109 Responses to OPEN THREAD…

  1. David Preiser (USA) says:
    March 7, 2011 at 4:52 pm

    Whatever small improvements they had in BBC reporting on Israel after the useful Jews left seem to have faded away recently.  The BBC is back to lying about geography and facts about Gaza again.  The demonization of Israel is back at the BBC.


    For years it has been blockaded by Israel, which the UN says is illegal under international law.

    No mention of Egypt’s blockade of their own border with Gaza.  Israel is the villain, full stop.   Don’t trust the BBC on Israel/Gaza issues.

       0 likes

  2. fred bloggs says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:03 pm

    The bBC is always going on about cuts.  This is how it should be done:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8365463/Death-by-a-thousand-cuts.html

    No chance; the bBC will NEVER expose the waste and pocket lining of Liebour.

       0 likes

  3. hippiepooter says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:08 pm

    Apologies for being OT, and excuse the tackiness, but I’ve had a blog for the last 4 months and have only now put up some proper posts.  If anyone’s interested:-

    http://www.hippiepooter.blogspot.com

       0 likes

  4. fred bloggs says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:18 pm

    I can only conclude from the 24 hour news, this weekend, that tjhe bBC is incapable of reform from the inside and will need dramatic emasculation or dismantling to sort itself out.

    An item on schools and the video image always go to no white British school children.  I thought this stopped before the election as they were doing it so often.  The second item was the red headline showing Cameron’s speech was about to be aired.  Then on the rolling white bar was the breaking news “Labour critises cuts”.  Breaking news; give me a break.   So they are still the mouthpiece of Liebour and cannot be reformed! 

       0 likes

    • dave s says:
      March 7, 2011 at 6:04 pm

      The lack of white children might be because the BBC never leave inner London. It does show the extent of white flight however .
      Unintended consequences of BBC laziness.

         0 likes

    • TheGeneral says:
      March 8, 2011 at 5:30 pm

      As a regular Viewer of the BBC, I did not realise there were any white children in Britain.

         0 likes

  5. George R says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:25 pm

    Excellent ‘Jihadwatch’ insight on INBBC’s propaganda for Islam, re-the King hearings:

    More protests on King hearings: Muslims feel “unfairly singled out” over jihadist terrorism

    ‘Some say…’

       0 likes

    • George R says:
      March 7, 2011 at 5:32 pm

      Is this straight from the ‘BBC Islamic School of Journalism’?

      Well done, INBBC’s Mr. BURRIDGE: a classic in Islamic apologetics.

         0 likes

    • hippiepooter says:
      March 7, 2011 at 7:23 pm

      I believe that is what is called ‘ripping the BBC a new one’.

         0 likes

  6. Natsman says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:25 pm

    Cameron loves the idiot Prince, TRUE!!  (No, not that one, the other one – the one who married the Ferguson bimbo…)

       0 likes

    • J J says:
      March 8, 2011 at 12:25 am

      Come on, that is a prince of the blood you are talking about.

      God save the Queen!

         0 likes

  7. cjhartnett says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:40 pm

    No…will someone explain it to me?
    How the hell does wee Douggie Alexander get an “access all areas” media pass to pronounce on Hagues efforts out in Libya?

    True that its a shambles-true that Hague and the rest of them are all out of their depth…but hold on!

    Foot and Mouth, HIPs, nations tax discs lost, volcanic ash and Iranians capturing our Navy personnel…to name but four examples of venal serial incompetence and mailce from wee Douggie and  chums back in New Labour days.

    Incompetent as the new breed are-they have years and lots more shambolic episodes to go before they even hold a candle to the perpetual mess and excuses,spin that were all that Labour ever stood for.  Why don`t the toady BBC even mention this?
    Boring perhaps-draw a line under it and move on-we are where
    we are-lessons shall be learned…presumably all this is still interesting and is the consensus of the electorate that maybe loved Labour too much in sparing Douggie,Gordon etc , the burdens of all this politics stuff!

       0 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:
      March 7, 2011 at 6:31 pm

      I was wondering that myself this morning, after hearing him quoted criticizing the Government’s foreign policy.  Again.  Is he somebody’s pet choice for Labour leader after Red Ed fizzles out?

         0 likes

      • NotaSheep says:
        March 8, 2011 at 8:42 am

        FWIW the may feel that they played safe in the last year of Brown by only pushing David Miliband and Ed Balls’s profiles whilst it was Ed Miliband that won the election. Now they need to spread the BBC love.

           0 likes

  8. Deborah says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:50 pm

    I can only presume the BBC’s hit on Prince Andrew is to avoid or push lower other stories – perhaps at the weekend to reduce reports on the Conservative Conference to a minimum?

    Doesn’t the prince have the same sort of friends as a certain Peter Mandelson?  eg billionaires and Libyans?  But today we had the ex-BBC ex Labour minister Ben Bradshaw pontificating on how badly the Prince Andrew issue was being dealt with by the present government on WATO.  Wato has it got to do with him?

       0 likes

  9. familyjaffa says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:51 pm

    http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=211095

    Poll; Israel among the world’s least popular countries. Only  Iran , N Korea and Pakistan are viewed less favourably.

    Buried on the BBC website

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-12654446

    Strangely, opinion was only asked about 16 countries. Why 16? why not 20? 10?  

    Order of popularity (based on results from all 27 countries where the survey was carried out): Germany, UK, Japan, Canada, France, US, Brazil, China, South Africa, India, South Korea, Russia, Israel, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran

    I wonder why Israel is hated so much, BBC.

    Do you think YOU might have had something to do with it?

       0 likes

  10. familyjaffa says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:54 pm

    Meant to add

    “according to a BBC World Service poll of 27 countries.”

       0 likes

    • pounce_uk says:
      March 7, 2011 at 6:33 pm

      I’ve had a butchers at that poll and noticed that the trend for China has been downward from the word go. Currently its at -4 (the UK is at 40) and the bbC reports that low figure by saying thsi:

      “Global views of China improved in 2011 
      from 2010. Among the countries surveyed 
      both in 2010 and 2011, an average of 44 
      per cent say that China has a positive 
      influence in the world”

      It seems that whoever wrote the article didn’t look at the actual figures that came up with their not to be touched countries.
      Oh and just for the info I did ‘O’ Level Stats at school. Which by the looks of things is more than the twit who wrote that bbC article has.

