OK, this is the last Open Thread of 2011 so say what you see….
OPEN THREAD..
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir Nov 16, 01:59
Weekend 16th November 2024
Kennedy has said that he is not against vaccines but wants them to be more thoroughly tested and investigated.[237][238] In… - Zephir Nov 16, 01:52
Weekend 16th November 2024
Kennedy is critical of the United States’ alliances with dictatorships like Saudi Arabia. He criticized the Saudi-led intervention in the… - Zephir Nov 16, 01:49
Weekend 16th November 2024
In 1987, Kennedy founded the Environmental Litigation Clinic at Pace University School of Law, where for three decades he was… - vlad Nov 16, 01:36
Weekend 16th November 2024
I only watch the BBC news on very rare occasions when I can’t sleep. Last night I switched on wondering,… - Zephir Nov 16, 01:33
Weekend 16th November 2024
All those “mass protests”against a country that offered to wipe out their debts and give them a trade deal, oh… - Zephir Nov 16, 01:13
Weekend 16th November 2024
Bit like the insurrection in Ukraine where their democratically elected president was usurped and exiled and Zelensky put in his… - Nibor Nov 15, 23:25
Weekend 16th November 2024
Dear Brissles, As a lorry driver I note : That every Summer the traffic increases It doesn’t decrease in autumn,… - BRISSLES Nov 15, 22:44
Weekend 16th November 2024
Nibor … .Being long retired I generally avoid the ‘old’ generally recognised rush hour on the roads. In more recent… - Nibor Nov 15, 22:36
Weekend 16th November 2024
Economy not doing as well as Rachel Reeves and Labour expecting it to do? Hold on! It should be stratosphering.…
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
Having worked in a customer driven environment all my working life, I have always taken the view, that you have to be there when the customers want you.
As such, if you are going to get a rush at a particular time, you were expected to be there. It often used to piss me off, but you have to acknowledge the sense in this to maximise business.
I would have thought, that Christmas was a very important time for TV companies; It’s probably the only time ITV can really earn advertising revenue.
Why is it then, that somewhere around the middle of December the entire ‘market rate talent’ of the BBC decamps and does a runner, reappearing around the second week in January.
I am thinking of people like Chris Evans, Paxman, Maitlis, etc. No one would begrudge them time to be with their families, but 3 weeks at THEIR peak time, when they should be straining every sinew in the ratings war.
It seems to me, that they think themselves above having to do what the proles have to do. I don’t expect it even occurs to them to consider the lives of shop staff working on Boxing Day; But considering the awful stuff they shoved on over the holiday, you’d have thought they would have tried to cover up their absences by putting something half decent on to distract the plebs.
I’ve noticed over the past twelve months that the BBC have got more blatant in their left wing bias, and even some of the ‘plebs’ are noticing.
If I was them, I’d be thinking very hard about upping my game in the quality stakes before the inevitable backlash happens.
“Why is it then, that somewhere around the middle of December the entire ‘market rate talent’ of the BBC decamps and does a runner, reappearing around the second week in January.”
I think the phrase is ‘producer capture’.
The BBC is not there to provide entertainment and information for you. It is there to provide jobs and sundry benefits and junkets for its employees.
John Simpson on the Today Programme this morning – managed a whole feature on North Korea without once mentioning that it was a communist/socialist state.
Mind you, he also commented on the sinking of a “South African” naval vessel byNorth Korea!
Is it me, or do I detect a thinly disguised approval of the whole Kim dynasty thing amongst the BBCs correspondants?
They are heartbroken at the news of Kim’s death. Anyway, it’s all the fault of America, according to this headline!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16287506
The bBC do know the truth, but seldon say so. On TODAY the 27th was an item about the economy with lasley Curwen. She among others had Mr Darling in the piece. At 24minutes into the program she stated a proposition rather than ask a question along the lines, ‘your gov with all it’s borrowing and bad policies caused the current situation’. To which a stunned Darling mumbled a reply.
So not all bBC tell lies, just a large majority. She knew the truth, suspect she won’t be there much longer, far too honest.
If only all beeboids got stuck into Darling & Co on a full-time basis. New Labour are like a defeated, retreating army that has salted the soil of the land it has relinquished. All that will grow are ugly, useless, deformed crops – like the one that sprouted on Oxford Street on Boxing Day, outside Foot Locker/Loot Focker. More & more, the general public will have the ‘achievements’ of New Labour thrust in their faces. Utterly sickening. Absolutely unforgivable.
‘When I look back over the political landscape of the last 30 years, the words Greenham Common come to mind. In my early 20s, though, I certainly didn’t want American cruise missiles on my shores. I didn’t have time – or maybe I was too ambitious and driven – to give up my job and go and live in a tent for six months in order to draw attention to it.
I did, however, visit Greenham. My ears were ringing with snide jokes about hairy women and lesbian grandmothers (in the media’s eyes, feminism was a dirty word even then). I was duly astonished by it – the collectivity, the humour, the energy, the intelligence and the power, the quiet – but determined – power of those women. I came back very clear that whatever happened at Greenham, I – we – were in their debt’
A Point of View – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16306356
Can someone please explain to me how I am in the debt of the Greenham protesters?
How have they improve my life exactly?
Jeff
And this week’s A Point of View also contains material that wouldn’t look out of place in the Guardian:
‘Perhaps the most pernicious erosion of moral probity in British public life over the past quarter-century has been the willingness of high-ranking civil servants to cash their chips in and become the tools of corporate interests.’
and
‘We, the masses, have acquiesced in the activities of a blatant media force, whose task it is to eavesdrop on the lives of a select few. And whereas the Eastern Bloc’s so-called Communists sought to perpetuate their dominance, we have only succeeded in maintaining our own subjugation’.
From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16338447
Jeff
She’s just another dozy feminist idiot.
The missiles were removed from Greenham as the result of an international treaty, not because of the lesbian camp, although I suppose the smell of unwashed bodies might have been of some influence.
“Ultra-Orthodox Jews make up 10% of the population in Israel. The community has a high birth rate and is growing rapidly.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16342327
Much as I detest these ultra-orthodox zealots, as do most Isrealis, the bBc makes them sound like a plague. Why does the bBC not have a similar line on every article to do with a certain religious group in England, and let us know their relative birth rate?
