Monday morning and best to start the week with a brand new shiny open thread! The floor is yours, as ever, let’s be hearing from you!
OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- tomo April 24, 2024 at 11:41 am on Midweek 24th April 2024https://twitter.com/AndyMeanie/status/1783076463022833975
- tomo April 24, 2024 at 11:32 am on Midweek 24th April 2024"The Ladybird Book of WMDs" https://twitter.com/iainpdooley/status/1783073007306416452 https://twitter.com/somersetlevel/status/178306678955...
- Fedup2 April 24, 2024 at 11:12 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Rob - good to see the broken carrier is in rosyth having the same fix that the other one had...
- Thoughtful April 24, 2024 at 10:53 am on Midweek 24th April 2024We do not have aircraft carriers (plural) because one of them is so badly built it's unseaworthy ! The worst...
- The Mouse April 24, 2024 at 10:41 am on Midweek 24th April 2024I just wanted to add my few words to what has been said about Lord Frank Field. Frank Field "In...
- Rob in Cheshire April 24, 2024 at 10:23 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Fed: Change the record. We now have 617 Squadron and 809 NAS. It has taken too long, I agree, but...
- Rob in Cheshire April 24, 2024 at 10:18 am on Midweek 24th April 2024At the time of St George, the Turks were busy looting and pillaging in Central Asia. They did not invade...
- Rob in Cheshire April 24, 2024 at 10:14 am on Midweek 24th April 2024I must give kudos to Dewbs. Letts just gave the impression of being a complacent tubby little squish. The level...
- Thatcherrevolutionary April 24, 2024 at 10:13 am on Midweek 24th April 2024So cloud seeding resulted in flooding in Dubai. So why not do this in Central Africa and end world hunger?...
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
Rhetorical question du jour…
Why, when media trot out unemployed youth with such as Masters Degrees, the actual discipline is invariably left unclarified?
Especially when said youth seems very coherent on why Government policy is a failure, and untroubled in interview as to specifics as to why they cannot find ‘anything’.
My wife’s firm is replacing her in an administrative position that requires the basics and will involve training atop of some sensible office skills and common sense.
Not great pay, but a stepping stone. So far, despite ads and posting at the JobCentre, they have had two ‘mature’ ladies… not a young person in sight.
Because studying for a degree can make it psychologically impossible to do a normal day’s work unless you keep your feet firmly on the ground.
In reality many develop a case of narcissitic entiltlement disorder.
A mere clerical job is beneath their dignity. So they drift into a moral, spineless apathy punctuated by conspiracy theories as to why their genius is unrecognised….and vote for the left.
They are failures who seek to blame everyone but themselves.
Take a boring job., nah!…they only get out of bed for 40k (in their subconcious).
Well my offspring after earning a 2:1, against my advise of taking a year out to lay on a beach surrounded by near naked females deceided to work in a car showroom 80 hours plus per week. That was 5 years ago, his earnings are OK , for a single guy living at home, but work ethic he’s got.
Absolutely wonderful term, ‘narcissitic entitlement disorder’ can i use that? What a superb put down to some sneering, moaning kid with a plastic degree! The main subjects at degree level should be science, medicine, engineering etc…… NOT law, english, and arty farty crap. The Uni’s have duped a whole generation of youth with offering useless degrees just to boost their funds, it’s a national scandal.
It’s the same in the US.
‘course, it’s not under copyright.
Thanks for the compliment.
“Absolutely wonderful term, ‘narcissitic entitlement disorder’”
Robert, my thoughts exactly…a NED.
RGH, thanks.
And to keep the unemployment figures down.
When 40% are encouraged into higher eduction (when previously it was 5-10%), taking on debt, with the ‘promise’ of a better life and job prospects, it’s a little bit harsh to paint them as being over-ambitious or narcissistic.
When most jobs don’t require a degree, only some basic education, common sense and a willingness to learn, it will soon become apparent that they have been sold a pup, particularly against the economic backdrop.
This lack of opportunity, of course, isn’t exclusive to the young, which is why you’ll be getting mature applicants for junior roles and turning your nose up at them, wondering what’s wrong with them.
It’s all a bit of a mess.
This morning the BBC made sure 3-4 minutes of Breakfast news (each hour) was given over to a mini Party Political Broadcast by the Labour party – as Labour launched their campaign for the local elections. Plenty of coverage of what Miliband and Labour want to do – cut crime and so on.
I am only mentioning this because it will be interesting to see how much coverage the BBC will give on their Breakfast news programme when the Tories launch their campaign for the council elections. I am sure they won’t get the same airtime, if at all, and I doubt the BBC will big up any campaigning into a mini Party Political Broadcast.
Shame this website doesn’t have some kind of database or table layout where instances of the BBC bigging up Labour can be recorded leaving a slot for the expected but rarely given, balancing instances.
I noticed that – Radio 4 did a similar thing last week in a thinly veiled story on elected mayors. They were in Birmingham where the only candidate they interviewed happened to be an ‘ex’ (I think) -Labour MP. Similarly, he was given airtime to promote his campaign.
As I was listening, like Llew first, thought ‘will I hear the same re the Conservatives when they launch their campaign?’. Then I thought about the past… how often have we heard that Labour are launching/relaunching ….. and thus get valuable advertising time on a broadcaster that does not allow advertising. Either the Conservatives do not launch their campaigns or they are ignored.
re your first point, it is standard practice for the BBC to report any Labour news form a labour perspective but equivalent Conservative news by interviewing opposing voices. It is clear and obvious bias but since the Conservative party refuse to tackle the problem, they obviously don’t care.
Re your point about a database or similar, maybe Beeb Bias Craig is your man.
How to spot BBC bias.
Example: The sheer brassneck of Beeb commentators who favour the left.
The unanimous opinion of BBC pundits – typified by John Pinaar – is that in recent weeks the Tory-led coalition has bungled their spin operation.
This is, on the face of it, a truism. The Govenrment have suffered bad headlines. But think about this. Isn’t it like the supporters of Liverpool FC claiming they don’t like Chelsea because the Chelsea club shop doesn’t display enough of their favourite Liverpool team shirts?
Perhaps Cameron should take a leaf out of Tony and Gordon’s playbook and bring the BBC on side.
Call some favoured Beeb reporters inside the tent and give them some exclusives – Nick Robinson.
Forge some personal and family links with top Beeboes – Steph Flanders and Rob Peston.
Give them some top Government quango jobs – John Birt.
Let the BBC increase the licence fee and expand, allow the top brass to ramp up their wages – Mark Thompson and Helen Boaden.
Easy as BBC.
“Forge some personal and family links with top Beeboes – Steph Flanders and Rob Peston.”