         0 likes

      • familyjaffa says:
        March 8, 2011 at 9:27 am

        I’ve just noticed something very interesting about that poll. BIASED!!!!!!!
        These are the countries that were polled
        Polling carried out in 27 countries: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Egypt, France, Germany, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Turkey, UK, US

        Take a note of which of the 16 countries asked about are missing.
        I wonder why they were omitted.
        <!– pullout-links–>

           0 likes

  11. D B says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:55 pm

    According to Mirror journalist James Lyons, Tory MP John Baron today expressed concern for Muslim sensibilites over the UK sending HMS Cumberland to Libya. Why? Because it shares a name with a pork sausage.

    David Cameron’s Conservative Party really is a pathetic joke.

       0 likes

    • D B says:
      March 7, 2011 at 5:58 pm

      If Baron was making some sort of ironic point that Lyons failed to convey then I’ll let him off. 

         0 likes

      • D B says:
        March 8, 2011 at 9:05 am

        The Telegraph’s Andrew Gimson confirms Baron’s idiotic statetement in his parliamentary sketch (final paragraph):

        Mr Baron objected that we had rescued our people from a Muslim country on a ship “named after a pork sausage”.

        When this sort of politcally correct madness has embedded itself so deeply into the psyche of even Tory MPs, truly we are fucked as a nation.

           0 likes

        • D B says:
          March 8, 2011 at 9:18 am

          Baron’s PA has replied to an email I sent yesterday. She claims Baron was being satirical. I’m not convinced. Here’s what he asked:

          Mr John Baron (Basildon and Billericay) (Con): Apart from the irony of sending a British warship named after a pork sausage to rescue Brits from a Muslim country, is not the real lesson from this situation that we should stop meddling in other people’s affairs and be very careful before we lecture countries on democracy when we have armed their autocratic rulers with crowd-control weapons?

             0 likes

    • Demon1001 says:
      March 8, 2011 at 12:20 am

      Then he’d better not go to India as Baron shares his name with a joint of Beef.  😎

         0 likes

  12. Guest Who says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:55 pm

    Engaged in my evening surf, and found some in the print media frothing over ‘government’ ineptitude, citing this:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12665575

    Ministers accused of ‘serial bungling’ over Libya
    Seems they were not so keen to read on to get to this:

    Labour has accused the government of “serial bungling”

    Which, i would submit, paints a rather different picture on the, er, ‘reports’.

    Since when is the national broadcaster meant to be serving Her Majesty’s loyal opposition’s petty party interest over and above the elected government, especially as regards a still vague operation, albeit one not seemingly handled very well. 

    As to whose door such operational detail gets landed at I will await until more is know. Unlike the BBC, which seems to enjoy a bit too much freedom to editorialise ‘for effect’.

    ‘Mr Alexander, shadow foreign secretary, said: “I believe I speak for many ..’

    A belief held by the BBC, no doubt. As to whether borne out in fact, the BBC seems untroubled.

    ‘BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner said there had been no need for a “cloak and dagger approach”.

    Mr Gardner’s previous ‘expertise’ being without question, and his level of unimpeachable source info being what, exactly, to support this view?

    It sounds like a rare old cock up, to be sure, but with decent intentions.

    The Labour Party and the BBC however seem more keen on fomenting distrust at home, only with the basest of intent.

       0 likes

  13. Chuffer says:
    March 7, 2011 at 5:58 pm

    Can’t find anything on BBc about the slaughter of Coptic Christians by members of the Religion of Peace.
    Cranmer has details:
    http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/

       0 likes

  14. pounce_uk says:
    March 7, 2011 at 6:18 pm

    Am I the only person to have noticed that for all Millibands cat wailing about a Gadiffi giving a lecture at a college his dad set up. That the whole affair with Libya transpired under his watch.

    You’d think that if he really objected to a Gaddiffi in London he would have said something during his time as Foreign Sec, I mean let’s be serious here, its not as if there was only one brother in the cabinet. There was his brother Ed as well. You’d think one of them would have said something.

    Its a little rich of the bBC to allow the idiots who wreaked the country to play the victim over British relations with Libya. Especially when the person in question has more blood on his hands over Libya than anybody in the present government.

    Thanks bBC 

       0 likes

  15. NotaSheep says:
    March 7, 2011 at 8:13 pm

    The BBC are making a huge fuss over Prince Andrew’s links with ‘convicted sex-offender’ Jeffrey Epstein but I haven’t seen any reference to another name in his address book along with 10 telephone numbers – Peter Mandelson – numbers include his direct line and his country home.

       0 likes

  16. As I See It says:
    March 7, 2011 at 9:08 pm

    BBC: ‘Cuts Cuts Cuts..’
    ‘NHS cuts!’
    A Labour Party scare leaflet being read out over the airwaves?
    No, BBC London News 6.30pm Monday 7th March 2011

    Biased BBC followers are well conditioned to the excesses of Today sounding more than ever the rest home for the prima donnas of the chattering arses – sorry (cough, snigger) classes. You have been exasperated at the Question Time audiences packed to well above the plimsol line with public sector and Labour Party minded activists  and cheering to the rafters every socialistic and big state comment from the panel. You bulk at the likes of Andrew Marr and Robert Peston’s casual leftism. Friends let me open the can of worms that is BBC London News…

    I can remember – perhaps in the later 1980s – noticing that London was sadly ill served by its regional news. Unlike other parts of the country where content had some local relevance, London made do with a diet of crime and rehashed left-overs from national news that happened to be centred on the capital. Then at some stage – I think the 1990s – I recall complaining (to whomever happened to be in the room at the time) ‘this news has been handed over to the communities unit!’*

    * I hae a vague recollection that such an organisation did once actually exist. In any case the phrase does sum up the endless stream of pressure groups, quangos, charities, minorities, and whatnot all sounding off about some or other ’cause for concern’ and demanding more support ie funding.

    In the last decade the subjects selected for BBC London News  seemed to me to betray an ever closer chumminess with Ken Livingston’s press office.

    Nowadays it is wall to wall cuts stories with a few puffs for upcoming BBC shows and reports on approved arts and entertainment.

    So what is today’s NHS cuts story based on? Something going under the title the Foundation Trust Network has written a ‘private letter’ to the cheif executive of the NHS.

    BBC man Karl Mercer pops up to talk to presenter Victoria Hollins (our favorite – Rizzla Teeth (sic) must be on holiday). There are some scary graphics flashed up on the screen with some big numbers banded around. Karl is excited and explains it is all a bit rushed because ‘we stumbled across this letter at 5 o’clock this evening..’

