So, what has the Ministry of Truth been saying that you would like to take issue with?
OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir Dec 25, 01:55
Christmas 2024
ALL the following from recruitment adverts Disgusting for any young white male comprising the vast majority of the potential construction…
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
The bBC, that Mosque protest in Portsmouth/Southsea and half the story.
Last week the bBC knocked up 4 different itterations on the matter about how a few people held a protest outside Southsea mosque. The main direction of all those attempts was to express how offended,hurt and shocked Muslims were that people were protesting against a holy building. That they didn’t have a clue why people would target their mosque and that actually they had taken an active role in supporting Remembrance Day and the poppy appeal. (Well for somebody who supported the poppy appeal you’d think he would have at least worn a poppy.)
Anyway back to why he couldn’t understand why his mosque warranted a protest during the run up to Remembrance Sunday. Well if you go back exactly one year and not more than 100 metres from Southsea mosque this transpired.
An Iraqi-born yob who spat on a World War II hero’s medals on Remembrance Day yesterday escaped jail. Abdullah spat at Mr House as he chatted to friends outside a pub after the Memorial Day service in Portsmouth, Hampshire last year. He then ran off.When he was interviewed, Abdullah showed no remorse and told officers he had done ‘nothing wrong’ adding: ‘F*** him and f*** his medals.’
Serwan Abdullahs court case came up in feb of this year (9 months ago) and the bBC as usual wrote a different version of events . Which is probably why they had no problem trying to claim the Iman of that mosque which is 100 metres from where Addulah lives couldn’t understand why the people of the area decided to hold a protest.
BBC South TV was making much of this story and I wondered why. It seems the protest was drawing much support from the people of Southsea if the police are to be believed. I thought there was more to it and your post makes it clearer.
The tone of the report was to deplore this support more than the protest itself.
BBC South Today……….did you ever see such a stream of utter drivel? Big Nose Sally Taylor imagining she’s a journalist of some importance, Tom Hepworth sounding like a Jackanory presenter on acid, and a stream of overdressed weather candy waving their arms randomly in front of a map of Southern England while reciting uncomprehendingly a list of words that, if read by anyone but a weather bimbo, might ressemble a weather forecast.
And like all BBc news, a complete lack of gravitas. it’s infotainment. They think ‘The Day today’ is a guide, not satire.
Sarah Palin has made a series of progs on Alaska, just started on US TV and drew the biggest audience ever on that channel for a new series. Even her critics accept it is compulsive viewing. Compliments abound.
The BBC has not given it a single mention, as far as I am aware. Odd that – their obsession with La Palin gets deep-sixed if there is any good news about her ?
I for one would like to see this programme, even more if it means part of my licence fee goes to Sarah Palin – that’s why it would never be shown on the bBC. Oh well, guess I’ll download it…who needs the bBC anyway?
They’re still analyzing the footage looking for all the crypto-fascist symbolism, while hoping to catch her out making some remark which proves she’s a religious freak.
The bBC, how it reports on the Island incident between Costa Rica and Nicaragua and half the story.
Reading the above the bBC paints a story about a petty border dispute. Nothing more nothing less. When actually the reason isn’t as basic as a mistake by google maps.
You see next year the president of Nicaragua Daniel Ortega seeks a third unconstitutional, term as president. However in order to do so he has taken a leaf out of the Hugo Chazez book of corruption and forced a rewrite of the constitution because he deemed it was against his human rights to be denied running for another term of office. Of course western Sid donor nations have objected to how he has cheated and cut off Aid to Nicaraqua, which has resulted in Hugo Chavez jumping in. IN otherwords this border dispute is more about gaining the public support for Ortega and less about google. I wonder why the bBC forgot to mention any of that?
Don’t worry, I’m sure if Ortega does try to pull a Chavez and his own government arrests him for it, the BBC will do what they did for the same situation in Honduras and declare it a coup d’etat, and censor any mention of Chavez.
Yep any South American despot can fully rely on the BBC to come up with the goods, just as long as said despot is leftist of course.
We can rely on the BBC to show us both sides of the argument, we will get the despots version of events and…er…uhm..well thats it really but that is we need to know sint it?
John Humphrys tells us a toy manufacturer has reinstated the pig to a
farm-animal set. Withdrawing the pig, which upset a mother and fan of the pig, was done originally out of consideration for Muslims and Jews.
Has anyone ever heard of a Jew objecting to toy pigs in farm-animal sets?
Only the BBC methinks, who are at pains to portray pandering to alleged Muslim sensibilities as less exclusively ‘Muslimy’.
Must everything we modify to suit the ROP now include an additional cover-up objectee so as to normalise Islam? I can foresee some fun with that.
The essential difference is that Jews don’t expect everyone else to obey the norms of Judaism. I could imagine a Jewish mother quietly removing a pig from the set.
I doubt that many Jewish mothers would even remove the pig from the toy set. I had a farmyard set as a child and it included a pig as well as cows, sheep, horses, etc. I don’t remember my parents or more rligious visitors being in any way disquieted. This is borne of fear of Islam and Juidaism is just being used as a cover – http://notasheepmaybeagoat.blogspot.com/2010/11/dont-use-judaism-as-cover.html
I too was a nice Jewish boy who owned a toy farm complete with piggy. My family managed to survive this trauma…..
Any Jewish parent so orthodox as to actually care that a little plastic pig doesn’t make it into their home wouldn’t be buying that kind of toy set anyway. It’s a ridiculous assertion.
I cannot imagine that any Jews would take offence at this.
