He never knew the half of it! Vent here…
OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- BigBrotherCorporation Nov 22, 22:43
Weekend 23rd November 2024
I thought the BBC were giving X the cold shoulder, because of Musk supporting Trump? - Guest Who Nov 22, 22:21
Weekend 23rd November 2024
https://x.com/bbcnews/status/1860028485890105443?s=61 Farming tax row – BBC Verify on which figures are more reliable and why Once folk have stopped laughing…… - Fedup2 Nov 22, 22:09
Weekend 23rd November 2024
Outrageous – BBC. Reports that the sentencing of Donald trump – an already convicted Felon – for a white collar… - atlas_shrugged Nov 22, 21:16
Midweek 20th November 2024
The French want to kick the British border check out of Calais so that they can just send the invaders… - Lefty Wright Nov 22, 21:12
Weekend 23rd November 2024
Flotsam Don’t tell anyone but we don’t refer to global warming any more. in New Speak we have to refer… - Fedup2 Nov 22, 21:09
Midweek 20th November 2024
Really vexed . The truth about Rachel Reeves insolvent with the Bank of England is coming out now ….. but… - Flotsam Nov 22, 20:50
Weekend 23rd November 2024
It’s snowing, feezing cold and frosty…………must be global warming - Lefty Wright Nov 22, 20:41
Midweek 20th November 2024
Scroblene The Private Eye ain’t the man he was some years ago. To me he kind of morphed into a…
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
Fat shit Mardell having a go at Sarah Palin again, the BBC really don’t like strong right wing women do they?
Oh and anyone else noticed that since Barry came to power dictators around the world are simply taking the piss out of America?
Oh, that’s just the President confusing his enemies.
Aunty does irony… at least in a way that sums up worrying times for democratic free speech rather well..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/dailypolitics/andrewneil/2010/11/these_are_worrying_times.html
Check out (while you can… I have kept a grab if the inevitable happens) the post that made it to No.25 before the thread gets ‘closed for comments’.
Evidently some schoolmarm at Aunty is out to teach chippy posters a lesson, though the only one seems tto be that on a free and open debating blog you tow the line, or else. Not sure that is so smart when it is for, and paid for the public who fund the BBC so ‘uniquely’.
Because if they withdraw service in this manner, then there can be little to not justify the public withdrawing payment in response… as if the daily breaches of Charter and service delivery were not enough already.
One wonders if Helen Boaden and David Jordan are aware… or complicit?
DW Wrote: >>One wonders if Helen Boaden and David Jordan are aware… or complicit?<<
My money’s on complicit, especially David Jordan, bets on certainty.
Oh, that’s just the President confusing his enemies.
Confusing them… like a fox (albeit one strewn along the fast lane between exits 23 and 24 of the M4).
Where’s the INBBC sob story about the ‘surprised’ Muslim parents of these jihadists? (As the example from ‘Newsnight’, Tuesday.)
INBBC ignores the reality of the Islamic jihad war being waged against British people from inside and outside this country.
‘Jihadwatch’ refers to this ‘Guardian’ report:
“I work as a minicab driver…But these people are my friends and my family and it’s my duty to come to fight the jihad with them”
[Extract]:
“Muslims in the U.K. are traveling to Afghanistan and spending part of the year fighting jihad for the Taliban. Then they go back to driving cabs in Birmingham. ‘UK-based Taliban spend months fighting Nato forces in Afghanistan,'”
Which of the following reports is most sanitised so as not to offend Muslim perpetrators of sex crimes against white English school girls?
1.) ‘Daily Mail’:
“Asian gang of predators abused and raped up to 100 girls as young as 12”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1332746/Asian-gang-raped-girls-young-12-picking-streets-sex.html#ixzz16HrBzfXO
2.) INBBC report:
“Agencies ‘missed chances’ to help Derby sex gang girls”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-11834872
(INBBC narrative: shift the blame away from any Muslims convicted of sex crimes against English white school girls, and concentrate on the responsibilities of the ‘agencies’.)
Funny how the only person for years who warned the Public about the Muslim Paedophile Race Rapes was Nick Griffin.
And the first time the BBC reported this issue on Radio 4 (I think, maybe 5 Live), one of the commentators blamed the girls for being kidnapped and raped. No mention of the Religion of Peace. Now can you imagine if it was the other way round, a bunch of Anglicans kidnapping drugging and raping underaged Muslim girls. You wouldn’t here the end of it.
Well, I suppose we live in a wonderful multicultural society.
Yes, deeply regrettable that we have to rely on Nazi vermin like Griffin to speak the truth about theses matters.
Funnily enough the BBC just did a bit on this, but of course kept going on about “Asian men”, perhaps I’ve missed Hindu or Sikh rape gangs then? I seem to remember them all being Mohammadens not Asians.
On Radio 5 Time-For-Dignitas The Dame talking about ‘coots’ to social services and as natural as breathing followed with…
‘More children will die as a result’.
He *could* have said
More layers of bureaucracy will be shed as a result or
Less money will be wasted on management consultants** as a result or
There will be fewer six figure salaries in ‘social services’ as a result or
Resources might be husbanded properly for the first time ever as a result.
*Could* have, but of course didn’t.
**My sister who works in social services for a council so small I guarantee you will never have heard of it, complained to me that her bosses have just written a cheque out for a million quid to KPMG. That million quid is more than the amount Warren Buffett has spent on management consultants in his forty odd years running Berkshire Hathaway – a million more.
More management consultants will go hungry as a result.
Naaaaah.
