Good Morning. Monday morning arrives and so does a new Open Thread to take us off into this new week. BBC annoying you? Please do tell….
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- atlas_shrugged Nov 15, 12:58
Midweek 13th November 2024
Village Christmas Fair axed because of looney irrational council elf an safety conditions about terrorist attacks. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14085105/Small-village-Christmas-fair-Canned-terror-attack.html Wonder if my… - Lefty Wright Nov 15, 12:57
Midweek 13th November 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9kcQBVo5Kk Is this the copper who knocked on Allison Pearson’s Door on Sunday morning? - Solomon Grundy Nov 15, 12:50
Midweek 13th November 2024
George Osborne suggested this as chancellor in 2015. Since then, a number of LGPS’s have merged and it looks to… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 12:17
Midweek 13th November 2024
“You really couldn’t make this up. Just days before the 1,000 day anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, we have… - JohnC Nov 15, 12:09
Midweek 13th November 2024
I agree because the UN is too valuable as a ‘meeting place for all Nations’ which otherwise would not exist.… - JohnC Nov 15, 12:07
Midweek 13th November 2024
Have you EVER heard of a ‘hate crime’ from a woman or a BAME against a white male ?. Me… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 12:00
Midweek 13th November 2024
HATE CRIMES …. https://youtu.be/myjEoDypUD8?si=yyYfR8sFEAG0_Yu2&t=37 - Eddy Booth Nov 15, 11:55
Midweek 13th November 2024
“Tyson slaps Paul during final face-off” https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/boxing/articles/cly03n4r1keo [img]https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/ace/standard/800/cpsprodpb/5cae/live/a414d290-a2f5-11ef-b299-f9ebab4415b5.jpg.webp[/img] “Novice boxer Paul, 27, will take on 58-year-old Tyson at the AT&T… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 11:50
Midweek 13th November 2024
THE END …. IS SOON …. “Iran’s morality police, also known as the Guidance Patrol or Gasht-e Ershad, is a…
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
Yesterday on the main BBC1 News at around 6:00/7:00 pm fully 6 minutes (of around 12/15 minutes) was devoted to the most important news in the world: the death of another drug raddled has-been celebrity. Now, I appreciate that Whitney Houston had real talent but, you know, her career and her death are not world-shattering events. Maybe her early death merits a foot-note on the news but in a time when Greece is filing financial and political bankruptcy (which got about 90 seconds), WH’s death is very small potatoes.
I suspect the BBC here is doing the equivalent of trendy clerics dancing the twist in the 60s. It’s a form of getting down wiv da kidz in the same way that (only partial exaggeration) all programmes were cleared to mourn the demise of Michael Jackson It’s a deep corruption of “public service” broadcasting of real news and is just another facet of the BBC’s infantilisation of its audience. Celeb-news, which BBC3, Channel 5 and a host of cable-crap stations broadcast incessantly, is important to a part of the population which is pandered to unceasingly. It also takes the form of the “serious” BBC commentariat treating the ill-informed outpourings of the barely literate (cf the Occupiers, UKUnCut and any lefty luvvie you care to mention) as if they came from the mouth of Socrates.
Fox News is doing the same thing, ergo the BBC is cool.
“Fox News is doing the same thing”
Let me cut some slack for Fox News although it’s still pretty appalling. FN are there for the money. It doesn’t pretend (I think) to do “public service” broadcasting. Nor are US taxpayers compelled to fork out the equivalent of $200 per household so that Fox News can insult licence-fee payers with an IQ over 75 by feeding them a diet of celeb-junk.
IMHO the only justification for the licence fee would be that the BBC is thereby relieved of the necessity to seek the lowest common denominator of public taste. Unfortunately, in its madness for ratings, the BBC is there with the rest of them snuffling at the arse-end of celebrity culture for a bit of (taxpayer over-funded) street cred.
I was being sarcastic. The last couple of times someone here has complained about the BBC making a fuss over something, a defender of the indefensible has chimed in saying that everyone else is making the same fuss, so the BBC is getting it about right. Doing the same thing as the news organizations they hate = Delivering Quality First.
“I was being sarcastic.”
Sorry about that – my sarcasm sensors are down today!
Comparing Fox New and BBC News is a little unfair, don’t you think? BBC News is nowhere near as impartial and professional as Fox News.
Are the BBC reporting or supporting the events in Syria? I thought the corporation was meant to be so impartial that it was enable even to allow ‘value judgements’. The BBC’s endless coverage could almost be seen as a warcry to rally the international socialist troops. I also read an article on its website discussing the issue of Al Queida being involved and supporting the rebels; the consequences of reading this almost made me vomit in the bathroom. Not once did the BBC use the words terrorist, extremist, Muslim, or fundamentalist and the piece almost came across as a eulogy for those barbarous and murdering filth. But that’s not suprising when you consider the lengths this organisation goes to in order to placate Muslim extremist and fanatics, even in this country. I even read somewhere that the BBC’s ‘impartial’ reporters have even been found with contact details for Muslim extremists and jihadis in Afghanistan by American special forces; makes you want to ask the question, ‘whose side are the BBC on?’
Elements of the Free Syrian Army (Islamist) setting up an ‘atrocity’ for the camera.
Even the BBC is now getting a bit jittery about what is happening in ‘Bosnia’ on steroids.
Good find mate! You should email this to the BBC as I’m sure I watched this one on their news 24!
Looks like the Syrian version of Pallywood;
If Bloggers and blog users can spot this, why can’t the “World’s Largest News Gathering Organisation”?
Rhetorical question, of course.
The BBC’s attitude is on a par with it’s worship of the celebrity culture. The rebels are by definition celebrities. The reality is that it is a very complex and very dangerous matter. Not that one would gather this from the BBC’s reporting.
It’s working so well that the Arab League is now calling for UN troops to invade Syria to help out. What the hell happened to the Narrative that the Iraqis and Afghanis were fighting Coalition troops because they didn’t like being invaded by Western Imperialists? The BBC is going to have a hard time squaring this circle.
Will Mardell be moaning over the drumbeat of yet another unwanted war? I won’t hold my breath.
Just look how quiet the BBC have become with regards the aftermath of the conflicts in Libya and Egypt wherein the Muslim fanatics are taking over by the day; I wonder why the silence? I think the BBC actually wants to have more Islamic fundamentalist states in the world, I realy believe the BBC is pro-Islamic. The BBC want worldwide power and will stoop to the lowest level to get it, even if it means sedition to one’s own countrymen, belief systems and values.
No surprise that the Arabs want someone else to do the fighting:
http://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars
The term “Arab Soldier” is something of an oxymoron.
If you ever get the chance to read j Bowes book ‘6 Days’ he describes Arab soldiers as lions ,yet the vastly outnumbered isrealis who kicked their arses, well they just got lucky. Just like they did in 1948,1956,1973,1982,2006,2009. seem those lions are pussies.
‘‘whose side are the BBC on?’
Often an interesting question.
On top of those twitter seminars oin the public dime, there are also those awesome stress-rleiveing awaydays, possibly with break-out sessions on ‘telling military types we like when their bomb fuse settings are not optimal’, etc.
Muslims killing Muslims .
Now why aren`t our more militant Muslims protesting about those Muslims killing Muslims ?
Why dont they get involved ?
Some of them could go to Syria and take part in a jihad , protecting those oppressed Muslims against the infad….. Muslims who are oppressing them .
While I’m on, I notice that AFAIAA Today‘s analysis (and its interviewees of choice – Alexandros Papadamos, a young engineer from Athens, and Guy Verhofstadt, former prime minister of Belgium) of the Greek financial meltdown failed to mention (or if mentioned, failed to explore and dismissed as lunacy) the obvious “solution” which is exit from the euro and a re-introduction of the drachma. Since Greece is looking endless austerity in the face (even given greater and greater handouts by Germany although, admittedly, it suits Germany to maintain a captive market for its exports), the earthquake of leaving the euro could not be worse than what’s already on offer.