Jews are not allowed to EAT pigs. That’s it.
Quite recenty rabbis ruled that there was no problem with Jews having pig heart valves inserted in their bodies.
The idea that anyone would object to a child playing with toy pigs is simply ludicrous.
And you’re right – the stinking BBC always conflates Jews with Muslims as a strategy to deflect criticism of Islam.
The ridiculous thing is that some daft person from the toy shop is quoted as saying that Muslims and Jews don’t eat pork –as the reason why they shouldn’t sell toy pigs! That’s like saying vegetarians don’t eat pork, therefore we mustn’t sell toy pigs – or cattle, chickens etc, for that matter. According to that line of reasoning, we shouldn’t have farm toys at all. But that is just bonkers, of course.
The bBC how it reports on the story of the father who lost his daughter to an Asylum seeker and half the story.
The bBC wrote this very touching article about a father who spoke about getting the man who killed his daughter deported. But funny enough they forgot to mention this snippet from their article
Darwen dad told his opinion doesn’t count at asylum seeker hearing
A GRIEVING dad was told his views ‘would not count’ over whether the asylum seeker who left his daughter dying in the road will be deported. Paul Houston attended the immigration hearing today hoping to read a letter explaining the impact on his family since 12-year-old Amy’s death in November 2003.But he was left in tears after being denied the chance to express his views. After seeing how upset Mr Houston, 41, was, senior immigration judge Deborah Taylor agreed to take the letter but told him it would not count in her judgment….
‘Gratuitous Publicity Puff Posing As An Article’ Alert!!
(Mind you, it’s a shoe-in, what with the leather-clad vegetarian visiting Cuba – how could the BBC say no?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-11713098
That’s one of the problems with the ‘left’ they are incapable of seeing wrong in their precious left wing paradises. The reality of life for many in Cuba is somewhat at variance with the roimantic views expressed by Chrissie Hynde and the BBC.
Laying a bed on Sunday mornings listening to R5Live I have oft wished that an interviewee would slap the sanctimonious and pompous Gary Richardson. Well this morning on “Today (R4 8:30) Karen Brady (East End porno, Sugar TV sidekick, west Ham board & 2018 World Cup committee) duly obliged. Richardson had whinged in anticipation of the BBC being criticised for airing an upcoming Panorama critical of FIFA to be broadcast days before the 2018 decision. He then went on to sneer in a typical superior & cynical fashion because Brady refused to give a 100% guarantee that West Ham would keep their manager to the end of the season. Brady was not being duly humble in his presence & one could sense frostiness. He coldly asked her to stay on at the end of the interview, this, it transpired was because she was to add a tip to the regular Today horseracing selections. He came back to her & she brightly announced that the tip was inspired by him & the horse was “Rear Gunner”. He continued to his tips showing no reaction, even though it was met by much mirth from the other beeboids in the studio.
Gary Richardson is loathsome. Always looking to antagonise – like Humphrys and Paxman – and he’s a sports correspondent!
Richardson is a twat.
Royal Wedding
Anyone notice the ticker feed at the top of the BBC news page?
Running order are comments from
1. The Queen/Buck Pal
2. Ed Milliband
3. The Prime Minister
Surely some mistake in the order?
No didnt think so……
One gathers that the BBC first of all gets its political guidance from Labour Central, and then decides how the news gets spun from that later…
Unique.
I sense another ‘training’ at the taxpayer’s expense this ‘scoop’ from ‘Chief Political Correspondent for the BBC News Channel’:
BBCLauraK Laura Kuenssberg Ed Miliband says he is “delighted” for Prince William and Kate Middleton and the “whole country will be wishing them ever …
BBCLauraK Laura Kuenssberg Oops – sorry Tweet too long – Ed Miliband says ‘whole country will be wishing them every happiness
One can see how counting to 140, indeed even when aided by a counter on screen, may throw some.
Or maybe it was just being too used to copying and pasting PR from familiar sources too often? You know, ones like these…
BBCLauraK Laura Kuenssberg Labour sources are querying timing of “burying’ U-turn on D St photographer on day Royal Wedding is announced
One is sure they are, dear. As we can be sure you will trot out whatever they send as is, immediately.
Ah nice to see lara kronensberg getting all the Liebour scoops as the ED.s have an eye [and a bag of sweets ] for the BBC types hardley a surprise though!
She really has taken Nick Robison’s slot, then.
David Dimbleby, one of the al-beeb’s Prime-timers, one of its Seven-Figure-Men, on Saturday Any Answers came out with…
“Is it sinful to be unemployed, as Iain Duncan-Smith implied on the Today Programme?”
Double D no doubt felt that ‘implied’ was his get-out-of-jail-free card. Unfortunately no because two minutes later he was shuddering into reverse gear.
‘What he seemed to be saying was…I think there was a context. When you alight on one word of course, it can seem different from what was intended, but reading the whole paragraph, the whole thought, it seems to be that what he said was sinful and tragic that when 4 million jobs were created in this country during the Labour government so many of this jobs were taken by people from outside this country, because those inside the country were unable for whatever reason…maybe some of them unwilling to take those jobs, and that’s what he thought…I think… how can I speak for him? I can’t possibly… that’s a sin I imagine he said that’s really awful how tragic that’s the case.”
Well, yeah, next time Mr Brilliant Journalist, Mr High Quality Broadcaster do read the whole paragraph.
Oh to have been a fly in his headphones in that two minutes when Mark Thompson was screaming down the line at him
Edit – soz posted that in the wrong thread before.
