Monday and time for a new one of these! The floor is yours….enjoy.
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Yasser Dasmibehbi Dec 22, 03:46
Weekend 21st December 2024
I found this interesting. https://youtu.be/tA8zz7niOy0?si=YwrTyvtMxLn2vVvH - StewGreen Dec 22, 00:14
Weekend 21st December 2024
Youtube just pushed a video at me that invading North Korean troops had been smashed cos they were using 19th… - StewGreen Dec 22, 00:09
Weekend 21st December 2024
“Jawdropping” propaganda from woke-Supremacist BBC and police https://youtu.be/IMuafLX0xhQ - Greencoat Dec 21, 23:22
Weekend 21st December 2024
Mantel was a deeply unpleasant, dishonest person. And her books? Next to unreadable. - tomo Dec 21, 23:12
Weekend 21st December 2024
Trump shooter…….. https://x.com/TonySeruga/status/1870474697676325217 - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:39
Weekend 21st December 2024
And that ‘Let’s get ready to rumble’ announcer is still going. He was doing the Tyson fights back in the… - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:35
Weekend 21st December 2024
Right going to watch the Fury fight now. The build up has been about 5 hours long. I think 4… - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:28
Weekend 21st December 2024
Indeed. I’ve seen few NK documentaries down the years. In a few of them, I’ve seen clips and interviews with…
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
In a previous post I drew attention to the way that Kirsty Wark on the BBC’s Review Show defended the presentation of the British Museum/Saudi royal family Hajj exhibition against guest commentators views that it was ‘too respectful’.
The same edition discussed the movie The Woman in Black, starring Daniel Radcliffe (ex-Harry Potter).
I’ve no particular axe to grinde as to the merits or otherwise of this film.
I was struck that the guest reviewers each thought it a bit of a turkey and Radcliffe’s acting was poor.
What did surprize me was how forcefully Sauchiehall Rose (sorry, Ms Wark) faught Radcliffe’s corner.
Sometimes with BBC bias the full picture emerges only later.
http://m.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/feb/06/daniel-radcliffe-ends-lib-dem-support?cat=film&type=article
‘Daniel Radcliffe ends support for Liberal Democrats
Harry Potter star describes Nick Clegg ‘whipping boy’ of Tories and says he will vote Labour’
‘Daniel Radcliffe has announced that he is no longer a supporter of the Liberal Democrats after emerging as one of the party’s most high-profile celebrity backers ahead of the last British general election, and will probably vote instead for Labour under its “genuinely leftwing” leader, Ed Miliband.’
Oh, now I see. Normal service has been resumed.
If on the other hand he had come out a few days ago saying that he was a strong Conservative Party supporter…….
I’m not surprised that Daniel Radcliffe’s acting is poor, as he always gets drunk before the filming starts…….and votes for left-wing parties (heh)
Who is Daniel Radcliffe? Is he important? Or is he the child actor that everyone raves about (can’t think why…)
A boy wizard for several years, wearing a cloak and flying a broomstick, fighting huge spiders with his magic wand, bought in a part of Leadenhall Market that doesn’t exist.
So what’s everyone complaining about? He’s obviously in touch with reality and extremely well qualified to comment on Labour politics.
Would that be the same broomstick that Cherie Blair uses?
No, she uses a Dyson 1000.
Is that part of the famous “contraceptive equipment” ?
Daniel Radcliffe: is he important? Yes and no.
Here is another example of a young man – rich beyond his (and our) wildest dreams – who understands the reality of his world. He knows he can only be credible to other inhabitants of the shitty little bubble in which he lives by being radical. He moved from Lib Dem to Labour? Of course. The radical left controls TV, the movies and, most of all, the British Theatre establishment. He needs to shows his credentials before he can get a job.
His new stance informs us that he is clueless about politics but he has good business sense and has made a positive career move,
However, you are right, Natsman, he is an actor. That is all he is: he reads other people’s lines. I am sick to death of these wealthy entertainment people being taken seriously as politicasl, religious and social bellwethers.
“Celebrity” is the symbol of a deeply unserious media.
Radcliffe is a multi-millionaire child actor, who made a lot of money speaking a few lines written by someone else. If you say the magic words “I support Labour” a powerful spell makes you at one with ordinary people, and entitled to your millions, because you care.
As it is, I don’t begrudge him his millions. I haven’t had to contribute a penny and he has made a lot of young girls and boys happy, unlike Labour, who are the dead-hand of Socialism taking money out of peoples pockets by force.
Perhaps he will grow up one day, but many luvvies seem to put off growing up indefinitely.
“As it is, I don’t begrudge him his millions”
He might need it if the press turn their wrath on the entertainment industry following their successful intimidation of Network Rail executives, not that I mind. Can’t see it happening though. Perhaps he should make a big donation to a suitable leftish charity, just in case.
Child actors don’t automatically become successful adult actors and his performance in his latest film is nothing special, by all accounts.
Don’t forget that every Saturday afternoon there are 22 grown men on a pitch kicking a pigs bladder about and getting millions. It is an absolute disgrace that these people are getting more than the average wage. They should give up thier millions to the poor or put thier excesive earnings towards building new hospitals.
It is not cheap to see a football match – are the clubs exploiting the poor? Where is the BBC on this?
Agreed. I wonder if Peston thinks their salaries are “bonkers” as well.
Yes indeed, many luvvies do wilfully postpone their entrance into maturity: they know which way up their bread is buttered. Christmas 2010, Colin Firth, guest-editor on Toady, delivered an absolute masterclass in right-on, beeboid button-pushing – they must have been ecstatic at such a display of grovelling cultural Marxism. So cringeworthy was Firth’s performance, dandling Benjamin Zephaniah on his knee, that he made Pavlov’s dog sound like an iconoclastic free-thinker. Awesome. Also, rather nauseating.
Where luvvie Colin Firth led young Radcliffe has followed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/dec/14/colin-firth-no-longer-support-liberal-democrats
Colin Firth: I no longer support the Liberal Democrats
‘Speaking at a film festival in Dubai he said: “My compass has not stopped spinning,” referring to the many policy switches made by the party he previously supported.’
I dont support the LibDims either . Neither does Mrs Meggs and her dogs at a guesthouse and Mr Patel of the corner shop and Sooty , Sweep , Thunderbirds , Gandolph , the milkman and that car driver who flashed me out .
Does it make any difference to the way anyone should vote ?
Would love to see how “As I See It” can demonstrate any factual link betwen Daniel Radcliffe talking about his political views, and somebody else talking about their opinion of a film that he’s acted in.
I realise that a factual link is the last thing that Biased BBC wants – after all, the inevitable lack of one will demonstrate how stupid the site’s commenters are.
But I also realise that said commenters don’t actually care about truth or honesty – all they want is selective reporting that confirms their own prejudice. Biased BBC’s commenters aren’t intelligent enough to comprehend anything else.
it just makes laugh, these hypocritical luvvies that support Labour/Democrats, bunch of twats
Dez ‘…factual link…’?
Are you suggesting that I have in some way maligned these good people?
Let’s use some common sense. What would make millionaires Kirsty Wark and Daniel Radcliffe support Labour? The party’s progressive tax policies perhaps? I think not. It is a massive dollop of self interest.
‘…truth and honesty…’?
Perhaps Wark should declare some of her interests next time she vents her opinions on the national airwaves.
Can Wark and Radcliffe justify their massive earnings? Should they not hand over the cash to build hostpitals or to combat AIDs in Africa?
“From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”
Karl Marx
“Biased BBC’s commenters aren’t intelligent enough to comprehend anything else.”
So what measures intelligence? Qualifications? Well you tell me yours and I will tell you mine.
Well just to be factual for a moment Scott M, the claim was that there is a link between the FACT that a Beeboid vigorously defended the multi-millionare Daniel Radcliffe against his critics, and the FACT that a few days before he had declared himself to be a strong Labour supporter.
I realise that in your mind there is no connection (indeed you believe that to make such a connection would be a demonstration of stupidity) but given that 1) It is highly unlikely that the multi-millionare Kirsty Wark did not know of about his announcement 2) That Kirsty Wark has very close links with the Labour Party in Scotland, the suggestion that the two are not unconnected is entirely reasonable.
What would be implausible is Kirsty Wark is coming strongly to the defence of the above mentioned actor if a few days earlier he had just announced that he was a strong support of the Conservative Party.
