Well, Friday HAS arrived and here is the thread to take us all off into the wide blue yonder of the weekend. If you have spotted BBC bias then THIS is the place to share it…the floor is yours.
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- vlad Nov 21, 23:37
Midweek 20th November 2024
It’s called ‘Unleashed’ – not a word I would apply to BoJo. Like being savaged by a dead sheep. - Sluff Nov 21, 22:30
Midweek 20th November 2024
After watching by accident the fawning sycophancy of the 10 pm BBC news to John Prescott, there can be no… - harry142857 Nov 21, 22:02
Midweek 20th November 2024
The emoluments for the Chief Executive for the year was £154,044. Registered Charity 802052 Children In Need - Philip_2 Nov 21, 21:40
Midweek 20th November 2024
BBC presses ahead with Radio 2 60s and 70s spin-off station despite admitting it will harm rivals The “arrogant” BBC… - Fedup2 Nov 21, 21:39
Midweek 20th November 2024
Plenty on twitter suggesting Reeves will be resigning on Friday – they have no honoure- she won’t - StewGreen Nov 21, 21:36
Midweek 20th November 2024
screenshot [img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gc8E_QvXUAAgfzM?format=jpg&name=small[/img] - Zephir Nov 21, 21:29
Midweek 20th November 2024
FFS this lot should be jailed for treason… “The Biden administration is loosening some key immigration restrictions ahead of President-elect… - Zephir Nov 21, 21:26
Midweek 20th November 2024
Regarding the lying (and plagiarising) Reeves. When the lying Starmer said this would be a “government of service” I never…
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
The Eurovision Song contest? Why do the BBC pay for it?
Is it because it is a metaphor for the EU? The Eastern states expect us to pay for it and get nothing back in return.
I think the Eurovision contest is a good thing because it is probably the only time of the year when a large segment of he British public turns its attention towards the concept of Europe as a whole. Where in the Caucusus do you actually draw the line? Why are Turkey and Israel there ( a healthy concept of Europe standing as a bulwark against which the Islamic world beats in vain would soon sort those problems out!)
It also teaches you he French names for all the European countries while also allowing you o chortle over the fact that a decade or so ago, every single statement by the presenters was made in both French and English – but now they don’t really bother much with the French bit. 🙂
While the singing section has some entertainment value – think of those drinking games where you had to drink three inches if the singer threw her arms out at the end of a song or finished on a rising or falling octave – the best bit is the scoring.
The drinking game rule that said you should go to bed if you saw Turkey or Greece vote for each other as you had clearly had too much and were hallucinating. But even that fell down a few years back when a slight thaw in relations saw a begrudging single point being exchanged.
Things have never been the same since he fall of the wall but it’s still fascinating to see the natural cultural / political blocks into which Europe breaks down. Who’d have thought all those Balkan states who were butchering each other just over a decade ago would all vote for each other. The way Germany often gives its maximum number of points to Turkey, is, however, downright sinister.
PS it goes without saying that the pro EU BBC is shooting itself in the foot by giving the very idea of Europe acting collectively, overtones of being silly / tasteless / gay/ riven by regionalism. Besides his homosexuality pandering to the gay following this event has, I think the reason the beeb uses Norton and before him (the non-gay) Wogan, as frontmen is because nobody can then characterise all the laughing at foreigners as ‘wogs begin at Calais’, little-Englandism.
Some ideas for drinking games:
http://www.aleth.talktalk.net/eurosong.html
http://www.webtender.com/handbook/games/eurovision-song-contest.game
http://www.cookylamoo.com/boringlikeadrill/2012/05/the-eurovision-song-contest-drinking-game-2012-edition.html
You probably are aware of why Germany always votes for Turkey – the thousands of Turks living in Germany can legitimately cast their votes for Turkey which they can’t do in their own country. There are a lot of ethnic Russians in the countries formerly in the USSR so Russia always gets extra, and there are many from those states living in Russia etc. It’s totally pointless having the votes cast by the general public as it’s no reflection on the “quality” of songs but it just shows where the largest diasporas of various nationalities are.