Addendum: just what was going through Dimbleby’s head when he led with ‘Is it sinful to be unemployed, as Iain Duncan-Smith implied on the Today Programme?”
Would not be sinful if Dimbleby found himself unemployed, that’s for sure. Would be a blessed mercy.
Thank for pointing up this twisting of facts by the beebles ! as i cannot get a sentence together about the Beebles treament of I.D.S’s very simple statement without er losing my calm shall we say ! ahem !
Dimbleby is prize twat. Humourless, dull and incapable of understanding intellectual nuance. My second least favourite Beeboid (after the fat slob John Simpson, who is more concerned with his elephantione ego than anything else).
That’s The Other Dimbleby who does Any Answers? 😉
‘One can learn more about Islam in practice from the ‘Daily Star’ than one can from INBBC.’ Discuss.
‘Daily Star’:
“WE’LL FLY BLACK FLAG OF ISLAM FROM NO10: HATE MOB IN THREAT OVER JAILED CLERIC”
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/163107/We-ll-fly-black-flag-of-Islam-from-No10-Hate-mob-in-threat-over-jailed-cleric
INBBC report: Zero, so far.
Isn’t it amazing how many news pages the BBC can devote to a small-scale protest which was held outside a Portsmouth mosque, yet can almost completely ignore the much nastier poppy burning protest held on Armistice day.
Here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-11755462
and here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-11751268
and here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-11752757
They all make a brief mention of the Muslim poppy protestors but fail to link to any story directly about the Muslim protest. Naturally they do of course link to the story of the arrest of the EDL leader
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11744811 at the same protest.
All the above can be found by searching the BBC’s site using terms like poppy protest, armistice day, armistice protest etc. But hard as I try, I cannot find any story directly about last week’s Muslim hate protest. The Daily Mail had no problem of course
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1328703/Two-faces-Armistice-Day-Boy-brimming-pride-fanatics-burning-hate.html
BBC, your bias is staggeringly obvious and you clearly make no attempt at balance.
Remember the fear the EDL generates in the minds of the BBC and the governing class and the omission becomes obvious.
I know little about the EDL but I do know it worries them.
A lot of BBC bias is fear driven.
Why do we need a Al-beebja helicopter – tellytax-funded – hovering over Buckingham Palace at the moment to bring us the Royal Wedding story?
Has the place changed since last time? Will stock footage of the roof from above from earlier this year not do?
Well obviously we don’t need the helicopter but if you have all that telly tax money then you may as well spend it before it is taken away
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11767314
…and then, Rory, there is the near daily output from a market-rate talent-bearing oufit not too far removed from where you are sitting.
Anyhoo.. Helen, maybe pop a link to this around instead, the next time you figure the licence fee payer needs to pay for your employees to put stuff they shouldn’t into the public domain, ironically as others in editorial seem to spend their lives concocting ways to not put other stuff out that doesn’t suit.. or simply ‘tweak’ it to help the narrative.
xx
Is it my imagination is is most of the footage on the scummy student riots the Police are using to track down the thugs coming from Sky News? What were the BBC filming last week? Rent boys?
Just for clarification, are rent boys boys for rent (like a pied-à-terre in Eaton Square, or more likely Bayswater), or are they boys who have been literally rent in two? Or both?
Now is there something the BBC is trying not to tell us?
The EU commissars want/need Ireland to take their buy out money, Irleand looks at the small print and says not if we can help it chum. The EU ratchet up the pressure and stooge outlets are running stories from the EU perspective with bought off reporters laying the angles down like a Bronx car dealer.
But wait theres more to this story than you might think, the UK is not in the euro and has no national interest stake in its survival. The UK is broke, there is not enough money to provide the UK with a serviceable navy and cuts cuts cuts rule the day, remember that there is no money left?
Now why would Cameron be claiming that he is ready to rescue the Irish economy with billions of pounds while claiming that UK trade would be adversly affected if the UK failed to cough up the billions of pounds? Something stinks me thinks!
The coalition aint preparing to sling billions of pounds in aid at Ireland, the UK is preparing to follow the direct orders of the Brussels commissars and transfer the billions of pounds to Brussels and only from Brussels will the cash be forwarded on with other EU cash. Geddit?
We are being ‘handled’ in a media sense, readied and prepared for the ‘good news’ the UK rides to the rescue of close trading partner Ireland, land of the plucky Paddy etc. Now if the coalition told the truth that the EU commissars have sent yet another demand for money and the UK regional satrap regime is duty bound to obey and place the interests of the EU above those of the UK then the people of the UK would be furious.
The UK is broke UNTIL the EU come banging on the door with their hand out, the UK is a money pit, it never mattered whether we were in or out of the euro you see, in or out the UK will cough up at every demand for cash, this is the story the BBC aint telling us for some reason.
If the UK hands over billions to save(purchase a controlling stake for the EU commissars)Ireland that will not benefit the UK at all then the line of bailout nations will grow. next will be Greece and Portugal and others, will the coalition use the essential trading partner excuse then?
The long and short of it is that the EU calls the shots with the UK economy now, they demand money and the UK pays up as if it were some kind of protection racket. The Brussels thugs come a calling and expect the money to be handed over with no ifs and no buts.
Everything the coalition is doing was done by Blair, rule by press release and stooge media deception. The EU is the boss man now, the whip cracks and the lacky lickspittles at Westminster jump about.
What our government is actually going to do is to pledge the labour and wealth generating ability of our people to a series of bankrupt countries and a deeply flawed system- the Euro.
This is wrong.