It might also be because the BBC in an article on its website about Daniel Radcliffe and the film cannot help itself bringing David Cameron and Ken Loach and the “fierce criticism” of the film funding policy into it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-16655400
I watched Countryfile yesterday (Sunday 5th Feb). John Craven ‘investigating’ why there is a fall in the purchase of ‘organic’ produce. (‘organic’ is in my inverted commas because the Soil Association allows chemicals that no proper farmer would consider safe). A great deal was heard from a representative of the Soil Association. The whole item was taken from the view of incredulity that sales had fallen. It was acknowledged that there are alternative schemes where food is produced using responsible methods. (by the way they did not point out that farmers are charged large sums to enter these schemes and the money is not recouped making it harder for UK farmers to compete. But we had the usual stories eg the man who claimed that farmers throw huge amounts of fertilizers onto the crops for it to be washed into water courses. My farmer husband suggested that neither the interviewed nor the Countryfile team could possibly realise the cost of fertilizer otherwise they would not believe the rubbish they spoke. The whole item was from the view that mainstream agriculture and its products were inferior.
There was also a new presenter – Helen – a young blonde bimbo who obviously knew nothing about the countryside, or interviewing. She did an item about a couple of men handcrafting rakes – but the questions she asked were at best lightweight and of no value or interest. Wasn’t Countryfile in trouble for getting rid of an older woman presenter? So presumably Helen has been appointed to show the BBC were correct that only young pretty female presenters can keep an audience.
More totty on the bbc! but still, no one does misery like Orla Guerin 🙂
“More totty on the bbc! but still, no one does misery like Orla Guerin “
I never thought I’d see Totty in the same sentence as Orla Guerin. :-O
‘a young blonde.. the questions she asked were at best lightweight and of no value or interest.‘
My peroxide sink estimate of BBC hiring policy (though, for balance, the entire MSM is equally afflicted. SKY on Saturday often looks like an entire Komet’s worth of T-stoff was consumed, other than Gillian Joseph) appears to be confirmed.
Sky and Fox do seem to employ a lot of totty, not that I’m complaining, the BBC and Channel 4 do employ some rough old birds though.
Not many people know that Channel 4 is publicly owned, like the BBC (perhaps it was Thatcher’s revenge). This could explain the lower quality of female broadcasters on Channel 4 and tyhe BBC, which Martin remarks on. Being less politically correct, the private sector has fewer qualms about employing the kind of women who attract more viewers, even if the sound isn’t working.
A little off topic(maybe) but has anybody heard anything about any leftwing activists who are packing their bags and moving on mass (complete with a red bus) to syria in which to protect innocent people from the Syrain army. You know like the bBC advertised here, promoted here and here. Has anybody seen sight or sound of so called US marine now an Irish citizen , but living in the Uk (gee i wonder why?) and bBC salwart Ken Nichols O’Keefe about the death toll in Syria and how he is willing to put his life on the line for his fellow man.
No, I wonder why?
OH yeah, no longer bother with Radio 2. Smooth 70s is 1000 times better and no ads. Another nail in the coffin for the bBC.
I remember those numpties with their ‘peace bus’. They went out to Iraq with much fanfare and noise, but soon headed home silently when they realised that the weren’t going to be allowed to set up wherever they liked, but were being ‘placed’ by Sadam’s henchmen. They assumed they’d be able to stake out hospitals and schools, being shoved in front of military facilities wasn’t part of the deal. Too close to the action. The naivety of such useful idiots never ceases to amaze. How quickly is their misguided idealism mugged by reality. They probably still deny that their actions provided propaganda for one of the most vicious regimes going.
The difference is that British, US or Isreali forces would avoid shelling the “human sheild” Syrian forces would not.
These “peace protesters” are not brave people. They are just self- publicising idiots who make the world a more dangerous place.
Just what I was about to say Mr. Tooke. 😉
I can’t forget them personally. Especially their fearless leader who’d destroyed his actual passport and replaced it with a homemade “World Citizen” job. Tragically (smirk) this occasioned lengthy delays at every single frontier en route to Iraq for our heroes, the reactionaries manning the border posts being more interested in doing their jobs properly than in waving the nut bus through on the basis of the glow of invincible self-righteousness emanating from its grisly crew.
Since then, every time that one of these numpties rears up and gives tongue on the way the world’s to be re-ordered according to their programme, I think of Captain Dumbo and his cornflake packet documents and it cheers me right up. 😀
You have to love the ‘tear’ tattooed on his cheek, symbolising the hurt he feels for the oppressed around the world( I guess). These angry lefties always feel others’ pain, except the pain they cause through the unintended consequences of their deluded campaigns that are driven entirely by misplaced anger.
He’s still at it, though…on the Mavi Marmara.
“Our Potential to Create a Better World, a Just World”: Testimony of a Survivor of the Mavi Marmara Massacre.
O’Keefe was a human shield in Iraq who formally renounced his US citizenship in protest in 2001; he now has Irish as well as Palestinian citizenship.
Still saving the world from ‘Western Imperialism’. So many victims to seek out to aid your self-aggrandizement.
I notice he has an Irish passport, just to be on the safe side.
abu qatada, Abu Qatada to be released within days – Telegraph
the old captain hook, “Internet biggest breeding ground for violent extremism, ministers warn,” The Guardian
yep! the go to guys for government advice? (gulp) …
what next, warsi – pickled -hook – qata, why not invite the OIC in as senior “jump? how high?” advisors.
could it get any worse … an el beeb special “lovefest” edition?
I think he should be released.
Preferably from a net at 10,000 feet.
Now lets see; abu is no longer considered a political refugee but an international terrorist wanted in several jurisdictions but the EU say that his HR will be violated if deported. So this makes him an international fugitive and stateless person.
This means the public purse is NOT liable to support him or his family or to provide a home for said family.
Why not withdraw his police bodyguard?
I heard the M Word alongside the extremist word on News at Ten tonight. Is this a recent first for the BBC?
Europe say we can’t deport him to Jordan, I say let Europe have him if they want him so much.
Mark Mardell continues to demonstrate why he’s a political junkie and nothing else, undeserving of the title “BBC North America editor”.
Who is Mitt Romney’s worst enemy?
There’s an amusing own goal right at the top:
The Republican rodeo and we – camp followers from the media – have trekked from the snowy mountains of New Hampshire to the beaches of Florida…
No comment necessary.
In any case, what Mardell demonstrates here is that he’s failed to learn the most important lesson from the campaign: Candidate Romney will have his feet held to the conservative fire by supporters of the other candidates (except for Paulistas). After the Republican convention, it won’t much matter how much people are worried that he’s too rich to care about poor people. What matters is whether or not poeple think The Obamessiah is an utter disaster and even an overripe cabbage would be better. Romney is at least that.
The US President editor is wrong when he says nothing has changed. Romney knows perfectly well that his previous political stances are a problem, and that he needs to appear more on the Right than he has been. There’s been a very clear shift in that direction in the last couple months, yet Mardell somehow hasn’t noticed. Or maybe he has, but the class war emotions override everything else and it’s irrelevant to him.
Mardell is a Socialist, and is still stuck in that Left-wing media bubble in which they’re overly focused on class war, the eternal hand-wringing over the haves vs. the have-nots. So he sees that as the number one obstacle for Romney, especially since he knows that his beloved Obamessiah is the Class Warrior in Chief.
Yes, Romney has made some minor gaffes in that direction, but Mardell’s claim to read his heart and mind is uncool. He says that Romney’s quote about not caring about the poor was taken out of context, but then later takes it out of context himself while telling you his personal opinion that he believes Romney thinks it’s okay to say he doesn’t care about the poor.
If anyone thinks The Obamessiah is more in touch with the common man, I’d say they need to check their meds. I’m sure most people will give Him a pass cos He is black, but someone who grew up mostly in Hawaii and a foreign country, then spent his entire adult life among the elite at Harvard and in Chicago is not going to be in touch with the common man. Even if He’s a redistributionist Class Warrior of the first order. He’s no more in touch with the common man than Peston or “Two Eds” or Katty Kay. But never mind that, Romney is enormously wealthy, and Mardell believes him to be morally inferior because of it.