Jon sopel, when introducing a News Channel report on the Ultras, said that it was reminiscent of the USA during the civil rights struggles of the 1960s.
Bingo! Two birds with one stone
Drag up the past, putting the USA in a bad light whilst ignoring the current behaviour of nations catering exclusively to those submitting to another religion.
Vintage Evan Davis, on Tuesday’s Today programme.
Listen out for doom-mongering ‘left-of-centre-thinktank’ man being given first and last word, as well as a selection of words put into his mouth by Davis at the end of his first slot.
Not at all downbeat interviewee is given centre slot, a general tone of utter disbelief, a few doom-laden words for him to agree on (he refuses).
Some researcher will be getting a kicking for selecting such an off-message man!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9668000/9668345.stm
At least they’re starting to label the think tank’s partisanship honestly. Finally, a gesture towards integrity.
Davis was obviously trying to decide whether to call the confident small business owner a liar or just plain mad. He clearly didn’t believe a word the guy was saying, and questioned him at every turn, in stark constrast to his hand-holding with the gloomy Dolphin.
Check out both the headline and summary in the box on the iplayer page.
No bias there.
So after not reporting the news over how Muslims, yes Muslims in Nigeria are trying to ignite a holy war by attacking Christian Churches on Christmas day. The bBC have decided to report how some nasty person threw a bomb inside an Islamic school injuring 6 children. Yet leave out how a Christian couple and their child were shot dead by innocent Muslims the day before. How rampaging Islamic mobs have targeted Christians in Yobe State, burning down over 30 Christian owned shops.The bBC does report how somebody tried to blow up a mosque on the 10th of Dec (what a fortnight ago?) yet for some reason the main story about how the bBC’s favourite religious bigots targeted 5 churches on Christmas day is still reported as a non story I quote:
The militants also planted bombs in Damaturu and outside a church near the capital, Abuja, on Christmas Day.
That bomb in Damatura killed 3people, the latter 39 people. But hey we can’t have the bbC informing the public how the religion of peace is actually the religion of Death.
Makes you wonder just what faith the people who are running for their lives in Yobe State belong to? It’s not as if the bBC wants you to know, is it.
To them, Muslims can only be pure, magnanimous and victims.
only one thing to do, ask the the head of religious programming 😀
at the bbc?, get him to explain, why such poor coverage when it comes to the multitude of atrocities to christians, isn t he outraged?, being such a religious soul n all 😀 , isn t he going to speak out, till the perps are exposed, over and over again, ask the question why?
ps … i mean, what paragon of religiousity, would deliberately ignore these glaring facts
The BBC really are pathetic scum. With the announcement today of the new carriages to be built by Bombardier for Southern Railways, Radio 5 have been in full Tory attack mode and having just heard Justine Greening get beaten up on Radio 5, I have to say the Tories deserve it.
Firstly the BBC attack the Government for the ‘subsidy’ for the carriages (clearly the BBC don’t really care about British jobs for British workers), then the BBC accuse the Tories of ‘guilt’ over the lost order for Bombardier over Cross Rail.
Greening was pathetic in NOT picking up the BBC’s attack from some dopey female on Radio 5 who went after her time and time again over the tender. Greening made a half hearted effort to point out that the Cross Rail contract was down to the last Government, but of course as we know the BBC ignore the last 13 years of Liebore incompetence.
I do despair at the Tories when they come on the BBC, was is essentially a good news story for manufacturing is turned on its head by the BBC and used to beat the current government with whilst excusing the last one, just like we see with the mess the economy is in, the PFI mess the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and so on.
If the Tories lose the next election, it will be down in part to the BBC spininng lies for the Liebore party.
It’s sickening, isn’t it? The Tory party don’t seem to have a media monitoring unit to pick up on the non-stop flow of bias and they are desparately in need of serious tuition on how to handle hostile interviewing techniques which the BBC have been using since the mid 90’s.
As you have said many times before, they deserve every kicking they get. If the Tories haven’t woken up and taken action by the end of Q1 in 2012, they won’t see 2013 as the co-ordinated with Labour attacks from the BBC will destroy any slim chances the Tories might have had from the floating voters.
No doubt beeboids would like Siemens to get all the rail contracts. They do bribe well after all – see their Wikipediaentry.
Good comments above regarding things like Labour being allowed to put salt down, the inadequacy and bias re North Korea and reporting over the holidays, the useless and hopelessly biased coverage of religious affairs etc, etc…need I go one?
It`s all of a piece really-useless lavender lefties in the knickerbockers and velveteen that Scargills lemmings didn`t dare wear back when they were collected back in 84-and these lilypad loafers pray to Dawkins for the nicer revolution.
That is the BBC mindset…to expect anything other than the occassional Buerk shows how reduced our expectations have now become.
And so to You and Yours.
1. It seems that getting all your homegrown veg is NOT a reason not to celebrate the good folk of Todmorden growing their own food in public gardens and allotments.
That it is likely to be nicked by the usual parasitic scum who grow nothing, know nothing is no reason not to get your head kicked in in defending your leeks and sprouts…is this not socialism? Equality for all-especially the freeloading class down at the Job Centre…or if they clean their necks…on the other side of the desks at the Job Centre…or even at the BBC.
2. It also seems that those nasty Tories and the capitalist housebuilders aren`t building enough houses…for the IPPR(a left- of- centre think tank apparently) says so.
Apparently 1972 and 1990 were terrible(Tory!) and this useless Coalition are failing to build like that nice Labour lot did all the way through the glory days of plenty from 1997.
Really hard to find that word socialist(let alone communist/New Labour) in any news bulletins these days isn`t it?
Nice bit of lefty propaganda here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16295827
It’s about ‘Human Zoos’, i.e. people from exotic tribes kept as circus freaks.
It blames:
‘The climax of the story comes with the imperialist high noon of the late 19th and early 20th Centuries.
A European public fed on notions of Christian evangelism and cultural superiority was titillated by re-enactments of life in the colonies which became a regular part of international trade fairs.’
The Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_zoo however presents a very different story:
” Ethnographic zoos were often predicated on unilinealism, scientific racism and social Darwinism.”
The unileanism page notes
‘At the same time, Christianity taught that people lived in a debased world fundamentally inferior to the Garden of Eden and Heaven. During the Age of Enlightenment, however, European self-confidence grew and the notion of progress became increasingly popular. It was during this period that what would later become known as ‘sociological and cultural evolution’ would have its roots.’