Was this discussed rationally – or at all? Of course not: that would be like expecting a rational discussion on Today of the CAGW scam or, indeed, anything else which is part of the Narrative. Again, the highly paid “professional” BBC journalists on location in Athens failed to ask the demonstrators what their alternative solution was (other than throwing stones at the police). Humphrys was very exercised by the democratic deficit in Athens which Verhofstadt, for more considered reasons, also deplored. Mind you, it comes to something when the ex PM of Northern Europe’s most corrupt country accuses Greece of the same crimes of which his polity is equally guilty.
Umbongo, surely the Beeboids think the violent Greek protesters just want to sit down with their opponents and work things out together. They didn’t ask the Occupiers for an alternative solution other than a generic redistribution of wealth, so why should they start now?
DP
Oh I agree and your cynicism about the BBC matches mine. But these “journalists” are at the top of their profession – or, certainly, paid as such. I know the Narrative gets in the way but a simple direct question once in a while would be educative for everyone. And, not only that, it would be interesting! It makes for broadcasting that you would want to hear/see and, maybe, be prepared to pay for (even if HM government didn’t compel you – well not you as it happens 😉 – or me to do so).
The BBC like rebellions and pictures of cities ablaze….fine copy to talk turkey over.
Yet you sense that Greece is a little too close to home…their second ones as likely as not.
Hence the “don`t mention the causes” stuff…just in case the serfs over here begon to see that we can do much better than the the riots of last year.
The BBC likes the pictures, but not the risk of unpleasantness by the OB vans…now if only we`d behave like chess pieces on Marx`s board, and didn`t shine a light too closely on their role in fomenting trouble then , that would be ” a measured and proportionate response”…and let them continue to pay Tristrams trukey basted spawn for those school fees!
I note that the BBC are very good at sneering at those who refuse to answer the call to be grilled by the BBC about their pet concerns of the moment.
Obviously Opposition means that you have plenty time to mooch about the Beebs many outlets, and tell us all how the Tories undid thirteen years of Labours great work that was just about to flower…until the damn Coalition came in to ruin it!
That said though, what is Mark Thmpsons excuse for not getting the lift down to the fourth floor to account for the Beebs rampant sexism re women and their pay(Womans Hour-today)…or about the DGs vacancy and the salary(Feedback-last week)?
When the Beebs management won`t even deign to go onto their own programmes, it only shows how redundant and toothless their “holding power to account” stuff is, in reality.
Yet these absences seem to be justifiable, for there is never that Billy Idol sneer about their own top brass being too busy to take the lift…maybe if they provided a rickshaw cyclist who wasn`t afraid of the fire exit stairs, we might be in business…with expenses too!
‘the BBC are very good at sneering at those who refuse to answer the call to be grilled by the BBC about their pet concerns of the moment. ‘
But then… questions won’t be answered.
For instance…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16985405
Open at 10TH FEBRUARY 2012 – 13:26, CLOSED
11TH FEBRUARY 2012 – 23:57
A day and a half, over a weekend, on a highly topical story that still unfolds.
Nothing to do with this, one imagines?:
‘The Greek bailout is not a bailout of Greece, it’s a bailout of foreign banks, mostly German and French.’
I also note, by sheer coincidence, Nick R’s latest gets pulled one before rollover to a new century. On a topic that still has legs, with no new one as yet.
My Newsnight producer has suggsted that there are many sophisticated metrics for what closes a thread. I fear that I can see nothing that makes much sense other than serving BBC agenda.
The Beeboid Corporation seems to be a law unto itself. It’s like a government department but without the accountability.
Can’t be bothered to implement employment laws or take the lift to the lower floors, true enough, but if something trivial happened, like calling someone a name or uttering a forbidden word and it got into the media, the useless overpaid scruff would drop everything and rush back from his holidays on the far side of the world to “take charge”!
Being a rugby fan, footie leaves me pretty cold. However, I did not like the bBC bandwagon on the Evra Sourez affair. I always look at the evidence and come to my own conclusion rather than going along with the herd. From the video I saw that Evra is short and has to hold his hand up to shakehands. When Sourez came along Evra was only bringing his hand up to horizontal. Which means he had deliberately taken it down, Sourez by passed him, Evra played to the camera and caused an incident. He did the same at the end of the game and had to be escorted away by the ref.
So if Evra shows three incidents of being provocative, then was he provocative before but not caught on TV. Was their truth to the Sourez accusations that Evra was just as much to blame for the original incident? Evra’s action on saturday give a strong hint that he was. But for the bBC court of Kangaroo’s why look at any evidence, go along with the popular herd is the thing to do!
We’ve had a discussion about this on the last Open Thread Fred. Evra’s hand was at the same angle for all the other Liverpool players who had had no problem in shaking it. It only dropped a bit once he saw Suarez going past him. It’s as clear as day that it was Suarez ignoring Evra’s hand and not the reverse as you imply.
This has been confirmed by the Liverpool executive admitting that is was Suarez’s fault and apologising for it, Dalglish’s apology for his venom directed at the reporter who had asked a fair question (obviously admitting that he, Dalglish, had got it wrong) and Suarez’s apology (albeit probably forced).
Don’t get the idea that just because Evra is a Manchester United player that he must be in the wrong – that’s been the BBC’s relentless anti-United propaganda campaign of at least 20 years standing. The fact that the BBC are unreservedly backing United on this one must point to the fact that, at least in this instance, they can’t avoid admitting that United are the wronged party.
The Beeboid footage here as discussed by those footy experts, Hansen and Shearer, shows it quite clearly and in slow motion too. From this it seems plain that it was Suarez who failed to shake the hand that was held in the same manner as for the other players.
See from 1 min 15 secs onwards.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17004667
How can this be about racism when there’s no political power involved? Narratives not adding up here. This is all very confusing to my tiny, crypto-racist, US brain.
David, why these things are important is because our gov via the media suppress a lot of news abou racial unrest in the U.K. There are a lot of strong rumours going around about a grooming case in Liverpool crown court.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/225515.html This is an irish site and the only one where I can find a reference to it.
fred, that article is one of the most bias I have read (incluidng the headline and the photo!) Almost every paragraph is riddled with untruth and innuendo and is finished off with naming and shaming!
I have never read that piece of filth before and hope never to again. This is the hypocrisy of the left, they have one post “Say No to Racism” and the one below it is a blatant anti-semitic rant which gets 6 likes and only 2 dislikes.
The left are vile, vile people and are the most blatant racists.
Fred, rather than PressTV being an Irish site, it’s an Iranian one (Irish sites have domain names ending in .ie, rather than .ir).
As such I think it’s probably unwise to make any assumptions about its content, or the people making comments below it.
Hello Millie, I used the much longer Youtube entry as my evidence. I still have the same opinion.
Ah… I haven’t seen the Youtube one, Fred.
I watched the match and saw the whole incident replayed from all angles, many times, and have to say the snub was from Suarez. No question, no doubt.
I’m sure someone might have been clever with Youtube and shown something to make it look as if the opposite to what really happened may have happened. But watching the whole thing made it clear who was to blame. Confirmed by the apologies.
Suarez did snub Evra but who can blame him? He is tried and convicted by the media and the FA in a kangaroo court and he doesn’t believe he did anything wrong (whether he did not I’ll leave to others to say). So, would you shake the guys hand, especially as there has been no ‘forgive and forget’ from Evra? You could call it petty and childish but from Suarez’s point of view it is understandable, if not laudable.