What Mardell keeps ignoring while dutifully covering the trials and tribulations of the Republican candidates is that the President absolutely must focus on Romney’s wealth because He needs to distract everyone as much as possible from His record in office. I have yet to hear Mardell talk about the President’s poor record being a problem. He’s told us previously that the President is playing it as Himself against evil Congress, but not that He has to do everything possible to distract people from the fact that His policies and poor leadership have been the problem. But that’s because Mardell doesn’t think there’s been anything wrong with the President’s policies. In his darkest moments, Mardell does admit that he thinks the President isn’t the best political wrangler around, which has hurt His performance a bit. Yet he never really lets you know just how much the country is concerned about it.
47 ‘alleged’ Muslim paedos were in court today in Liverpool to face charges of grooming white children but, surprise surprise, Didn’t see this in the BBC, Sky or any other British mainstream media outlet. Dusgusting! In my view the media cover – up over the Muslim sex gangs is tantamount to them being complicit in this reprehensible and loathsome crime. There is a widespread outbreak of this attack on our young children by Asian paedos and our PC politicians and media encourage it by forcing silence on the whole issue. What an affront to the British people!
PS Remember everyone to email the BBC requesting an answer as to why they never mention these crimes in their headline news. If they do mention it at all, you will be sure to find it tucked away on some regional subsite that is hardly viewed or difficult to find.
As I recall the BBC told me that these crimes did not exist, they were racist inventions of the BNP and vile slanders designed to provoke racist sentiments. This view was endorsed by ‘community leaders’ and the riots in Rochdale and the north were a direct result of these poisonous lies spread by white agent provocateurs.
That is my recollection anyway
And we all know that the BBC’s word is Gospel don’t we now!
Who you gonna belive? The BBC or your lying eyes?
The fact this is NOT covered is the same reason we have not heard this before; Home Office, Police, Cabinet have asked the media NOT to cover it.
They have enough problems dealing with the daily fallout of internal terrorism without the population at large getting over excited about their neighbours and friends being raped by these social delights.
Not sure if this has been mentioned before: http://www.christianconcern.com/our-concerns/islam/nine-year-old-british-girls-forced-to-marry-under-sharia.
This case isn’t being ignored. There are reporting restrictions in place. “
Reporting restrictions have been imposed banning reporting of the case at
Liverpool Crown Court until the prosecution opening, which is expected this afternoon after a jury has been sworn in.”
Ah ! As a good Republican I notice you can’t bring yourself to acknowledge Crown in the manner you highlighted Liverpool Court.
Well I’m sorry mate, that’s the way things stand at the moment, unless you know different !
And don’t start with your Magistrates’ excuse either.
John. I searched our system for “Liverpool” and “Court” so that’s why they appeared in bold when I copied them across.
As I’ve said before I think it unlikely any Judge would be too worried about what’s posted on here, but legally it is difficult to discuss this case in any depth at the moment.
Yes, we wouldn’t want a Judge too be too worried about what’s posted on here.
After all, this week they have shown once again that they haven’t a clue as to why the country could possibly resist the temptation to think their legal wisdom as being bonkers.
There are all sort of reasons for reporting restrictions to be put in place by the courts for this sort of case. Speaking in very general terms and in no way specifically about this particular case; It could be there are other trials going on at the same time and reporting of one could predudice the other or others. Or in a paedophile case there may be issues with identifying child victims. As a rule of thumb a judge will put the interests of justice and the victim before the right of an anonymous person on the internet to get a bit excited and spout off.
Given the restrictions I don’t want to comment on this 47 figure. But it would be much larger than any number I’ve seen from a reputable source. (Although the number I have seen is still big)
I thought “47” must be a typo, so I checked.
It isn’t.
Are you sure?
Until the MSM get around to reporting it, I can’t be sure of anything, and even then..
However, it’s not Merlin’s typo because lots of sources are using the same figure.
Perhaps it’s a mere 46.
Barry. It’s not a case of “Getting round” to it. There are journalists in court at the moment. But since the judge has not lifted reporting restrictions no one can report anything. The BBC, ITN, Sky et al do of course challenge this sort of thing on ocassion. but I am not aware if that has been done in this case. You and John may be interested to know that contempt of court can land you up to two years in prison.
Do reporting restrictions explain why there is no reporting AT ALL?
I was under the impression that such restrictions were nomally confined to specific details, as in the case of the recent Stephen Lawrence show trial.
A judge can restrict whatever they like. As I’ve said reporters will challange that. If like me in the past you are reporting on a court case where the other journos are from local papers the BBC’s instant access to informed legal opinion in an office in London is very useful for all concerned. I will try and remember to keep track of this case for you. At the moment for a number of reasons things have been pushed back to next week.
Don’t worry Barry the BBC will report it as soon as the restrictions are ended. They have sent there best people to Liverpool who are at this moment crossing out any “valued judgements” that may cause the BBc to be seen as baised.
After all they are probably not members of the Tory party and as far as I know not one of them is a banker. So no matter what the outcome you will be able to read it on the BBC Liverpool web page for about 10 minutes on Sunday morning. Then it will be back to the real news of a that funny cat sneaking into Anfield.
Interestingly there’s an article in the Grauniad today (I know, I know!) by the attorney general about compempt in an internet age. It’s worth reading to give some idea of the way things operate. I would also add that the general view amongst some hacks is that tabloids appear to be able to push the boundaries in a way the BBC cannot. Though as i said court restrictions are challenged by the BBC and others. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/08/contempt-of-court-act-internet
The Banglatown Broadcasting Corporation does a cover up. (literally)
Tower Hamlets Councillor Shelina Akhtar sacked for benefit fraud
An east London councillor has been sacked after being jailed for 16 weeks for benefit fraud. Tower Hamlets Councillor Shelina Akhtar, 33, of Poplar, who represented Spitalfields and Banglatown, was sentenced at Snaresbrook Crown Court. Last month she admitted three counts of failing to notify a change of circumstances with regards to housing benefits for a rented property.
Read the following headline from the bBC about how Shelina Akhtar has been sacked for benefit fraud. The thing is, the actual story is about her getting jailed, not sacked, but I suppose sacking doesn’t sound as bad as getting jailed does it. But the story becomes more opaque as we go along it seems that this is the second time that Ms Akhtar has been found guilty of benefit fraud.
However I do like how the plastic muslims at the bBC felt that Ms Akhtar shouldn’t be shown unless covered up, oh how pious of the bBC, yet the Evening standard aired a picture of the women showing her hair over a month ago. Instead the bBC airs a very poor quality of this women all covered up.
But then, that’s the whole premise of the bBC article. A cover up.
Dear the BBC (again, like for the zillionth time, I mean howay man it shouldn’t have to be like this),
I am writing to complain about yet more shoddy journalism (yes more, more as is MORE! MORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRE!!!!!!!!!!!!). The article in question (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16914477 )is about an East London councillor for Tower Hamlets, now I wouldn’t normally have any interest in a councillor for Tower Hamlets, but the article was pointed out to me by someone as it has a glaring omission!
The article correctly mentions the fact that the councillor has been sacked for benefit fraud (well done), but fails to mention that she has been jailed for the same offence!!!!! Yes, you’ve written an article about someone being sacked but have forgotten to mention the fact the she has also been sacked!!!!!!!! I mean like OMG!
The journalist who wrote this should know all the details before he writes his article, otherwise he is extremely poor at his job and should like the councillor also be sacked! The other possibility is he or she missed out this information on purpose which is equally as bad and also deserves a sacking!
Can you hire some proper journalists please? I could do a better job than half of your lot! Oh, and please actually respond to this complaint, as I am sick of the BBC being hit and miss when it comes to responding to my complaints. If I select ‘yes’ on the do you want a response bit then please respond, when you don’t I’m like ‘HOW RUDE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!’
Cheers,
James M.Gowland
The BBC really seem to have it in for Rangers don’t they?
Ok quiz for the week
How long will the bBC not only keep this story off their news outlet but if and when they do will they refer to it as a racist hate crime. You know like they do when a muslim woman has her burka ripped off, or even when thrown off a bus. (Which in fact was a falsehood) Anyway here ;s the story:
Pictured: Swollen face of trainee chef left for dead after he was savagely beaten ‘by Asian gang in hate crime attack’
It’s only racist when a white person does it! Asians/blacks being racist don’t fit in with the socialist narrative so they don’t report it. Just look at that fat lump of excrement Diane fatty-bum Abbot being invited on to ArabSringnight, sorry, Newsnight after her racist tweets. Don’t recall David Starkey ever being invited back on after his ‘racist’ remarks.