Well I can see them forging a personal connection with 2 Eds Steph like the 2 Eds but isn’t Robert straight and married? 🙂
Melanie Phillips:
Her outstanding article on INBBC chums, Galloway andLivingstone, and the complicity of the British political elite with the continuing Islamisation of Britain:
“A dangerous enemy of democracy who’s being encouraged cynically by the Left”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2123715/George-Galloway-wins-Bradford-West-election-A-dangerous-enemy-democracy.html
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2123715/George-Galloway-wins-Bradford-West-election-A-dangerous-enemy-democracy.html#ixzz1qsqEt6kV
Even ‘leftist’ David Aaronovitch had a telling critique of Galloway in ‘The Times’ [£] (31/3).
[Excerpts]:
…”in Bradford, some of his appeal to the voters was couched in sectional and religious language unprecedented in the past 60 years of British politics. One of his leaflets began thus: “God KNOWS who is a Muslim. And he KNOWS who is not. Instinctively, so do you.”
And:
…”almost no Galloway event or pronouncement is now complete without several invocations of ‘Allah’ in one form or another.”
And, a conclusion:
“He [Galloway] is the florid symptom of a problem -the pustule, but not the disease.”
I still say Galloway is a uniter: he brought the white working class together with their Muslim neighbors.
If he had been a Labour candidate, rather than taking votes away from Labour, they’d be celebrating him for it.
Agreed on the second point.
The first point is less clear. I refer you, if you are interested to the UK Polling Report to The Bradford West constituency.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/bradfordwest/
The most intriguing observation is:
“Bradford West was held by the Labour party throughout the 1980s, but is now a Conservative target. In 1997 when the Labour party swept the rest of the country, Bradford West was one of the few seats where the Conservatives advanced, possibly due to sectarian reason – the former Labour MP, Marsha Singh is a Sikh representing a largely Muslim seat, while his 1997 Conservative opponent, Mohammed Riaz, is Muslim.’
The Conservative, Riaz achieved 31% in 2010 and now, Galloway playing quite shamlessly to the Muslim gallery (Anti-Israel, Kashmir etc etc) has achieved a massive vote and the Tories have slumped to low single figures.
So, it would appear that any party with a ‘Muslim ‘ ‘candidate has garnered a huge boost from identity politics. It will be fascinating to see the breakdown of the voting eventually and the investigation into widespread electoral fraud a.k. proxy voting.
RGH, I don’t dispute your counterfactual. Rather, I’m being slightly sarcastic and speaking from what ought to be the BBC’s angle, given that they’ve spared no effort to push the Narrative that the Mohammedan vote is not the main factor in Galloway’s victory.
Yesterday, Zubeida Malik was presenting the notion that it’s “patronizing” to think that Mohammedans voted purely along religious lines (i.e. Galloway being the better Muslim and taking the anti-this war line). According to the BBC, Galloway won because Labour voters felt disenfranchised from their Labour leaders, and so turned to a third party.
Ergo, Galloway has united the white working class (viz the oldies in that club Malik visited yesterday), and the Muslim community at a stroke. The BBC should be supporting this kind of Social Cohesion, not worrying about how to save Labour and reassuring people it won’t happen again.
“I still say Galloway is a uniter” No he is a traitor and anyone who votes for him is no friend of Britain.
Galloway wants to divide the country – not unite. He should never have been in the postion to stand in any election. It is only because Labour repealled the laws on treason that he, and the ruling elite are not behind bars.
When I call Galloway a uniter, I’m doing it with extreme sarcasm. It’s mainly aimed at the BBC. I just don’t know the html code to display it properly.
George
Do you have the link?
If you mean the David Aaronovitch article, unfortunately it’s in the Times, behind the paywall.
Galloway is certainly a gracious winner though…
“Nick Cohen, David Aaronovitch… EAT your treacherous hearts out. I WON! #bradfordwest”
George Galloway has hit back at critics on twitter after being widely mocked for a tweet that described his Bradford by-election victory as a “Blackburn triumph.”
http://www.itv.com/news/story/2012-03-29/bradford-west-by-election/
The Nick Cohen article is available, though…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/apr/01/nick-cohen-george-galloway-livingstone
Yes, apologies, ‘Burkean Outlook’, it’s case of [£ paywall].
David Aaronovitch’s article appeared in ‘The Times’ , 31 March, p21,
title:-
“So why did he choose to stand in Bradford?
“George Galloway fights only in Muslim seats where he can spin his narrative of grievance and victimhood.”
An excellent article on the subject
“Bradford Spring”: Did the Muslims Just Steal Another Election?
Zubeida Malik on Today this morning reported on jihadi groups recruiting young Mohammedan men in Britain to go fight in Somalia. A major British Mohammedan figure who works to prevent young British Mohammedans from becoming radicalized by these recruiters says they’re all over the place these days.
Apparently what he refers to as the common cause of jihad is due to “plenty of grievances to be aired…(he corrects himself, realizing that appears to justify jihad)…a lot more grievances to be manipulated, let’s just say.”
He then said that the jihad is taking young British Mohammedans – converts included – mainly to Somalia, but also to Kashmir and Afghanistan. Hang on, what do the first two have to do with Western Imperialist aggression and the illegal wars which the BBC has told us time and time again are what radicalize Muslims? Narrative fail again.
This recruiter guy says there will be a major incident around the Olympics, due to these jihadi recruiters. But the EDL is really the problem, right, BBC?
Link is here. Sorry, can’t delete and redo comments anymore.
David
You should be able to if you have gotten editor permission from ASE?
David
How do I embed video’s in the thread? I think I might have a very interesting interview for the readers regarding Tommy Robinson
if it’s YouTube, you can just paste the link. Haven’t tried others yet.
Editor rights fixed for you David.
Thanks, ASE. Will check it out later.
The umma has issues with all of its neighbours. Bags of grievances against India, China, Russia and, of course, Western Imperialism and ‘Zionism’. THey also have enemies within…Ahmadiya, Shia, Christians.
All of whom are seen as some fifth column for some sinister interest somewhere. It’s a total freudian car crash of cultural ressentiments and irredentist longings.
I was intrigued by the Muslim chap who questioned what some possible extremists were up to in his mosque in the early hours. He said, in not very good English, that was told to get out and was threatened with death. He said that he had moved and gone to pray in another mosque because he feared for his life. Isn’t this the way all so called moderates will be treated unless they do as the terrorists dictate? ‘Do as we say or we will kill members of your family, plant a bomb, hide someone’ Echoes of N Ireland, when car bombs would be driven by terrified victims whose families were held hostage.
Interesting timing for the item, before the 7am News. Balance isn’t just about objective reporting, hiding it away is another form of bias.