You’d think grown men could take such language during a competition for what it is – sledging. Of course if you can get a rival teams players banned then …
Actually Suarez had admitted using the offensive word but denied that he meant it in a particularly offensive way. Evra at least held his hand ready to shake but it was Suarez (the man who admitted his guilt) who refused to play his part. As I said before, don’t let the BBC’s 20 year anti-United campaign blind you to the fact that once a blue moon they may be the innocent party.
I tend to agree that these grown men should be able to take a bit of sledging but as Suarez had admitting using a racist name it was against what is now allowed in football, rightly or wrongly.
Strewth! A BBC double-barrel on Start the Week. Lola, Baroness Young, her Wiki entry must push so many beeboid buttons that I’m surprised Marrxy wasn’t slobbering at her feet. We had, of course, the reverential tones for this former actress, whose most prominent role was in Metal Mickey, 1980-83, onto Haringey Arts Centre, blah, blah. And also the Cambridge classics prof, Mary Beard, a beard for what? Islamic terrorism? After 9/11 Beard thought ‘the US had it coming: nice. ‘Mad Max’ Hastings was in there somewhere: poor bastard.
For some peculiar reason I do not watch or listen to every BBC news programme, but I have been puzzled as to whether reporters have been covering the trial in Liverpool Crown Court of 11 alleged asian paedophiles. Rumour on You Tube now suggests that due to violent assaults by the UAF on two trial lawyers, the trial has been postponed. If any of this is true, it is a very serious matter which our state owned BBC should have investigated.
You’re only allowed to know what the BBC and others believe you can be trusted with – hence Natsman’s comment, below, about somebody called Whitney Houston.
Gossip on the web, which is all we have to go on, seems to suggest that the trial that isn’t happening has not been postponed and there was no assault on the lawyers, who don’t exist.
Nothing, repeat nothing, is happening in Liverpool. Nothing at all.
These UAF thug scum are the new liberal fascist SS/Gestapo. We are living in a ‘1984’ state where freddom of speech is being curtailed and any deviation from left wing mindset will be dealt a crushing blow. Unbelievable; I’m telling you civil war is coming in this century. I know whose side I will be on, do you?
And David Cameron supports the UAF.
His name was still there last time I checked.
The Two-Tier System in Action
Good link mate and so true. I can’t recall the BBC ever reporting that disgraceful racist attack by those Muslim thugs! Suppose it just didn’t fit in with the lefty narative of multicultural utopia.
I’ve given up on hopes that the BBC might be bold enough to hold the executive up to scrutiny on this one.
The Beeb are far more comfortable seeing themselves with a supporting role in the opperation of that (so long as it’s left-liberal) executive.
A lawyer mate of mine reckons the blackout is because a previous trial collapsed due to adverse reporting ie the defence will call foul if their lads get bad mouthed by the press.
Another thought is that there may be such a conveyor belt of these cases that the reported results of one could be argued to be prejudicial to the outcome of the next in line. In the same way that the acquittal of Peter Storrie of tax evasion was kept secret for a year until the Harry Rednapp verdict.
Any way you look at this it is a sorry state of affairs.
First off, the cops were far too slow to act (PC reasons).
Secondly, the Beeb with all their Panarama, Newsnight investigations etc etc had no interest in such stories (PC reasons).
Thirdly, the truth will inevitably and inexorably come out. And it will be five times as messy for all the attempted coverup.
It is a truth universally acknowledged that paedophiles are not asian but Catholic. Therefore there is no possible story involving asian paedophiles. QED. (See how easy it is making ‘value judgments’ at the BBC?)
Woke up, was told, again, all about poor Whitney Houston, heard all the grovelling comments from the BAFTA bash, had head filled with footballers not shaking hands, and Greece being Greek. Turned over, went back to sleep…
According to some, Whitney Houston was the greatest person who ever lived. This is news to me because, between 2009 and February 11, I thought that Michael Jackson was the greatest person who ever lived.
Apparently, Nelson Mandela has been paying tribute to the latest greatest person who ever lived. Hope he’s in good health otherwise Whitney Houston’s ownership of this accolade might be short lived.
Can’t say I’m surprised that the BBC should be in full blown mourning for a past-her-best hasbeen, famous for wailing endlessly on the same note and for strangling the nth degree out of the smallest syllabel of material.
Add in the wasted talent, the history of sustance abuse and falling victim to abuse from the dodgy character with whom she jumped into bed and you have pretty much the Beeb right there in a nut shell.
I was watching The Big Question on BBC Sunday morning, and Nicky Campbell just can’t himself can he? In the aftermath of the secularists halting the saying of prayers before council meetings in Bideford, the second topic on TBQ was ‘ Is christianity being marginalised? ‘ In the middle of hosting the debate he just couldn’t resist interjecting with this editorial quip ” With all the government cuts you would think they would be praying as much as they can ”
The cynicism in me can’t help feeling that the topic of discussion was decided after the editorial quip was conceived.
If it was as you say then it was even more contrived. The seculariists never complained about prayers before the council meefting, their complaint was that the prayers were DURING the council meeting.
Fred Blogs
The headline and subsequent reading of the article in the Guardian suggests that prayers at Bideford are said at the commencement of council meetings.Once the meeting has started, this of course is deemed to be during the meeting.
It is such an irrelevance to the main point of my post,I cant imagine why you bothered with the pedantry.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/feb/10/council-court-battle-prayer-meetings
Nice that the bBC live report (News 24 1330 ish) following the release of Abu Quatada thought that the terms of his bail conditions were “rather draconian” Perhaps a nice holiday would be more in order, near the seaside somewhere.
“….near the seaside somewhere”
How about a nice long stay at Fukushima?
More BBC airbrushing in pursuit of the Cause….
http://www.gmp.police.uk/mainsite/pages/9d9f5b4308e14750802579a1003cec4e.htm
“Police are investigating after a 16-year-old girl was raped in Farnworth.
The offender is described as Asian, with a medium build and having dark hair.”
Compare this with…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-17002574
Yesterday upon a stair,
I met a “man” who wasn’t there.
He wasn’t there again today,
I wish that “man” would go away.
Milligan?
I am getting bloody sick to death of the useless and gutless acorn army BBC pussy-footing around the bloody Asian/Muslim paedos; we are hearing about this (not on the BBC I hasten to add) every bloody week from different news sources. For goodness sakes, who are they supporting, the victims or the rat filth perpertrating these hideous crimes? There is enough evidence now to suggest that this is a national emergency and an out-of-control problem in the Muslim community. I urge everyone to spread these stories via social networking because the BBC won’t that’s for sure; they’re too shit scared of offending ‘radical’ Muslims.
Acorn Army…excellent Sir!
Pretty clear, sadly; who the BBC does support….one Gareth Peirce is worth a thousand Fiona Pilkingtons in Beebworld.
The BBC will now be worried if Semtex actually constitutes a “healthy and appropriate balanced diet” if placed in little Qatadas lunch box!
This is blatant ‘proof’ of sinister bias: it is clear that the story is lifted 100% from the police press release…with the exception of a few words: spot the differnece…
BBC version:
The girl was grabbed from behind in Egerton Street, Farnworth, and dragged into a nearby alley off Lomax Street at 01:30 GMT, police said.
The attacker pushed the girl to the ground and then raped her. She got up and ran away before calling for help.
Greater Manchester Police said the victim was unhurt but left deeply upset by her ordeal.
Det Sgt Darren Wiggans, of Bolton CID, said: “We are at the very early stages of the investigation so I cannot go into too many details about what happened.”
He added: “Incidents like this quite rightly cause some concern in the community, but I want to reassu
Police version:
Shortly before 1.30am on Saturday, 11 February 2012, the girl was walking home along Egerton Street when she was approached from behind by the offender and dragged into a nearby alleyway off Lomax Street.
He pushed her to the ground and raped her. She managed to get up and ran away before calling the police.
The victim has been left deeply upset by her ordeal.
The offender is described as Asian, with a medium build and having dark hair.