Not true. I’m sure that if you go to their NorthWest page in a couple of days, find the bit that petains to Manchester, select “Other Minor And Basically Unimportant News” and scroll right down to the bottom, well then right underneath “Wythenshawe granny wins £5 on lottery scratchcard !” you’ll find a para or two along the lines of “Potential EDL supporters anger defenceless Muslims, Fall over by themselves.”
And then one of our cherry vultures will show up here with the link to show that Auntie doesn’t ignore this sort of thing AT ALL.
Simples.
Lol!
Ah yes. The Beeboid scam known as Hidden in Berkshire.
Someone on the previous open thread mentioned ‘Start The Week’ with Douglas Murray & Peter Hitchens…
‘Like’ this page on FaceBook for updates…
Douglas Murray Appreciation
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Douglas-Murray-Appreciation/112159852184572
I don’t know where Margot James MP got the idea that James Stuart Mill is a conservative philosopher. She ought to read Maurice Cowling’s “Mill and Liberalism”, or better still, anything he wrote.
Thanks for the link – I must say that the female “conservative” MP just confimed my views on the “modern conservative” – It is not conservatism but Blairism.
ht Guido Fawkes
Yesterday I listened to File On Four . Like the BBcs other ducumentary programmes ; Analysis and Cause For Concern it tells you what issues you should be worried about .
So yesterday they wanted you to be overly concerned about cocaine users who suffered fits when in pollice custody on both sides of the Atlantic and who died .
The users who were arrested were showing abberant behaviour and violence
Apparently in one case study the fellow went out shopping and somehow imbibed cocaine . The shopping list must have been smudged or something
So the BBC used its time to do FOI requests to police authorities and complants commision, added up the sums and said something was wrong .
Police need more training in how to handle these violent people , coroners need re educating to give different verdicts , there should be new classifications of death etc .
Sad as these deaths are for some , they are not the liquidation of the totally innocent .Shouldn`t we just make it accepted that if you take illegal drugs there are side effects which the user has to take responsibility for . It is self induced and any harm suffered by the user is the is a by product of this choice ?
Who at the BBC decides the topics that we should be concerned about ?
Good old BBC…and at least they`ve given us all the diagnosis of “excited delerium”…one for those of us who collect our Blue Badges!
Womans Hour had me weeping into my Sanatogen with their account of how “vulnerable children in conflict with the law”, end up hanging themselves.
Ours not to ask what it was they did, that finally meant that they had to be banged up…it must have been bad!
I wonder how many crocodiles they have to use to collect all those tears. All the more because we out here don`t have the time to give a damn…the BBC care for Hindley, Qatada etc, so that the rest of us need not.
Ah Bless!
Leveson just keeps on giving…but the BBC are forever chopping and changing what the verdict is.
So it is that we hear the mighty Paul Dacre cite the BBCs corresponding hypocrisy in regard of hacking, use of snoopers etc.
It was put out live on Eddie Mair…then all of a sudden we had a long piece on “procrastination” being as serious an illness as obesity or what have you.
Then I look at the news…and the mentions of the BBC seem to recede by the hour.
So at 10 O Clock…no quotes, except Dacre getting asked about “morality”.
Got to be a longitudinal study of how a news story decays over time, as left with the BBC
‘Got to be a longitudinal study of how a news story decays over time, as left with the BBC’
As eloquent a description of agenda-shaped editorial by omission as I have seen.
Yep I’ve posted here on this before, the BBC have an ability to kill a story dead by either just not reporting it, or spinning a lie across their output, they spin tihs lie until it replaces the original story, then they just bury it.
The magical ability of the Left to wash their hands of any responsibility for their actions never ceases to amaze me. There was an illustration of this last night. There was a programme on BBC Four about the circa 15,000+ deaths from HIV that took place in a few years in San Francisco in the Eighties. At no point (from what I saw) was there any acknowledgement that there might be a connection between these deaths and the active promotion (by the Left) of sexual promiscuity and drug taking in the years preceeding the HIV epidemic.
Germany in skeptical turmoil on both Climate and Solar/Windfarms Posted on February 6, 2012 by Anthony Watts
I have two major stories out of Germany to report, one on the rise of Climate Skepticism into the mainstream, as Germany’s Top Environmentalist Turns Climate Sceptic, saying
“I couldn’t take it any more. I had to write this book.”
Doubt came two years ago when he was an expert reviewer of an IPCC report on renewable energy. “I discovered numerous errors and asked myself if the other IPCC reports on climate were similarly sloppy.”
….and the other major story is on the failure of solar and wind power in Germany. First, the mainstream skepticism:
Body Blow To German Global Warming Movement! Major Media Outlets Unload On “CO2 Lies!”
Excerpts reposted from NoTricksZone by Pierre Gosselin
<img src=”http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/BILD1-175×300.gif” title=”BILD”/>Today Germany’s national tabloid Bild (which has a whopping circulation of 16 million) devoted half of page 2 on an article called:.
“THE CO2 LIES … pure fear-mongering … should we blindly trust the experts?”
That’s what Germany’s leading daily Bild (see photo) wrote in its print and online editions today, on the very day that renowned publisher Hoffmann & Campe officially released a skeptic book – one written by a prominent socialist and environmental figure.
This is huge. More than I ever could have possibly imagined. And more is coming in the days ahead! The Bild piece was just the first of a series.
Mark this as the date that Germany’s global warming movement took a massive body blow. Continue reading →
Of course the BBC will not be reporting this will they?
Of course the BBC will not be reporting this will they?
Get it on one of the limited feeds on Twitter Richard Black follows and he might RT it as ‘breaking news’ or, what he deems ‘reporting’. Trouble is, there are other editorial influences at play, too.
So, for a while, I’m guessing more focus on PR about frogs who are having to become Club 18-30 reps to cope with drunk Clownfish, or something.
Lord Lawson’s GWF have also been covering this, but thanks for the reminder. One can only hope that this story will contribute to the already substantial drip-drip of constant reality checks the pro-AGW are being subjected to by brave, honest and principled people worried by the duplicity and subterfuge of corrupt climate science.
This year is very important in the struggle against the criminality of the IPCC and it’s cronies. The next IPCC Assessment Report is due in 2014, by which time we might well – and with any luck – see the IPCC thoroughly discredited and perhaps even starved of taxpayer funding. Keep up the good fight!
Blacks getting another well deserved drubbing over a bishop hills as well lol
“Blacks getting another well deserved drubbing”
I can see the BBC headline now.
“Biased BBC commentator allies himself with the Klu Klux Klan”.
“Matthew Rowe should be lynched” says Anti-Racist campaigner Diane Abbott.
A most useful posting. I will circuloate. Thank you, Cassandra.
Why Capello has called it wrong again – http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/davidbond/2012/02/why_capello_has_called_it_wron.html
‘Most people applaud the FA for finally taking such a strong stance on this issue’
Most people in Broadcasting House might well applaud the FA for hanging Terry out to try before he’s even set foot in a courtroom. But why assume that the wider public share the view that it was right to suspend the presumption of innocence (something the BBC seem fond of where terrorists are concerned)?
The article also fails to address the important point that the manager should have the final say over football matters. As we’ve seen at Chelsea and Newcastle, when the board overrules a manager, it can undermine his authority and damage the team’s performance. There’s no point in paying £6 million per year for a world class manager, and then pulling the rug from under his feet…
Jeff
Seeing that the Falklands is starting to suffer from the lack a fresh fruit and veg due to an Argentinian blockade on air cargo.
Wondering how long it is before there will be a peace flotilla of concerned activist folk heading for the Falklands.
With a full crew of concerned BBC reporterettes granted exclusive access by various independently-funded family members.
Or… wrong kind of humanitarian abuse on the line?
If a Gazan can be deemed to be suffering from a lack of Mercedes, then a banana-less Falklander is surely amongst the most oppressed there is.
There’s not much charlie on sale in the Falklands so I doubt the ‘peace protesters’ will be that bothered.
Our glorious state broadcaster has been on fine form this morning. Pravda would be proud of Radio 5.
Where to start. Well how about Justine Greening? Yep according to Radio 5 interference in the bonus payouts to Network Rail was “political opportunism” this got repeated several times this morning. Of course what story is Radio 5 leading with? why Red Ed’s Commons debate on banker bonuses of course, but no sense of bandwagon Ed using political opportunism here of course.