Contrasting reports on counter-Jihadist demonstration in Denmark:
1.) ‘New English Review’:
“European Gathering of Counter Jihadist in Denmark Withstood Assaults by ‘anti-Fascists’”
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/41365
2.) Islam Not BBC (INBBC):
“Clashes break out at far-right rally in Denmark”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17576278
A poll you won’t be seeing reported by the BBC:
49% Trust Republicans on Economy, 38% Trust Democrats More
But remember, kids, any opposition to the President is based on racism.
Heard Evan Davis passing on a tweet of Prescotts by way of sneering at David Davis…the Tory leader we should have had.
1. Is it Labour Party policy to pass on tweets for Evan Davis..or does he seek them out himself?
2. What is the forum to ask the likes of Davis how they choose which guests to smarm to…and which ones to sneer at?
Given Davis gets a puff piece in the Independent today, it only tells me that the MSM are in cahoots to stick to their sticky little narrative…much as I despise the Tories, I despi
se even more the Beebs “show of impartiality”.
Davis` slip of a tongue into the ear of the listener as he nips at the Tories is utterly repellent…is Today the last refuge of ringworm journalists-and how much longer are we to expect to have to fund it all?
“David Davis…the Tory leader we should have had.”
Amen to that, Chris!
I guess it’s interviews like this that are behind Cameron’s supposed loathing of Davis…
http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=46534
I firmly believe that the Conservative party would have elected DD as leader but for the BBC’s ceaseless promotion of David Cameron. It was in the BBC (and Labour’s) interest to have the Conservative party lead by an ‘old-Etonian toff’ rather than an ex-council house lad; makes the narrative so much easier to spread.
It wasn’t a sneer and Davis laughed at it when read out.
Come on Jim-you must get my point!
Evan Davis has no brief to pass on sneery , malevolent texts or tweets from Prescott-and “Lord Prescott” would only do “sneery malevolence” in any utterance of his.
Davis was slipping ball bearings under David Davis in order to do the Beebs bidding…you know that as much as I do!
‘1. Is it Labour Party policy to pass on tweets for Evan Davis..or does he seek them out himself?
The BBC are perfecting the art of ‘one degree of separation’ editorial, where they ‘quote’ some one who as said something they couldn’t say themselves…. and often as a ‘joke’. And existing solely within the bubble of their restricted twittosphere provides a rich seam. Of course, my teens are discovering that muttering something and then, when challenged, whining ‘I was just joking’, simply makes them venal on top of silly.
It is possible some may disagree with that argument, and by way of one of their own believe writing ‘it isn’t, it just isn’t… because I say so’, will represent a powerful counter as opposed to a waste of bandwidth.
I’m not a great fan of Nick Clegg but I have to admire his response to the bleating of BBC 5 Live’s Peter Allen this afternoon.
But your new Government initative won’t create a single job! Whines Beeboid mouthpiece Allen.
Governments can’t create growth. Maybe you and I have a different idea of how an economy works, says Clegg.
Bullseye!
Quite right. All governments do is transfer wealth. Governments don’t spend, they consume. For the government to ‘create’ ie fund a job, wealth is transferred which hinders creating a job (or even destroying a job) elsewhere in the private sector which around the world is the only engine for growth that is both economically and socially sustainable.
That was Labour’s huge mistake. The funds dried up (Brown and Balls were totally in hock to the banks for their cashflow) and the artificial house of cards is collapsing from day to day.
The article on the BBC website telling us about Paul Ryan’s support for Mitt Romney is fair. But the menu on the home page says “Mitt Romney backed by budget hawk”.
What is a budget “hawk”? I suspect it is a term for “overly aggressive” – a bad thing. Who wrote the menu and described Ryan as such. Isn’t one man’s “hawk” another man’s “realist”?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/us_and_canada/
Perhaps the hawk-eyed David Preiser (USA) could point me to any BBC posting EXPLAINING the Ryan plan.
Haven’t found one yet, Louis, but I’m pretty sure that Ryan’s budget gives money to the wealthy, kills black babies, and controls women’s lady-parts.
No, I’m only joking. When the House passed what was essentially his budget plan last year, the BBC described it this way:
The plan, introduced by Republican Paul Ryan, would cut healthcare and social programmes for the poor and require the elderly to pay more for their healthcare than they do currently.
In fact, that last bit is a partisan lie. The plan would actually give seniors a voucher with which to pay for private insurance. On paper, that would make them pay more as private insurance is currently more expensive than what they pay now. Well, that’s not surprising as seniors obviously don’t pay the whole cost of Medicare on their own; it’s “co-pay”, which is a rather small percentage of the actual cost. In any case, if the insurance industry gets regulated better and non-competitive monopolies broken up, costs may very well not skyrocket for them and just might get lower. There are a variety of ways to reduce costs, and nobody can say what will or won’t happen there. Yet the BBC had already decided, because that was the White House talking point.
As for “social programmes for the poor”, even the non-Right Economist admitted that the plan would have actually switched the current payout system to block grants for states to manage on their own. Costs would rise less rapidly, which as we all know equals cuts in BeebSpeak. Whether or not services would be reduced in years to come is totally unknown, and in any case would be up to the states and not the evil budget hawk. An God forbid somebody makes it more efficient and means-tested.
But explaining Ryan’s plan honestly? The BBC wouldn’t dream of it.
Thanks, David. Seems that Ryan is the only grown-up in the room – so far. Three years and still no serious budget from your Obamessiah.
Very annoying when they decide that mere omission isn’t enough but go for the more sinister disinformation/diss the opposition.
Can I just ad that my post at 6.19 (7.19 where I live) was in reply to David Preiser’s comment re Today. I thought that pressing ‘Reply’ would link the two posts and so I didn’t indicate what I was referring to.
I see that now. It does look like the latest reply, not nested with the others. Need to get used to looking at the grey box thing.
It’s nice for the BBC to provide that balance on a Monday morning, after, what, three days of fretting about the far-Right whites (in which they erroneously include the BNP). Perhaps it’s a reaction by the Today producers after hearing complaints?
30th anniversary of the Falklands War.
BBC covers it, naturally.
On Kirchner: The president paid tribute to the “hundreds who came to fight here, to this territory, to the islands, and to the hundreds who laid down their lives”.
On Galtieri: The defeat of the Argentine forces led directly to the collapse of the military dictatorship led by Gen Leopoldo Galtieri, who was later jailed in Buenos Aires for “incompetence” during the war.”
That Britain led by Mrs Thatcher achieved that is something that Argentines should be reasonably thankful for. But Kirchner (Motormouth) has emphasised that an invasion authorised by a military junta is somehow praiseworthy in terms of patriotism?.