So basically the truth is these exhibits result not from Christianity, but from its absence or opposite – Darwinism and secular society.
How typical of the BBC to blame the evils on the past on colonialism and Christianity regardless of the facts.
Admittedly this is a report on an exhibition with a rather militant perspective, BUT at the BBC, the far left is given free ride with no balancing counterpoint, whereas the far right is just attacked.
Personally, I find it difficult to distinguish this from all those anthropologists and human rights activists who want to keep stone-age tribal peoples from joining civilization.
So what was happening in the colonies before they became colonies? Was it all peace and love, Auntie Beeb? Take that pile of stones they named “Zimbabwe” after. No, it wasn’t “evidence of an old black civilisation” as lefties claimed at the time. The stones were the remains of an Arab slave trading fort, where blacks sold blacks they had captured. How about the Moghul (islamic) invasion of India in the 1400’s? At least the Portuguese, who arrived at the same time, tried converting the Hindus, not mass-slaughtering them! The sheer cruelty of life outside the west is now largely a thing of the past – mostly thanks to the influence of European Christians.
An excellent point, Matthew.
Scientific racism did not grow out of Christian evangelism. Livingstone fought the Arab Slave Trade in the Great Lakes region on the Christian conviction that all humanity was created by God and ALL needed the message of salvation.
Racism derived from very different roots. Darwinism espoused by the more extreme proponents of evolution..Huxley, Spencer etc. denied a religious dimension and proposed a scientific structure of cultural evolution. This was brought to its worst excesses in the extremes of Nazi science.
And, of course, Marxism derives from the same unilinealist roots. Marx and Engels were historical materialists and were fully in agreement with the concept of grades of culture. The whole dynamic of Marxism is violent evolution (revolution) leading to a higher social order. First socialism and the dictatorship of the proleteriat and then to pure communism.
Cultural racism lead them to put the ‘proleteriat’ of industrial societies at the vanguard as opposed to the idiocies of other cultures mired in primitive practices and religions.
Indeed. It is never acknowledged by the BBC that eugenics was the AGW of its day with every ‘scientist’ buying in. Those that had the temerity to object were castigated and villified. Smell familiar?
Great moment today on Radio4- incredulous BBC reporter- probably Evan Davies- just couldnt get his head round the fact that Tracy Emin supports the conservatives- and even worse! – David Cameron. She stood her ground and I think will have won a lot of supporters who would have written her off as another arty lefty metropolitan media – the lady actually thinks for herself, and he just couldnt believe it!
beeboids don’t want people to think for themselves
they thrive on upholding the hive mentality at all costs……can’t have the proles going off script
that’s why we have cultural communism…..aka political correctness
the dogma of the leftist dictator
To be honest, I’m trying to get my head around the fact that Tracey Emin, or ANY fashionable modern artist, would admit to voting Tory. Considering the obvious backlash from felllow artists and the surrounding media luvvies, it’s a decision that must have taken some courage. She’s also confessed to being a ‘secret royalist’. This is what I hate most ; the almost religious intolerance of the left to these apostates from the ‘approved’ mindset. Why should anyone have to feel a need to keep their opinions hidden like a guilty secret?
Celebrate diversity, you lefty bastards! (then choke on it)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/8980125/Tracey-Emin-Im-abused-by-other-artists-for-voting-Tory.html
gillyches posted on this in the death throes of the last OT.
This is a typical example of the Beeboid mindset; I bet they don’t even see anything remotely wrong with this exchange. I can think of no better insight into the alternative reality of the BBC.
Oh looky here, well well =-O .
You may remember the BBC reports of eco doom about how coral reefs were/could/maybe dying off because of CO2, it was the new scare of the week while it lasted. Off to the coral reefs the beeboids went to promise that coral reefs and its inhabitants were under threat from CO2. Then nothing, the BBC dropped the scare but have they issued a retraction yet? Here is a very interesting article from WUWT telling us the truth about yet another wholly wrong and dishonest scaremongering bag of ecofascist lies. You will never see this on the BBC thats for sure.
The fishes and the coral live happily in the CO2 bubble plume Posted on December 28, 2011 by Anthony Watts
Guest post by David Archibald
Willis Eschenbach’s post on lab work on coral response to elevated carbon dioxide levels, and The Reef Abides, leads to a large scale, natural experiment in Papua New Guinea. There are several places at the eastern end of that country where carbon dioxide is continuously bubbling up through healthy looking coral reef, with fish swimming around and all that that implies.
<img style=”background-image: none; padding-left: 0pt; padding-right: 0pt; display: inline; padding-top: 0pt; border: 0pt none;” src=”http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/image_thumb11.png?w=644&h=425″ title=”image” border=”0″ alt=”image”/>
Coral Reef at Dobu Island with carbon dioxide bubbling through it (photo: Bob Halstead)
What that implies is that ocean acidification is no threat at all. If the most delicate, fragile, iconic ecosystem of them all can handle flat-out saturation with carbon dioxide, what is there to worry about?
That lack of a threat is a threat to a human institution though – the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) based in Townsville, north Queensland run by Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg.
Continue reading →
BBC criticised for naming panda as a woman of the year – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8980607/BBC-criticised-for-naming-panda-as-a-woman-of-the-year.html
On that link page the BBC admits entering a pig for woman of the year 2009. Better looking than female Labour MPs I suppose.
That’s a bit unkind! 🙂
And some female Labour MPs are quite attractive! I wouldn’t kick Caroline Flint out of bed! LOL!
Jeff
I would kick Caroline Flint out of bed.
‘Mutton’, doesn’t begin to describe it.
I wouldn’t mind taking out a few grudges on Gloria Del Piero.
“A devout muslim drug dealer … ”
Fascinating phrase from this Daily Mail story on the gang culture surrounding the Oxford Street murder.
When criminals convert to Christianity they give up crime. When criminals convert to Islam for some reason they see nothing incompatible in continuing a life of crime.
I’m sure the BBC will conduct a fearless investigation into this telling dichotomoy in criminal religious conversion.
I’m sure Hitler had his reasons for being a deep admire of Islam.
when the BBC do a ‘documentary’ on the Labour years, 1997 to 2010, all they need to do is put the phrase ‘total cunts’ on the screen for an hour
The Queen’s Christmas message was primarily about the birth of Christ. Directly afterwards the BBC summarized it as being about the importance of the family.