I’m just waiting for today’s “everything’s wonderful in Egypt, darling” piece. Should be appearing in 5, 4, 3…
BBC Radio 5 Live are telling me that there is GOING TO BE a protest over GM crops this weekend. There may be some law breaking involved in the action planned by the activist groups. I am indirectly paying for all the fun to be enjoyed by these activists (or what I would term protest-hobbyists) both via the cost of the additional policing that will required and, I suggest, through that part of my BBC TV Licence that will be spent on pre-promoting the protests and then the OB costs of covering it.
Why?
I’m planning a demo over my councils use of 60% of council tax going on pensions do you think the BBC would oblige me with free publicity?
GM crops, fracking, nucular – deal with it (pretrendy) lefties and sundry camp-followers it’s happening whether you like it or not.
Don’t GM crops have Vegetable Rights? The Right to Grow, without being pulled out of the ground by some head up arse attention-seeking adolescent rent-a-cause “activist” (Plant Murderer)? May be I will just call around and pull all his teeth out, to prevent Dental Warming? No legality required, if you have a “cause”.
EGYPT.
INBBC’s Cairo Bureau is as politically enthusiastic as ever for the Muslim Brotherhood, with INBBC’s Ms YNELL repeating her oxymoronic term for Presidential candidate Aboul FOTOUH as being a ‘moderate Islamist’.
Alternative:
“Egypt’s Presidential Elections: What’s at Stake”
by Raymond Ibrahim
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/11745/egypt-presidential-elections-what-at-stake
INBBC’s Ms Y Knell:
“Yet graffiti on the school wall and cars that pass covered in posters, suggest significant local support for the moderate Islamist, Abdul Moneim Aboul Fotouh.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18179191
For INBBC’s Cairo Bureau:
“Egypt’s Christians oppose Islamic supremacists: I don’t want the Islamists. If they come to power and I oppose them, they will say I am criticising their religion and who knows what they’ll do to me?'”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/egypts-christians-oppose-islamic-supremacists-i-dont-want-the-islamists-if-they-come-to-power-and-i.html
Where do these people get the idea that such a thing as moderate islam exists?
The qu’ran doesn’t give choices for a variation of it’s edicts. They all must follow the barbaric 7thC methods of savages.
We are very familiar with the BBC forever pushing the scary climate change mantra in programmes such as Countryfile but I watched the Chelsea flower show last night and well … cringed a lot. ‘Sustainable’ cropped up a lot not surprisingly, as did ‘extreme weather events’ but to top it all Rachel de Thame said we must reduce carbon dioxide wherever possible. I would have hoped that someone with a reasonable gardening background may well have shown some independent though about blackening the name of this most vital plant food. But no. No questions asked.
From various trailers and hints picked up along the way, I feared it would be like that. I steeled myself to cautiously watch a bit of it (with one eye covered) but after about 10 minutes I could endure no more and switched off. There was an hour of it.
CO2 plant food, opposed by plant journalist. Its like jumping up and shouting Heil Hitler if the Fuhrer is mentioned. RSPB support bird-killing machines to fight non-existent global warming. Its not a delusuion, its a calculated betrayal of reason for personal gain.
BBC News 24 are spoilt fo choice:
Leveson/ SNP. SNP/ Leveson.
And they say that National Geographic’s output is all Sharks and Nazis!
BBC-EU, and its lack of interest in British national sovereignty.
If BBC-EU were representing the interests of British people, it would discuss, and let the British people discuss, the impact of further EU political and economic integration on British society.
Instead we get:
“EU plans to speed up closer union to save euro”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18193437
Before turning over for Question Time last night I saw Clegg shilling for the EU by claiming that leaving would cost 2 million jobs. On QT later Prescott said that the CBI warned that the minimum wage would cost 2 million jobs (that magic number again) but that this prediction turned out to be completely wrong. So going off Prescott’s logic Clegg is talking bollocks.
Used to be 3 million jobs ‘dependent’ on Europe in Bliar’s day. Though the chap who came up with the number in the first place described its use in that context as ‘pure Goebbels’. The context being ‘if we opt out of the EC we would lose 3 million jobs’.
My above comment should probably read ‘ I saw Clegg shilling for the EU by claiming that a Euro break-up would cost 2 million British jobs ‘ etc etc.
Surely there aren’t 2 million people working for the EU in Britain?