I honour men who fall in battle on both sides…the ordinary men of different backgrounds and character…conscripts mostly on the Argentine side who really didn’t have a choice.
But the BBC should make very, very clear how nasty Galtieri’s junta was.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB73/index.htm
“Washington D.C. : The National Security Archive and its partner NGO, the Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS), today praised the State Department’s declassification of more than 4,600 previously secret U.S. documents on human rights violations under the 1976-83 military dictatorship in Argentina. ”
1983 it was over…failed Falklands ambitions discredited a vicious regime thanks to Thatcher’s steady moral courage and that of British servicemen.
As for General Galtieri:
Structure and modus operandi of the security and intelligence apparatus involved in the disappearances in 1979 and 1980 – chain of command of military intelligence Battalion 601 and the joint operations center known as Reunion Central leading up to the then Army commander in chief Leopoldo Galtieri;
The modus operandi utilised death squads.
Today, the man would be up in front of the Hague (if not tried in Argentina) for crimes against humanity.
Thank the Deity, he lost at Stanley.
testing log-in…again
I’ve just put up a blog post on Mark Thompson’s recent interview talking about religion.
Its notable that he appears to be arguing that as religions other than Christianity are closely tied with ethnic minority groups, they deserve kid-glove treatment.
So, Christianity deserves harsher treatment because race trumps religion!
By the way, am loving the new website. So much better!
Testing: George Galloway’s victory speech from Bradford.
Were they looking for his contact lens at the end of that clip?
Greetings, David Preiser.
I note that there’s an interesting court case in New York City tomorrow:
“AFDI leaders Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer to Testify in Free Speech Suit Against New York’s Metropolitan Transit Authority”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/04/afdi-leaders-pamela-geller-and-robert-spencer-to-testify-in-free-speech-suit-against-new-yorks-metro.html
I wonder if/how INBBC will report it?
Thanks for the info, George. I was aware of that ad campaign Geller tried out on city buses (it was a take-off on something some atheist group ad about leaving religion in general, IIRC), but didn’t know it had progressed to this stage.
Those interested in seeing the message itself can see it here. It would be pretty large, plastered across the side of 30 buses around the city.
I’ll try to keep an eye on this.
My mistake. That ad ran. The link below goes to what the MTA refused. Can’t say I blame them, as Geller is calling those who want Israel destroyed (read: Palestinians and other Muslims) “savages” on it.
The hearing was today, and I doubt she’s going to win her case. as the ad is demeaning rather than strictly critical.
There are currently 37 news items on the BBC website relating to the Trayvon Martin case, but there’s been nothing new since 29 March. Since then NBC has admitted that it edited Zimmerman’s 911 call to make him say something he didn’t (and therefore seem racist), and now ABC has conceded that enhanced CCTV footage of Zimmerman arriving at the police station contradicts their earlier claims that he didn’t have head wounds. Will the BBC report this?
I notice that the spate of shootings in Chicago in recent days – which included a murder by hoody-wearing thugs in the congressional district of former Black Panther Bobby Rush – have also gone unreported by the BBC.
Also unreported by the BBC – Bobby Rush is a former Black Panther.
“Unreported by the BBC” – sounds like a strand.
Also the same weekend of this shooting there was a record number of shootings in Chicago.
A city with some of the strictest gun laws in the country, and a state which has just basically banned anyone from carrying a gun outside their own home. Yeah, that’ll stop the shootings.
‘NBC has admitted that it edited Zimmerman’s 911 call to make him say something he didn’t (and therefore seem racist), and now ABC has conceded that enhanced CCTV footage of Zimmerman arriving at the police station contradicts their earlier claims ‘
The BBC adopts a policy of ‘evolving the story’, which either means changing what they have broadcast before to cover up anything that shows them up, or ‘watertight oversight’ which takes this further to consign the whole issue to the ‘moving on’ bunker to spare their professional and integrity blushes.
More narrative-defying info on Zimmerman emerges.
The current issue of Computer Active mag (http://www.computeractive.co.uk/) has a very interesting ‘front page’ article on how to “Cancel Your TV Licence”.
It’s worth a read.
I don’t have any links, financial or otherwise, to the publication, parent company or either of its employees.
The bBC, the biggest instigator of anti-Semitism in the Uk.
Red Cross delivers fuel to Gaza hospitals
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) says it has begun distributing emergency fuel supplies to hospitals in the Gaza Strip.The 150,000 litres (33,000 gallons) of diesel would help 13 public hospitals maintain essential health services for the next 10 days, the ICRC said.Immediate action had to be taken to prevent further deterioration of the fuel and electricity crisis, it added.Gaza’s only power plant closed eight days ago because of a lack of fuel. Hamas, which governs the coastal territory, decided more than a year ago to fire the plant with fuel smuggled from Egypt, rather than pay for fuel from Israel, which is more expensive and subject to restrictions.
So reading the above the reason why Gaza is without lights. (and Israel provides 70% % of the power to the enclave) is because Hamas can’t trust the jews, who by all accounts keep on hiking up the prices. Really?
Nothing about how when the Egyptians changed governments to one more favourable to Gaza. Hamas decided to start restricting goods from Israel in which to smuggle them through the tunnels so as to tax the goods and earn themselves a good wage packet. The other thing is , the fuel isn’t paid for by Hamas it is paid for by the PA and they have refused to keep on funding a government which doesn’t charge people for electricity paid for by other people.
But anybody who doesn’t know the facts, Muslims,GG, the left and the young, well they just swallow what the bBC tells them.
The jews are to blame. Wow and to think that Israel allowed through 9 fuel tankers through last week.
But you don’t here the bBC telling the plebs that. NO! to the bBC the Jews are to blame.
The bBC, the biggest instigator of anti-Semitism in the Uk.
The link for above failed HTML link:
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=227502
So after the plastic Muslims at the bBC decided to air an anti-Semitic bent behind the lights out story inn Gaza. Here is how real Muslims are being informed of the reasons why by a real Islamic news paper: (dated last Monday)
Political clash leaves Gaza without electricity
A political fight between Egypt, Hamas and the Palestinian Authority is to blame for fuel shortages that have led to a major electricity crisis in Gaza, sources told AFP on Monday.
Gaza has long suffered power outages, but the problem has spiraled in recent months, with hospitals warning they face disaster and residents forced to endure rolling blackouts lasting up to 18 hours a day.
At the root of the problem, according to officials and sources on all sides, is a political tug-of-war involving Gaza’s Hamas rulers, the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority, and the Egyptian authorities.On Sunday, Gaza’s sole power plant shut down again for lack of fuel after using up some 450,000 litres of Israeli diesel that was delivered on Friday.