‘Little Black Sambo’!
Love it; and you just know that the Beeboids’ heads will explode when they see that!
Tracy Emin called a ‘Tory Stooge’ by Justin webb
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9668000/9668818.stm
‘Tracy Emin called a ‘Tory Stooge’ by Justin webb ‘
Actually… ‘someone’ wrote in to say that, and of all views they ‘listen to’ that could have been shared, that was the one the BBC Labour lickspittles, from researcher through producer to market rate ‘talent’ chose to run with.
Go figger.
Speaking of the only political forces whose names should be uttered with reverence if they bash the enemy, as Nick Clegg seems off for a day putting the bins out, Mr. Miliband has rushed out to say… willsay… something… anything… and in true form it has gone down like BBC job applicant on the HR diversity interviewer.
Even the Gaurdian is struggling to pitch it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/dec/29/ed-miliband-david-cameron-depression-despair
I reckon top of the hour and home page across the BBC empire by bedtime. Maybe with a Prescott ‘interview’ in support on R4 tomorrow.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16346627
No comments enabled. Maybe they were worried none would be suitable for Justin to parrot?
BBCPolitics BBC Politics VIDEO: Miliband’s New Year message of hope bbc.in/vvDkg3
Hope?… to whom, Aunty?
So if someone declares support for Conservative party then they are a “Tory stooge” but the dozens of Labour supporting presenters, journalists and experts who regularly appear on the BBC…Not a word of criticism allowed.
I bet Labour wish that their party political broadcasts were this good:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16218546
Jeff
I don’t think the Lib Dems will be quite so pleased with their video:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16218549
Nor the Tories:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16218548
Jeff
Control the edit suite and you control the message.
Control the message and you control the public.
Control the public and you control policy.
Control policy and you dictate who enables it.
A £4Bpa, 24/7 pan-media monopoly propaganda machine that uses public money to tell the public what to think on behalf of the financial interests and ideological beliefs of an unelected, unaccountable and unremovable minority.
They don’t so much tell lies (though often do) as shape the truth to suit. And we pay for it.
Unique.
BBCPolitics BBC Politics VIDEO: Miliband’s New Year message of hope bbc.in/vvDkg3
QED
I quite like Melvyn Bragg’s “In our Time”, well, usually.
This morning they were on about polymers, and sure enough, we were told that we had greedily stolen all the lovely oil, which was, after all, buried “sunshine energy”, and not left any for our children and grandchildren – mean, selfish folk that we are. We must, therefore, make polymers from plants (starches and cellulose, you see), rather than grow them to eat.
Anyway, this sort of claptrap always riles me, because, if we don’t use the oil which is still there in abundance, and probably will be for ages, and conserve it instead, what good is it for later generations?
I mean, if WE can’t use it, there will be no need for vehicles and plant that relies upon it, so we’ll have to develop something else – in whcih case the oil will be of no use to future generations, either.
If, however, we restrict its use, then those unscrupulous fellow world dwellers will want it for themselves and try and nick it, resulting in all sorts of nastiness.
Or, we take advantage of this bounteous gift, exploit it whilst we can, cheaply, whilst at the same time look for and develop alternatives. Best way, I think, don’t you? After all, oil, like coal is no fucking use beneath our feet if it can be of some value to our lives.
In Our Time is an example of the sort of programme I would be willing to pay for if the BBC went subscription.
I can’t think of another one, mind…
Assuming that he were to believe in it, what would Ed Miliband want for Christmas? Who do you reckon will give him the biggest present?
Even Michael White of the Guardian admits that the Labour leader is on the ropes.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2011/sep/27/ed-miliband-speech-more-work-needed
‘will still require a generous leap of faith to conclude….he is ready to be prime minister’
Female Guardianistas are ready to ditch Ed for a sister….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/18/catherine-bennett-ed-miliband-failed-leader
‘the Labour leader continues to stumble. Time for Yvette?’
So to the BBC’s present for Ed (ahem, their analysis)
Well they certainly wrap it up in pretty paper and put a bloody big bow on it…..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16289866
‘Ed Miliband’s year was book-ended with by-election victories.
There was Oldham East and Saddleworth in January – after a court overturned Labour’s win at the general election – and Feltham and Heston this month, with an increased vote share.
The party took charge of a minority government in Wales as well.’
It gets a bit negative after that because it talks about Scotland. You won’t find much about Ed’s deep unpopularity in England outside of died-in-the-wool Labour strongholds.
Bias in his favour? Nah, not us gov…
Yvette Cooper, what a joke!!!
BBC Editor shows how their devotion to twitter as a ‘news’ medium is so apposite…
BBCRBlack Richard Black ‘Guardian follows tabloid journalism model’ shocker gu.com/p/34c2e/tf – ‘BBC panda causes outrage’ – so where is it?
More a way to engage in media hissy fits. Actually, for once, he’s almost right. Can’t speak for others, but outrage was not my main reaction. More ‘sad, predictable, right-on, luvvie ninnies.’
Mind you, when the Graun thinks the BBC have lost the plot, and the minions’ only response is they have, so there, something wonderful is in the air.
Enough already of Kim. I haven’t added up the coverage time on the death of the 69 year old, but it is way too much. So, here’s my prediction: Kim is dead. There is every likelihood that sadly he will still be dead tomorrow. And our impeccable beeboids have found out also that next week — you guessed it! — he will most certainly be dead.
We know only too well about BBC-NUJ’s perennial leftist political bias;
Channel 4’s gross failings are not to be ignored either:
“Thirty years of Channel 4 and the coarsening of British life”
By Stephen Glover
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2079571/Channel-4s-30th-birthday-The-systematic-dumbing-TV-programmes.html#ixzz1hvfTOIXj
Turkish airstrike kills 35 teenagers by mistake.
So have you seen the Al-Beeb article which whitewashes the above attack.
Be amazed, at how the bBC leaves out any mention that this was a mistake.
Be astonished, at how the bBC leaves out any mention that these were civilians.
Be astounded, at how the bBC allows the Turkish military to excuse itself.
Now when was the last time, you saw the bBC do the same with say the: US, UK or even Israel?
Funny enough the leftwing Guardian reports the story as it should by telling the truth:
Turkey kills ‘smugglers’ in air strike aimed at Kurdish guerillas
Well, maybe they figure it will help with the EU entry pass?
