Sir Howard Davies is being treated by the BBC as if he were the first martyr of the London School of Economics given his resignation over LSE closeness to the Libyan tyranny. However I get the impression from BBC coverage of this issue (On Today 8.34am and 8.49am, a double whammy!) that the BBC thinks Sir Howard has perhaps been a little precipitative in his resignation over this “unfortunate” issue and anyway, isn’t UK business itself  guilty of taking money from some questionable sources? Never miss the opportunity to attack the capitalist system, right? Of course the biggest scandal of all is that millions of us Brits are forced by the BBC to given them our cash to fund their social engineering broadcasting network. That is every bit as big a scandal as anything the LSE do with Libyan blood money.

Bookmark the permalink.


  1. George R says:

    Yes, it seems Islam Not BBC (INBBC) was having some initial difficulty finding its ideological line on LSE – Gaddafis – Libya – Islam, but finally seems to conclude that ‘DHIMMMITUDE’ is about right.

    “Mental dhimmitude: Bat Ye’or’s theory of the British collapse”


  2. George R says:

    “The real scandal at the LSE”

    [Extract; emphasis added]

    “The governing council [of the LSE] accepted the loot (of which £300,000 was subsequently paid) from the Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation. The fact that among those members giving their assent to supping with the devil was Sharmi Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty and merciless scourge of those who compromise principles of justice, only adds to the air of unreality that surrounds the whole shameful episode. She has since spoken of her ‘bucketfuls’ of regret.”

    A supplementary extract from ‘The Times’ (3 March) ,emphasis added:

    “Shami Charabarti, the director of ‘Liberty’ and a member of the ruling council, said: ‘The director has been completely straight about his embarrassment. The council has been completely united in its regret. As a human rights campaigner I can only share bucketfuls of both’.
    “Ms Chakrabarti was on the council when it accepted £1.5 million from a foundation headed by Mr Gaddafi in 2009. He had already been awarded a PhD by the university although his thesis is now being investigated over alleged plagiarism and ghostwriting.”

    Of course, INBBC’s chum S. CHAKRABARTI of the LSE’s ruling Council has not yet joined Director, Howard Davies and resigned, although she should, admitting that she is just as culpable.


    • Cassandra King says:

      I feel sure that universal Shami will get over her regret very quickly indeed, I am sure that once she has a quick look at her bank account any regret will vanish like the morning mist. Who will call her a hypocrite to her face? Not the BBC thats for sure.

      Yes I am sure sure Shmai felt very sorry when the rebels uncovered the torture chambers belonging to Gaddafi and I am sure that Shami regrets sucking up to the Gaddafi Jnr who almost certainly knew of and visited the torture chambers.

      I am also certain that the BBC being the kind forgiving entity it is will help Shami quickly forget her part in this grubby shameful and squalid episode, the BBC will use its highly effective BBC patented historical airbrush on Shami so she never again has to revisit this past shame. Of course if Shami was a right wing peoples enemy the BBC would never ever ever ever let her forget her shame and her guilt, the BBC would follow her around reminding of her of it till her death.

      The leftist hypocrites will close ranks and forget the whole episode ever happened and universal hypocrite Shami will recover from her fake five minute period of fake regret and keep hammering away at her political enemies, totally unaware of her own grubby hypocrisy and the BBC will keep inviting her onto the airwaves every five minutes to ramble on about human rights. If you are friend of the BBC your past mistakes are forgotten and your sins washed away.

      Thats it Shami never mind the tortured and murdered innocents of Gaddafi just have a quick look at you bank balance, mmmmm lovely money, dirty but wonderful money, it makes it all worthwhile eh Shami?


      • George R says:

        Yes, if I were a cartoonist I could draw a picture of ‘universal Shami’ carrying two buckets, one labelled ’embarrassment’, the second labelled ‘regret’, as she walks to the bank.


  3. David Preiser (USA) says:

    The BBC needs to be held accountable for their highly selective outrage.