The diesel, paid for by the Palestinian Authority, was delivered via the Kerem Shalom crossing on Gaza’s border with Israel.
‘Unfortunately all the import routes for fuel have been cut, whether we’re talking about the tunnels, the official crossings or from Ramallah,’ said Ahmad Abu al-Amrin, an official at Gaza’s energy authority. ‘The plant stopped functioning for the first time on February 14, but the fuel shortage began on December 25, 2011, because of security measures taken inside Egypt along the borders, which blocked the provision of fuel to the Rafah region.’
The bBC, the traitors in our midst.
Silly me the link:
http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/03/26/203332.html
Yes, we’ve heard this song before, haven’t we? Still Mubarak (the BBC’s least-beloved Muslim dictator, curiously) hasn’t been in charge for over a year, and there’s still no open love for Gaza. Why does Hamas have to smuggle anything in from Egypt, BBC? They can buy fuel there, but…what…have to leave it? And that’s not the main story here?
Is the all-powerful Jewish Lobby still buying off the Egyptian Army? Oh, yes they are. Apparently the President just handed over $1.3 billion to them last week.
Who’s contributing to the World’s Biggest Open Prison (with a Mercedes dealership), BBC? I thought it was the Right-wing, conservative Evangelicals who made the Government support Israel (when it’s not the Jooos, I mean. Gotta mix your pitches here, keep the batter off balance.) Where’s Jeremy Bowen? Why no scowling at The Obamessiah about this?
PS: I’ll spare defenders of the indefensible the effort and say that it’s not treason for the BBC to support Hamas. It’s just really sad.
Just posted. Discuss
You could produce local radio programmes, via a laptop (with £10 microphone and freeware sound editor), whilst sat in a caravan, in a car park or outside your house. Throw in a free wi-fi service and/or competitive 3G/Mifi dongle and you’re set.
Where is the need for plush, centrally-located offices? In a war zone, you go where the story is and edit on-the-fly; why not do the same, from Newcastle, Edinburgh or Belfast, every day?
Brilliant. Translate this into TV and across the spectrum, and you might even eliminate a significant amount of the inherent bias.
Oh, my goodness:
Obama takes a shot at Supreme Court over healthcare
President Barack Obama took an opening shot at conservative justices on the Supreme Court on Monday, warning that a rejection of his sweeping healthcare law would be an act of “judicial activism” that Republicans say they abhor.
It’s definitely true that the Right has been bitching about activist Left-wing judges putting ideology over cold legal analysis, most often against the 9th District Court on the Left Coast. But seeing as how the Court most likely won’t issue their decision until the summer, this is a pretty immediate opening salvo. Somebody doesn’t have full confidence in the solidity of the legislation.
“Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” Obama said at a news conference with the leaders of Canada and Mexico.
As a university-level lecturer on Constitution Law, He should know all too well that this is exactly the purpose for which the Supreme Court was created in the first place. If the Legislative Branch gets something wrong, there’s another Branch to check them.
He should also know that this is most certainly not unprecedented. It’s happened loads of times since the Court first did it in 1803. Marbury vs. Madison is practically the most famous case of all time. Sure, Chief Justice Marshall is also notorious among some Right-leaning scholars for expanding the powers of the Court too much, but that’s not the point.
“And I’d just remind conservative commentators that, for years, what we have heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law,” Obama said.
What’s this whining about the Court being unelected? He appointed two of the Justices on purely ideological backgrounds, FFS. Hell, it happened as recently as two years ago. Don’t remember the President whining about them being unelected then.
I we’re gong to be massively generous here, the only reason the President isn’t telling a blatant lie is that before 1913, Senators weren’t elected but were appointed by their State legislatures. Yes, really. I was surprised the first time I heard that as well. But guess what: that was in the Constitution until people started screwing around enough that Congress decided to pass the 17th Amendment which allowed us to vote for our Senators instead.
The reason I bring this up, is because it’s pretty clear that the President not only knows that this is going to be a main election issue one way or the other, but He or His team suspect He might be on the losing end here.
Which means that the BBC, and especially their US President editor, will have to make every effort to get out the White House talking points. Hopefully they won’t be stupid enough to try to tell you that the President knows best because He’s a Constitutional Law scholar. They’re definitely generally ignorant on US law, and especially on history. The Beeboids are doubly handicapped here because they rely on their Left-wing media friends for their “facts” and how to think on these things.
Watch this issue. It should be fun.
Tim Stanley’s take here:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100148828/obamas-law-its-judicial-empathy-if-the-supreme-court-agrees-with-me-judicial-activism-if-it-does-not/
What’s your point? Stanley is looking at the broader picture of judicial activism in general. I’m talking specifically about the Judicial Branch and the Legislative Branch of the Federal Government, and the President’s troubling statements about it, not the Supremes versus States, which is a different Constitutional issue. Focusing on judicial activism in general, as Stanley does, ignores what the President is actually doing here, and actually seems to sanitize His behavior to some degree (not that this was necessarily Stanley’s intention).
Stanley also didn’t bother to mention that the President appointed two Justices for ideological reasons, and instead quoted some BS about the polls affecting their decisions (which is also a wrong interpretation by the President, but never mind). Sure, all Presidents have pretty much done the same thing, and I’m not pretending otherwise.
The point is that I was giving everyone a heads-up about how this story may develop in this election year, on what’s going to be one of two or three top issues either way, and trying to give a little historical, factual background that the BBC so often either leaves out or gets wrong when it comes to the US.
No point, thought you’d find his view interesting. Doesn’t undermine your point.
And right on cue:
US President Obama warns Supreme Court over health law
A nice reading of White House talking points. Plus, the dishonest spin continues:
The act’s requirement that all those eligible should have medical cover has been condemned as an assault on civil liberties by conservatives.
Not “should have”, dopey Beeboids, but “must purchase”. There’s a world of difference, yet the BBC still doesn’t get it. So the keep lying to you about it.
Anyone ever notice the bias in the weather reports? If there is a snowflake in Scotland up a mountain with a population of two owls and a family of goats, the whole segment is taken up by it. Meanwhile, those of us in the rest of the country are given short shrift. If you want to know the weather in England, population about 50 million, you’ve got to go to the website, which actually isn’t too bad. They’ll even give you Tel Aviv if you type it in.
As soon as I hear the phrase, by some bimbo weather lady “it’s been a chilly old night” I cringe, and wonder where the sanity and standards went . Why are they all, without exception, so patronising?
Anyway, the whole of the BBC organisation is so blatantly biased, why leave out weather reports?
The on going BBC obsession with regionalism and what they like to term ‘the nations’ (Scotland Wales & Northern Ireland to you and me) means that the weather is covered in just about inverse relation to population density (and, presumably, public interest and licence fee payment).