    Stumbled eh? And don’t bother to put it in any context for us then, Karl.

    Normal service has been resumed.

       0 likes

  17. Natsman says:
    March 7, 2011 at 9:12 pm

    Slimy, sleazy, greasy Mandelson, he slithers and slides his evil way into everything, no doubt trousering on the way (in more ways than one…), and smelling of something putrid.  They all move in the same, iniquitous circles, and slip away largely unchallenged and much the richer.

       0 likes

    • John Anderson says:
      March 7, 2011 at 9:26 pm

      “Oozing charm from every pore
      He oils his way across the floor”

         0 likes

  18. pounce_uk says:
    March 7, 2011 at 9:19 pm

    When I was in Croatia (Ploce death camp) with the Rapid Reaction force (took 6 weeks to get there) during a Brigade O group. We heard a scream outside and all the Rupert’s went outside to see what the commotion was. Well it transpired that Kate Adie had turned up in a black armoured Range Rover, (with aircon) got out ,put on her body armour(BA), messed up her hair , dirtied her face and started to report from the front line. Really? We were in a rear staging area where our ships had just unloaded our kit and where waiting for the nod to head up country. Which kind of explained all the bloody German tourists sunbathing while I wore bloody body armour mit bin lid. Anyway a soldier on seeing this transpiring started giving her jip and then followed that up by throwing a number of bricks in her direction, hence her scream. He legged it and the officers went to her rescue. Poor thing. Imagine my surprise when I went outside after the O group had finished and found my bloody driver and vehicle missing. Wearing full BA (with plates front and back) helmet, gat and combat jacket (you wear a combat jacket under you BA as protection against flames) I had to tab from one end of the docks to the cattle sheds where our set up was. Anyway on asking my driver where the hell had he buggered off to, he related the Kate Adie story and that it was he who had throw the bricks at her and then when she screamed he legged it.
    Ever since that day, I’ve been very suspicious about any story which has a bBC reporter wearing body armour. Now one gripe of mine was how idiots (And yes we have them) would replace their ceramic plates with books or cardboard as it was more comfortable, until a round hit them, that is. Which meant I became something of a twat when it came to inspecting my juniors (And seniors) BA.

     So it really gets up my nose when I see a reporter risking life and limp by showing him wearing..body armour which clearly shows he is missing his ceramic plate. As witnessed during the Israeli set to with Gaza .Remember, it was when the bBC would show Gaza lit up with lights, while at the same time reporting how the poor people of Gaza had no electricity.

    Well currently Libya is the centre of attention and the bBCs intrepid reporter ‘John-don’t call them terrorists-Simpson decides to visit the front line and while wearing body armour he is shot at and they leg it back to safety, or so they think.

    Well have another look at John’s body armour, well actually his armpits. Notice something, he isn’t sweating and anybody who has worn body armour will tell you, you sweat like a f-ing pig. When I was posted to Cyprus I went in Jan and i noticed that while everybody else was covered up, I was warm as toast. The weather in libya today was 14 degrees.

    In fact have another look at his body armour, it look spotless. Anybody who has worn body armour will tell you the outer covering soon gets dirty, ours were DPM so didn’t show much when they got dirty, but light blue?

    Then there’s the idiotic statement in the car, when he tells everybody to get their heads down, Yup it seems that John who isn’t wearing a bloody helmet (If there’s one thing you carry its your helmet) is having a Frank Gardner moment. But here’s something. One thing I’ve noticed about civvies who have been issued body armour and helmets in a war zone ,is they never take them off. Which begs me to ask just how bloody authentic is the bBCs coverage?

    His synopsis of how he thinks the battle is going appears to be very similar to how Jeremy Bowen wrote up the 6 day war. (Egyptians not as well armed , tigers but lead by donkeys, Israelis just bloody lucky time and time again) Err John, look back 65 years and see how the battle in that very area went back and forth due to supply issues and not who had the better weapons.

       0 likes

    • Guest Who says:
      March 8, 2011 at 6:22 am

      Which begs me to ask just how bloody authentic is the bBCs coverage?  

      One tends not to conflate the BBC with ‘authenticity’ these days.

      At least, not with what you see, what you hear or what they show or tell you.

      As to what stinks… that might be accurate.

         0 likes

    • matthew rowe says:
      March 8, 2011 at 11:00 am

      Oh now be fair it’s hard to leave the bar when it’s the reporter from Reuters round! and  the tiles do make good coasters for the tables  as we have to pay for some of the damages from the spillage and the knives we use to edit [sorry truthifie] our pics can scratch the tables,dam the Tory cut’s !! also the amour is all scratchy and chaffs a bit so gonna get one done by that great designer , social commenter and soon to be BBC  historian and food and drink critic John Galliano!  
      From our own collaborator// sorry correspondent  
      Mr bowel

         0 likes

  19. pounce_uk says:
    March 7, 2011 at 9:22 pm

    When I was in Croatia (Ploce death camp) with the Rapid Reaction force (took 6 weeks to get there) during a Brigade O group. We heard a scream outside and all the Rupert’s went outside to see what the commotion was. Well it transpired that Kate Adie had turned up in a black armoured Range Rover, (with aircon) got out ,put on her body armour(BA), messed up her hair , dirtied her face and started to report from the front line. Really? We were in a rear staging area where our ships had just unloaded our kit and where waiting for the nod to head up country. Which kind of explained all the bloody German tourists sunbathing while I wore bloody body armour mit bin lid. Anyway a soldier on seeing this transpiring started giving her jip and then followed that up by throwing a number of bricks in her direction, hence her scream. He legged it and the officers went to her rescue. Poor thing. Imagine my surprise when I went outside after the O group had finished and found my bloody driver and vehicle missing. Wearing full BA (with plates front and back) helmet, gat and combat jacket (you wear a combat jacket under you BA as protection against flames) I had to tab from one end of the docks to the cattle sheds where our set up was. Anyway on asking my driver where the hell had he buggered off to, he related the Kate Adie story and that it was he who had throw the bricks at her and then when she screamed he legged it.  
    Ever since that day, I’ve been very suspicious about any story which has a bBC reporter wearing body armour. Now one gripe of mine was how idiots (And yes we have them) would replace their ceramic plates with books or cardboard as it was more comfortable, until a round hit them, that is. Which meant I became something of a twat when it came to inspecting my juniors (And seniors) BA.  
     