The argument might be made that our banks are in to Ireland for countless billions and this is the least worse option.
It is still wrong for those banks made their own decisions and are not “too big to fail”
No generation has the right to pledge the labour of it’s children to prop up a discredited financial system because this is what it will mean.
I almost sound like a socialist! Not at all . Human nature is such that the capitalist system has always needed firm regulation to ensure it does not indulge in behaviour that harms all the nation.
The first duty of government is to act in the national interest of all of us.
@isaby Jonathan IsabyWhy does the BBC need its (licence fee payer-funded) helicopter hovering above Buckingham Palace??
Well, you could ask Mr. Hunt, I suppose. For all the good it will do.
Personally, I think it was just killing some time until Roger, Richard & David had finished in the BBC bar, to whisk them to a private country retreat to de-stress over nobody taking them seriously any more on matters enviro.
Obama has a new book. Palin has a TV programme.
But which is best?
There’s only one way to find out…compare and contrast BBC coverage of course.
Barry gets a nice article, a couple of nice quotes, a nice big picture so we can all pick it out at Waterstone’s. All very nice.
Palin gets this. Plenty of sneering and cynicism from the very first second – I’m sure John Humphrys starts with some sort of shooting gag, but my speakers mean I can’t make it out very well.
So put Barry’s book on your Christmas list, and if there’s still some room left maybe you could add something from here as well.
Spare a thought for all those kids with parents employed at the BBC who will have to fake gratitude when they open Obama’s book on Christmas morning.
Humphrys sounds like he’s totally drunk. He’s slurring his words, saying them slowly as if trying to sound sober – but failing and laughing at things that aren’t remotely funny.
He also made fun of Palin for pointing out that Alaska is near Russia. Perhaps he ought to look at a map and see that she has a much better idea where her state lies in the world than he does. She probably knows many things better than him to be honest.
First stages of dementure…
Like how to shoot and maintain an AR-15. The only thing Humphrys has ever shot is his load. Across some fat young boy’s back.
Oh god that image is gonna stick !!eeewwwwwwwwwww they don’t make water hot enough !
No sitting President has ever published anything commercially while in office. If Bush had done this, the Beeboids would be sneering at the phony patriotic populism. Georgia O’Keefe in the same breath as George Washington? Seriously?
So that’s what the President has been doing. I had been wondering.
Millie T, you give Him too much credit. According to the publisher, He actually wrote it some time before He took office. Or had it prepared for Him at that time.
Nice to have ‘nowt else to do and plenty of free time.
Plus an MSM indulgent of this.
The bBC reporting on violence committed by Muslims and half the story.
Homes burnt in southern Egypt Muslim-Christian violence
At least 10 houses have been burnt down in a confrontation between Christians and Muslims in southern Egypt.No one was injured in the attack, the latest flare-up between Egypt‘s majority Muslims and Christians, who make up some 10% of the population. The cause is believed to be rumours of a relationship between a Coptic Christian man and a Muslim woman….. The incident is a symptom of the wider tensions between the two communities, where rumours are quick to spread, and both sides fear attack by the other.
Reading the above do you get the impression that all of the fighting was 50/50 and the Muslims gave as good as they got. I mean the last line above points in that direction and here is what the bBC isn’t telling you as read by the locals in the Middle East:
Israel
Muslim-Christian tensions broke out on Monday in southern Egypt, where a Muslim mob stormed a Christian neighborhood in the mixed city of Abu Tesht and set fire to several homes. The arson attack followed rumors that a Christian man was romantically involved with a young Muslim woman.
Gulf states
Muslims set fire to homes owned by the family of a Christian man after he was rumoured to have flirted with a Muslim girl in a southern village, Egyptian security officials said on Tuesday.Police surrounded Al Nawahid village in Qena province and arrested several Muslims after the overnight torching of five homes, a store and a storage place owned by the Coptic Christian family, officials said.Most of the Muslims who allegedly took part in the incident were relatives of the girl, they added.
According to the bBC houses were burnt down during fighting between Christians and Muslims in southern Egypt due to rumours of an affair between a Christian man and a Muslim women.
The actual facts state that an Islamic mob went on the rampage after a Christian man was seen walking and talking to a Muslim woman, that mob then went on and burnt down several Chritian houses.
Why does the bBC go out of its way in which to hide the ugliness that is Islam? A religion of peace my arse.
Threw a bit of a fit the other day. Saw about a minute and a half of Sally Bercow on Have I Got News for You. She is constitutional joke, but her husband is a constitutional risk. I left the room after saying something so extreme that I won’t repeat it and left the psycho I’m married to (By God can she cook though) to watch it.
Jesus the BBC is so riddled with PC/left nonsense that it can only be fit for the bonfire.
Bet she likes “X-Factor”…
(Mrs. Law, that is, not the Ber Cow)
Bishop Hill and Harmless Sky have made a submission to the bBC review of impartiality in science coverage.
I’m still digesting it but it looks good. They get their teeth into Harrabin.
Oops. My joke about the three main Whores of the Apocalypse bunkering down via helicopter, above, was probably closer to the mark.
Interesting how they have morphed from French Knights at Agincourt, thundering across the field oblivious to the reality of what faces them, to hit & runners popping out of a hole to issue a broadcast only ‘report’ before scurrying off to chair a ‘seminar’ in a friendly zone.
All blogging seems to have ceased. Still, nice to have a £3.6B megaphone to 60M+ to keep on chanting the call to the faithful.
Delingpole is onto it – http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/jamesdelingpole/
Bloody good job too. Hang ’em out to dry.