  4. Fran at AFI says:

    The real scandal is that the BBC should have run the LSE’s acceptance of Gadaffi’s blood money as part of an investigation into the way British Universities are accepting funds from totalitarian regimes worldwide – and the way in which those monies are being used to shape opinion about, say, Israel’s right to exist within the UK.

    But as the BBC is at the forefront of the campaign to delegitimise Israel, its reluctance to carry out decent investigative journalism is easy to explain.


    • Cassandra King says:

      The political struggle and poionous hate campaign by the leftist ‘educational establishment starts to make sense when you find out that probably vast amounts of funding comes from islamist sources. Despite all the heart on sleeve moral high ground holier than thou bollocks they were simpy prostitutes selling themselves for money.


  5. john in cheshire says:

    I wonder if Mr Howard Davies has been on any Common Purpose courses. And if not, why not. And if so, how many other senior persons in the LSE have been on Common Purpose courses. Does anyone know?


  6. sue says:

    If accepting blood money can be justified ‘if the motive is to bring the Devil back into the fold’, as David Cameron seems to be saying, shouldn’t someone be monitoring the effectiveness of this dubious strategy? Otherwise it amounts to mere prostitution.

    Even if they think they could remain politically independent, once these bodies (universities, arts organisations or whatever) become dependent on the golden goose, the fear of withdrawing it is a greater bargaining tool than if they’d resisted temptation in the first place. Surely academics writing in support of Gaddafi etc. – is proof enough that it’s pure prostitution.
    Rather than bringing the Devil back into the fold it looks like the Devil is the one with the fold, and we’re the ones being brought in.

    We’ll lose the reputation for excellence anyway, if people think the top universities are merely handing out ‘Mickey Mouse degrees to despots.’

    The BBC doesn’t appear to be taking this as seriously as they should, which is odd, given their fascination with the M.P.’s expenses scandal.
    Still,  funding is a tricky area at the moment, maybe they’re sensitive.

    I’ve just seen this article entitled: Libya: LSE feared ’embarrassing’ Gaddafi’s son over donation.


  7. ltwf1964 says:

    who does the scummy bBC “news” have on this morning for an “analysis” of what could happen in Sauidi Arabia?

    that’s right-a blood money representative from the LSE

    lower than whale dung-that’s the bBC


  8. George R says:

    INBBC seems to have lost interest in LSE-Gaddafi scandal; perhaps INBBC is dependent on its chum, SHAMI CHAKRABARTI, still LSE council member, for the right political line for the ‘labour-left’ to spin.

    As indicated in article here, MP Robert Halfon  suggests that all LSE council members are implicated and should resign.

    “Gaddafi son’s LSE thesis ‘written by Libyan academic'”


  9. George R says:

    BBBC-NUJ has shown its political liking for street demo/anti-big business outfit, ‘UK Uncut’ on several occasions recently (not least on ‘Newsnight’, of course).

    In comparison, BBC-NUJ is less interested in the activities of ‘Student Rights – tackling extremism on campusues’


  10. matthew rowe says:

    hmm get the vauge feeling the BBC is p8SSED over Sir Howard Davies jumping is because it clears the way and sticks Mzz chatty in the firing line !


  11. Elby the Beserk says:

    “Of course the biggest scandal of all is that millions of us Brits are forced by the BBC to given them our cash to fund their social engineering broadcasting network.”

    No you are not. This is a great blog, but what you write there is bollocks. It is not illegal to not own a TV. We don’t. It’s the easiest way not to pay the TV license, and I tell you – you won’t miss it, and you won’t belive how much extra time you have to do other things.

    There is always something better to do than watch the TV. Especially for kids – it’s the last bloody thing they need, especially in these days when kids spend more time with screens than human beings.

    Folks. Kick that TV out.


    • Roland Deschain says:

      Why the xxxx should we, just to avoid paying the BBC?


    • matthew rowe says:

      Sorry what ?does the risk of a prosecution and imprisonment not count as coercion? threatening visits by paid goons ? blackmail letters ? you many know different but others don’t so get off yer I’m cleverer  then you bit as many  people chose to watch TV and your high and mighty comment fails to help  those  like the elderly[oh yes no freebies with the beeb all covered by central government from our taxes ] and the lonely ! so  sorry but if you chose not to have a TV fine but I bet you still use some part of the BBC’s output that you don’t pay for but others have to so no kudos there !