By ‘they’, I guess the EU, Turkey and the BBC are fiarly interchangeable.
Such two-faced editorial (I can no longer accord the BBC any credit for reporting anything straight) epitomises all that is wrong with its £4Bpa media monolpoly ‘news’ ‘product’.
And I am forced by law to pay for this?
what makes this story worse, is the turkish media is reporting that the group of kids (50 of them) were redirected by the military to take a certain path. A path we now know that lead to their death.
The Turkish Media is rightfully questioning the Military over this strike, yet the bbC which does the same to the UK,US forces remains silent, in fact they bend towards the Military in excusing their mistake.
Looks like this report has undergone a complete transformation as it “developed”. Sometimes the BBC waits for more information before rushing to report, sometimes they don’t. No agenda to support here, so they went ahead early.
Good article by Robin Shepherd (very apt!) in the Commentator:
That is why the polls – always deliberately censored from the discussion by the BBC, the Guardian et al – consistently show that the large majority of Palestinians only accept a two-state solution as a stepping stone to the destruction of Israel…
…And that is why the people in the BBC and the Guardian who refuse to report and discuss such matters are not just the enemies of truth, they are also the enemies of peace.
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/763/gingrich_was_wrong_about_palestinian_identity_but_right_that_it_is_at_the_core_of_the_conflict_
BBC Radio 5 positively buzzing with excitement. Salford cops have classified the shooting of an Indian student as a ‘hate crime’.
Steady now, say the PCs, we’re not saying it was ‘racially motivated’ just that ‘the community’ perceives it as a ‘hate crime’ so that’s how we have to treat it.
Nonsense I know. As if shooting a lad in the head were not motivated by some form of hate.
Still the Beeboids are practically ejaculating with the thrill of there being a racial element to this story.
ooohhh the “community” again hmmm.
A very sad fact that people gets shot in the GUN-chester area, isn t it, (yep! many many shootings) a bad scene for so many
the community? could that include the …
(by now well instructed, in, “bad ole racist blighty/colonial guilt-colonial guilt!”) … community in India too , by any chance? …
Better wheel out the handwringers eh!
Has anybody el beeb managed to massage a “white” into the equation yet? … goodness they must be chomping at the bit.
sorry to be so cynical
Since when does the ‘community’ decide something is a hate crime? What utter bollocks. So the next time a white kid gets stabbed by a bloack kid and the local white population demand it be treated as a hate crime the Police and BBC will be onboard with that?
Just who did the plods consult to decide this was a ‘hate crime’? Did they go door to door? or just ask the usual ‘community representatives’ (Guardian readers who don’t live in the community) their opinion?
I think we know the answer to that.
Shootings like this go on in Salford all the time, the place is a shit hole, glad to see the BBC now living there.
Where does the community’s ability to define a crime end, one asks?
And kicking the shit out of a white woman in Leicester with cries of “White bitch” is what, exactly? A sign of affection?
i note this morning, in one hour on el beeb1 news, this students pic was flashed 9 times, with the considered “hate” crime link?
Strangely post 8.45 this morning, after positively wetting their pants all yesterday on this, 5live now seem to be back tracking slightly … hmmmm
major bullsh-t alert
I only saw this clip of Ann Coulter demolishing Paxman yesterday; sorry if it’s been posted before (it’s 5 years old) but it exemplifies why the BBC are scared to death of a Fox UK:
Another biased tweet from Katty Kay:
If unemployment were 7%, would Obama’s distance even be a story? RT Obama Gains Reputation as Distant in Washington
Why, yes, Katty. Yes it would. This has been a story about Him from the start, you dishonest Beeboid, and nothing has changed.
April 2009: Spare me the details; Barack Obama’s aloof relationship with Congress.
November 2010: Biden: Obama views as aloof because he’s ‘so brilliant’
Januray 2009 – before He even took office: Barack Obama has been criticized for being too cool, too aloof, even too serene.
Here’s another one from before He took office: Obama’s silence begins to seem aloof/bought given the urgency of the American street
Bonus bias: Katty is quoted in that last one defending Him even then.
Katty Kay is the most partisan hack imaginable.
Question for INBBC’s Ms WYATT: were the perpetrators Muslims?
“Afghan girl’s ‘horrifying abuse’ exposed by video”
By Caroline Wyatt,
INBBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16356247
NIGERIA.
This critique of ‘New York Times’ coverage could also be applied to that of INBBC:
Raymond Ibrahim: New York Times Minimizes Anti-Christian Aspect of Nigeria’s Christmas Day Jihad
TURKEY.
INBBC will put this into the political context of INBBC’s unswerving political campaign to get 80 million Muslim Turks (and Kurds) into the E.U.
“Turkey admits 35 civilian deaths near Kurdish village”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16352388
EGYPT.
More INBBC political propaganda for Muslim Brotherhood (MB):
“Islamists in Egypt’s tourist spots win surprise support”
By Angy Ghannam,
INBBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16348229
An alternative view of MB in Egypt, which INBBC permanently censors:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/br0nc0s/managed-mt/mt-search.cgi?search=egypt+muslim+brotherhood&IncludeBlogs=1&limit=20
Is INBBC interested in reporting about Muslims destroying cultural archives of Egypt?
A report from ‘Family Security Matters’:-
“Burning Issues: Islamism, Intolerance, Iconoclasm”
Part One (of Two)
Adrian Morgan, The Editor
http://familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.11133/pub_detail.asp
Islamisation of Europe.
INBBC barely reported on any of the following in 2011, developments which it quietly condones:
“Europe’s Inexorable March Towards Islam”
http://www.hudson-ny.org/2711/europe-march-towards-islam
Occupy lovefest on the World Service’s usually excellent The World Today programme this morning.
We had the delights of unknown song-writer Jeremy Gilchrist (18 minutes in) going all Dylan (with added Stipe vibrato for good measure). It was so lovely and I half-expected him to kick in with EVRY-BODY HURRRRRRRRTS…SOME TIIIIIIIMES.
Previously we were treated to a chat between two Omars (35 minutes in): one was a film-maker who was on the scene at Tahrir Square when the Egyptian revolution was kicking off; the other Omar was an Occupy Oakland protestor.