Yes, title to James Delinpole’s article:
“Why the BBC cannot be trusted on ‘Climate Change’: the full story”
[Opening paragraph]:
“When the history of the greatest pseudoscience fraud in history -aka ‘Climate Change’ – comes to be written, no media organisation, not even the Guardian or the New York Times, will deserve greater censure than the steaming cess pit of ecofascist bias that is the BBC. That’s because, of all the numerous MSM outlets which have been acting as the green movement’s useful idiots, the BBC is the only one which is taxpayer funded and which is required by its charter to adopt an ideologically neutral position.”
For some reason, the BBC has decided to copy and paste from a wire service report about my Congressman, Rep. Charles Rangel’s conviction on 11 counts of ethics violations. I mean, nothing’s going to happen to him other than the lightest possible slap on the wrist. He was already more or less elbowed out of his committe chairman’s seat months ago because the Dem leadership making a political gesture towards cleaning up corruption before the election, so any official reprimand will be little more than a “Tut-tut, for the record” vote by his colleagues.
Left out of this cheap news brief are two important facts which put specific parts of this into a different context. This part, for example, leaves out two key pieces of information:
The panel reached its decision after a second day of closed-door discussions. But the congressman was not present when the verdict was announced.
The senior New York congressman walked out of proceedings on Monday in protest at the panel’s refusal to postpone the hearing while he found a new lawyer.
What the BBC doesn’t want you to know – or just couldn’t be bothered to find out – is that Rangel’s previous firm dumped him at the last minute, after being paid almost $2 million. Why would that be, I wonder? The other key piece of information censored by the BBC or whatever biased wire service they got this from is that Rangel paid those lawyers out of his campaign fund – which is unethical, but apparently not illegal.
So what looks like a possible miscarriage of justice – Ooh, the poor victim wasn’t given a chance to defend himself against his accusers – is actually a case of a corrupt politician failing to get away with yet another scam.
Then there’s the fact that the corrupt Democrat leadership slyly postponed the hearing until after the mid-terms, in order to keep Rangel in office and protect the Party from too much negative attention. This wasn’t even pointed out by the BBC in their other news brief about Rangel. That piece also censored the information about why he no longer had legal representation.
One other problem with this BBC News Online piece is that none of the “From other news sites” link to any local New York news sources. That’s sloppiness and poor editorial policy, not bias. Couldn’t they find anything within 500 miles?
Tonight, ‘Newsnight’ gets in the only two historians it apparfently knows about, (one American, Schama, one British, Starkey) to explain a ‘Royal Wedding’ to us.
Will it be as instructive as this ‘Royal Wedding’ sequence of 1951?:
Gay activists chain themselves to White House gate
Gay rights activists briefly handcuffed themselves to the White House’s north gate on Monday, urging President Barack Obama to repeal a ban on homosexuals serving openly in the military.
Thirteen demonstrators organized by the GetEQUAL campaign for gay rights — including nine veterans, a Catholic priest and other advocates — were arrested after shouting they were “proud to serve” and vowing: “We will not disappear.”
The BBC’s coverage of the President’s abject failure on gay rights issues:
The Today Program this morning, Jim ‘Ivan’ Nauchtie takes comments from Sue Cameron of the FT about the David Cameron personal photogrpaher story.
Nauchties claims that no previous primer ministers had tried to have a ‘vanity photographer.’
Actually Tony Blair did says Ms.Cameron, Alistair Campbell tried to push it through, but it was knocked back by the cabinet secretary.
Silence from Jim Nauchtie, then he comes back with it being a little bit suspect that the government announced that the photographer will be paid by the Conservative Party and not as a civil servant on the day of the announcement of a Royal Wedding.
‘Yes’ says Sue Cameron, handing the beaten Mr Nauchties his testicles on a plate – ‘yesterday was a very good day to bury bad news.’
Now this Sue Cameron is a previous BBC2 Newsnight presenter, why did she feel the need to stick the knife into labour like that?
The number is not, but I am wondering if the time between posting and closing on Nick R’s latest blog isn’t some kind of record…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2010/11/cameron_photogr.html#comments
Certainly shut up shop at almost 5.30pm on the nail, neatly before any actual stiffs with real working jobs get home to chip in… to a blog in theory run for all by the national broadcaster they are compelled to pay for.
Some might have noted this…
‘So too Nicky Woodhouse, the woman behind Webcameron.’
…and asked of this was a different take to Mr. Crick of Newsnight’s description of this as a ‘propaganda service’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/michaelcrick/2010/11/tories_and_lib_dems_offer_jobs.html
A distinction possibly covered here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/2010/10/new-bbc-editorial-guidelines-l.shtml
Or, then again, along with most else it promised, possibly not.
Speaking of early closing, I am wondering how long Richard Black’s latest venture beyond the bunker may last before ‘watertight oversight’ gets imposed.
If only because he is being filleted.
John Swinney (I had to google for the spelling I’m afraid) who is the Finance Minister for the Scottish Subsidy Shuffling Party, in coalition government with the Scottish We’ll Shuffle The Subsidy Differently Party will today announce – according to the BBC – “one billion pounds of savings”.
Funny that, when it’s a ‘friendly’ it’s ‘savings’ when it’s the nasty baby-eating George Osborne it’s CUTS CUTS CUTS EVERYONE CUTS DID YOU HEAR YES CUTS CUTS CUTS.
They have so whored themselves to the cause, the BBC, that even simple reportage is beyond them.
Time to put them on subscription only.