     So it really gets up my nose when I see a reporter risking life and limp by showing him wearing..body armour which clearly shows he is missing his ceramic plate. As witnessed during the Israeli set to with Gaza .Remember, it was when the bBC would show Gaza lit up with lights, while at the same time reporting how the poor people of Gaza had no electricity.  
     
    Well currently Libya is the centre of attention and the bBCs intrepid reporter ‘John-don’t call them terrorists-Simpson decides to visit the front line and while wearing body armour he is shot at and they leg it back to safety, or so they think.  
     
    Well have another look at John’s body armour, well actually his armpits. Notice something, he isn’t sweating and anybody who has worn body armour will tell you, you sweat like a f-ing pig. When I was posted to Cyprus I went in Jan and i noticed that while everybody else was covered up, I was warm as toast. The weather in libya today was 14 degrees.  
     
     
    In fact have another look at his body armour, it look spotless. Anybody who has worn body armour will tell you the outer covering soon gets dirty, ours were DPM so didn’t show much when they got dirty, but light blue?  
     
    Then there’s the idiotic statement in the car, when he tells everybody to get their heads down, Yup it seems that John who isn’t wearing a bloody helmet (If there’s one thing you carry its your helmet) is having a Frank Gardner moment. But here’s something. One thing I’ve noticed about civvies who have been issued body armour and helmets in a war zone ,is they never take them off. Which begs me to ask just how bloody authentic is the bBCs coverage?  
     
    His synopsis of how he thinks the battle is going appears to be very similar to how Jeremy Bowen wrote up the 6 day war. (Egyptians not as well armed , tigers but lead by donkeys, Israelis just bloody lucky time and time again) Err John, look back 65 years and see how the battle in that very area went back and forth due to supply issues and not who had the better weapons.  

       0 likes

    • Grant says:
      March 8, 2011 at 6:03 pm

      Pounce,
      I am the last person to gossip, but I had heard that Kate Adie was a bit of a “Rupert’s favourite” , if you get my meaning. Are you sure she didn’t turn up in a “Range Roger ”   ?
      As I say, not one to gossip.

         0 likes

  20. Jon S says:
    March 7, 2011 at 9:45 pm

    i wonder what would happen if we had a Fox News style channel in the UK? 

       0 likes

    • Mailman says:
      March 7, 2011 at 11:34 pm

      I dare say we would get the same shit thats thrown at Fox…and I dare say that a Fox like news channel here in the UK would also quickly turn in to the UK’s most trusted media outlet.

      Mailman

         0 likes

  21. pounce_uk says:
    March 7, 2011 at 10:02 pm

    How the bBC would love to report the events in Libya. (yes i know its a spoof)

       0 likes

  22. Jon S says:
    March 7, 2011 at 10:03 pm

    Sarah Palin on the BBC News tonight, here we go again biased BBC

       0 likes

    • Mailman says:
      March 7, 2011 at 11:41 pm

      Fuck me if that wasnt a half decent article on the BBC’s anti-christ. Ok, they could have probed more around the reasons WHY she left office or perhaps pushed a few of the ant-Palin haters a bit harder or side stepped the blatant slurs on her personal life (especially considering the role the BBC played in the trig palin grandson smear!) BUT all in all, this is probably the first time the BBC has actually allowed Palin to talk unfiltered and unedited and you know what…she doesnt sound like the start raving nimrod al beeb makes her out to be.

      Hell…they even let her take a poke at Barry, the Bringer of Light, mentioning his $1BILLION election fund (up from the HALF BILLION DOLLAR fund he had for the last election) and the mfm alphabet news outlets.

      All in all, this wasnt as tragic a train crash as I was expecting. Perhaps even the BBC can see the writing on the wall for Barry the Magnificent?

      To be honest, I dont think Palin will run. I think she will do what she did for the Tea Party at the mid terms and energise the base.

      Make no mistake about it though. She is the most important political figure in America.

      Regards

      Mailman

         0 likes

      • hippiepooter says:
        March 8, 2011 at 9:41 am

        I wonder if the BBC would have given more balanced coverage of Palin if she had been gung ho about standing?  I’m sure we would have seen the worse of the worse from them.  ‘Palin threat neutered – MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!’ might account why the BBC’s guns were spiked for this report.  They’re working out where to train them next.  I’m just wishing and praying that Colonel Allen West will run.  There’s simply noone, as far as I’m concerned, who can offer what he has to offer.  I think Palin would have a key role to play in any administration and the experience she gains from that would stand her in good stead for a run in future years.

           0 likes

        • Cassandra King says:
          March 8, 2011 at 10:33 am

          To true!

          Alan West as POTUS and Palin as VP would put the USA back on track.
          Is the Republican high command smart enough to go for it though?

             0 likes

      • David Preiser (USA) says:
        March 8, 2011 at 2:40 pm

        Well said, Mailman.  Only the Beeboids and a few of their fellow travelers have such a fixation on Sarah Palin.  It’s pretty amusing to see them fall apart at the mere mention of her.

           0 likes

  23. TooTrue says:
    March 7, 2011 at 10:03 pm

    Site wouldn’t let me log in unless I changed back to TooTrue from TrueToo. so I guess I’ll have to be TooTrue from now on.

    I had a look at the perceptive comment from pounce, posted on the main page by Craig as Pouring oil on the flames. While checking out that smuck who rhymes with Amanpour, I noticed another clip:

    Prof Brian Cox visits Chankillo solar calendar in Peru.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12619455 

    This is apparently part of the BBC’s Science & Environment output but it had less to do with science and environment than an adoring portrayal of Cox by whoever was filming him, even including a close-up shot of his eyes.

    The BBC can’t even keep its love affairs to itself, but has to inflict them on the public.

       0 likes

    • Natsman says:
      March 8, 2011 at 10:31 am

      Cunning ploy, using pretty-boy Cox as much as is humanly possible, especially as he is on-side with the AGW propaganda.
      The ladies (and, no doubt, the boys) can’t resist the doe-eyed particle physicist, and he can do no wrong – they hang on every word he utters, even if some of it is utter ideological bollocks.
      Talk about blinded by the light…

         0 likes

      • Roland Deschain says:
        March 8, 2011 at 1:04 pm

        And like most prominent people onside with AGW, he has a size 50 carbon footprint.  At least judging by the number of places in the world he travelled to just to demonstrate the passage of time the other night for Wonders of the Universe.

        Unless of course he sailed.

           0 likes

        • David Preiser (USA) says:
          March 8, 2011 at 2:41 pm

          TooTrue, you probably need to change your alias in whatever account you use to log in (Google, or whatever).