Was anyone listening to Vicky Pollard’s 5Live show on 25th Nov? Apparently the net immigration figures are caused by the drop in Britons emigrating, not by the number of immigrants entering the country. Priceless! Only Beeboids could dress up stats this way. Unbelievable, an insult to our intelligence
I notice that they are trying to ‘drift’ Pollard onto television. Eeoow spray-booth tan didn’t begin to describe it.
Afraid this horse is a non-runner.
The current government decision is that higher education should be paid for by those receiving it (the students) and not the taxpayer.
This is a perfectly acceptable point of view and any political argument against it should be on the basis of either higher taxes or cuts to other services that would be required. That should be the real debate. the bBC does not realise this.
The Consevatives never committed not to do this and so their political judgement should only be argued against on the question of priorities for spending.
The Liberal Democrats made a commitment and single biggest plank of policy that their priority was different, which they have reneged upon, this can be argued after the revelations they were intending to go back on this commitment before the election that it was getting votes under false pretences.
The bBC should have concentrated on this as it was the actual facts, not their support a yob line.
Had the bBC been doing their job they would question the bogus line spouted by Conservatives and Liberal Democrats alike that this is all being done for the benefit of the poorest students and getting more of them into university than the pitiful numbers that do make it at present.
Anyone with half a brain can see this is just a sop to the Liberal Democrats to try and get them out of jail.
If it were anything else why would they be simultaneously be abolishing the EMA the single largest piece of government help to encourage the poorest students to stay on and do A levels in the first place.
In fact just before the election the Conservatives were still arguing that Labout would abolish the EMA but that they would keep it, it was not a key plank of policy, but it was one that was discarded, perhaps we should blame the needs of the Coalition for this unannounced change in policy.
The bBC live in fear that the coalition will break up and a proper Conservative government will be elected so they toady to the Liberal Democrats and give them an easy ride at every opportunity.
The truth is the decision is to pass the costs of higher education to those that benefit from it – students, all this ‘support for the poorest’ is nonsense. The bBC wouldn’t pick up on it though would they, none of them qualify as poor.
I don’t think the Beeboids believe the Conservatives could win a real majority if another election was held soon. More likely they think the Lib Dems will either be forced to side with Labour after this Tuition Fees “broken promise”, or might even lose seats to new Labour or worse challengers. Plus, they’re expecting that everyone hates the nasty Tories now because of the ideological boodget coots, which hit the poorest hardest.
I would wager that many in the BBC eagerly await the collapse of the Coalition Government so that Labour can come back into power and save the country.
BBC mongs going on about Sarah Palin making a gaff over South Korea. Funny the beeboids don’t mention this one
Or this Gaffe
Or was it?
The BBC also censored the story about how certain Leftoid darlings made complete fools of themselves because they didn’t know their American History and assumed they were superior to Sarah Palin.
(The fools include BBC-trusted thought-leaders at the HuffingtonPost, and Gwen Ifill, who was the moderator for the debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden.)
http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/foi-request-reveals-bbc-staff-s-disciplinary-record/s2/a541696/
Amused me, anyway.
I post this link in case the BBC are struggling to find the endless f**k ups by Barry Obama, but I won’t hold my breath. Biden is even worse. He makes Prince Philip look PC.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/barackobama/a/obama-isms.htm
On another note I notice the BBC are moaning at the 2000 extra train carriages ordered by the Government, they will take up to 10 years to introduce, all the fault of the Tories according to the beeboid mongs, funny if Liebour had ordered them in 1997 we’d have had them all by now.
Yesterday, Justin Webb gave free rein to one of the President’s “spiritual advisors”, who stated uncategorically that the Tea Party would not exist if there wasn’t a black man in the White House. Ol’ Justin didn’t think this was worth challenging, because, to judge from his own reporting of the presidential election, he believes it himself. Webb and his colleagues suggested on more than one occasion that too many United Statesians might be too racist to vote for a black man.
Now there’s a new poll showing that 27% of voters think that Tea Party-backed Congressman should be setting the country’s agenda now, versus 28% who think it should still be the black man who is President. Another 23% think Republican leaders in Congress should be running things, against only 16% who think Democrat Congress leaders (even with Nancy Pelosi!) should be.
This means that 50% of the country doesn’t want either the President or Democrats to lead the way. If we’re to believe the message put out by the BBC, this means that 50% of the country is racist (I won’t even comment on the 16% of Democrats who don’t want a black man to set the country’s agenda). If that’s true, then how did we elect a black man in the first place by several percentage points? Have some people suddenly gone racist?
The BBC continues to libel millions of people.
If the spiritual adviser hadn’t said it, the Webb Monster would have. He always does. But then, they all do. It must be part of the Beeboid contract.
I’m sure you noticed that ol’ Justin actually slightly challenged Willis’ claim that Fox News was behind it all, but was completely silent when the man said the Tea Party movement was about racism.
BBCLauraK Laura Kuenssberg Eric Pickles accuses the LGA of ‘scaremongering’ over possible job losses – wonder if he has said that to the LGA chair who is a Tory peer?
Entirely legitimate point to raise… make. However, inbetween her crushing journalistic coups such as ‘XX just left the building’, one wonders if the impartial Ms. K is as snarky in such terms with internecine exchanges in parties a bit closer to her heart.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100065528/has-andy-coulson-got-to-the-bbc/
Like with almost anything the BBC comes out with, I find value not so much with the original posting, but amongst the comments.
Anyone notice the difference between BBC reporting of recent events in the ‘occupied territories’ (funny term that isn’t it – it doesn’t even need to specify which “territories” such is the obsession with Israel) and Egypt.
In the “occupied territories” the Israelis “demolish a mosque” according to BBC headlines, while in Egypt “Christians clash with police” (later we learn that the clashes took place after the Egyptian authorities demolished a church).