Now, please forgive my scepticism but I find it a little hard to equate the two movements: Egypt Omar, not to mention Tunisian, Libyan and Syrian Omars, were risking life and limb to face down their authoritarian governments and many were killed, tortured and injured in so doing.
Now, we know the US is a fascist dictatorship that sends cancerous gamma rays to South America but I don’t recall the Oakland Police Department sending in the tanks to remove the Occupiers and their state-of-the-art tents.
On a more serious note, do BBC journalists really draw equivalence between the Arab Spring and the Occupy movement? I mean, seriously? This is like comparing a D-Day veteran with a winner of It’s a Knockout.
Furthermore, what, in any meaningful sense, has the Occupy movement achieved?
On a more serious note, do BBC journalists really draw equivalence between the Arab Spring and the Occupy movement? I mean, seriously?
Yes. Seriously. They believe it with all their hearts. They keep suggesting as much over and over in their reports. The Occupiers in Zuccotti Park told me that’s what they think, and the BBC is in lock-step with them on just about everything anyway.
And the PM show gave space to some Occupy protestor in London who promised more occupations in 2012 and was allowed to make some rather extreme accusations about police brutality…
they can’t help it…
Yeah, but the the BBC is trying to polish a turd.
Four murders. One biased BBC news story.
1) Christmas day, Texas: Muslim Aziz Yazdanpanah – dressed as Santa – guns down 5 members of his family in an honour killing.
2) Boxing Day 1am: Anuj Bidve is shot dead in Salford by 2 white youths for reasons unknown.
3) Boxing Day 2pm: Muslim gang member Seydou Diarrassouba is stabbed on Oxford street.
4) Tuesday 27th: Babysitter Catherine Wynter is murdered.
Note that murders 1,3 & 4 are ‘black on black’ whereas murder 2 is thought to be white on black.
Guess which murder featured front and centre on the main BBC1 Friday news bulletins? Yup – number 2. White on black. Needless to say there was no mention of the other murders. And for good measure the news item was followed immediately by a completely unnecessary ‘reminder’ feature on the Stephen Lawrence jury deliberations.
Bias by selection of which news to report. Bias by omission.
The BBC should be made to explain that in detail. But they won’t answer of course.
So the main headline on the bBC is that 30 years ago Maggie had a chat and refused to arm the police. Get that ,she refused, yet the bBC push the story that she not only did but folks only riot when the torys are in power.
The Daily Mail in contrast compares how she spent £1800 on doing up 10 downing st, while the current sack of shite spent £30,000. I dread to think what Blair and brown spent.
‘ I dread to think what Blair and brown spent.’
I think, in the case of the latter, it was more a process of ongoing renovation.
Perhaps the greater question is what those two, and their repective GOAT herds, cost the country, and still are.
As you correctly identify, not areas the BBC seem too keen to ‘analyse’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2011/12/its_become_a_tradition_on.html
Twitter and Helen Boaden; The Editors and Giles Wilson… the gifts that keep on giving.
What a half-assed defense. He should just tell it like it is: It was lightweight, no attempt to be intelligent or profound. The list was just what struck a few Beeboids’ fancy when they put it together.
And these dopey Beeboids wonder why people feel they don’t represent the public view.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16071986
Bless. They actually use the word ‘experts’ (one presumes the cropping is to hide their big brains?)
And I don’t think it’s with irony.
Mr. Black didn’t make it, for some reason.
http://order-order.com/2011/12/30/media-analysis-you-wont-read-in-the-guardian/
…or… noting how it happens so often to almost be accepted…
‘Not that you would realise it if you only listened to the BBC’
Now, why are we required to pay for such ‘news’, that is in fact now almost always tribal agenda dressed up as thinly disguised, one-track opinion?
INBBC: forever propagandising for ISLAM.
In this case, it is almost a press release for a Muslim TV programme in America.:
“US TV show All-American Muslim plans to address 9/11”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16360963
Of course, such is INBBC’s political propaganda for Islam that any criticism of this TV programme is cernsored, e.g.:
“‘All-American Muslim’ Misleads on Islam”
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=47508
by Robert Spencer
An article on (Our)views At Ten last night about the potential use by police of droneswhichkillinnocentpeople. We all know of course the BBC’s hatred of droneswhichkillinnocentpeople providing as they do *gasp* profits for US manufacturers and proving as they do very effective on the battlefield.
I believe I detected a stealth edit between yestereve when I first saw the bulletin and this morning when I rewatched it for purposes of research 🙂 as there were less references in today’s version to the (BBC-invented) controversy surrounding droneswhickillinnocent people.
Still, though, the droid presenting was in quick as a flash with ‘the debate continues about the use of military droneswhichkillinnocent people.’
Sorry, did I say, ‘quick as a flash’?.
I meant to say, ‘quick as a hellfire missile from an IDF Apache Attack helicopter to the wheelchair of a Hamas spiritual founder’.
My bad.
Brief aside; while researching* 🙂 the above piece I (skip)read on the Guardian website a weep-piece about the above humane destruction. The whole tone of the article was intended to revile the reader and leave them thinking ‘what a disgusting affair’.
‘Yassin, who used a wheelchair, was said to have been directly hit by the first missile, leaving his body severely disfigured.’
Hmmm, direct hit from a hellfire missile…severely disfigured.
No sh*t, Sherlock.
Yeah, I know, I’m on fire today.
I’m just loving the PC formulation ‘used a wheelchair’. Does that mean we have to say Stevie Wonder ‘uses a white stick’?
What’s the big deal? The Obamessiah has set up a global apparatus to kill anyone He likes with drones, anywhere, any time. And without due process of law or any formal approval of war action by Congress. US citizens included.
If He feels like it, He can have someone killed from a distance. The BBC hasn’t complained about that, so it must be okay.
The bBC reporting from Gaza and how its tells half a story.
Israeli raid kills Gaza militant
An Israeli air strike to the east of Gaza City has killed the leader of an Islamic militant group, the Israeli military says… A spokeswoman said two short-range rockets were launched from Gaza on Thursday and five on Wednesday. There were no casualties or damage from the missiles. On Tuesday, Israel jets struck Gaza twice, targeting an Islamic Jihad operative in the northern Strip. Ten people were wounded in the strikes.