Time to apply cuts to the jobs of the bratocracy who have total contempt for the concept of professional integrity and objectivity.
For info, the Scottish Subsidy Shuffling Party isn’t in coalition, it’s running a minority government, which has given it all sorts of problems, with the Tories making them shuffle the subsidies in all sorts of different directions.
Thanks Rue, I suppose I should have googled that as well but a big van with a spinning antenna on the roof had just stopped outside and I was headed for the shed. 😉
Let the Scots have their referendum on the condition that if they vote No to independence the English also get a vote on whether to let Scotland stay in the Union or not.
Kick them out and we’d save a bloody fortune.
Whole different topic, but ‘independence’ to Scotland means the freedom to choose whether to be dependent on the English taxpayer or the EC taxpayer. That it might mean ‘independence’ as in ‘not dependent’… naaah.
That post was by iphone in the shed btw. Through a gap in the larch I can see someone dressed as a SWAT operative on my roof holding a meter against my tv aerial.
🙁
This article and the submission to BBC about the BBC’s stance on climate change is well worth a read:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/11/16/montford-and-newberys-submission-to-the-bbcs-science-coverage-review/
Beeboid Colette something on the News Channel just now saying that 40% of the Welsh budget is spent on “health”, and is very concerned what will happen with the new swinging cuts forced on the innocents by the nasty people in Westminster.
Nobody is going to bother discussing how and why the public sector is the largest employer in Wales, with almost 25% of all jobs. It’s just scaremongering about what will happen to the roads and health services. Is there no segment of the public sector which the BBC might find to be too big or wasteful? It all seems so vitally necessary to hear them tell it.
For those interested Mark Steyn is standing in for Limbaugh today, 5pm GMT. Usually pretty good.
http://wabcradio.com/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11777743
No evidence against MI5, but we pay Binyam a million plus anyway.
And no comment on it from Al-bBC.
Utterly sickening.
We should stand up to these people and give them nothing but a swift permanent exit from the UK.
If that means it costs us more money than paying them off then its regrettable but so be it.
Make it clear the costs are incurred due to the previous government and put the blame where it is needed, but do not endanger British lives.
Pay the money if need be, take them to court.
This is the security and defence of the realm.
By making a payoff you make future actions more likely and put UK forces and civilians at lethal risk – it is little better than doing deals with terrorists or paying off pirates or kidnappers, what happened to the the British government doing no deals.
With the British people having to swallow huge real cuts, this sort of obscene payoff to terror supporters brings the government into disrepute.
But the bBC just tamely accepts it, shocking.
BBCLauraK Laura Kuenssberg Ed Balls has written to the Home Secretary about forcing police officers to retire to bring down police numbers
Not sure, but maybe she and Ed are advocating it? Hard to tell, but I doubt it.
The bBC, and it’s ongoing misinformation campaign against Israel
Fears of split in Israeli-Lebanon border village
The above (And a number of other bBC articles written today) all point to how the nasty jews are going to rock the boat by handing over the top half of the village of Ghajar to the Lebanese. A little more detail from the bBC explains that Israel captured the village in 1967 and has been there ever since. Really?
Here is what the bBC isn’t telling you about the village of Ghajar. While they explain that all the amenities are in the southern Half of the town they don’t mention that the reason for that is the Northern part is the newer part which between 2000 and 2005 (when Israel pulled out of Lebanon) was administered by Beruit and as we all know the locals always leave it to the Jews to build up the infrastructure. In 2005 Hezb-allah launched a devastating attack on the village in which to try and capture an IDF soldier unfortuantly for them the IDF was waiting and killed the kidnapping team. Since 2006 and the war with Hezb-allah Israel moved back into the Northern half in which to secure the whole areas and it is that half it is handing back to Lebanon. So if the locals were happy to be ruled by Beirut between 2000-2005 why is the bbC bitching now? Funny enough the locals have been protesting which is why 500 of them held a protest that they don’t wish to be Lebanese, but rather Israeli or Syrian. I wonder why the bBC didn’t mention the former just like they don’t mention that the entire village opted to take up Israeli citizenship in 1981. The way the bBC writes up that snippet you get the impression it was forced upon them. Really? funny how all those Druze Syrians who live in the area (you know who the bBC had protesting about the lack of water the otherweek) had no problem refusing the same offer.
Strange how the bbC which takes great store in bitching when Israel doesn’t do as the UN asks, is making Israel out to be the baddy when they do and in a situation where the local people want to remain with Israel. Now contrast that viewpoint with how the bBC fights for the rights of the people of: Kosovo, Kashmire, Southern Thailand.
Makes you wonder if the bBC is as impartial as it makes out.
I don’t really agree that Wyre Davies is making Israel out to be the bad guy for splitting the village. I do, though, agree that the piece is weighted very heavily in the direction of making Israel look like the villain in the situation with Lebanon in general.
But Davies is avoiding placing blame where it actually belongs: the UN. He just sees Israel at war, and won’t blame the UN for creating the “split” in the first place.
It will be very interesting how many villagers will opt to abandon their property and remain in Israel.
Residents of Lebanon border town protest Israel decision to withdraw unilaterally
Reluctantly, INBBC reports about ‘the tiny minority of Islamic extremists’ again:
‘Jihadwatch’:
Germany warns of “concrete indications” of planned jihadist attacks on airports, railways
The ‘misunderstandings’ of the Religion of Peace just keep on coming. Funny how that keeps happening, not to mention the uniformity with which Islam is so routinely ‘misunderstood.’ ” (‘Jihadwatch’.)