Next we move on to bankers again with GORDON BROWN getting a mention, yes shock horror the BBC decided that his name can be used after 2 years again, but in what respect I hear you ask? Well he was the ‘genius’ that gave us the first bankers bonus tax and what a great success it was (well it wasn’t as Alistair Darling admitted but Gary O’Donoghue tried to correct someone for suggesting this) and that Gordon was indeed a great man (funny there’s no mention of his other achievements like flogging off our gold at rock bottom prices, creating the useless FSA, raping the private pensions, wrecking Lloyd’s bank, I could go on, his achievements are many) and you proles need to remember that.
Then we get some story about stalking and the beeboid gives a big sound bite for Yvette Cooper (who I hear you ask) who is in favour of a new law….oh by the way some bloke called Cameron is as well, just as well he’s not the leader of our nation or something.
Radio Pravda has been in full flow this morning
New laws needed ?!
How did the people cope with stalkers before , in the thirties, fifties seventies .?
If they had no stalkers ,why do we have them now . If they did , why didn`t they bring out laws then ?
Why dont the BBC ask questions like that ?
SKY at least had a vaguely sensible expert on.
She pointed out, like so much else, the laws exist but are not being policed.
Hence cranking out yet more laws is a job creation scheme for legislators and pea-brained media, but little else.
I’m concerned about how Richard Bacon is getting on, with all this snow about.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/specials/drugs/351602.stm
“For 40 years, Blue Peter has been a force for good, providing positive role models for children to follow and helping them to become responsible and caring adults. It is vital that nothing tarnishes that reputation. Richard accepts that he left us no option but to terminate his contract immediately”
Isn’t Bacon the shmuck who was delighted with that horrendous “comedian” with the gutter mouth who thinks comedy is degrading Sarah Palin with language you wouldn’t even hear in a bar near closing time?
And didn’t he try to worm his way out of it by claiming he wasn’t specifically praising the “comedian” for the Palin outburst?
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
‘Isn’t Bacon the shmuck who was delighted with that horrendous “comedian” with the gutter mouth….?’
Yep, just as well the Beeb is ‘….providing positive role models for children to follow and helping them to become responsible and caring adults. It is vital that nothing tarnishes that reputation.’
Yes, Bacon has had his problems with white powdery substances: the kind that just seems to fly up nostrils unbidden, as the shocked recipient bends over the toilet cistern in some Shepherds Bush pub toilet. He’s a very thick, very unsavoury, piece of work. After the Blue Peter fiasco he should have been terminated alright – with extreme prejudice. Not that he’s the only beeboid snorter, of course: just the one imbecilic enough to get caught. No doubt he aspires to the gutter, people do when they’re down in the sewers.
Any news from Liverpool this week BBC?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/england/merseyside/
‘Dog Walkers Lost in Fog Rescued’
Obviously no news from Liverpool then.
I wonder if the internet reveals any newsworthy events from Liverpool?
Lets try the left leaning LS Media The Independent Liverpool Student Newspaper – it boasts ‘The Guardian Student Media Awards 2011′
http://liverpoolstudentmedia.com/2012/02/english-defense-league-to-protest-outside-liverpool-crown-court/
Well well, it seems there’s a major criminal trail and political protests taking place.
Did you hear the one about the dozen Muslim men in the northern town? No, you must get your news from the BBC.
The BBC – lost in the fog.
Sarah Montague refers to Charles Dickens as “novelist and social reformer”.
I think we all know which one of theose labels matters more than the other-yet we continue to honour him for his writing!
I guess we all know what Sarah wants us all to tap out on her tombstone now any way…and, no doubt: all Beeboid clones like herself will want the same.
Certainly tops “journalist”…or even “independent thinker”.
Time now to refer to Juniper, Bunglawala and Chakrabhati by the one generic term “social reformers, directing it all from the BBCs radio car”
THE BBC RADIO 4 TODAY SHOW? ITS FOR GUARDIAN FANS WHO CANT READ 😀
They can’t spell either. 🙂
Can you catch pananoia directly from the radio?
A good programme on schizophrenia “The Life Scientific” was somehow spoiled for me when Professor David Nutt got his old soundbite in-“cannabis less dangerous than booze”-and the psychiatrist being interviewed had to spend minutes saying that there was absolutely no scientific basis for Nutts comments.
Without being paranoid, I just thnk that the BBC just HAVE to roll out this old barrel of drug legalisation at any excuse…and then take up lots of time in educating the staff at the BBC if not anybody else.
Let the BBC go and ask Frank for their personal problems like the rest of us.
Next up…the Crusades and the lessons for assisted dying that follow!
These random associations are exactly what the psychiatrist warned us of as signs of “illness”…so I ask again
“does listening to the wrong kind of radio4” make you paranoid…or grumpy at least?
Has the BBC picked this up yet?
The right’s stupidity spreads, enabled by a too-polite left
If you can’t stomach the Guardian, there’s this:
George Monbiot’s worst-ever Guardian column – and that’s saying something!
IQ tests seem to be respectable again – in the right circumstances, that is.
“The Right’s Stupidity Spreads Enabled By A Too Polite Left”
You have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at that headline.
I like this comment from Ray Dance – I once read a book by George Monbiot. It was called The Corporate Takeover of Britain. In this book Monbiot attempts to spin a planning dispute about a supermarket car park in Southampton as an expose of a huge corporate conspiracy. I remember thinking at the time, is this the stupidest man in England?
As I understand it his first job was with the BBC Natural History Unit. He then became a Current Affairs producer at the BBC World Service.
I’ve heard this desperate (or should I say Dezparrot) claim before when to all appearances the opposite appears to hold true. From what I can see people of the right are more able to think for themselves, whereas the people of the left can only think alike on everything. That’s why you can predict the BBC response to any item with a 99.9% degree of certainty.
The trouble is that the poor dears who read the Guardian really believe it themselves. Like with all other left-wing lies, (even their being too polite and quiet are lies in themselves) they will keep repeating it as a mantra “We are intelligent. Them on the right are all fick!” until they have no room for any self-doubt left. Classic brain-washing techniques.
Monbiot is one of Climate Alarmism’s biggest and most unrepentant propagandists. It’s very difficult to quantify the damage his misleading and dogmatic pro-AGW scribbling in the Grauniad has done over the past decade or two.
Do I choose Toynbee or Jerry Moonbat as my Lavender Eugenicist Index Indicator of 100 now?
I reckon there`s a Thickies Forum to set up and we could hound these buggers for being “thickist”…active incitement to denigrate people not as clever and privileged as themselves!
Bulldoze their second homes, I say!
If Monbiot is correct, then the next logical question has to be: how can the superior intelligence of the leftopians be so catastrophically wrong about so much? Enforced Multiculturalism, Communism(check out Seumas Milne of the Guardian, described by novelist Robert Harris as a ‘Stalinist Rip Van Winkle’), Islam, Crime & Punishment, The EU, Economics, The Family, Education, Eco-Greenery, Foreign Aid, New Labour, The BBC, Human Nature, just for starters. Brilliant sheep: on their way to the halal butchers. Pitiful.
It is a basic principle of left thinkers that they themselves embody an intelectual elite. They imagine that they will lead the masses who are blind to their obvious leftist wisdom toward the shining uplands of utopia. It is a deeply undemocratic concept. Like the one that says we need a TV poll tax because we are all too stupid to make the right choices.
There’s a great comment one of the articles to which Toby Young links…
Ray says:
When you believe you are an intellectually and morally superior person, it’s not surprising your study confirms that.
I’m thinking of doing a study to determine if exposure to death turns you into a Democrat. There’s considerable anecdoetal evidence that most dead people vote Democrat.
http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=5118
I switched on the World Service this morning in time to hear this:
“Hi I’m Justin Rowlatt and this is Business Daily. Some home truths for the West from Malaysia’s former Prime Minister.”*
So I switched it off again.
*I assume the former PM is the arsehole who had all those negative things to say about Israel. I have no doubt half the bloody BBC has converted to Islam.
How likely are we to come across an item on the Beeboid World Service touted as “Some home truths for Malaysia / the East from Britain’s former Prime Minister”?
I rarely listen to it but I would guess it to be a very low probability.