So reading the bBC report above, the so called militants (good one, terrorists who don’t terrorize but rather politicalize) only fired rockets into Israel after the jews attacked first on Tuesday. Here’s what the anti-Semitic bBC doesn’t tell you:
Wednesday a similar attempt by Gaza terrorists resulted in a failed effort — the rocket did not explode on impact. There were also attacks on Sunday and Monday this week as well.
Which in a nutshell means that rockets have been fired over the border, Sunday,Monday,Wednesday,Thursday.
Wonder why Anti-Semtism is on the rise in the UK, thanks to the half a story reporting from the bBC , you don’t have to look far into seeing why folks in the UK feel that the Jews are to blame.
What will 2012 have in store for our politicians? – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-16359151
‘Speculation will continue into 2012 over the durability of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition.’
But the article says nothing about speculation over the durability of Red Ed’s so-called leadership. How odd…
Jeff
Jeremy Clarkson accused of racism AGAIN after toilet jibes during Top Gear Christmas special in India
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2080152/Jeremy-Clarkson-accused-racism-AGAIN-Top-Gear-Christmas-Special-goes-India.html#ixzz1i1ki1ClW
There’s nothing racist about the jokes he was making, but it’s amazing that he keeps getting away with this sort of un-PC stuff!
Go Clarkson! LOL!
Jeff
Clarkson, the Daily Mail… and the right kind of national treasures.
The only bit worth a laugh was this:
‘‘If viewers or religious groups want to complain, they can complain to the BBC. We won’t be responding through the media.’
If Hugs Boaden doesn’t have a bunker posting on The Editors from the security of the BBC staging area waaaaaay behind the lines, I’ll be surprised.
Every BBC tweeter will also not be responding, pro or con (Defending Jezza to defend Aunty…tough dilemma), natch.
Ther BBC does nothing but ‘respond’ via the media, on everything… all the time. That’s the problem. It has become the story, and frnakly seems to be addicted to the limelight whilst protesting too much, too often.
And a complaint to the BBC about the BBC is worth about as much as a Robinson source or Flanders prediction.
Re: ‘And a complaint to the BBC about the BBC is worth about as much as a Robinson source or Flanders prediction.’ –
True, but people should complain to the executive, respond to their brush off and then escalate the complaint to the Trust (that’s the offical procedure for escalation).
Very few people do that, meaning few complaints get escalated.
Even if just a small proportion of escalated complaints get upheld, that could change things for the better…
See http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/handle-complaint/
Jeff
Oh, don’t get me wrong, I am not saying don’t complain.
I do it all the time, and escalate when the inevitable brush-off is eventually received.
It’s the arrogance of that spokespersons’ statement, and the dumb acceptance by too many that the procedure actually does what it’s meant to, that rankles.
I complain becuase it has to be logged sure, but more to add to a growing archive of unanswerable service failure charges on their part for when the time is right.
I have them caught in lies, stealth edits, weasels and all manner of other stunts that would have a normal service outfit answering to the Fraud Squad.
They try and take me to court on licence fee grounds… I have a few questions of my own first to be asked in public.
And the other thing that got me was the wording: If viewers or religious groups want to complain…
Why bring religious groups into it when
the complaint had nothing to do with religion?
23 Year old mother of 3 murdered in London on Christmas day by the father of her youngest (4 week old) child. For five days the the BBC ignored the event, and they have only just put this brief passage low down on the ‘England’ news page :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16366886
Contrast that with the unfortunate young student killed in Manchester in a ‘racial’ incident. He has been on the news, online and on the radio every single day, almost every bulletin since the event, with analysis, family details etc. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-16367931
Four measley lines, not much to sum up a life. More of a text message than a report. No details of course, since they would be horribly off narrative in this case. You may also compare this with the white washing paeon of praise heaped on ‘loving son’ Seydou:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16369086
“For five days the the BBC ignored the event”
Nice to see Biased BBC’s relationship with the truth is as fluid as ever.
The man’s arrest was reported on the 28th, his being charged reported yesterday, and his remand in custody reported today. So, not ignored at all.
The news reports are short, but once an arrest has been made there are restrictions placed on what journalists can say. As opposed, say, to the death of Anuj Bidve, where police are trying to locate the killer and actively encourage the media to report some facts in the hope that they may encourage witnesses to come forward.
This post shows that Scott’s relationship with the truth is fluid more than anything.
The lady in question was murdered on Christmas Day that’s 3 days before the 28th even in the parallel universe you seem to inhabit, Its painful for you I know, but a gruesome murder which took place in West London, The BBC’s heartland, was ignored by the nation’s premiere news service for 3 days. No eye witnesses deemed necessary by the BBC to encourage then?
By your own admission the coverage of the news has been curt. The BBC did not even to manage to find a picture of the victim. One only has to make a cursory search online to see that other news providers give fuller accounts without compomising these fanciful restrictions (the only restrictions being in reality those of political correctness).
Shame on you Scott.
‘Biased BBC’s relationship with the truth’
But not so nice to see you are as true to form as ever.
Trying to conflate an individual poster with an independent free forum still. Then.. truth?
Especially when, again, you are only able to pounce on what at best might be seen as not trawling the full extent on the BBC archives as you seem to have the time, resources and lack of anything better to do, whilst wilfully ignoring how the BBC in turn wilfully ignores restrictions when it suits. And hits watertight oversight on integrity when it doesn’t. That’s is the point: the multiplicity of standards, depending on how the narrative is best served.
The semantic correction on an absolute may have proven to be valid and of value; but the terminology in pitching it simply confirms your total lack of awareness of scale or context. A perfect BBC shill.
Of all that has been raised and discussed of late… this is what you could not resist to chip in with your latest, bestest damp squib?
Good job.
Bless. Catch somebody out when they make an incorrect claim about the BBC, and the handbags come out. Why, it’s almost as if you’re a bunch of insecure people who know deep down that you’re a bunch of lazy, biased hypocrites with incredibly thin skins.
“on what at best might be seen as not trawling the full extent on the BBC archives as you seem to have the time, resources and lack of anything better to do”
Sorry, but when somebody claims that the BBC has “ignored” a topic, I would have thought that typing either “Ruby Love” or “Grand Union Canall” into the search box that’s at the top of any BBC News page would be easy enough for any of Biased BBC’s commenters to manage.
Obviously I was wrong.
Scott says: “Bless. Catch somebody out when they make an incorrect claim about the BBC, and the handbags come out. Why, it’s almost as if you’re a bunch of insecure people who know deep down that you’re a bunch of lazy, biased hypocrites with incredibly thin skins.”
