committed his crime in 1996 when the bBCs saviour Nelson was running the show.
    He didn’t get sent down for 22 years but rather 96, which was cut down later to 22 which was then cut to 12 years. Ref that nasty prison he was sent to, well it was C-max, here is what wiki has to say on it:
    C Max is the maximum security division of the Pretoria Correctional Services located in Central Pretoria, South Africa. It is run by the South African Ministry of Correctional Services. The division is specifically designed for violent and disruptive prisoners who have been classified as dangerous in terms of the South African Criminal Procedure Act. Prisoners are kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours of each day out and specialized equipment, such as electric shields, are used by the prison guards. It consists of two rows of fifty cells each.

    It was at C-max where he was stabbed and he didn’t find god until he was moved to Zonderwater prison.

    How do I know all this because the Mail & Guardian are running with an article where David Goldbatt a south African artist is running with an exhibition where he photographs ex convicts at the scene of the crimes they committed. Something the bBC leaves out of the whole article.


  47. Martin says:

    Fat ugly female beeboid sniggered when talking about lesbian Hattie Hatemenperson called Danny Alexander a “ginger rodent”

    BBC seem to find it amusing.

    So call I call Hattie a fat ugly lying lesbian live on TV as well? My comment is far more accurate.


  48. David Preiser (USA) says:

    As DB pointed out the other day, the BBC made a big deal out of the President’s appearance on Jon Stewart’s political show.  Part of reason for the little love fest was to lend credibility and draw attendence to Stewart’s rally in Washington, DC, which starts about an hour from the time of this writing.

    Originally, Comedy Central was going to produce two rallies.  Stewart’s “Rally to Restore Sanity” was supposed to “compete” with Stephen Colbert’s pseudo-con act “March to Keep Fear Alive”.  But apparently now there’s going to be only one rally, and there are some questions about what’s actually going on.

    Stewart and the Democrat activists at Comedy Central have been tight-lipped about it all.  Or at least they’re blocking access to anyone not in lock-step with them.

    Stewart locked out even his fellow travelers at the Washington Post and New York Times on Wednesday, when He appeared before them.  They’re not happy, and are now telling tales out of school about Stewart’s behavior.

    Mr. Stewart declined interview requests and has offered little description of what is planned. He also has apparently lowered a cone of silence over members of his staff and executives at Comedy Central, which will broadcast the rally live.

    Sounds odd.

    More than 1,000 individuals applied for press credentials, but the list was whittled down to 400. “We tried to be as accommodating as possible, and when we could not grant credentials, we encouraged people who didn’t get credentials to just come, because it is a free public event,” said Craig Minassian, a former Clinton administration press aide who is a consultant to Comedy Central and is helping produce the rally.

    Stewart is trying to maintain the facade that he’s non-partisan, but it’s starting to smell bad.  So how is the BBC going to cover this?  You know all the Beeboids in the US love him and watch regularly.  Probably the ones who live in the DC area will be there to give you live coverage.  Worth every penny, I’m sure.


    • DB says:

      I wonder if the BBC report on the Rally To Restore Sanity will mention that the crowd was overwhelmingly white (at least as white as tthe Glenn Beck one), or point out the absurdity of Yusuf Islam, who said of Salman Rushdie “He must be killed. The Qur’an makes it clear – if someone defames the prophet, then he must die” appearing at an event supposed to celebrate tolerance.

      (Finally managed to log in to comment. Had to do it through Twitter – anybody else having problems logging in to the comments via Google? Any how, many thanks to all for kind comments re Rachel Kennedy twitter expose last week. Also, great to see David Preiser blogging .)


      • Martin says:

        Not noticed anything but the site does seem slow.


      • Asuka Langley Soryu says:

        Yeah, I heard some Radio 1 the other day. They described the Tea Party as ‘mostly white’. Whereas the Restoring Sanity rally was a model of ethnic diversity.
        I realise Radio 1 is produced, presented, and aimed at tigh-jeans-wearing simpletons, but even so.