“Germany tightens airport security over attacks threat,”
BBC News,
The Islamic face of schoolchildren in Britain shows itself, but INBBC censors it online. ‘Daily Mail’ doesn’t:-
“Five Muslim boys and white girl, all 12, excluded over Facebook death threats to classmate who supported British troops”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1330517/Boys-excluded-Facebook-death-threats-classmate.html#ixzz15YnFCh2E
‘
Good spot George.
Now let’s imagine a group of white kids had done the same but with Islam as the target……
I reckon no less than 9373630974875 Beeboids on the case, across radio, TV and web.
George, thanks for the abover, didn’t know the DM had picked ip on it or that it was six brats. follow the link back to my shared blog site where I name the little bastard behind these threats.
The bBC, the current headline story about gas prices and half the story.
Gas and electricity prices: How are they calculated?
The bbC goes to great lengths in which to try and explain the recent hike in gas prices. But for some reason it doesn’t want people to know that actually the price of gas is the lowest it has been for a long time and that situation will remain for around 20 years and the reason why is that the US having developed a home-grown shale gas industry has turned from a net importer of Natural gas to a rival to Russia when it comes to exporting Gas. Which explains why the UK received its first shipment of gas from the US last week. A landmark event the bBC hasn’t bothered mentioning?
The BBC has set up a blog page to promote the new Miranda series. Personally, I don’t see her appeal. Is it supposed to be funny simply because she’s unattractive yet carefree, no cleverness required? In any case, as her comedy stylings are largely based on those cherished fundamentals of British comedy – embarrassment and toilet humor – the BBC is asking viewers to share their own “Miranda moments” of cringing from embarrassment, and Miranda herself starts off with her own “cringe of the week”, which is a classic example of it.
The very first submission from a viewer, though, is great:
Realised that this is where my license fee goes. Cringe.
She is awful. She’s also turned up in “Not going out” which I don’t now watch.
It was quite good when Megan Dodds was in it.
Anything is good when Megan Dodds is in it. 🙂
Apart from the Rachel Corrie stage thing, but I’m pretending that didn’t happen……..
“England 2018 bid chief brands BBC as ‘unpatriotic'”
INBBC response?: ‘What do you mean, ‘unpatriotic’?; we support Binyam Mohamed.’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/9201248.stm
‘Jerusalem Post’:
“IAF kills 2 terror operatives in Gaza air strike ”
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=195733
Anyone else see George Alagiah’s report from Afghanistan regarding women?
I love the way he said that women were punished by the Taliban using an extreme interpretation of Sharia law”
I couldn’t stop laughing, how can you have an extreme version of something that is already extreme????
It’s like saying there is an extreme version of cannibalism.
For INBBC’s G. Alagiah, about ‘what is Sharia’ (from ‘Political Islam’ site):
“This question can be answered by the fact that all Sharia is based on Koran and Sunna. Sunna is pure Mohammed and Koran is the delivered by Mohammed, so we can say that Mohammed is the only standard for truth in Islam.”
[…]
“We have to educate ourselves because the universities are bankrupt on the subject of Islam. They do not allow any teaching about Islam that is critical and uses critical thought from the standpoint of the Kafir. No debate is allowed. Only Muslims and dhimmi apologists are allowed to speak about Islam. Anyone who disagrees based on their own understanding is a bigot.”
http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/self-taught/
Here’s something since the kidnapped British couple (The Chandlers) have found their freedom. Have you noticed how the bBC really has gone out of their way in which to try and paint Somali muslims as the heroes. We’ve had articles about Somalis handing money over..really? Somali classing themselves as British and now the bBC airs an article about how the criminals who kidnapped and tortured this couple are allowed to bleat that the kidnapping was a mistake, that they only resort to kidnapping because they have no jobs and nothing to feed their kids.
Christ is there any subject the bBC won’t rewrite Muslims as the victims?
Richard Black on tuna –
But following the results of the mid-term elections, the Gulf of Mexico oil leak (which may have badly affected bluefin spawning there) and the stalling of climate negotiations, the Obama administration is not in as firm a position as it might wish to push any environmental agenda aggressively.
I’m not here interested in the tuna argument but note the “may have” in the brackets pushing the usual agenda.
Contrast this with an NRO article –
The catastrophists were wrong (again) about the Deep Water Horizon oil spill. There have been no major fish die-offs. On the contrary, a comprehensive new study says that in some of the most heavily fished areas of the Gulf of Mexico, various forms of sea life, from shrimp to sharks, have seen their populations triple since before the spill. Some species, including shrimp and croaker, did even better.
………………………………
Also surprising was how quickly the populations grew. “In the cosmic scheme of things, a matter of four or five months led to this huge difference in everything, sharks, fish of all forms, even the juvenile fish found in sea-grass beds. That’s a pretty interesting and unanticipated outcome, I would say,” says Valentine. The surge is so robust, he says, that it may be impossible to determine whether the oil spill has had any effect on sea life at all.
Why oh why is it all so one-sided with Black and the bBC?
Bias in their genes.
Why would The Obamessiah have less political capital these days because of the oil spill? Could Black be tacitly admitting that He screwed up the clean-up process and blocked media access to key areas? The BBC sure as hell never reported any of that.
Black must have been watching an entirely different mid-term election than the rest of the solar system if he thinks a lack of progress on Climate Change legislation and a deal in Copenhagen was even remotely related to the Democrats’ big losses.
He’s seeing the world through his own prejudices, clearely not based in reality.