My guess is it’s the shills such as Clegg and Mandelson that are worried about their taxpayer funded lifestyle going west if we quit the EU.
Yes some folk do well out of the EU eg the Kinnock family.
It’s what supports their careers, just as the AGW con supports so called environmentalists in their wonderful life style.
Why not jet off to South America to save the panet especially when somone else foots the bill. There is a logic in what they do, but it’s self serving only.
My above comment should probably read ‘ I saw Clegg shilling for the EU by claiming that a Euro break-up would cost 2 million British jobs ‘ etc etc. Just read 1327 below.
Never like to kick a dog when it’s down but… Sony Award loser Gameshow Nikki had an interviewee on who reminded Gameshow’s 30,000 listeners that Ahmadinejad wanted to see Israel wiped off the map.
‘Ooh’, jumped in Gameshow, ‘there’s a big argument about that’. And just in case anyone didn’t hear it he said, ‘Ooh there’s a big argument about that’.
‘Big argument’ of course is Gameshow-speak for
‘I Gameshow and we at the BBC, Unite union, Labour Party, Guardian, Polyversity Grants, Hamas, and Al-Aksa Martyr’s Brigade believe…’
A huge argument indeed. Last week the Iranian military chief Major General Hassan Firouzabad said that “the Iranian nation is standing for its cause and that is the full annihilation of Israel”. Whereas in February Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, said that Israel was a “cancerous tumour that should be cut and will be cut”.
The argument is tricky to follow isn’t it?
Was he saying that there’s a big argument about the fact that Ahmadimjihadi said that, or that there’s a big argument about whether or not we’re allowed to take it seriously?
I was unfortunate enough last night to catch a part of Newsnight on BBC2 but was amazed to see a member of the Government being spoken to respectfully , politely and given all the time he needed to get his point over with no criticism allowed.
You won’t however be surprised to hear that the politician in question was Nick Clegg prattling on about how the Euro can’t fail and is wonderful but if it did fail (which it can’t) then this would be very very bad for Britain. According to Cleggy British banks would fail , the city would go to hell in a hand cart , we would be reduced to a barter existence and toads would fall from the sky (I may have made up the last two but you get my point). None of this was questioned by the breathless reporterette who lapped it up and thanked him for educating us little people.
This was followed by a studio talk by the Milliband that isn’t Labour leader who agreed with everything Cleggy said and a Lord Wolfson who pointed out that parts of Europe were hopelessly uneconomic and getting out of the Euro was their only choice. Reporterette listened politely to him but what he was saying might as well have been in Arabic as it was so outside of her understood view of the world she just ignored his points. Then the lesser Milliband would speak repeating what Cleggy had just said and so on. After just a few minutes Lord Wolfson had an odd resigned yet bored look on his face. Thankfully at that point my cat decided to come home and I went to bed making a resolution to try even harder to avoid watching Newsnight.
Here’s a take on Cleggy’s we must stay in Europe message (warning it’s very sweary if you don’t like that sort of thing):
http://thesnowolf.com/2012/05/and-whose-fault-is-that.html
I caught the final 15 minutes of Today today and it yielded a most amusing moment. Justin Webb was interviewing a rather cynical (realist if you will) columnist from The Church Times about the campaign shenanigans between the rival factions lobbying for election of the Archbishop of Canterbury – from about 2hrs 48mins 30secs in:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/player/b01hxt5j
Here at around 2 50 -51, Webb got his chance to lob in his usual Beeboid preoccupation with raaaacism when the columnist said there had been a lot of dirty work in this campaign, most of it concerning Sentamu. Leaping through this open door, Webb threw in the old ‘ “People say” as in ‘People say there is a racist campaign against him…’ only to find himself completely discombobulated and reduced to a feeble “Hm” by the columnist’s blunt reply, to wit that to allege racism against your opponents is itself a fairly dirty trick! Total collapse of stout party ensued: the Webb Monster immediately wrapped up the interview… I doubt he has recovered from the shock yet.
I rather suspect that Sentamu’s real problem is that he believes in God something that the C of E is at pains to avoid encouraging.
Yes, I heard that and enjoyed it too. Webb didn’t know how to respond at all, did he? An interviewee expresing an opinion like that left him in unfamilar territory.