Detective Sergeant Darren Wiggans, of Bolton CID, said: “We are at the very early stages of the investigation so I cannot go into too many details about what happened.
“However, I can reassure the community that the victim is being supported by specially trained officers and a CID inquiry is now underway.
“Incidents like this quite rightly cause some concern in the community, but I want to reassure everyone that we are treating this extremely seriously and now want to hear from anyone who may have heard or saw anything.”
Both these cases in Liverpool and Farnworth have some creepy social undercurrents, in that the police seem to be more worried about “reassuring the public” than they are about “catching the scum that do things like this”.
It`s as if the police are some Ministry of Reassurance smothering blanket….and this has been going on since Ian Blair if not even before.
Only the BBC could possibly think the question “What are the Police for” makes a title for a radion show….bleeding obvious to most of us down here on planet normal, but there again I`ve not done Criminological Sciences at Hendon Poly have I?
The police don’t even talk about the public any more. Instead it is that smothering blanket c phrase, as in “However, I can reassure the community that the victim is being supported…”and “Incidents like this quite rightly cause some concern in the community”.
We used to be the public. What happened to us?!
Panorama tonight will feature a story on the explosion of devastating poverty in the US. I just caught a promo clip….sorry…video report from Hillary Anderson about this on the News Channel. Tent cities popping up all over the landscape, children in Las Vegas being made to eat rats for dinner, and the US is now apparently the worst country in the developed world for social mobility.
Pay no attention the fact that the people in the tents look exactly like the Occupiers heavily promoted by the BBC last year, back when living in tents was a deliberate choice to show solidarity and fight the system. One wonders if you will be told that people not on the Left are calling these “Obamavilles”. Will the Stimulus be mentioned at all? I thought the President’s Keynesian genius was working? I could show them honest, hardworking people in real trouble in my own neighborhood if the BBC was interested. But that’s not as sexy.
Nor should you pay attention to any of the plump children in the scenes of children who have no food. I did learn, though, that Las Vegas was a symbol of the country’s “fabulous wealth”, rather than a symbol of greed and pipe dreams and shallow entertainment. I was surprised to learn that the BBC had no idea that unemployment in Vegas is about a third lower than the national figure over the last five years. Of course, that’s irrelevant, because it wouldn’t be useful for the classic journalistic technique of juxtaposition, which highlights the poverty in the desired way.
The report will be accurate in saying that something like 47 million people are in trouble. That’s why people are using the epithet “Food Stamp President”. I wonder if the BBC will mention that? We are definitely in trouble now, yes. But what is the BBC’s goal here? Find out for yourselves tonight. I won’t be watching.
I am disgusted that it has taken the BBC almost a month to reply to my complaint, and given that on the article it states last updated 6th February, I also find the fact that article in question was updated what would be a good 20 days at least after the article was written very bemusing. This is considering that 20 days later, the story is potentially ‘old news’ and in any case it highly unlikely to feature prominently on any of the main news sections within the site, meaning these updates you speak would be missed by most people. And if the updates in question were the ones that took place on 6th February, how on earth did it take so long to get hold of this information?
Cheers,
James
> Subject: RE: Complaint Reply Required
> Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:21:09 +0000
> From: newsonline.complaints@bbc.co.uk
> To: xxxxx
>
> Dear Mr Gowland, thank you for your email.
>
> This report was updated as information became available and does now include The Guardian and The Mirror.
>
> Thank you for contacting the BBC and our apologies for the delay in replying to your email.
>
> Kind regards,
> BBC News website team.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/handle.shtml
>
> —–Original Message—–
> From: xxxxx> Sent: 16 January 2012 18:23
> To: NewsOnline Complaints
> Subject: Complaint Reply Required
>
>
>
> {Title:} Mr
>
> {First Name:} James
>
> {Last Name:} Gowland
>
> {Under 13:} No
>
> {Email:} xxxxx
>
> {Postcode:} NE12
>
> {Location:} England
>
> {Feedback Type:} I would like to… Make a complaint
>
> {Complaint type:} BBC News (TV Radio Online)
>
> {Complaint about:} BBC News Online
>
> {Complaint category:} Not enough coverage
>
> {Contacted before:} No
>
> {Contacted again reason:}
>
> {Reference case number:}
>
> {Complaint title:} MISSED OUT GUARDIAN AND MIRROR
>
> {Complaint:} The listed article which includes ‘editors views’ on the phone
> hacking enquiry two leading newspapers are missing, they are The Guardian
> and The Mirror. Why have the two leading left wing newspapers been left out
> of it.
>
> Also, with The Guardian, they have lied, accusing the Murdoch papers of all
> sort of things in relation to phone hacking, most of which have been turned
> to be untrue, this has been barely mentioned by the BBC who have instead
> focused on Murdoch, orchestrating a huge which hunt against him. This latest
> article comes of no surprise to me , considering your phone hacking
> coverage has been awful to date.
>
> {URL:} http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16535724
>
> {Reply:} Yes
>
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/
> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
> If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
> Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
> Further communication will signify your consent to this.
>
Is the BBC claiming that they didn’t know about the information concerning the Guardian and the Mirror’s until later? And you’re expected to believe that?
‘I also find the fact that article in question was updated what would be a good 20 days at least after the article was written very bemusing.’
Updated as the story evolved.
Not, in any way, a stealth edit.
Believe it or… no.. jkust believe it.
I accept that stories are updated as they evolve. That’s as it should be, as it would be silly to make a new piece very few hours. In this case, I’m not even asking about whether or not the edits are noted. But I am curious if whether James’ correspondent is claiming that the BBC had no idea about the charges against their fellow travelers until after publishing their news brief. I find that incredibly hard to believe.
Fair points, but I stumble here.. ‘I’m not even asking about whether or not the edits are noted’.
Because of the precedent set. Coming out with what is at best inept inaccuracy, or worse deliberate misinformation at the time, and then quietly tidying up later on is not something I feel should easily be excused.
I certainly don’t, and won’t.
That is a licence to say whatever you feel like, whenever you feel like it, as it can all be sorted in post with a blank sheet on accountability if someone awake actually notices.
UPDATE:
With regards to your latest response I have two further queries. 1. was the updated article made prominent on any of the main pages within the news site? If not then like I said before very people would see it, making the updates pointless. 2. Considering information for pretty much all the main British newspapers except for the Mirror and the Guardian were included in the original article, why did it take a further 20 days or so to obtain and write up details for the Mirror and the Guardian? The fact that it should take so long to get hold of and post the extra information into the article, is something I consider shocking!
Cheers,
James M. Gowland
Subject: FW: Complaint Reply Required
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:47:06 +0000
From: newsonline.complaints@bbc.co.uk
To: xxxxx
Dear Mr Gowland, thank you for your email.
We are sorry about the delay in responding to your email but the volume of correspondence we receive is high and the number of people available to deal with this is limited. We do our best in the circumstances.
The report you refer to is an on-going piece of background and analysis so it is not surprising that it should be updated some weeks after it was first published. We do not regard it as ‘old news’ but rather a relevant piece of background material to be linked to whenever appropriate.
Thanks again for contacting the BBC,
Kind regards, BBC News website team
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/handle-complaint/
‘the volume of correspondence we receive is high’
Wild guesses at the reason?
‘and the number of people available to deal with this is limited.’
So… not trying seems the best option?
‘We do our best in the circumstances.‘
Luckily, the rewards for failure at the BBC are maintained year oin year.
What was provided was no answer.
Next time the BBC News Channel talks about “swinging cuts”, can we complain that this is a “value judgment”?
A question for the BBC:
If any country or organization or “coalition” – e.g. the UN, NATO, the Arab League – take military action against Syria, how is that any less illegal than removing Sadaam Hussein from power?
This is an open book quiz, but please show your work.