             0 likes

          • TooTrue says:
            March 8, 2011 at 10:20 pm

            David Preiser,

            I signed on as TooTrue here after the site changed from Haloscan to the new system. Then, with some difficulty, I changed to TrueToo. It asked me to log in yesterday but wouldn’t accept TrueToo, even with validated password changes, etc. But it’s OK going back to TooTrue, thanks.

               0 likes

    • Grant says:
      March 8, 2011 at 6:08 pm

      I have posted this here before about Cox, but there is something just incredibly creepy about him , not quite natural. I can’t bear to watch him.
      The BBC had a similar love affair with archaeologist, Michael Wood, who is a bit old for the BBC these days.
      I am sure my lamented old mate, Martin, would have something to say about it.

         0 likes

      • TooTrue says:
        March 8, 2011 at 10:23 pm

        Grant,

        I have posted this here before about Cox, but there is something just incredibly creepy about him , not quite natural. I can’t bear to watch him.

        That’s exactly it. The guy is evidently totally in love with himself, and no doubt also expects everyone else to be.

           0 likes

  24. TooTrue says:
    March 7, 2011 at 10:07 pm

    David preiser,

    For years it has been blockaded by Israel, which the UN says is illegal under international law.

    So I guess the BBC is finally telling us Israel is illegal under international law.

       0 likes

    • deegee says:
      March 8, 2011 at 9:25 am

      Wishful thinking, on the part of the BBC?

         0 likes

      • TooTrue says:
        March 8, 2011 at 10:21 am

        Yes, the subconscious urge coming to the fore in a badly-constructed sentence.

           0 likes

    • deegee says:
      March 8, 2011 at 9:30 am

      Note how the Internet summary leads. The Gaza Strip has been described as the world’s largest prison camp. There is, of course, absolute freedom of movement in China?

         0 likes

  25. David Preiser (USA) says:
    March 7, 2011 at 10:38 pm

    Somewhere, several Beeboid heads just exploded:

    Obama Brings Back Military Tribunals at Guantanamo Bay

    President Obama announced Monday that military trials will resume for detainees at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, saying he wants to “broaden our ability to bring terrorists to justice.”

    The president issued an executive order outlining the changes Monday afternoon, as Defense Secretary Robert Gates rescinded a January 2009 ban against bringing new charges against terror suspects in the military commissions.

    Oh, dear. How about it, Beeboids?  Not only is The Obamessiah threatening to illegaly invade and force regime change in a sovereign nation, but Gitmo is still open and now he’s violating international human rights laws just like Bushitler!

    Let the wailing and gnashing of teeth and scornful twittering begin.

       0 likes

  26. hippiepooter says:
    March 7, 2011 at 10:57 pm

    Over at Harry’s Place they have an excellent post on – oh the shock! horror! of it – yet another well known human rights activist who turns out to be just another posturing, preening .. sham.

       0 likes

  27. pounce_uk says:
    March 8, 2011 at 1:35 am

    I see the bBC have got their Taliban loving Pakistani to knock up another article over how we are all going to die in Afghanistan.
    Taliban step up attacks in effort to destabilise region
    Many of the factors that led to uprisings in the Arab world also exist in Pakistan and Afghanistan. But guest columnist Ahmed Rashid says the Taliban, who have escalated violence to unprecedented levels, would harness any revolt in this unstable region.

    Unprecedented levels. So is the death toll higher than when the Taliban were in power? Have a look at how in 1998 and after they captured the city of Mazar-i-Sharif and in 2 days they murdered over 8000 people. (go to page 120)

    “In the past six weeks, more than 200 Afghan civilians have been killed and hundreds more wounded in a series of brutal suicide bombings, gun battles and improvised explosive device (IED) attacks across the country. Part of the reason for such attacks is as retaliation against US Special Forces, who have been launching up to 20 attacks night and day in the winter months on Taliban leaders and their logistical networks, killing or capturing hundreds of fighters.”

    Right so the message is if we stop killing the Taliban they will..continue killing the sick lame and lazy which lets be honest they do with relish. Also what Ahmed hasn’t mentioned is that the taliban have admitted that they are losing the war. Just for the info I’ve known about this for a good few months.

    “In the past six weeks, more than 200 Afghan civilians have been killed and hundreds more wounded in a series of brutal suicide bombings, gun battles and improvised explosive device (IED) attacks across the country.Many aid and development programs have come to a halt because of the increased pace of violence. The rising cost of fuel and food has angered many Afghans.”

    And the reason for the increase in fuel costs? Silly me the bbC doesn’t say, here is why taken from the New York times in Dec:
    KABUL, Afghanistan — Government officials expressed alarm on Wednesday about what they described as Iran’s unexplained ban on fuel exports to Afghanistan, asserting that at least 1,400 loaded tankers were parked on Iran’s side of three border crossings. Abdul Karim Barahwe, the governor of Nimroz Province in western Afghanistan, said the Iranian authorities had started halting tankers bound for Afghanistan about 10 days ago. The effect is driving up fuel prices just as winter is setting in. “We really don’t know the exact cause of the ban; Iran doesn’t officially say the cause of the ban,” he said. Now, he said, both the Interior and Commerce Ministries, as well as President Hamid Karzai’s office, “are trying to sort out this problem with Iran.”

    As for the food price rise, that is due to the fact that due to the floods in Pakistan, food which is usually exported to Afghanistan has stayed in country.

    As usual the bBC tells half the story in which to fog the vision we have of the region. I  mean how many people here knew that Iran had stopped fuel shipments to Afghanistan?

       0 likes

  28. Guest Who says:
    March 8, 2011 at 6:54 am

    Meanwhile, in other, lippy-service ‘news’, it’s International Wimmin’s day today, apparently.

    So SKY (can’t speak for BBC, as the though of Sian emoting over those poor wimmin and how they don’t have a voice with Emma or some other celeb is hypocrisy too far) have one day out of 365 to make some kind of point.

    No worse than the trivial Mr. Holmes, but the gaggle of giggling peroxide soaks certainly have made a powerful case for seeking out an actual news broadcast channel where the topics are more important than the looks or views of the teleprompter readers.

    I am guessing that it is not intelligent, mature women’s day, as that would be a step too far to get the ratings from a producer class than hold up Hello! or OK! as a target.