I guess this phenomenon could be forgiven, up to a point, since the celtic fringe tends to get more interesting weather.
My main criticism of BBC weather forcasting is the tone of ‘the end is nigh’ sensationalism. You know what, who cares if it is the hottest first Wedeneday in March ever recorded in Falkirk? I, for one, no longer believe what I’m told about these whacky supposed statistics.
As for the growing regional bias, it’s similar to the intensifying left-wing bias. The BBC is suffering from what I could term the feed back effect. As more and more middle of the road English people give up on the BBC the corporation hears more from the shrill lefties who still care what the BBC says. Listen to Ed Miliband talking about the Beeb. I guarentee to you that it is just about the only institution he wouldn’t care to change. Think abouty why that might be the case.
The BBC is obsessed with the DQF agenda (delivering quality first – ((please – no comment)) and the first proposals suggested large cuts to regional news but it was obvious from all their consultations and the loaded questions that there was no way this was going to happen – not sure what the politics of this was – but regional is obviously high priority to the BBC Trust.
The new world order – Black, Brown, and Soviet-red all over.
“…Scoff scoff scoff. There is no global conspiracy to get One World Government. If there was, the leaders would have sent a memo to Bob Brown to be quiet, to Scientific American to rephrase the agenda, and to Richard Black to stay out of group photos at socialist events. So there is no central command, no invisible patriarch who pulls all the strings. But clearly there is a whole class of people who “know” what you need better than you do, and they know you need more governing.”
“…So the Outreach Group advises UNEP and it looks at how unelected NGO’s can better use the information within the GEO reports to pressure Governments.
“…There, behind a Felix Dodds and an Esther Larranaga, is Richard Black, BBC journalist, a publicly funded broadcaster with a duty to remain impartial, in the middle of an advisory process that seeks to influence Government decisions. There with the full knowledge and agreement of the BBC.”
http://joannenova.com.au/2012/04/the-new-world-order-black-brown-and-soviet-red-all-over/
Called it.
So the government are going to have a competition to ascertain who can come up with the technology to bury CO2under the North Sea. There’s millions (or billions) in it for the “right” company.
They’ve already tried and given up.
The question, of course, which is never put by the BBC to these excited advocates of such a hare-brained plan is, Why?
We all know about CO2, that vital, trace gas without which we wouldn’t exist. We know it’s present in tiny amounts, of which our contribution is infinitesimal. Why the fuck do we need to spend billions burying it?
“Why the fuck do we need to spend billions burying it?”
According to the dildo in office and in the BBC studio there are apparently “100,000 jobs” in exploiting this technology. Funny isn’t it, there are always a “100,000” jobs in any old crapola costing eye-watering billions thrown at “climate change”: much like the 3.5 million jobs “lost” if we dared to leave the EU. Needless to say, the “100,000 jobs” claim went unchallenged.
The wonderous ‘green jobs’ agenda, that has been such a success in Spain, and has given President Obama so many opportunities for boastfulness.
The BBC does all that it can to obfuscate the negative results of mass immigration.
This motivation leads to a certain amount of news management to surpress the discussion of trends of which the public is perfectly well aware and yet about which the BBC appears innocent.
The Beeb is also running a new narrative these days where any side swipe they can get against the American legal system goes to the top of the news.
Today on BBC 5 Live a report warns us of the huge increase in cross border disputes over child custody. Illegal abductions have doubled we hear and are going to further increase.
So right on cue the Beeb brings us the testimony of a distressed mother.
And guess where the estranged father has gone to ground with her child….the US of A!
She must be another one of those GI brides of which we have so many tens of thousands these days and I’m sure this case is absolutely typical of this new and growing problem?
10 out of 10 for BBC anti-US narrative and for skewing the news in favour of multiculturalism.
And on the bBC news website is this story:
Atiya Anjum-Wilkinson disappearance: Father given new jail term
A man from Greater Manchester has been given a fourth consecutive jail term for refusing to reveal the whereabouts of his missing daughter. Atiya Anjum-Wilkinson went missing on her third birthday two years ago.Her father, Razwan Ali Anjum, of Ashton-under-Lyne, later indicated she was in Pakistan or Iran but has refused to disclose her exact whereabouts.
A High Court judge ruled he was in contempt of court and imposed a 12-month prison sentence.
Mr Justice Moor said Anjum, who is in his late 20s, would not be eligible for release until he had served at least six months.
Veteran lefty Rhod Sharp on R5 Upallnight (4:40am) introduces a cosy three way with a US based beeboid and Katy Ellmore of the Population Media Centre, an organisation whose main mission is to bring people into balance with the world’s resources and to empower people to make healthy & educated decisions about their lives & their communities so that we can all live in a healthy & prosperous future.Their modus operandi is to produce soap operas which start as normal pap, but having hooked an audience then introduces its message for social change. these programmes are beamed to simple natives around the world (but maybe to we sophisicates as well). Rhod butts in to say that the BBC had had this sort of programming in Afghanistan. Was Katy aware of it? No says Katy but she is aware of much BBC output on these lines.
All this sounds much like how Dr Goebbels operated. I am sure that the beeboids would have been crying foul if dear Katy had a different world view to the BBC.
This must be more of that using the BBC to “spread influence” that Jeremy Paxman was talking about. Paid for by you.
BBC Dame Nicky and his lefty pseudo science pals are fretting about violent soap operas perhaps being at the root of real life murders.
The Beeboid seems quite keen to censor the viewing of impressionable youngsters.
And now we go over to footage of hour after hour of aggressive protest from the middle east under scorred with approving BBC commentary and wonder whether something will kick off here against the Tories?
BBC tailed a vews bulletin last night with the story of the 24 million unemployed across Europe. And went on with
‘…of course across the pond in the US it’s a different story with solid economic growth, and unemployment falling rapidly.’
I was momentarily taken aback. The BBC actually praising The Evil Empire. Wow. Of course then came the punchline.
Loadsatexters/ some commentators/ many would argue (Ed Balls and thus we at the BBC believe) that perhaps austerity may not be the way ahead. So there we had it – the world’s greatest broadcaster doing what the world’s greatest broadcaster does best – shilling for its Labour Party chums.
Doubtless a droid will be along in a minute with
‘topical discussion… blah… right question to ask… blether’.
Everybody else, though, will have noticed something of a pattern to the questions that the BBC raise, the thoughts they leave hanging there.
The palace builder could easily have mused on whether the differences in the directions of unemployment had something perhaps to do with rigidities in labour markets, or the State as a percentage of GDP say… but didn’t. Funny that.