The first words on The World at One after the news headlines were “Gotcha”, referring back to the Belgrano headline that clearly still gets under the BBC’s skin, and pretty much showing the BBC’s agenda. Although no doubt Dez will pop up and explain that they are in fact no way showing any enjoyment at The Sun’s troubles and were just reporting what, in their hallowed formula, “critics” are thinking.
A follow-up question for the BBC:
After watching the speechifying in the UN about how Assad’s government is losing its legitmacy and should end because of the current human rights violations, does this mean the Jewish Lobby controls the UN now?
ABU QATADA.
INBBC continues to censor out all references to ISLAM, and to him being a MUSLIM.
a.) ‘Daily Mail’
“Qatada’s release ‘imminent’ as Downing Street says it is ‘considering all options’ to remove him at earliest opportunity.
Round-the-clock protection for extremist’s family.
Son, 18, delivers hate sermon outside Belmarsh prison .”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2100070/Muslim-hate-preacher-Abu-Qatada-Security-operation-costing-10-000-week.html#ixzz1mHSj48fq
b.) Islam Not BBC (INBBC) report:
“Abu Qatada to be released from Long Lartin jail”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-17012448
Or round to Shami’s place for B&B
Given the name Chakrabarti denotes Brahmin caste, it would probably end in GBH – & A&E for wee Shami.
Mardell’s “drumbeat of an unwanted war continues, as Kevin Kingston (?) reports from the Middle East that Israeli diplomats have been attacked in a couple of countries. This, of course, gives the Beeboid correspondent an opportunity to fret about how Israel views Iran as its “most potent enemy”, and about how Israel will might now drag us all into war.
Who started this again, BBC? Which country is constantly calling for the other’s destruction, BBC? Which country are you blaming, BBC?
‘Mardell’s “drumbeat of an unwanted war continues’
I asked which wars were wanted, other than by a bunch of folk history, and karma, has seldom been kind to.
No answer.
When is the media actually going to report on the current trial in Liverpool Crown Court of 47 Muslim men alleged to have groomed and raped under age girls. I wonder because I know dam well if the group of men were white or Christian ( just look at the savaging of the Catholic Church by sections of the media) and the victims were under age Muslim girls, all Hell would be let loose.
This case should be publicised as there may be reasons unique to the way these men interpret their religion that allows them to behave so appallingly, allegedly.
It is the constant double standards set by the Authorities and the Media when it comes to Race or Religion that really gets my goat and a lot of others I suspect.
Tricky this. No doubt a public hullabaloo would have the defence screaming ” no possibility of a fair trial” and the cases could collapse. The time to watch out for non reporting is after the verdicts.
You may be right but my point was IF the defendants were White or Christian or both or basically not Muslim, there wouldn’t be a news blackout. If they are found guilty then the Muslim community will need to have an open debate on how a lot of Islams followers interpret the Koran here in the West.
As for a fair trial, what about the Stephen Lawrence media coverage? back to my point about double standards. I must point out I have no sympathy with the two men found guilty of his murder just that a media frenzy was ok in that case but not this one.
White is the new black?
If white Chritian men had raped just one muslim girl let alone hundreds in a systematic exploitative attack on a racial group the uproar by the MSM would be heard around the world. The BBC would have the story on the front page 24/7.
’47’ is a mistake, right?
There is a culture clash going on here, an attitude towards woman that is not only out of place in modern society, but by targeting white girls, it becomes racial – a way of undermining the home mores.
Too often this is brushed under the carpet, thus effectively normalising such behaviour.
Yes, because this is a country that doesn’t appear to care about its young girls or women who pay the price for its promotion of immigration and worship of multcult baloney. What sort of a country is it that allows this to be swept under the carpet while it turns a blind eye for the most part?
Nasty case of a couple from ‘Eccles in Lancashire’ having trafficked and abused a disabled youngster from Pakistan.
The Beeb report shows us their mindset. Apparently the UK Borderforce ‘will have questions to answer’.
Peter Allen and Aasmah Mir on BBC 5 Live at your service, Britain.
You’ve got to love my mate Sheena. There he sits on BBC 1 news and tells us that the Tories have double standards because THEY (nasty Tories) think that not having respect for the law is a sign of radicalism and that if we don’t obey the EU court we’re no better than they are.
Well Sheena, the TOP court in Britain has ruled this bushy bearded shit CAN be booted out and that is good enough for me.
BBC bias in action again over Greece, austerity, austerity, austerity. Sound familiar?
But perhaps the BBC might like to explain to people that the purpose of the Euro is to keep German exports cheap, so long as German car workers are doing nicely does anyone in Greece think Merkel gives a shit about them?
Of course the EU twats don’t want Greece to bail out of the Euro, if Greece goes, then Spain, Portugal, Ireland and even Italy might be next and Germany might end up with just France and a few other of its political ‘bitches’ as friends.
Newsnight has decided to have a quick check back on Eygypt and see if like, all is going per plan for.. the ladyees. Bless.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2012/02/monday_13_february_2012.html
Most pleasing!
1. Affirmative action quotas for those Kabul Higher echelons then?…will Harriet Harman kindky go and check for us all.
2. Imagine Jeremy Bowen is already showing them how to light that Kandahar Nail Bar just so, so we can get a better picture than the Kabul one a few years ago…did Cherie Blair ever come back for the 30% off your next visit offer I ask myself?
3. No mileage in pointing out the “second hand” shops with nails pulled out then I suppose…the Taliban are feeling vulnerable enough as it is, in the world of Orla and Jezza no doubt!
Since when was the so called Arab Spring done for women? It’s about putting bushy beared men in charge of these Countries.
You’d think the BBC might have noticed the plan to ban the wearing of bikini’s on tourist beaches, not exactly the sign of liberalism is it?
I have deja vu again over Greece. BBC reports don’t move on either do they?
Austerity austerity austerity and Daddy Mason wetting his pants over ‘such viscerally felt anger’ on the streets.
June 2011
You have to hand it to Paxo, that was a nice slap down.
‘Oh come on Paul, it was hardly the entire population of Athens on the streets…’
very interesting comments from Trevor Kavanagh about the ongoing Stalinist purges of what remains of Britain’s Right Wing press.
listen after 4:50, very interesting, I wish some journalist/interviewer would pick up on it. along the lines of “the destruction of NI is the objective of our competition and enemies in other newspapers and political parties…”
No sympathy, this blog has been pointing that out for YEARS, the BBC and the Guardian along with the Liebore party have been plotting, the only reason they didn’t more before was they had the support of Murdoch for 13 years.
‘listen after 4:50′
I have little time for Mr. Boulton, who is a cheerleader for the ‘some might say’ style of alluding to a point no one else has made bar himand a few like-minded ‘above it all’ anchors, a role for which he is admirably suited in the nautical sense as he is like a rock in his belief that he is the font of all wisdom.
For the life of me I cannot grasp how the broadcast pond dwellers of the media estate think themslves in any way different to those in the press.
Supplementary:
“Trevor Kavanagh: ‘Police have treated Sun journalists like suspected terrorists.’
“Trevor Kavanagh, The Sun’s associate editor, has accused police of treating journalists like suspected terrorists after five of his colleagues at the newspaper were arrested. ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9078537/Trevor-Kavanagh-Police-have-treated-Sun-journalists-like-suspected-terrorists.html
“We are all journalists now”
(by Nick Cohen)
http://www.spectator.co.uk/nickcohen/7647868/we-are-all-journalists-now.thtml
Remember the outrage by the BBC when that Guardian Journalist was arrested?
Amelia Hill? Try googling her name and plenty of stories about her come up, she’s got a thing about coppers it appears. Now there’s a coincidence.
Interesting spin on Poor America -Panorama. Started by laying out Obama’s election promises on tackling unemployment, the programme narrative is tha because he lost control of the house of representatives it’s the republicans fault…
Who could have imagined?