‘Justin Rowlatt and this is Business Daily. Some home truths for the West from Malaysia’s former Prime Minister.”
Home truths for the UK from his Newsnight colleague Paul Mason on the EU/ro negotiations still forming a sigfinficant exchange the BBC is trying to wiggle out of via their complaints hole.
Citing berks you happen to agree with does not make for ‘home truths’; it merely is an example of only passing on comments you like which, far as I can gather, is the definition of propaganda.
“Citing berks you happen to agree with does not make for ‘home truths’; it merely is an example of only passing on comments you like which, far as I can gather, is the definition of propaganda.”
Not quite the definition, but the “Card Stacking” propaganda technique. Only quote from those who support the cause and ignore those that don’t. Its as if no other opinions exist. It is also “bias” in the true sense of the word.
Two reports on ‘Asian’ (euphemism) race attack on English white boy:
1.) ‘Daily Mail’
“‘I don’t know why they chose me’: Boy speaks of ‘hate attack’ by Asian gang that has left him fighting for his sight”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2097330/Dan-Stringer-Picture-trainee-chef-beaten-Asian-gang-hate-crime-attack.html#ixzz1lh9vIsd4
2.) BBC-NUJ:
“Hyde teenager injured in ‘hate crime'”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-16923075
Does Beeboid Ms HILL expect us to pay for men’s suits as well as for women’s dresses?
“BBC newsreader Jane Hill calls for dress allowance”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9065587/BBC-newsreader-Jane-Hill-calls-for-dress-allowance.html
“Jane Hill outs herself as gay in BBC’s in-house magazine” (2009).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1239594/Jane-Hill-outs-gay-BBCs-inhouse-magazine.html
“BBC newsreader demands dress allowance despite earning up to £100,000-a-year”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2097519/BBC-newsreader-Jane-Hill-demands-clothing-allowance-female-presenters.html#ixzz1lhSmx95X
“despite earning up to £100,000-a-year”
Earning? No. Being paid it? Yes.
No-one at the BBC earns that sort of money. It’s robbing the taxpayer to pay these lightweight no-marks that amount.
A plastic surgery allowance would be more appropriate.
Looking at the comments, that all went well for her, and the BBC, I think.
“BBC newsreader demands dress allowance despite earning up to £100,000-a-year”
Of course she does and there is nothing anyone in the world can do to stop her. Who has the final word? The licence payers? Of course not. The BBC is not a democracy, it does not respond to the views of its shareholders.
The constant propaganda against bankers from this lot of greedy spongers amazes me.
If she`s lesbian, then isn`t there a whole wardrobe of dungarees and boilersuits available by the Womans Hour studio!
If not, I`d sue if I were Rhona Cameron…and if there is, then surely all Beeboids of this persuasion should save us money and wear the same few dungarees and boilersuits.
Why confine yourself to endless hire of Footlights shite scripts(The Jo Brand Big Red Book…Sandi Toksvigs Wise Wound archives?)…save us all a fortune on wardrobe, and let`s see the same uniforms.
Good enough for Madame Mao…good enough for her snuffies at the BBC!
maxkeiser Max Keiser RT’s new Arab station is a hit, putting additional pressure on Al Jazeera English who, for some reason, thought they should emulate the BBC
I am shocked… shocked I tell you, that not emulating the ‘get someone with no choice to pay for what you want to say to them, and others’ model was not opted for, yet seems to be working.
“Welcome back `azel love…pull up a chair and tell your uncle John what you`ve been up to then”.
Ah…to see Hazel Blears back up where she belongs…chipper, smiling and chequebook by her helmet at the BBC was “reet grand”.
MPs expenses?…sucking up to Anjem Choudhury and ummachums?…flip flopping houses to screw us all of our money so she could pay her milk bill in sunny Salford?…nah, lines drawn an all.
“Tell us `azel love …didn`t Charles Clarke lose them potential terrorists with far more style than these Eton toffs?” That was about the extent of the questions from Humphrys.
Oh look…here`s “Lord” Prescott blagging legal aid and coining it in.
You know what-I hope he gives his money to a better cause than his KFC bucket carriers…Harold Shipmans lad for instance!
http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/exclusive-bbc-incites-offences-under-the-protection-of-children-act/
Seems it’s not just ‘your views’ being sought.
I have to concede I’m finding it difficult to recall a ticker on the main news page that said “Muslim cleric found guilty of….”
But I’m sure it must have happened, mixed in among the usual description of “men”.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-12335032
Touché! Thus proving the wisdom of putting a qualifier in, rather than saying “It never happens”.
Just for fun, I think Aunty has hired Dr. Who to handle its archive complaints, through he does seem a hole digger in the mould of my Newsnight Producer chum…
Dear Sir or Madam,
It’s Sir.
Might I take this opportunity to enquire how you did not know this, as the BBC complaints system makes considerable play of garnering such detail?
Thank you for your comments regarding this report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15591860. I am sorry not to reply sooner.
If it was about an event in November of last year, that is quite a period.
May I also ask why the complaint itself was not included in this reply, or a complaint log number, or anything to help find out what you are responding, after all this, time, to? It is tricky to respond otherwise.
It was widely reported at the time, by the main international news agencies, and claimed by the activists on the boats that they were carrying medical aid.
Until I see my original complaint it’s hard to be sure, but I’d think I was interested in how activist claims got translated into BBC headlines.
The video of the conversation between the Israeli Navy and the boats is indeed perplexing. This video suggests that the boat was carrying medical supplies http://www.tahrir.ca/content/video-showing-medical-aid-tahrir-labeled-food-stuff. It is not our video and we are not able to verify it independently.
I’d suggest therefore that rushing to broadcast news, and headlines such as:‘Israel boards protest boats taking medical aid to Gaza’ … when the actual facts are in such doubt, is hardly optimal on the trust and integrity front, much less professionally sound.
Would you agree? Or not?
Best regards,
Middle East desk
BBC News website
Beyond the mystery of why complaints are being haandled in so many different ways by so many different BBC departments, despite going into the system by the only means one has on offer, I have to love the ‘we didn’t know what was true, so went with our version of it anyway’ admission.
Unique.
Funny how some things are broadcast as news without “verifying independently”, while others are kept on hold until verified.
That’s just one way the BBC becomes ‘unique’.
Just checked my mail and found the identically worded non-response to my similar complaint.
The report is now ‘history’ – the official BBC version, that is. It is no longer news and therefore will neither be edited, stealth or otherwise, nor will there be any update, such as Israeli sources examining the boat found no medical supplies.
Surely as journalists that is an important story. The following questions arise:
1)Why did the Israelis not find anything? Was it incompetence, conspiracy or was the boat actually not carrying anything?
2) Why did the spokesman feel doubts about the Turkish response required subterfuge? (About 1:08 into the video).
3) Why did the Captain not know about the medical cargo – or was he lying? (About 0:48 into the video).
4) Why knowing that Israel would deliver the medicine anyway and would throw away food, didn’t the Tahrir protestors point this out at Ashdod? (About 0:23 into video)
5) Why if the BBC couldn’t verify the information wasn’t there a notice to that effect in the report. Not even the famous BBC ‘scare quotes’ indicating this was a quote from an involved party?
6) Why did no BBC journalist think it important enough to be in Ashdod for the inspection?
7) Was the unacceptable delay (4 months!) in responding to the complaint a tactic to avoid changing the report?
I kept a record of my complaint (2nd complaint as I wrote a follow up when no reply came in a reasonable, promised time) in the Five Minutes for Israel blog.
BBC headline: Israel boards protest boats taking medical aid to Gaza
Inspection of the boats at Ashdod port showed no cargo was aboard.
This was confirmed by the Canadian boat captain when questioned over radio.
If the BBC correspondent(s) was not aware of this at time of the incident he/she has aware of it for four days. The BBC has a journalistic responsibility to update the article with this information.
My Site (click to edit) I will be also referencing your comments (and Not a Sheep’s) in my Five Minutes for Israel follow-up. Please contact me if you want to add something further.
What should we do now?
Should we complain that the BBC did not update the report?
Should we complain about the excessive time to respond?
From the on line Telegraph ‘Debt Crisis and Greek Debt’ comments section
24 hour strikes in Greece, and no coverage on BBC or Guardian. I listened to a very short clip about the Greek Troika talks on BBC 4 on the way home yesterday, where it was stated as news that all parties would sign an agreement today on the bailout. All very cheerful and matter of fact, no indication whatsoever of the murky mess this has dissolved into.