The BBC is putting a positive spin on US news (unemployment falling rapidly? LOL.) because we have a Left-wing President who espouses all the far-Left economic principles loved by the BBC.
Still, again we see the BBC blaming austerity for everything, when it’s barely even started. The Obamessiah has had three years to work His Keynesian magic, and still needs four more years to get us out of the mess He inherited (so the Narrative goes), but doing austerity for two seconds is proof that it doesn’t work? It’s so transparently nonsense.
there are fat cats that the BBC want to mention at every opportunity & then there are others
The owner of the Daily Mirror announced the changes as the annual report showed that Ms Bailey earned £1.3m last year in pay and pension, including a £248,000 cash bonus, despite a 40% plunge in profits
On that Carbon Capture incentive story the BBC Science Guru Shukman says that ‘ the rules also only allowed systems that trapped carbon dioxide after the fuel was burned – so-called “post-combustion”. By contrast, the new competition will be open to coal and gas stations, and to schemes that attempt to capture carbon before combustion. What does that mean? Are they going to remove the carbon and oxygen atoms before they are formed? Late April fool story anyone?
Before combustion? Doesn’t that mean stopping it from being burned for energy in the first place? I guess by “capturing” they mean taking it away from you entirely before you can use it.
Removing an utterly harmless and indeed essential trace gas and plant food?
Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first make mad.
The BBC just can’t help injecting global warming into news reports, despite the fact that temperatures have been stable for the last ten years.
This report on the discovery of the fossil of a 50 million year old, 50 ft snake includes five paragraphs on the dire consequences of global warming. Drip. Drip. Drip. Who are these people?
“Aside from the excitement of discovering a new and enormous species of snake, the reptile can tell scientists a lot about the history of the Earth’s climate – and offer a glimpse of the possible effects of global warming today.”
“…ability to thrive in a warm climate could be relevant in the event that global temperatures rise according to the projections of climate scientists, Dr Bloch adds.”
“Perhaps the plants and animals of the tropics today already have the genetic ability to cope with global warming.”
“Tropical plants and the ecosystem in general have the ability to cope with high temperatures and high levels of CO2, another major concern with the current trend of global warming,” says Dr Jaramillo.
As the temperature increases, you have the probability they will come back,” says Dr Jaramillo.
Anybody seen or heard the BBC mention Ken Livingstone’s anti-Semitic statements to Muslim voters in London yet?
Scott? Dez? Jim? Bueller? Bueller?
I expect most at the BBC don’t consider them to be anti-semitic – so no story to report.
I haven’t I’m afraid. Are you conjoining two separate episodes though? I’m not sure his alleged ( he denies saying it) statement about rich Jews was to a Muslim audience. I might be wrong.
You are wrong (quelle surprise!)
http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/65477/jews-wont-vote-me-because-they-are-rich-ken-livingstone-tells-labour-activists
Quelle mouche t’a piqué?
Ah, you’re right Jim. I was combining his offensive remarks about Jews with his “Beacon of Islam” peroration. Livingstone denied he made the anti-Semitic remarks, but then later admitted it. Even the HuffingtonPost, a daily read for some Beeboids, mentioned it, while the BBC has remained completely silent on both incidents. Curious, no?
Imagine if Boris had said something like that.
Yes, I had to read the JC article twice.
But the original letter says it was at a meeting of Jewish labour supporters.
http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/65426/the-letter-ed-miliband-jewish-labour-supporters
Curious, yes. Worth covering.
As was the “Beacon of Islam” speech. Both these incidents occurred before Livingstone appeared on the BBC News Channel to be “grilled” on his mayoral platform (so to speak) by BBC London reporters. Needless to say, they avoided it like the plague.
Less worrying I think. He’s playing a dubious political game, but it’s not offensive in the same way.
BBC timidity in the teeth of an Election or perfidy?
I’ve never voted for the man.
But Jim, you’re making a judgment about Livingstone’s statement: that it’s merely a political tactic, just a game. That’s fine, you’re perfectly entitled to do so, and probably correct up to a point. However, the BBC isn’t supposed to do that. They should be objectively reporting it, and then wheeling out one of their London correspondents to “analyze” and tell you that he’s just pandering or whatever.
Having said that, is timidity a valid excuse? If so, why would the BBC News producers be so timid? What is at stake for them? It’s not kosher for them to go all, “Oh, that’s our Ken, bless,” and not report it.
It doesn’t matter if it’s timidity or perfidy. It’s wrong, and clear bias in the BBC editorial process.
Maybe. But I don’t think so.
They covered the ‘ riddled’ incident recently, which was a similar issue.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16955851
Similar issue, yes. But I’d submit that the fact that the BBC reported this and not the Jewish problem speaks volumes about the very biases we complain about here.
Btw didn’t the teacher in Ferris Bueller turn out to be a creationist loon!?
I don’t know. But the school principal who was after him turned out to be an enthusiast of teenage boys.
More taxpayer money down the Green Toilet:
World’s Largest Solar Plant, With Second Largest Ever Department of Energy Loan Guarantee, Files For Bankruptcy
This time, the venture corporatists gave a $2.1 billion guaranteed loan. Now, I don’t think all that money has been handed out already, as these things are usually done in stages, with certain targets required before the next batch of cash is doled out. But it’s probably looking at $1 billion.
BBC: ZZZzzzzzzzz
cj, if you are about! Just to let you know this week’s Composer of the Week on Radio 3 is Verdi. Listened yesterday to the opening programme – superb singing and playing of some of the most tuneful and dramatic extracts from his great operas. Should be plenty more like that all week.
It’s on every day Mon-Fri 12 noon till 1pm, repeated 6 30 – 7 30 the same evening.
Here’s yesterday’s on iPlayer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b01f5hpr
I’m listening to it again now!
Islamic Jihad, France and Islam Not BBC (INBBC).
While Mohammed Merah was alive, INBBC described him as a ‘gunman’; now, after his death it describes him as an ‘Islamist gunman’. When will it describe him as what he really was: ‘a mass murdering ISLAMIC JIHADIST’?
And in its latest euphemistic and misleading headline on France’s suspected Islamic jihadists, INBBC uses its vague political misnoma of ‘militants’-
“French terror charges for 13 suspected militants”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17603103
“Sarkozy shows extremists the door”
by Douglas Murray
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/7762438/sarkozy-shows-extremists-the-door.thtml
Alternative report to INBBC on France:
“France: Muslims detained in sweep planned to kidnap Jewish judge”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/04/france-muslims-detained-in-sweep-planned-to-kidnap-jewish-judge.html
Can one imagine anyone in the Britsh political elite, Tories, Labour, Lib Dems, INBBC, etc saying what Sarkozy said?:-
‘I am giving a warning which is very clear and which must be heard. Anyone who makes comments contrary to the values of the French Republic will be instantly removed from French territory. There will be no exceptions, there will be no indulgence.’