This was after one other poster, other than the one he was replying to, answered…hmmm…almost seems like this is what he came on to say. Also, not a single one of those links was ever available through the main page, the main news page or he main UK news page. It’s easy to hide what they want and they do it regularly. This, the few lines in each link and the lack of info – compared to other simialr stories – means the “ignored” that daniel wrote is perfectly acceptable when compared; the fact that you jump on this with pedantic fervour only highlights the BBC bias.
bye
That is routine BBC practice. It means they can hide stories that go against ‘the narrative’ whilst being able to say ‘but we did report it’. Lying scum the lot of them.
Since when have two people been a bunch? But anyway, for you to accuse other people of thin skins is hilarious. If anyone wants to know what thin skins are, just watch what happens if anyone so much as mentions homosexuals. Suddenly they’ll appear, Scott and his Beeboid twit(ter) mate, handbags swinging, screeching and caterwauling, making such a racket of outrage and indignation as would rouse the dead. Honestly, to hear them, you’d think they had been flayed alive.
‘Obviously I was wrong’
As others have kindly gone on to demonstrate, you are, again.
With a media estate spanning vast broadcast and online resouces, often poorly served by its own risible Beware of the Leopard search engine, I do agree caution is advised when using words like ‘ignored’ by the BBC, but when relative values or context don’t count to the cherry vultures nesting in their straw men nests, even a qualifier (that the BBC headlines too often fail to use) would not matter.
You could have served your purpose, and accuracy, with a simple correction.
But the continued excavation of that hole as a misguided, single-track tribal apologist is good value too.
Well I watched several BBC news reports and listened to BBC radio over last few days. I heard about the murder of this young woman but had no idea until now that someone had been arrested or charged.
I do know the father of the Indian student wants his son’s body returned and I also know that he is upset that he received the news via Facebook and that the Police have now apologised for that.
In fact there is probably nothing about this case that is in the public domain that the BBC have not told me about it.
Come on, Scott. Surely you must realize how difficult it is to take you seriously when you claim that one item out of 100 disqualifies an entire blog.
we had a vist from dumb ealrier today,now his big sister dumber weighs in in tediously boring beeboid fashion as well
she almost peed her panties a while back when I gave her a bit of a written roughing up,and then goes on to accuse people here of having “thin skins” ROFLMAO
Funny how Scott’s paradigm – that one inexactitude in one missive fundamentally undermines the whole medium – doesn’t apply in reverse.
“Surely you must realize how difficult it is to take you seriously when you claim that one item out of 100 disqualifies an entire blog.”
David P, I don’t recall doing any such thing. Mind you, David Vance has a knack for repreatedly misrepresenting Radio 4 Today items, to the extent that he will present an opening gambit made by a presenter (often deliberately provocative to engineer a response) as the sum total of the segment, regardless of the resultant conversation.
Still, at least that’s not as undeniably stupid as when he devoted a whole blog post to how the BBC had completely put him off his stroke by broadcasting an anti-Thatcher joke, without ever realising that he’d actually been watching Channel 4.
Or cjhartnett, who tried to claim that the BBC was indulging in an Islamist conspiracy by not reporting on John Inman’s death. Except that they did when it happened, rather than 3 years later when cjhartnett found out about about it. Amittedly he did try to delete his post one he realised what a dick it would make him sound like, but by then too many people had seen it that his attempt at deletion seem like the feeble-minded attempt at ego-correction it was.
Of Mille Tant. who earlier this year accused me of posting of multiple names – and, once I’d denied it, claimed I had previously admitted doing so. On my producing evidence that actually I’d said the exact opposite, MT decided to take othe offensive and take umbrge at my calling him a liar. Too ture, my bad – “too lazy to actually take two minutes to research the truthy, because that would have been too much of an intellectual exertion on the person of someone who’s never shown any predeliction for such rigour in the past” would have been more accurate.
But I’m sure these are all isolated incidents. As are all the simliar inciedents that have taken place over the last few years.
You know what would make Biased BBC look adult and mature? If those who were responsible for maintaining the site took responsibilty for doing so. But David Vance is more concerned with hiding his inability to debtae honestly in order to promote his own visibilty on the BBC (egotism winning out over principles, not that he has any), “All Seeing Eye” claims that what goes on here is “agressive banter” – until somebody who has previously brown-nosed DV and his cronies is threatened, at which point it stops being banter and being abuse.
Because Biased BBC and its contributors automatically assume that they are automaticallly on the moral high ground. When people contradict them, they fall back on what they assume must be horrible slurs, without realising that people with an IQ above 100 will realise that they’re supid lying idiots.
Apologies for numerous spelling mistakes in the paras above. I’ve started using a new computer which applies autocorrection differently and has yet to adapt itself to post-Next Years’ Eve merriment!
So Scott makes a number of allegations – for all I know, true – about the accuracy and veracity of some B-BBC posts.
So how would you feel, Scott, if you and all your family, friends, etc* were forced by law to pay £140 per year to fund Biased BBC, make Davids Vance and Preiser, cjhartnett, Millie Tant et al extremely wealthy in the process, and all without them having to answer to anyone for being dishonest or misleading (the irony of your comment on site responsibility vis-a-vis the BBC Complaints procedure is pure gold)?
* Given that we are all clearly such bunch of tossers it doesn’t say much for said family and friends that you are posting on here at 00:25 on New Year’s Day.
Gawd, you’re not still banging on about some trivia of no consequence whatsoever, are you? Perhaps you can provide a full transcript of the evidence and the transcripts of the learned Law Lords’ Judgements in the case of Millie Tant vs Scott or Scottie or Scott M or Scott Whichever and Whosoever so that we may all treat this important matter with the seriousness and rigour it so richly deserves.
‘Celebrity’ Mastermind, and the question from John Humphreys: ‘What does the W stand for in George W Bush?’
Sniggers all around… Humphreys took three questions to recover.
Saw it. Another vicious little instance of how THEY think.
the tedious leftoid twats are even at it in (z-list)”celebrity mastermind”
pie munching nobody gets asked “what does the “w” stand for in George W Bush
cue barely stifled giggles from audience and Humphries for the obvious inference……
how very professional bBC……worthy of every penny of licence tax……NOT!!!!!