When the agreement isnt signed, BBC will just update the news to say it will be signed tomorrow, no problem
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/debt-crisis-live/9065383/Debt-crisis-and-Greek-debt-talks-live.html#disqus_thread
Ah, the gravy train still rolls on….
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2097519/BBC-newsreader-Jane-Hill-demands-clothing-allowance-female-presenters.html
The BBC provides it’s usual balanced coverage of Shale Gas, this time in Northern Ireland…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-16889695
“…Earlier this week an exploration company said there could be enough gas to guarantee natural gas supply for Northern Ireland over 50 years…”
This could mean much cheaper fuel bills, secure, home-grown energy for decades to come and lots of local jobs. Good news? Not to some green gobshite the BBC is only too happy to quote verbatim:
‘…”We all know the massive environmental damage that fracking has caused around the world and we are here to let Tamboran and the relevant government ministers know that they will not ride roughshod over the wishes of the local community and that we are prepared to stand up for our rights,” he said….’
‘Massive environmental damage’? Eh? The ‘earthquakes’ (in Lancashire) the BBC quote were so insignificant – no more than very, very faint tremors at best) as to be totally meaningless, according to scientific opinion. But why let a few facts get in the way of sensational story?
The BBC are at it again. There has been some wretched policy decision that Shale Gas is A Very Bad Thing and the dogma must be propagated throughout the Corporation, tainting every news story to mention it.
Meanwhile, in the US, Shale Gas continues to provide the American economy with a bonanza: thousands of jobs, very cheap domestic fuel bills, a huge surplus of domestic fuel (which the US is now exporting), a secure energy supply and a nice income for the US Revenue.
Which bit of any of that is so objectionable?
‘…”We all know the massive environmental damage that fracking has caused around the world and we are here to let Tamboran and the relevant government ministers know that they will not ride roughshod over the wishes of the local community and that we are prepared to stand up for our rights,” he said….’
Did you know that millions of innocent women and children die each year from fracking, that millions of poor oppressed people face starvation and poverty as a direct result of fracking. And computer models suggest that fracking could wipe out all life on earth by 2200 if nothing is done to stop this evil industry. The BBCs Harrabinshuckmanblack has spoken to highly regarded world renowned experts from greenpiss and fiends of the earth and the world wild lies fund and their models suggest that fracking could cause mother earth to cry.
Which bit of any of that is so objectionable?
Tricky one, but I’d hazard a guess at “cheap domestic fuel bills” as it lets Joe Public stick two metaphoric fingers up at the greenies.
The leader of another Islamic nation is toppled but I don’t recall the BBC warning us of any trouble on the horizon.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16922570
‘Maldives President Mohamed Nasheed has resigned after weeks of demonstrations and a mutiny by some police officers.’
Could it be that the Beeb liked him because he was a Greenie hero?
BBC country profile
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12651486
‘The Maldives is made up of a chain of nearly 1,200 islands, most of them uninhabited, which lie off the Indian sub-continent.
None of the coral islands measures more than 1.8 metres (six feet) above sea level, making the country vulnerable to a rise in sea levels associated with global warming.’
‘A former political prisoner and activist, President Nasheed highlighted the threat of global warming to the low-lying island’.
‘A source close to the the country’s first democratically elected president described Tuesday’s developments as a “coup by the former regime”.’
Sounds as if the BBC think he was a good bloke.
So BBC, tell me is this an Islamic state?
‘Most tourists are taken straight to their island hideaway by seaplane or speedboat, where they are free to drink alcohol and get luxurious spa treatments, insulated from the everyday Maldives, where alcohol is outlawed and skimpy beachwear frowned upon.’
Oh so it is just a matter of sensibly respecting the local culture?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maldives#Religion
‘….open practice of any other religion is forbidden and liable to prosecution. Article 2 of the revised constitution says that the republic “is based on the principles of Islam.”
‘The requirement to adhere to a particular religion and prohibition of public worship following other religions is contrary to Article 18 of the Universal declaration of Human Right’
Beeb! Why didn’t you say something about this?
Not a good sign for civilization. Nasheed was only recently trying to tell his citizens that they shouldn’t be dragging their country backwards into fundamentalism.
‘Beeb! Why didn’t you say something about this?’
Was asked, rhetorically.
The BBCs favourite despot is finished, the poster boy of the CAGW fraud has been kicked out of office.
Maldives President Mohamed Nasheed resigns amid unrest
Of course the BBC tries it best to misreprent the issues, trys to cover up the real cause of his downfall, makes sure the reader gets the impression that the military and religious nutters are to blame. The BBC tells us about unspecified protests and crises but tellingly fails to inform what these demostrations were about. In fact Nasheed was just another corrupt chancer living stealing as much money as he could and has been since he took office. But the BBC cannot tell the truth because they have championed his cause for years. Just one more clear example of the BBC so wrapped up in its lies it cannot tell the truth. Demonstrations against Rasheed and his corrupt thug regime have been going on for at least two years but his role of CAGW poster boy meant full on BBC protection and far from his enemies being islamofascists the protest movement is actually proteting about Rasheeds own infatuation with islamist extermism.
“Olivia Lang BBC News
It is a startling turn of events for a man heralded as the harbinger of change who pledged to complete the archipelago’s transition to democracy.
In recent years, Mr Nasheed had attracted worldwide attention for his campaign for action on climate change, even holding an underwater cabinet meeting to highlight his cause.
But domestically, he appeared to lose his footing as a series of crises shook his government.”
This is how the BBC perverts the news to fit their warped agenda, we are not told about the reasons for the demostrations and protests lest we realise who this man really is, lest we discover that years of pro Rasheed BBC propaganda was based on lies. Its the same old story with the BBC as they protect their favoured despots around the world from Chavez to Castro to Nasheed. They have lied for so long they cannot now tell the truth about Rasheed about his awful regime.
The Maldives Are Not Sinking
Yes it is sinking! Just not under the water 😀
I`m pretty sure that the Maldives was one of the places on a list of places that persecuted Christians….pretty high up in the top 50 as well!
Didn`t know then it was one of the 38 Muslim countries that were on that list…but when I see the name of the leader, fair to say that it is.
Funny that this coalition lark doesn`t seem to have taken root in any country where Muslims are in the ascendency isn`t it?
I`m sure the BBC will give us an explanation!
“The first-ever presidential elections under a multi-candidate, multi-party system were held in October 2008. President Maumoon Gayoom was defeated in a runoff poll by Mohamed Nasheed, a political activist who had been jailed several years earlier by the former regime. The opposition’s victory brought some limited freedoms, but not in the religious sphere.”
“In 1998, all known Christian foreigners were expelled from the country, and all known Maldivian Christians were arrested and released only after intense international pressure. Maldivians who become Christians abroad have been known to disappear when they return home, never to be heard from again. Today, in a nation of 314,000 people, Christians make up less than one-half of 1 percent of the population.”
http://www.persecution.net/maldives.htm
I had better cross the Maldives off from my weekend break then.
‘I had better cross the Maldives off from my weekend break then.’
Well, it was tricky getting in, as their airport was haveing trouble coping with the volume of 1st and Business Class ‘reporters’ flying in and out to…er… ‘report’ from 5* hotels with fax lines direct from the government PR dept.
However, this issue seems to be getting resolved though, oddly, the new air traffic capacity seems not to be in the form of a seaplane lagoon.
Someone else has noticed the BBC’s penchant for publishing vacuous puff pieces:
Partly, the success of [astroturfing] is thanks to the BBC, which delights in announcing that a particular guest is from a “Right-wing think tank” such as Reform or Policy Exchange, but often fails to apply the same labelling to Demos or the IPPR. Dan Hannan will be introduced as a “hardline Eurosceptic”, whereas Michael Heseltine would never be billed as a hardline Europhile.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/robertcolvile/100135626/how-bob-crow-became-the-voice-of-reason/
Penchant? It is SOP!
Last night i wrote about how long we would have to wait until the bBC aired this story about how young Dan Stringer was put in hospital by 10 rather dark skinned people (who may have uttered god is great) in what is in any book a racist attack. As of almiost a day later the bBC still has to mention this attack. However the bbC does have the time to report this much more serious incident:
Woman arrested over ‘racist rant’ on Central Line
A woman has been arrested after video footage apparently showing ethnic minority Tube passengers being racially abused was posted online.