Just seen an advert on ITV for a new panel debate show, to be hosted by Tom Bradby, called ‘The Agenda‘. There were very few details as to the format, but the link claims it will be broadcast in a weeknight slot some time in the spring. Unfortunately, it will only be a half hour programme, but perhaps if it takes off it will be lengthened to an hour. Here’s hoping that it becomes a more balanced rival to the BBC’s Question Time, to give it some real competition. I’m sure Tom Bradby will make a better, more engaging host than Dimbleby, and hopefully ITV will be less likely to stuff the panel and audience(if there is to be one) with the usual suspects. I’d certainly welcome that!
Here’s to hoping, anyway.
I’ve always been quite impressed by Tom Bradby.
It would be fun to have an alternatve to QT which merely frustrates. Fortunately the craich on the live bBBC forum makes it entertaining.
If “down market” ITV can produce an intelligent discussion programme, this will undermine the BBC’s justification for the BBC Tax quite nicely.
Agree about Tom Bradby. His blog is quite good but not updated very often.
Is it my imagination or is the British TV media cheerleading for us to start a war with Syria? The BBC and Sky seem obsessed with this Muslim shit hole.
Seems like it. Liberal lefties like starting wars these days provided they make them feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Mind you it has to be the right sort of war, one that spreads peace and democracy to countries that don’t have a clue what that means and really don’t care. Not the sort of nasty old fashioned war like the Falklands. That would never do.
And as for a war in our national interest that would be anathema. Too grubby for a high minded liberal.Certainly never a war in defence of their homes and way of life. They would rather live as slaves than compromise their so sincerely held principles.
‘Mind you it has to be the right sort of war’
The very idea.
I’ll give ’em credit for being quick, though noting their defensive stances seem unidirectional…
Thanks for contacting us regarding the BBC News Channel programme ‘Dateline London’ which was broadcast on 11 February.
You are welcome.
We understand you were unhappy with the selected panel as you felt their views on certain subjects were too similar.
Not just me, I suspect, but yes.
We make no editorial comment or judgement on the views expressed by contributors to our programmes, and our aim is simply to provide enough information for viewers to make up their own minds.
You make no comment, yet your editorial judgement is absolute in inviting the panellists whose views, or as you call it ‘information’ is all UK viewers are presented to… ‘make up their own minds’.
This may include hearing opinions which some people may personally disagree with but which individuals may be fully entitled to hold in the context of legitimate debate.
‘May include opinions’… fair enough. Exclusively being served only one set… not so much. You have, I note, not answered my specific question in this regard.
It is also not always possible or practical to reflect all the different opinions on this subject within individual programmes. Editors are charged to ensure that over a reasonable period they reflect the range of significant views, opinions and trends in their subject area.
I wonder, with the daily sample of editorial choices in invitation made, how many times do your researchers, editors and producers coincidentally reach for their iPhones and accidentally bring on a full set of commenters from more conservative papers (and conservative commenters from them… a Riddell, Chivers or Lean from the Telegraph doesn’t count, and one is unaware of any equivalent ‘balance’ within the ranks of such as the Guardian or, for that matter, the totality of the BBC ranks)?
I’d suggest… not so much. In fact, it would be interesting to put to the test the so-called ‘balance’ of panels, vox pop quotes, audiences, etc, on top of how these are edited, to reflect not just the range of significant views opinions and trends in their subject areas, but for a change to reflect the views and interest of the UK public.
There is a good measure of this… ABC ratings. Such as The Indy or New Statesman are not at first blush what springs to mind as dominant in reflecting the UK audience, at least to the level brought on. Overseas correspondents are trickier, but again why does one suspect that the ‘balance’ of political hue ‘invited’ on is more than a tad skewed most of the time? To get a bunch of folk all agreed the UK defence of the Falklands is not welcome is… ‘interesting’ even in terms of the totality of world opinion, despite, or maybe complemented by the inclusion of an Independent journalist to ‘represent’ the UK.
Plus a British panel chairman more keen to facilitate than challenge tribal prejudices in at least presenting a small aspect of the counter-argument. Joking about standing up for a few penguins sounded more like a LSE student uni ‘debate’ after the hall bar has closed for the night. A few decades ago Argentina invaded, and many died in removing the occupying force. Their news President is rattling nationalistic sabres to distract from domestic problems. Not a joking matter. And not for the BBC to be assisting with subtle propaganda rigging panel discussions. If you can’t do it properly… don’t do it.
Nevertheless as we’re guided by the feedback we receive I’ve registered your complaint on our audience log. This is a daily report of audience feedback that’s made available to all BBC staff, including members of the BBC Executive Board, the production team for ‘Dateline London’ and other senior managers.
And as such, is totally useless, a waste of time and cynical in its cynical trotting out.
The audience logs are seen as important documents that can help shape decisions about future programming and content.
They could… but clearly are not really intended to, don’t and won’t.
I no longer believe they are anything other than a sop to try and close a file.
Not good enough.
I now require information on how to escalate my complaint to the next of what I am sure is many equally pointless levels.
A shame it has to be this way, but the BBC has brought this upon itself by not taking legitimate concern with its bias seriously.
NB This is sent from an outgoing account only which is not monitored. You cannot reply to this email address but if necessary please contact us via our webform quoting any case number we provided.
As always, I here register my protest at this risible extra hurdle, introduced solely to make a convoluted system even more difficult for licence fee payers to engage with to articulate reasonable concerns when all that happens they get filed in a log none of you have the slightest intention of reading much less appreciating.
I also, as you seem to feel it is not germane, here I add the actual complaint… ‘for your log that is made available to staff… not that they are required to read it’. But you never know, eh?
Full Complaint: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01c9w6c/Dateline_London_11_02_2012/?t=22m20s The BBC, we are told, is here to reflect a variety of views on issues. It is also, we hope, here to ensure the balance of those are in keeping with the majority views of the UK viewers compelled to pay the licence fee. I would therefore be keen for an explanation for the reasoning behind the composition of a panel that seems united in a view, for example, on the Falklands almost totally at odds with the British public, supported by the BBC ‘chair’. What are the political affiliations of Steve Richards, chief political correspondent of the “Independent”, Saul Zadka of Al London, Nabila Ramdani of The Guardian and Michael Goldfarb ofGlobal Post? Rigging discussions in this manner does your reputation for pushing skewed agendas no credit.
ps: Try to sort out the 502 bad gateway dropouts. This system is bad enough without introducing stupid technical hurdles.
pps: Re: Is your complaint addressed by the following BBC response? Will the BBC be providing programming to celebrate the London 2012 Festival and Cultural Olympiad? (opens a pop-up window) – No. And I doubt out of all the egregious other examples across your output, many are that concerned about this either.
Please be assured that your responses are well noted and made available to those who may benefit from understanding how the BBC treats input and concerns on matters of balance and treats complaints with a view to genuinely improving the service to those who are compelled to fund it in a Charter obligation to educate and inform… impartially.
Oh and, of course, several attempts at re-complaining, refilling in the same information, before being rejected at the end on a 502 Bad Gateway Error basis.
Trying it on much, Aunty?
“Editors are charged to ensure that over a reasonable period they reflect the range of significant views, opinions and trends in their subject area.”
I’d be interested to know what constitutes a reasonable period and what the statistics are for that period. I’d lay you a pound to a penny there aren’t any.
‘I’d lay you a pound to a penny there aren’t any’
Me too. When… if… (they seem ‘sensitive’ to this one, hence my quick response) they get back I will throw that back at them, though conceding that ‘questions won’t be answered’.
This is classic ‘Beware of the Leopard stuff and needs to be challenged.
Also, since when are we now ‘averaging’ out ‘views and opinions’ over a period, not that I think Craig couldn’t demolish that claim in a hearbeat, as if it actually resolves anything?