       0 likes

  29. Shay says:
    March 8, 2011 at 8:47 am

    The Beeboids just seem as if on a crusade to undermine Palin. Newsnight’s interview with Mrs Palin allowed her to point out some of the myths about her that have been spread by the media. So Dame Nikki (R5 8:25) has to be more subtle in his mission to undermine. He says that SHE IS SUPPORTED by people who believe that humans & dinosaurs walked the earth at the same time. He will have hoped to leave viewers with the understanding that Mrs Palin shares that opinion. Creep!

       0 likes

  30. George R says:
    March 8, 2011 at 9:01 am

    Islam Not BBC on Christianity and Islam:

    “BBC’s controversial record on religion: past criticism of corporation’s coverage of Christianity”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8366640/BBCs-controversial-record-on-religion-past-criticism-of-corporations-coverage-of-Christianity.html

       0 likes

  31. familyjaffa says:
    March 8, 2011 at 9:29 am

    I’ve just noticed something very interesting about that poll. BIASED!!!!!!!
    These are the countries that were polled
    Polling carried out in 27 countries: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Egypt, France, Germany, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Turkey, UK, US

    Take a note of which of the 16 countries asked about are missing.
    I wonder why they were omitted.
    <!– pullout-links–>

       0 likes

    • deegee says:
      March 8, 2011 at 9:51 am

      It’s not clear. Were they given a list of ‘just’ those 16 countries? Was there some kind of allowances made for population numbers? How were the polls taken?  

         0 likes

  32. hippiepooter says:
    March 8, 2011 at 9:45 am

    Someone mentioned this in a previous OT.  Has the BBC still mentioned about the founder of HRW disowning it and forming a new Human Rights organisation?  Key news.  Seems to risk opening up a can of words the BBC dont wish to explore.

    http://advancinghumanrights.org/news/advancing_human_rights_launches

       0 likes

  33. deegee says:
    March 8, 2011 at 10:09 am

    It’s just entertainment, I suppose?

    Actor Charlie Sheen fired from Two and a Half Men show

    The bit that amazed me was at about 1:00 when the question was raised about Warner Bros share price. According to Warner Bros. Entertainment the company produced 40 television series for the 2010-2011 season; 20.5% share of home video in the United States; grossed more than $1 billion box office for films for the last 10 years. As far as I can tell, Warner Bros. shares aren’t even traded separately from the even more gigantic Time-Warner Incorporated.

    So I guess the answer is not so much.

       0 likes

  34. Umbongo says:
    March 8, 2011 at 11:29 am

    Again on Today this morning the BBC set its agenda and contravened its “impartiality” obligation.  
     
    Immediately before Sir Martin Harris of the egregious Office of “Fair” Access (whose remit is, I admit, lefty rubbish on stilts) was to be asked about widening access to UK universities and the upcoming report, Claire Callender, Professor of Higher Education Policy at Birkbeck College was “interviewed”.  She was permitted – encouraged even – to utter the education establishment’s anathema on any attempt to restrict access to UK universities by the functionally illiterate and innumerate (who, for the purposes of this morning’s “discussion”, were inaccurately and contentiously described by the BBC/Guardianista/Birkbeck College/OFA claque as being “disadvantaged by poverty”).   
     
    Of course, there was nobody from the “other” side who might have been critical of the BBC/Birkbeck College line on “fair” access by claiming that there’s more than a remote possibility that “fair” access and its academic underpinnings are a load of complete crapola.  You see, the “science is in” (© Richard Black) and people like Callender, who have been complicit in ruining one of the world’s best education systems, are allowed to read from the holy writ of lefty educational academe without any awkward (or indeed any) questions from the Today team.

       0 likes

    • hippiepooter says:
      March 8, 2011 at 11:02 pm

      So, Umbungo, there was noone to put the view that ‘fair access’ meant those with the necessary grades get in, those who dont, dont?

      There’s no telling what might happen if the public are exposed to such dangerously subversive ideas.  What would we do without the TODAY programme to shield us from them.

         0 likes

    • dave s says:
      March 8, 2011 at 12:27 pm

      A bit too like the Tea Party for comfort. Really interesting. I doubt the protestors were the usual benefit taking bunch.

         0 likes

    • hippiepooter says:
      March 8, 2011 at 11:19 pm

      I recognised one of the apparant organisers of this fracas as a top guy in the Liverpool BNP.

      If, as I suspect, they are very much wrong that they were acting with lawful authority, I very much hope they get the book thrown at them.

         0 likes

  36. David Preiser (USA) says:
    March 8, 2011 at 3:10 pm

    I love how the BBC was practically demanding military intervention in Libya a couple weeks ago until the US President got cold feet about it.  Now that the Tories have come out in favor of it, they’re voicing every concern against it possible.    
       
    Just a little while ago the News Channel had on some talking head who was mewling about how awful a no-fly zone would be, and that it would be terrible if anyone helped arm the rebels.  He advised that we could “train them”, but didn’t explain how that fantasy scenario would work seeing as how he also didn’t want to send any military in or provide arms to them.    
      
     
    Stage performer (not a journalist or even a proper newsreader: she’s an actress) Emily Maitlis was too busy approving of his message to ask if by “training” he meant some sort of online course along the lines of the ones the Beeboids have to take every time they get busted for betraying their biases or lying to children.      
     
    The BBC follows the lead of the leader of a foreign country, all at your expense.

       0 likes

  37. Guest Who says:
    March 8, 2011 at 3:16 pm

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/neilmidgley/100009721/sick-to-the-back-teeth-of-cuts-at-the-bbc/

    Neil, dude… we feel their pain.

    Though my recent crown did set me back about twice a licence fee.

    Unique.

       0 likes

  38. George R says:
    March 8, 2011 at 3:24 pm

    Tonight’s ‘Newsnight’:

          Paxman – Chomsky – Islam nexus

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2011/03/tuesday_8_march_2011.html

    Supplementary:

    “Chomsky: US is more fundamentalist than Saudi Arabia or the Taliban”http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/28337

    “Beginning of a Democracy Uprising in the U.S: Noam Chomsky Hopes Wisconsin Protest Will Be Just Like Egypt”

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/beginning-of-a-democracy-uprising-in-the-u-s-noam-chomsky-hopes-wisconsin-protest-will-be-just-like-egypt/

     Yes, Chomsky can be political prompt for the political left’s alliance with Islam, which is well underway, especially at INBBC.

       0 likes

  39. David Preiser (USA) says:
    March 8, 2011 at 4:15 pm

    Is anyone else enjoying Jeremy Bowen’s amusingly edited interview with an anonymous Libyan protester?  They’ve repeated it on the News Channel three times in the last hour.