    • deegee says:

      Not owning a TV as a matter of principle does make reading B-BBC a bit pointless.


  12. George R says:

    Of course, ‘universal SHAMI’ is still very much part of the unelected ‘politically correct’ (!) elite in Britain, having e.g. BBC-Labour-NUJ endorsement.

    She even vets our police, from a privilegfed position, to see that they uphold ‘liberty’, unlike her LSE council in its dealings with the Gaddafis of Libya.


    (prescient ‘Biased-BBC’ recent thread.)

    Talk about the sham of liberty/Liberty!


  13. George R says:

    Predictable:- David Miliband (remember him?) is on Marr’s Labour Show, urging that the London School of Economics be turned back into the socialist-leftist institution it was when his father, Ralph Miliband, was a socialist lecturer there.

    [Extract from AP report]:

    “The LSE’s Ralph Miliband Programme was set up in 1996 with a donation from a former PhD student who had been inspired by the socialist.
    “Asked on BBC1’s Andrew Marr Show about last year’s memorial lecture, [given by Saif al-Islam Gaddafi] former Labour foreign secretary Mr Miliband said: ‘It’s horrific.
    “‘The Ralph Miliband Programme at the LSE was founded by a former student of my dad’s in the 1950s who said he’d learnt more in the seminars of my dad – who was obviously on the left – he’d learnt more about the right because my dad believed in showing all sides of opinion.'”

    So in the political coalescing of the Labour ‘thinking’ of D. Miliband- A. Marr, the alternative to any present LSE corruption is to make the LSE a socialist hegemony! No right-wing lecturers should be appointed to the LSE apparently because the ‘impartial’ mantra is that you can let only socialists  lecture about the political right fairly! That’s pluralism to them!

    By the way, there’s not much reason for D. Miliband to be so apparently outraged by the LSE’s role of subservience to the Gaddafis, Libya and Islam, after all D. Miliband wants to turn to European Union into EURABIA anyway (and Marr no doubt goes along with it):

    “Miliband & Mandelson: The EuroMed Vision”


  14. sue says:

    All of a sudden the BBC falls over itself in the rush to examine Saif. It seems they knew all along. Well, they must have.
    Though some people still think Saif was a sincere moderniser, others know it was all part of the plan to keep the old man in the power to which he has become accustomed.
    I heard this on the World Service, and then there’s this on the web

    There’s something of Matt Lucas in the picture at the start of the vid.


    • Craig says:

      Sue, that web article uses Dr Omar Ashur as its expert. 
      Did no-one at the BBC spot the irony of asking a lecturer from the University of Exeter, funded by Saudi Arabia, to criticise the West for being too pally with an authoritarian, human-rights-abusing regime like that in Libya? Needless to say, the BBC article makes no mention of Exeter’s own links with such a regime.


      • sue says:

        I noticed that too, but as I always seem to be going on about Exeter University I thought I’d leave it to you to point it out. 🙂


  15. George R says:


    His excellent ‘Sunday Times’ (6 March) piece, entitled:

    ” Libya is bad enough, LSE, but how do you explain Ms Liberty?”


    “How do they get these jobs (part 356)? This week we examine the case of Shami Chakrabarti CSE,
     the hand-wringing director of tjhe pressure group Liberty for the past eight years and almost weekly performert on BBC’s ‘Question Time’. If she’s not patronising you on some other p-rogramme, lightly chiding you in a copmpassionate manner as if you werer a five-year old who had just had a little nasty accident.


    “Can you imagine for a moment the LSE council and court of governors accepting a donation from tghe Israeli government – despite the unquestioned fact that that country is several shades closer to a pure democracy than anything envisaged by Gadaffi? If that had been suggested, you would have had Chakrabarti resigning live on air during ‘Question Time’ and Giddens penning an angry pamphlet (which nobody would read).”