If the BBC is not reporting that story (and yet is reporting the Tube outburst) it marks a new low in their broadcasting output.
I suppose the media concept is watch the BBC if you do not want to know what is going on in Britain (from fiddles by MP’s to failures of care by the NHS) but do want to have explained to you why pay rates in the Public Sector outside London that are 30% higher than the free market rate – more if you include pension entitlements – are justified.
Ah yes, the BBC, getting it just about right. They will not be happy until 80% of the country is unemployed, and people leave the State education system with certificates of correct thinking.
Pounce,
“As of almiost a day later the bBC still has to mention this attack.”
http://goo.gl/xoJSe
15 hours ago = 9 hours before your post.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/england/manchester/
But des not only is that story hidden from view from main stream British people, it’s not as public as the nasty evil white racist woman who is throwing abuse. But the Bbc headline states that the victim feels it was racist. Now have another look at how that headline is written, do you get the impression that the white victim was a member of a gang, maybe if your mullahs bollocks weren’t in front of your eyes you might be able to see how the NBC lie and tell half truths in which to protect Islamic racists in the uk.
Pounce,
Hyde teenager says unprovoked attack was ‘racial’
“Now have another look at how that headline is written, do you get the impression that the white victim was a member of a gang…”
Erm, No. [boggle]
The way in which Dez seeks to draw attention to the textual slips
“almiost”
“bBC”
made by Pounce in his comment are a perfect illustration of the contempt which middle class Leftists such as Dez have for the working class.
Dez, just to be clear, you are not fit to lick his boots. You are the slime which remains once the soul has left the building.
wild,
“The way in which Dez seeks to draw attention to the textual slips…”
I was merely pointing out that the BBC had reported the story and that Pounce was mistaken. I couldn’t care less about his (or anyone else’s) spelling/typos.
dis·in·gen·u·ous
[dis-in-jen-yoo-uh-s]
Adjective; lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity
Example – It is not uncommon for Labour voters at the BBC to make the disingenuous claim that they are politically impartial
Whilst admiring the access and devotion to archive research in defence of BBC timelines, if not relative heft applied, one can only regret it is deployed to highlight clear abuses as opposed to highlighting the vast number of them there are.
For which, thank you.
6.15pm R5live, two spokesman from Russia, re the gaulling media/arab driven hysteria, about getting Russia/China erm “on board”?? & kicking Asad out!.
Telling it straight, about their own islamist problem,(funded by saudi/qatar) … the knee jerk f-ck up in Libya, which they won t be party to repeating, the Egyptian disaster, the denial of reality by
rose glassed UN asswipes as a very large populus support Asad
etc etc, etc.
oh dear …not the required el beeb response
but not to worry, goes completely over the head of the microphone chimps anyway … something akin to
“do you really think a large percentage of Russsians, just don t get it, Bill” … comes the bleat …
oooohhh! brother!, there literally is no helping them 😀
Talking about 5lite and Russia. Why is the radio5 female newsreader in Moscow? Is she an expert on Russian affairs? Don’t the BBC have someone else based in Russia?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Sandford_%28journalist%29
And most important , how much is it costing? I expect she is not staying in the local YWCA.
Now I know – it was her turn
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live/2011/09/peter-allen-911.shtml
‘Now I know – it was her turn’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live/2011/09/peter-allen-911.shtml
Have to love ‘closed for comments’ after… 1.
At the time of writing the top of BBC website says:
“Police should have warned people whose phones were hacked by the News of the World, a judicial review – pushed for by Lord Prescott – rules”
No reason to put Prescott’s name in the headline except to give him a prominent plug.
‘give him a prominent plug’
Conisdering what we are treated to from his orifices, may I suggest at least two for public health and safety reasons?
Apparently it was “The Lord Prescott” along with four others.
Who might they be?…the BBC hasn`t told me yet, when I was listening.
Does Tracey Temple get a cut of it if she was the cause of the hacking?
And how come the fat bulimic ignoramus manage to get legal aid and paid for by us?
A lot of questions, good ones, there.
‘BBC hasn`t told me yet’
Quelle suprise.
“Certain questions are not being asked’
From Daphne Anson
“I Couldn’t Agree More With That Statement” Said The BBC Newsreader To The Anti-Monarchist
I see in the photo, PC has humbled our Head of State. She now prostrates herself to dictators and theocrats. It wasn’t always thus:
http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/queens-1979-visit-a-glimpse-of-uae-for-the-world?pageCount=0
Boy, 14, gets police warning after hate campaign against EastEnders cast and crewFor some reason, which is not made clear in the article, this lad had it in for the Eastenders production team, and launched a hate campaign against them by masquerading as several people writing on various blogs and sending hate emails and writing abusive comments on internet forums.
He’s described in the article as ‘sick’ quite a few times, and judging by the only 8 comments that have so far been approved by the Daily Mail, they seem anxious to want to make this view ‘the norm’.
I think the irony of this story is terrific.
So this 14 year old has picked up on those qualities portrayed as part of every day life on the Eastenders programme? Whatever did those involved with this programme think they were going to create in the society? If anything, it’s to his credit that this 14 year old targeted them – part of the source of much that brings our society down passing as ‘entertainment’.
As for masquerading as a group of people to present a different reality to achieve his desired agenda, that’s something akin to what the BBC do on a daily basis. Masquerading as fair and impartial while twisting the news to fit their own agenda.
The only difference is we’re not forced to pay this lad to do it. I don’t find this lad ‘sick’ at all, just those he targeted can’t understand why.
What goes around – comes around.
Hmm, thicko Paxman discussing tits on Newsnight, no not the Liebore party but fake ones.
Paxo then links Leveson Page 3 comments to breast jobs….except the Sun doesn’t allow women with fake ones to do page 3.
But hey why not take a chance to knock Murdoch again.
‘Paxo then links Leveson Page 3 comments to breast jobs….except the Sun doesn’t allow women with fake ones to do page 3. ‘
So…again… the BBC is not educational, informative, or even concerned with accuracy. Nifty. If unique.
Amazing what you do discover mind..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2012/02/tuesday_7_february_2012.html?postId=111654674#comment_111654674
And Laurie Penny. Eclectic, at least.
Newsnight is beyond parody. And help.
I take it the new Newsnight regime is in place. Last night’s piece of excruciating all heat no light sister democracy should act as a warning to old Paxo.
‘I have a right to inflated mammories!’
‘The Government was at fault in not warning me of the dangers!’
I reckon the BBC have already decided Paxman is too male, too centre-left, too English and too middle-aged. last night was his punishment.
When Newsnight gets put out of its misery and ceases to be the national embarrassment that it now is, the show tonight will be seen to be a shark jumping moment…when the show gave up the ghost and decided to become Oprah.
Why else would thirteen women with breast implants be facing Jordan, Naomi Wolf and poor old Ann Milton…or was it Nick Cave?
Uttelry disastrous programme-Jeremy will no doubt count that as thirteen women on his show, sao let`s hear no more of this sexism stuff!
By the way-it`s the Governments fault that they stuffed their bras…bound to be men behind that as well!
Naomi Wolf says women shouldn`t be using hair gel for implants-but hey, it`s their right-and therefore the State is to blame..as ever!
No bigger boob appeared on this execrable piece of sileage than poor Paxman…time to remove this show….long gone malignant and irrelevant at one and the same time!
Yes have you noticed that when something has gone wrong in particular when it went wrong under Liebore (as this story did) the BBC never look for a ‘former Minister’ to come and explain why it went wrong? but when the BBC want to ‘praise’ something gonig right now (like not handing out banker bonuses) they can’t wait to wheel out some old lefty tosser?
Actually this show isn’t the one that jumped the shark (although it’s close) the one they had on the other month about women shaving their vaginas and ‘vajazzling’ them was (apparently we men are to blame for that as well) the one and Paxman was on that one as well.
Funny that in the week the BBC is accused of not giving enough women slots on the Newsnight we suddenly get a whole studio full of female idiots.
Perhaps the BBC might like to ask why women are told they need to be stick thin and look like 9 year old boys by the fashion industry? Maybe they can ask all those homosexaul fashion designers why they think the ideal woman should not look like a woman but a young boy