    Bowen is sitting in the front right seat of a car, and the anonymous rebel is on the left.  There is only one camera in the back seat.  Yet, the interview is seemingly done with two cameras, as we get a shot of Bowen in full sincere mode asking the questions, while the camera cuts cleanly to the obscured face or wildly gesticulating hand of the rebel, with the audio seamlessly streaming underneath what is obviously two video tracks.  Two shots, one camera, stitched together in post-production as if it was a sitcom.

    This means that either Bowen did the standard journalism trick of filming his own questions separately, so that he can give full focus to his stage performance, or they faked the beard and flailing hand of the man being interviewed.

    Either way, it’s all very fake.  How nice of the BBC to use their expertise in dramatic televison production to bring you this vital insight into the story.

       0 likes

    • Guest Who says:
      March 8, 2011 at 6:07 pm

      From those same wonderful people who brought you http://www.tcm.com/mediaroom/index/?cid=198444&nbsp; ? 

         0 likes

    • Andrew says:
      March 8, 2011 at 6:12 pm

      I saw it earlier and scratched my head at their ‘editing’.  There’s a small comment at the very start where we hear about ‘another’ protestor.  I didn’t pick up on it the first time.  You can imagine why when I thought there was only one person I was scratching my head at how the mans accent seemed to change.  Then I wondered whty sometimes he had glasses and then we we sway shots of his ear only, it was clear he had no glasses on.  Then the final trick was where the beard came from only to disappear later.

      All in all it was poor editing dressed up to make it look like a continuous free flowing interview when it was nothing of the sort.

      I also found the cloak and dagger introduction quite funny as well.  ‘Informants could be everywhere’ we were told to in order to set the scene the scene for the awkward camera angles so we were clear this was a secret interview.  So if that was indeed true, quite how was it keeping the mans identity secret by sitting in a nice clean people carrier in the middle of the bloody street, talking to a white bloke in a nice Lacoste top.  Surely if there were risks from informers they should have carried out the interview somewhere a little more discreet.

      There was something else I think I picked up on David.  I’ll go back and check but I’m sure at one point Bowen is in the front interviewing him with his kness against the dashboard and then suddenly he is in the rear.

         0 likes

      • Grant says:
        March 8, 2011 at 6:53 pm

        A Beeboid “in the rear”  ?   Well, there’s a surprise !

           0 likes

      • deegee says:
        March 8, 2011 at 11:28 pm

        I’m not sure that Bowen hasn’t plausible deniability on his side about the ‘musical chairs’ although I think it most likely he rerecorded his questions separately. This is reinforced by the jump in angle of view: ultra closeup on the Libyan; head and shoulder on Bowens, and by the change of lighting in shadow for the Libyans and full on for Bowens. This would be tricky to the point of impossible in real, unscripted conditions suggesting the cameraman changed positions. Possibly for the questions leaving the rear and photographing from the driver’s seat or even outside the car.

        The female reporter brought on a wave of deja vue from the First Lebanese War for me. The same firing into the air with no apparent target and the same crowd of onlookers milling around. No one runs, no one takes cover suggesting strongly that this is all special effects for show and not a real battle.

           0 likes

    • pounce_uk says:
      March 9, 2011 at 12:02 am

      As I’ve traveled a lot, you soon pick up on accents, that man Bowen talks to has spent time either in the Uk or with British people. Just my dinars worth.

         0 likes

      • dave s says:
        March 9, 2011 at 12:32 am

        I too was convinced he came from the UK and was trying to disguise his accent to confuse us. Interesting.

           0 likes

    • Andrew says:
      March 9, 2011 at 8:47 am

      I couldn’t get straight in my head about what this story was about, especially until reading Pounce’s Kate Adie story and his analysis of John Simpson’s flak jacket.  What struck me was the only people this clandestine meeting would have actually looked secretive to were the people watching on TV who were no threat to his safety.  Had you actually been there with a slightly wider view of proceedings, the creation of the footage would have been quite public to any of the ‘ever present informers’ that they were supposedly hiding from.

      So if it wasn’t really clandestine what was it all about?  I wondered if the answer lies in the story itself.  In fact what struck me about it was how much of a non-story it was in reality.  We have two men who want Gadaffi to step down (not exactly the only two in the country with that view are they), with some slightly different views about how that should happen.  Are these two men key players in the uprising?  Not obviously from the reporting – they seem just like everyday Joes.  It struck me that they this story was nothing new and was about nothing.  They could have found two people with the same views anywhere.  It didn’t need a car journey and production techniques taken from an episode of 24.

      It was a total waste of time and resources.

      I wonder if this was one of two things.  Did the BBC work out somewhere in the development of this story that it was junk and decided to try and hide this fact by dressing it up as an episode of Spooks, hoping the public wouldn’t notice.  Alternatively I wonder if this was an attempt to present Bowen as some sort of man risking life and limb for the big story to show that he digs really deep in his analysis fo conflict.  Unfortunately it didn’t work.  It didn’t take too long to realise  that this story was on par with his ‘indepth’ work in Egypt.

         0 likes

  40. Shay says:
    March 8, 2011 at 5:34 pm

    How much longer can Sky News keep Alex Crawford? She is a natural to join Lyse, Orla & Barbara – she can get veiled up like them (see google images) & she reports in the same anguished tones.

     Her current reports from Zawiyah, W. Lybia are masterpieces of Pallywood – Hamas must have sent advisors. She is totally biased in favour of the rebels & needless to say the station is swallowing her Pallywood reports hook, line & sinker.

       0 likes

    • Guest Who says:
      March 8, 2011 at 6:02 pm

      Just another peroxide sink, as far as I can gather.

      Or maybe it’s an International women’s day triumph of PC over common sense, whereby you lob as many Western women into a culture not known for their embracing of frontline blondes, in order to force a ‘story’.

      Whatever the rationale, the result doesn’t seem to be much by way of ‘reporting’, but lots of emoting.

      Over the weekend there seemed something darned odd about the slick suit in London calmly asking her questions as the Libyan army was, apparently, knocking down the door, as opposed to him telling her to leg it.

      So I figured it all to be a breathless set-up to try and score a Pulizer, and switched off.

         0 likes

  41. Yerjoking says:
    March 9, 2011 at 12:06 am

    WTF are you people talking about? 
    A “liberal bias”?!? as opposed to an illiberal one? I’ve always thought the ITV did such a stirling job with Sir Trev – and finally my patronised arse.