Oddly Richard Black and other BBC “journalists” ignore the natural seepage of hydrocarbons into the Gulf. For instance, this project proposal http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/FutureSupply/MethaneHydrates/projects/DOEProjects/MH_05638HYFLUX.html , although infected with climate change hysteria, en passant points to the extent of natural hydrocarbon leakage into the Gulf. Further, this abstract http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/view.php?id=20863 issued by NASA Earth Observatory in and concerning research work undertaken in the late 1990s stated that “twice an Exxon Valdez spill worth of oil seeps into the Gulf of Mexico every year”. The Exxon Valdez spilled 250/750,000 barrels of crude oil into Prince William Sound.
Black – another BBC employee with impartiality in his genes – is happy to crucify BP for what exactly? Well, it demonises Big Oil generally and bigs up Obama’s crudely xenophobic mouthing on the subject. OTOH does he get the great unwashed out here nearer an appreciation of what might really be happening out there? I don’t think so but that’s not the function of Black’s “journalism” is it?
BBC-Obama’s Mardell is pushing the Democrat line that the Republicans are not being politically supportive of Obama, and so are causing problems for America; Mardell’s piece has the headline:
“Republican moves test co-operation”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/
But more accurately, Mardell’s headline could be:
“Democrat moves test co-operation”
-see this about Soros, re-Obama –
“Soros Tells Progressives: Prepare to Bail on Obama”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/soros-tells-progressives-prepare-to-bail-on-obama/
This is pure White House propaganda. Mardell is being as partisan as possible here.
It’s the President who is unwilling to compromise, not the nasty Republicans. What’s more, Mardell is talking as if whatever He wants to do is absolutely necessary, and it’s wrong for the Republicans to disagree. Fretting over the President’s difficulties in getting what He wants is partisan behavior.
And of course as this is Mark Mardell, there’s something he doesn’t want you to know. He moans that the Republicans snubbed his beloved Obamessiah, when this is in fact the President who has never deigned to have a one-on-one meeting with the Republican leader in the Senate. But according to Mardell, it’s just nastiness from the Republicans.
And what’s this nonsense about Republicans harming our national security interests? What successes has the Obamessiah Administration had in foreign policy where He’s helped us on that score? The diplomatic “reset” attempt with Russia where they couldn’t even get someone who spoke Russian to get the word right? Returning the Churchill bust the minute He moved into the Oval Office? After Gordon Brown’s very thoughtful gift, giving the PM in return a set of DVDs that he couldn’t even watch because they were encoded for the wrong region, and then blowing off a joint press conference? Embracing Hugo Chavez and failing to help our allies in democracy in Latin America? Sucking up to Iran? Letting China continue to get away with their financial shenanigans at our expense? Giving Putin everything he wanted regarding our own missile defense system and getting nothing in exchange?
None of that ever happened in Mardell’s world, I’m sure. Once again he speaks as if the President’s desires are correct, and disagreeing is dangerous, giving no consideration to the idea that maybe the Republicans are right.
Listened to Today in the car this morning between around 7:50 & 8:20. Two items jumped out at me.
1: Justin Webb interviewing Grant Shapps on housing benefit. If Craig was monitoring it his interruption coefficient would have gone through the roof. I was willing Mr Shapps to take Mr Webb to task on this but he never did. It contrasted mightily with Justin’s reverential silence in his interview after the news. (Didn’t catch the interviewee’s name but it was about Guantanamo Bay.)
Why does the BBC only ever concentrate on the hardships that will arise from the spending freeze? I’ve rarely heard a serious interview on Today about the hardships that will arise if the Government doesn’t rein back spending.
2: Mark Mardell in the 8:00 news described Sarah Palin as “brash, folksy and shrill”. Impartiality in the genes, indeed.
They simply can’t write unbiased, factual pieces anymore. There has to be someone to blame(not the left), behold(muslims) or be enriched by(immigrants).
The unacceptable farce of the BBC Trust, as illustrated on ‘Today’.
Thoughout this long, ‘in-grown toenail’ of a converation between BBC-NUJ’s Naughtie, and BBC Trust’s retiring chairman, Lyons, the absurdity of the Trust’s contradictory role was obvious to all licencepayers, if not to the Naughtie and Lyons.
From Lyons’ cheery opening of ‘Hello Jim’ the cosy relationship of Trust with BBC-NUJ was obvious. There was no one to represent the interests of British licencepayers, of course. Get rid of the Trust; and the BBC licence fee.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9202000/9202440.stm
A key BBC-NUJ-Labour political success:
“White Britons to become minority by 2066”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/8142176/White-Britons-to-become-minority-by-2066.html
Dame Nikki excelled herself this morning on Radio 5 Life-Support-System. The government immigration minister (who he ?) was on and happened to commit the cardinal error (on Dame Nikki’s show at any rate) of having a pop at the last ‘government’.
‘Of course we inherited an economic mess’.
(Deathly silence while the Dame seethes)
‘Really’, she says, ‘there’s a huge argument about that’.
Has anyone out there heard this ‘huge argument’? Fraid I haven’t. Perhaps the Dame will come on here and enlighten us.
Edit : I’ve just had a phone call from Dame Nikki’s agent who’s under the arches at Charing X station (let’s face it he ain’t got a great gig). He first asked me for a couple of quid ‘fer ma bus fare hame’ and then told me that the ‘huge argument’ the Dame referred to is regularly aired on The Gordon Brown Hour on Radio Kirkcaldy, to which Nikki is a regular listener.
Respect to the fella for clearing that up.