So let me get this straight… the BBC can invite on Josef, Adolf, Herman and Henirich to discuss Balls to their hearts’ content on air… so long as, at a later stage, when another auidicne may be watching… they wheel out Stalin to chip a few cheery thoughts of his own? And the BBC simply then claims they ‘get it about.. centred’.
I call BS… big time.
To quote the incomparable Peter Simple:
“How can we be said to be biased?”she laughed infectiously. “All shades of progressive opinion are represented!”
Any host on a discussion programme will take the basic precaution of checking on a participants views. To suggest they were just random, and just “happened” to support ine side, is to insult our intelligence.
The B.B.C.: “bias is in our DNA”.
That’s why I hate it.
and the irony of it is, they all hate our bloody guts anyway
‘If Mr Diamond was awarded more than £2m yesterday by Barclays’ board – which is presumably what happened – we don’t know whether he will follow Mr Hester’s example by refusing it, or whether he will give it to charity or whether he will simply keep it.’
– http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16980020
Couple of points:
A. Barclays is a wholly private company who didn’t receive a bailout. What they pay their chief executive is nobody else’s business.
B. Perhaps Mr Peston should lead by example, and donate his ample wages to charity before he starts suggesting other people should consider doing the same.
Jeff
Somewhere, a Beeboid’s head just exploded:
The Decline of Violence
Neuroscientist Steven Pinker on the triumph of peace and prosperity over death and destruction
This is a heretical idea coming out of, of all places, Scandinavia. There are war nerds who run regressions trying to predict what leads to escalation, military tensions, or de-escalation. There was a lot of statistical support for an idea called the Democratic Peace. The extreme form is that no two democracies have ever waged war on one another. There’s a new movement to try to argue it’s actually the capitalism, more than the democracy, that’s doing the work in this correlation. And there seem to be data that capitalist countries are less likely to go to war with each other. They’re less likely to go to war, period, including against noncapitalist countries, [and are] less likely to have civil wars, and less likely to have genocides.
Brilliant! If only we’d known this before – all those occupy people could have stayed at home.
Capitalism = peace and prosperity . =-O No worries. 🙂
I fully expect coverage on Newsnight soon. 😉
WWI Germany and UK and USA (and others on both sides) capitalist. So much for that theory. You could also argue that Nazi Germany was still a democracy when it made war.
Germany under the Kaiser was not a modern capitalist nation. So this new theory doesn’t apply. And the Nazis were Socialists, FFS! How many times do we need to repeat that?
Germany under the Kaiser was hardly a democracy, although it was arguably capitalist. Nazi Germany was certainly not democratic from the burning of the Reichstag onwards.
‘Somewhere, a Beeboid’s head just exploded’
On the plus side, there will be little to no mess. Though possibly a few more GHGs released.
Found myself on a BBC link asking me to vote for the new Elizabethans…heros of the era ranging from 1952 to today.
I nominated HEATHER BROOKE as mine…but Christopher Booker, Nigel Farage, Enoch Powell and Peter Hitchens would make the list.
Wonder if we can get one of our people nominated….otherwise we`ll end up with bleeding David Attenborough or Stephen Lawrence(with due respect!
I second the Heather Brooke nomination!
I’d give her a permanent statue on the fourth plinth!
(the freedom of information campaigner – not *ahem* the other one)
my apologies i appear, to have posted on the last reply my error.
I note that unelected unqualified S Warsi is at it again, opening her mouth and putting both feet firmly in, religion is under attack??? ….. ahem i think we are, by one in particular 😀
dame nikki is all excited, its the subject on his your call 5live.
lots of talk of militant secularists, militant athiests, shoehorning a christian (always militant ???), all waxing on (and on).
there seems to be a missing component 😀 …..
one particular erm, faith that would benefit most from this type of bulls-it, that warsi seems to court so vociferously ala the OIC etc.
any idea which one?
ahem … doesn t appear that BBC5live has any idea… wink wink
intolerance – militant etc …. a clue anyone? … I word – M word.
The “delete” option under the first post is your friend there. You can make a stealth edit and pretend it never happened.
As is done in the most unique circles.
re.
yep! … just as i thought, the enormous bearded burkha d “elephant in the room” never got a mention :-D.
hilarious, our unqualified, unelected muslim cabinet chairman, can talk intolerance, militant, ideology totalitarianism no less, in regard to atheism, secularism etc, oh yes … she says jump, the BBC says how high, so follows, an hour of secula v christian, atheist v christian
christian v christian…..
er… where? are the questions to the genuinely militant, intolerant, totalitarian, supremacist, ideology that pretends to be religion …
that has forced so many into a more so called militant position?
warsi … she must just love it,
the old bbc/warsi,(crosses fingers) like that they are” 😀
‘the enormous bearded burkha d “elephant in the room” never got a mention’
Again, thanks to SKY, I just learned that the EU court ‘didn’t know’ that last year Lebanon had outlawed tirture and confessions/tesimony so acquired.
But even so, they still won’t ‘trust’ Lebanon anyway.
What intrigues me is this is the same EU that seems to find Israel pretty much beyond the pale on all things in comparison to such bastions of EU-PC derring-do, yet even Rumpy-Pumpy might struggle on accusations of the dodgy jail practice stuff around that country.
However, one of the poster kids for their ME nroatherhood of love.. they don’t trust with simple justice.
Can’t quite connect those dots.
Dame Nicky does a reprise of his The Big Question debate for the radio this morning. Such diversity of opinion.
Same Beeboid ringmaster, same approved commentators: Rev Rose the Jamaican-born vicar of Westminster and Dibley; and limp dem and Guardianista Evan Harris MP – oh but look, he lost his seat at the last election to a Tory.
All water under the bridge I’m sure. Harries was supported by Beeboid Stephen Fry and the Oxford secularists – but lost.
Useless discussion but one interesting moment.
A caller agreed that Christianity was under attack and referred to BBC Thought for the Day contributors promoting other religions and their own political views.
Under orders or as a well-trained Beeboid Nicky was having none of it and hurriedly moved on. ‘Lets talk about issues in the world outside of the BBC’.
Don’t go there, licence payers.
Universal Giles Fraser popped up again on the Today programme, debating with Richard Dawkins whether the UK is Christian. Is he on appearance bonuses?
In truth, I have to admit he caught Mr Dawkins a beauty. The exchange went something like this (I paraphrase):
RD: Most people who say they’re Christian don’t know the first book of the Bible
GF: You’re the High Priest of Darwinism. Could you tell me the full title of “Origin of Species”?
RD: Of course.
GF: Go on then.
RD: On the Origin of Species and… er… er… um…. Oh God… something something
Priceless!
Hilarious! Who’d a thought it? That he’d get Dawkins like that!
I note from the survey that went out in his name that onlt 23% of people asked thought the Bible to be the perfect morality template on how to live today.
Dawkins is therefore correct….we`re none of us Christians, unless we too want the Midianites circumcised before we butcher them!
Let no-one say that Dawkins searing intellect and statistical validity does`nt riddle all manner of theology and ethical living.
The great Martin Seymour Smith referred to Richard as “the Archdunce Dawkins” , and not fit to wash the spats of the great EO Wilson, who he slavishly trailed for way too long.
Dawkins holed before the waterline, but Justin and John were offering poultices and liferafts as best they could…poot Webb seemed winded.
Fraser might be an idiot-but on this show, at least he`s our idiot for the moment!
Whilst we`re on the topic!
Dawkins sees fit to determine whether someone who states that they`re Christian actually is…him being disinterested an` all.
Now that Qatada is out today-maybe Dawkins might want to slip a survey round to his gaff( no email or telecanvassing Dickie ol` boy!) in order to see if Qatada IS actually a real Muslim and not one of those lazy box-tickers.