    Pointing out that Israel treat Palestinians badly isn’t bias, it’s fact. There are compelling arguments about the inhumanity of the democratically elected Palestinian opposition Hamas, and the cliche the Palestinians “never miss an oportunity to miss an oportunity” but this doesn’t take anything away from the illegal land-grabs, false-imprisonment, internment and miss-treatment of palestinian by Israel.

    Even the sidebar quotes from Andrew Marr are hardly damning. He’s vaguely changed his view and admits the BBC no longer has its outlook dominated by middle-class christian heterosexuals.

    The site links to SKY News! SKY FUCKING NEWS!!! seriously, I know the TV license is a bit of an anacronism – but you can’t be serious about SKY news, can you?

       0 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:
      March 9, 2011 at 2:04 pm

      Yerjoking, you obviously haven’t been paying attention to this blog, or comprehended the point of posts here.  You are also – typically of anti-Israel types – blatantly misrepresenting people’s statments here.

      So let’s clear this up, and see what you have to say then.  The complaints here aren’t that the BBC points out that Israel treats some Palestinians badly.  You are incorrect.  The complaint is that the BBC demonizes Israel by censoring news about what’s really going on with, for example, Egypt’s blockade of Gaza, or that a given border incident in which a Palestinian is killed was in fact started by Palestinians trying to kill Israelis.  There are numerous examples of that on this blog.

      The point is that the BBC is serially dishonest in its portrayal of both sides of the story, and makes it out that Israel is exclusively to blame for everything.  There is a difference between honest and accurate criticism and demonization.  If you care to discuss this, I’m sure people here will be happy to do so.

      As for your cherry-picking of the sidebar quotes, how pathetic of you to point out Marr’s quote about not being able to find any evidence of bias in spite of all the other quotes from Beeboids stating that there is a definite bias.  Pretty weak, and does not help your credibility at all.

      Sky F@#$ing news, eh?  Are you able to point out an instance of false reporting or lies on Sky, the way we do with the BBC here?  If so, start your own blog about Biased Sky, and then you might have a leg to stand on.  At present, all we know is that you hate Sky without offering any substantial argument as to why.  It may be a given in your world that all Sky News is false because of who owns it, but you’ll have to actually spend a moment proving it in the real world.

      Oh, and Sky is not the official state broadcaster with a special remit to be impartial and honest, does not have a generations-long connection to the public and special place in their minds, and nobody is forced to pay for Sky simply because they want to watch something else entirely.  Must try harder.  But you’re clearly new to this blog, and have no idea as to the history.

         0 likes

  42. Jim Hanson says:
    March 9, 2011 at 12:07 am

    This is not BBC bias, none the less you guys might be interested in this story: <a href=”http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/08/npr-executives-caught-on-tape-bashing-conservatives-and-tea-party-touting-liberals/”>NPR Executives caught on tape…</a>

    Ja,es O’Keefe, the young fellow who did the sting on ACORN where he posed as a pimp with his hooker has struck again. This time he sent two fellows to a meeting with NPR executives. The two posed as Muslim’s affiliated with an educational program promoting global Sharia law.

    The NPR execs manage to be mind-bbendingly insulting and condescending towards Americans, asure the two they have no Zionist tendancies and laugh in delight when one of the two tells them they call NPR “National Palestinian Radio”.

    To say it has caused a bit of an uproar would be an understatement. Republicans, gleefully playing off one of the execs comments that NPR would be better off without government funding, are pusging to defund public broasdcasting entirely. Meanwhile NPR is floundering around trying to stem the bleeding.

    At any rate, I imagine the attitude of the two NPR bozos would be familiar to the BBC types.

       0 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:
      March 9, 2011 at 2:15 pm

      This is relevant to the blog for two reasons:  the Beeboids in the US occasionally quote NPR talking heads about US issues.  NPR is also infested by former JournoListas.

      Secondly, and more imporant, the BBC’s brief mention of Juan Williams being fired was weighted against him without discussing what really happened.  Now that the people who fired him have been exposed, the BBC is utterly silent now that we see who the real bigots are at NPR.  And what a shock that they share the same opinions as the BBC.  Those statements about the Tea Party and Republicans are the exact same we heard time and again in BBC reporting on the US.

      NPR is funded in part by the government (i.e. the hard-earned money of citizens), and is going to feel the heat for being so blatantly biased to the far Left.  That’s why the BBC is censoring this news so far.

         0 likes

  43. familyjaffa says:
    March 9, 2011 at 1:40 pm

    “but this doesn’t take anything away from the illegal land-grabs, false-imprisonment, internment and miss-treatment of palestinian by Israel. ”

    Watch the BBC a lot do you?

       0 likes

  44. joseph sanderson says:
    March 9, 2011 at 1:47 pm

    Just got home from a trip to Hasselt, was listening to Radio 4 (198lw), after laughing along to a 30 min comedy was then treated to a programme called ‘you and yours’, one of the segments on this show was the claims from a former ‘Daily Star’ journalist who claimed that his former newspaper was making up negative stories regarding Muslims.

    What was most striking from the very sympathetic interview was right at the end, when the host of the show read out a short statement from the Daily star in which it pointed out:

    Richard Peppiatt worked purely as a casual reporter at the Daily Star for almost two years. Recently he became unhappy after he was passed over for several staff positions. He refers to a Kelly Brook story: in fact, he approached and offered the newspaper that story, vouched for its accuracy, and then asked for and received an extra freelance fee for doing so. Since he wrote his email we have discovered that he was privately warned very recently by senior reporters on the paper after suggesting he would make up quotes. Regarding the allegations over the paper’s coverage of Islam, he was only ever involved in a very minor way with such articles, and never voiced either privately or officially any disquiet over the tone of the coverage. For the record, the Daily Star editorial policy does not hold any negativity towards Islam and the paper has never, and does not endorse, the EDL.

    The interviewer put to the ex journalist if he felt that the ‘Daily Star’ only published article about muslim extremists, terrorism and immigration, the ex journalist unsurprisingly answered YES!

    The man is now on a tour of BBC radio stations R4, R5 & Newshour giving his own bull..t side of the story.

       0 likes

  45. tommy attkins says:
    March 9, 2011 at 4:55 pm

    over in the USA, a senior exec of NPR has been caught describing the US population as “uneducated”. To people who said they were members of the Muslim Brotherhood and had $5m to invest.  
    Its strange that more stings like this haven’t been done to the behind the scenes BBC “agenda setters”.  
    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0308/NPR-executive-calls-tea-party-seriously-racist-most-Americans-uneducated

       0 likes