The benefits of a very secular state. Everyone is expected to coalesce around the values of the republic rather than a diverse set of fairy stories.
The trouble with the argument that all sky pixie worshipers are equally idiotic, is that some of the systems of belief have more benign outcomes and are more in accordance with natural justice than others. Whether you define Britain as a country with a constitution broadly based on Christian values or the enlightenment principles to which he French state formally subscribes, you will find that both countries believe their citizens should reject as obnoxious a whole raft of doctrines associated with one particular sky pixie system – and one alone.
Quick, Beeboids: time for another special feature warning against the far-Right. >_>
The Telegraph has this story today
Boris Johnson brands Ken Livingstone a liar in furious mayoral race bust-up
There is no doubt that Livingstone is the liar, and he tried to imply that Johnson used the same kind of tactic to avoid paying tax as he did. The worst part is this element which Boris identifies about Red Ken as
…the hypocrisy of a man who for years has railed against those who use special arrangements to reduce their tax and who has then been caught – bang to rights – doing the very same thing himself.”
To understand the true relevance of this statement you would have to read this article in the New Statesmen from a few weeks ago
Sorry, Ken — own up or accept the consequences
The most damming part of this article as far as Ken is concerned, besides the fact that if the New Statesman is critical of him it must be serious, is this paragraph
The big problem for Livingstone is that he has been a vocal supporter of UK Uncut, which campaigns against not just (illegal) tax evasion but also (legal) tax avoidance – by Vodafone, Topshop and other big companies. “These rich bastards just don’t get it,” Livingstone wrote in 2009. “No one should be allowed to vote in a British election, let alone sit in our parliament, unless they are paying their full share of tax.” The former London mayor called for everyone to “pay tax at the same rate on their earnings and all other income”.
The word “hypocrite” is being whispered – and not just by the usual suspects on the right. “I think it’s bad for him,” says a former adviser to Livingstone who worked with him at City Hall. “People expect more from Ken.” If he was a Tory or, say, Tony Blair, this wouldn’t matter – but it is an axiom as old as party politics that left-wing politicians are, rightly, held to higher standards. Principles matter.
So what does the BBC have to say about this recent episode? You might think it was a party political broadcast for Livingstone, with the article ending with this statement from him
“Those of us who are leading candidates in this election have a duty to the electorate to rein it in and direct it to the issues at stake for Londoners,” he wrote.
“We must take account of Londoners – the people we are trying to talk to. We need to afford them the respect to have a decent discussion about how we address their concerns, their quality of life, the squeeze on their living standards, the future direction of their neighbourhoods and home city.
“I suggest to Boris Johnson therefore that he and I work together to raise the tone and spirit of this election.”
Of course, no mention either of his hypocrisy. They still continue as they did in their last article simply allowing Ken to deny he was using this kind of tactic, when it was clear to everybody that he was.
Here’s the current one
Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone in on-air tax row
This the BBC will spend time on – twice – and leaning away from Boris, but they still censor news of both Livingstone’s “Beacon of Islam” aria and his mad scene about Jews in front of Labour activists.
It’s perilously close to perfidy, really.
‘They still continue as they did..’
What… is to stop them? They are now, without question, unaccountable, even in the face of many a ‘bang to right’ of their own, and yet… nothing can or will be done, and they know it.
The BBC complaints process is an interest of mine, not least because of its utter predictability. I just got my latest two ECU Director replies, saying if I really want to waste my time going to the Trust fine, but he knows what they will say.
Hence it is always interesting to hear the experiences of others, as in the comments to the latest Black Ops farce (and there being so many now it’s hardly worth worrying about… though some noted that is an attitude to worry about too):
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/4/1/more-black-and-greenery.html
So, Newsnight’s first segment tonight purported to be a discussion about what happened in the Bradford by election, featuring Dianne Abbott, Will Self, Tory Toff MP and Galloway himself, but very quickly turned into a ganging up on the lone Conservative MP by three lefties. Nice balance BBC – 3 against 1 – with the host doing very little to force the discussion back to the local political situation in Bradford.
…and now I’m suffering the twin assault of the insufferable Bonnie Greer and Mehdi Hasan on the Sky News papers preview.
Help – where’s Douglas Murray when you need a common sense antidote to these diseased lefties.
ps – the time of my comment above seems to be one hour out – should be 11:53 pm. ??
Is Newsnight still going? Since they shut down their blog I ceased to be be aware of them (well tucked up by then, and it is not worth iPlaying).
Sounds like, having removed a small but vocal thread where their blatant bias was critiqued quite vocally, as far as the mods would allow, they have become emboldened.
Once we get Paul Mason introducing Laurie Penny as a the new Youth Editor with special guests John Prescott and Jonnie Marbles on just how monopolistic NI is, one will know they have got where they were aiming.
I had no idea that the Conservatives lost 10,000 votes in Bradford. No way that’s not strategic voting, although I still wonder if that would have stopped Galloway entirely.
Norman Tebbitt violated Godwin’s Law in his post about it, but he was kind of right.
Good Morning
After the Tommy Robinson baiting, it might be worth contrasting and comparing this:
Part 1
<param
Part 2
<param
Sorry I’ll try again
Part 1
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7y8ITzw-KI&w=560&h=315%5D
Part 2
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17SzFxEeC54&w=560&h=315%5D
Money well spent, without much choice or challenge, I am sure some will agree:
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2012/04/03/thank-you-british-taxpayers/
If mainly from those more familiar with, and approving of lack of choice and no challenge when it suits (go on cherry vultures, spare me the agony of the BBC search system… if it was in the Gruan it may have slipped through the filter somewhere)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9184693/Surgery-bans-elderly-patient-over-her-carbon-footprint.html
Now, where did these guys get the idea that, if all else fails, you can simply claim ‘carbon footprint’ and you can ban anyone?
I wonder if BBC expedited bootings will try this one soon?
Of course, if Richard Black stubs a toe in the Maldives, the BBC would probably hire a B-52 to fly him back. They are that unique.
(checked the date, and it seems two days too late)
I checked the date on the article,as I was sure it must have been an April Fool thing, but its’ dated 3rd April, so it must be loony left time. It’s come to this… *sigh*
It must be all of five minutes since I heard the narky tones of fourteen-year-old EMA baby Owen Jones mithering on about the evil Tor-rees Kuts. Fret not, says Auntie Beeb, for here he is turning up once again like a bad Laurie Penny. And I do so enjoy the irony-free Beeb zone where there can reside discussions on Charideez suffering from public spending cut backs.