Maybe Dawkins could drop the Womans Realm techniques for this survey though…and place (Abu and chums) on what seems to be the Atta-Zarqawi Scale of Islamic Attitudes.
Worth a punt Dickie…global warming grants etc seem to be drying up a bit these days I`d imagine!
Hey ho! The rating agencies are at it again. And the BBC slavishly reports their ‘findings’ with unquestioning, religious zeal. Who are these people? They gave major banks Triple-A ratings just before they collapsed. Obama and Cameron do nothing to attack these charlatons. They are bringing down governments and I belive playing an not so subtle role in the drive for world government. Greece and Italy have already lost their democratically elected governments, thanks to these people. And what about their ratings system? Their financial anaysis is so sophisticated, but their ABC rating system would embarass the average primary school teacher. Financial systems are all about confidence – so who invented ‘junk’ as a way of describing a country’s financial status. The BBC have form here too – they caused Northern Rock to collapse with those oh so helpful pictures of long queues. It’s about time Mervyn King really trashed these ratings agencies – I mean, where were they ten years ago? Now they’re ruling the world – and doesn’t the BBC just love it.
‘the BBC slavishly reports their ‘findings’ with unquestioning, religious zeal.’
Quelle surprise, as Paul Mason might demand we say.
Now, I have on occasion been a bit rude about the bottle blondes at SKY, but today’s did her bit to correct my low estimation.
Alistair Darling was (waffling) on, and while I am sure he had a BBC moppet firmly attached out of shot keeping the smile on his face whilst trotting out the usual chez Aunty, this lady was having none of it.
She even pretty much accused him (albeit to the ‘expert’ on next) of not knowing what the hell he was on about.
Which I rather had gathered myself, but bice to see at least some media with cojones and an ability to tell it straight..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9080473/Sean-Penn-accuses-Britain-of-colonialism-over-Falklands.html
Ladies.. fire up your iPhones! Am guessing our Sean is on a plane to Newsnight as we speak.
I’m not an expert in this sort of thing but I looked up several definitions of “colonialism”. Most of the definitions refer to some form of unequal relationship between coloniser and indigenous or existing population. Since the Falklands never had an indigenous population and Argentinian claims to have occupied the place at all seem extremely tenuous, it seems to me that British colonialism is not the issue at all.
I’m sure that people who’ve spent their working lives studying this sort of thing could run rings round my analysis, but I don’t particularly care. It seems to me that the Falklands are a case of British settlement, not colonialism, and Cameron was right to state that it’s the Argentinian ambitions for the islands which are colonial.
Unfortunately, for Hollywood attention seekers and the BBC, “settlement” doesn’t have the same ring to it.
“Scotland Yard Stasi and this sinister assault on a free Press”
By Richard Littlejohn
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2100664/Scotland-Yard-Stasi-sinister-assault-free-Press.html#ixzz1mM23vOCQ
(Are Beeboids saying: ‘and what was wrong with the Stasi’?)
A journalistic lesson for Beeboids? –
‘Daily Mail’:
“Only a free Press can root out corruption “
[Extract]:
“Thanks to a dogged 11-year-long investigation by this paper, bent police chief Ali Dizaei is today back where he belongs – behind bars.
His re-conviction, for framing an innocent man over a private dispute, highlights yet again the vital role of a free Press in cleansing public life of corruption.
For if it hadn’t been for the persistence of the Mail’s crime team, Dizaei would never have been brought to justice by an abject Scotland Yard, cowed by his accusations of racism.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2100724/Only-free-Press-root-corruption.html#ixzz1mM3hTECn
Liking the ‘most liked’ trend here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17025472
I do, however, predict a closing if it is maintained.
I think this guy best resign himself to oblivion, mind, if a bit too ‘perky’ in the critique.
9. steve-one
This comment has been referred for further consideration
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17022631
Ditto.
Ali Desai?…didn`t hear too much about him being convicted yet again did we?
What with Qatada being bounced around the legal and penal systems, I do wonder whether this hokey-cokey method of imprisoning people applies only to Muslims.
Probably a disorientating method of scrambling brains, so imagine Gareth Peirce will be suing…human rights and the right to a stable and consistent environment or something.
Still-Islamic bungee jumping in and out of Wansworth …could catch on, and we might win an Olympic medal for it…as long as it`s added to Irans tally and not ours!
Christ-what a broken backed joks of a country we now are…and maybe that`s the BBCs very intention…to tell the Pakistanis and Taliban that we`re no longer worth the Semtex…but feel free to offer us ricin recipes as they wish.
Off topic:
For anyone who would enjoy a lighthearted interlude and a break from the Beeboids, the Google animation for St Valentine’s Day is a treat. Intrigued by the use of the Hank Williams song but not recognising the singer, I did a search and found the animation has attracted a lot of attention, with numerous articles online. Here’re two for a sample:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/comic-riffs/post/valentines-day-google-doodle-todays-charming-musical-animation-makes-for-one-sweet-gift/2012/02/13/gIQA15kOCR_blog.html?tid=pm_entertainment_pop
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2152208/Valentines-Day-2012-Google-Doodle-Animates-Tony-Bennetts-Cold-Cold-Heart
Forgot the Google link:
http://www.google.co.uk/
EGYPT.
INBBC, inc ‘Newsnight’ has just worked out that its Muslim Brotherhood (MB) is committed, by its Islamic ideology, to the enforcement of the subservience of women.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/9695850.stm
Will INBBC and ‘Newsnight’ now catch up with the fact that the global MB is committed to Sharia law and jihad, not only in Egypt but globally? Of course, if Beeboids kept themselves informed by referring to sites like the following, they would be on the MB case:
‘global Muslim Brotherhood report’;
http://globalmbreport.org/
‘jihadwatch’:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/br0nc0s/managed-mt/mt-search.cgi?search=muslim+brotherhood+egypt&IncludeBlogs=1&limit=20
You know something-for once in my life, Dawkins might be onto something!
If the country IS as thick about Christianity as his survey suggests, then he will agree that we need FAR more faith schools, MUCH more rigorous theology, divinity etc taught (without opt-out) in our schools, and Sundays (and Saturdays) to be given over to Judaism and Christianity.
The High Pope of Pulchritude has gone up in my estimation
Survey is here I`m hoping!
http://c3414097.r97.cf0.rackcdn.com/IpsosMORI_RDFRS-UK_Survey_Topline_14-02-2012.pdf
According to my twitter sources, the Question Time line up for Thursday is as follows: Ken Clarke (vomit), Susan Kramer (double vomit), John Prescott (treble vomit), Owen Jones (continuously vomiting for several hours at the thought of him), and Julie Meyer (who is apparently right wing so might be okay). This has to be the worst Question Time line up for a long while me thinks!
‘John Prescott (treble vomit)’ – I believe in his case, it is a ‘condition’.
Apropos of nothing at all, some news sources are currently quite excited about the memoirs of some young staffer JFK seduced, deflowered and had on tap for a fair old while in what might be considered an abuse of executive power.
I wonder if rogering the secretary might crop up as a Q in QT for, say, an aspiring Police Commisioner?
Or will it be more ‘John will be John’ level?
More about that JFK memoir.
Quite a scumbag, really. Amazing what abuses a lefty can get away with when the media are so in love that they just refuse to examine their idol too closely in case they shatter the image they have created for themselves.
Watch for Owen Shoutie’s usual MO of inventing as he goes along ‘statistics’ which ‘prove’ his point.
Or better still – don’t watch.
As Police Commissioner for Humberside, Prescott will be able too make sure all the Police cars are Jags, and then cross the Humber Bridge every day in an escort made up of a fleet of Jags as he travels between the Cake and Pie shops of dull Hull, grim Grimsby, ghoulish Goole and scummy Scunthorpe.
There’s an old joke about T in Typhoo, at least we will now know who it is in Scunthorpe.