A delight to hear the sherry suppers of the BBC mulling over the prospects of assorted Archbishops and their prospects of becoming the Archbishop of Canterbury.
As we all know, the Today programme is a candid, but ever-so-supportive friend of the Christian faith here in Britain. The BBC is always happy to discuss the theological aspects and nuances of the faith as manifested and lived out here and now in 2012.
Oh sorry-gays, women bishops, racism and-of course abuse of kids and same-sex marriage…THAT is all the BBC wants us to know about, and that is ALL we`ll be getting until eco-Armageddon.
Therefore any supperating, incontinent fool who dares to get onto the BBC is just Satans Little Helper. For Davis and Webb etc only care about how best to render the Church as useless as other opponents of the Gramsci Project…all neutered and slavering about the kitten heels of BBC/LeftLibby gauleiters.
Funny though-all this crap about the Archbishop to be…yet nothing about mocking runners and riders stuff about the new DG of the BBC…which I`m guessing is NOT for the likes of us to be mocking and sneering at.
No need to ask THOSE runners and riders about gays, same sex etc…but what of their views on the Euro, immigration, the license fee, Israel?…
nah, be no difference…some choice eh?…welcome to Pyongyang Hospital Radio.
He certainly believes in getting his face on the telly, not to mention his regular contributions in a tabloid newspaper. I wouldn’t be surprised if he got up the noses of the current Archbishop and other prelates and functionaries in the Cof E.
Have just come back from a week’s holiday in Italy. The hotel TV had CNN and BBC World News.
Tuned into BBC Monday evening, four black Chelsea supporters or former players talking about Chelsea’s epic European win. Well actually, it wasn’t about the football it was about racism and John Terry; went out for a walk.
Next day tuned into a programme called Hard talk with Louis Saha , a black French footballer. The whole three minutes I saw was about racism in French football, the idea that the French FA equivalent has suggested a quota on the number of black players in the team. Extolled the contribution from non white players when France won the World Cup, but no mention of the dissent and lack of team spirit from black players in the last World Cup when France underperformed. On to racism in British football…click!
Gave BBC a miss for one night, tuned in before dinner, subject… Is there racism in British schools? Why they bothered to pretend to pose a question, when as anyone tuning into the BBC knows it is actually a statement, which will be justified by producing dubious and slanted ’’evidence’
Anyone watching BBC World News last week might just think the BBC is doing a great job in presenting the UK as nasty racist obsessed country.
They had him on Newsnight, with Jeremy Paxman desperately trying to get him to find racism in Britain; in British football; among the players; among the fans. He failed utterly. If I remember right, the footballer said it was like paradise here.
I don’t have much time for Terry, he’s a prick, but given his upbringing that’s hardly suprising.
Still why do the BBC never question the fact that the accuser in the Terry case is the brother of the man Terry replaced as England Captain? A motive for the accusation or mere conincidence? Don’t worry the BBC won’t enlighten us.
I`m no fan of Chelsea or of Terry-but because of the witch hunt against him, then I back him.
At least he`s loyal to his club, and leads by example-so unlike the lilypadding journos and third raters who pronounce him guilty without the inconvenience of a trial.
Sort of FT article to get FT editor Lionel Barber onto the inside track for next DG
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2149317/A-rosy-view-Boko-Haram-Nigerian-Islamist-terrorist-organisation.html
BBC News online home page: SNP top story followed by Leveson.
The BBC, forcing our news agenda on the disinterested.
….and as if to confirm my take on their choice of news stories, their third story is: Olympic torch arrives in Wales.
Ah the BBC world, it must be another one of these parallel worlds located slightly outside the real world. A little like the Arab World about which we hear so much.
The BBC have picked up this story from the Jewish Chronicle.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-18207323
But notice the phrase “Jewish prejudice” in the headline. Since, as you’ll see from the story “anti-Jewish prejudice” is meant, this is an example of poor grammar that conveys an altogether different impression than the one that should be given. Is this sloppy editing what they teach at CoJo? I think we should be told.
Good find, Daphne Anson.
Anyone who challenges the BBC on the headline will be given the standard excuse that there is a strict word limit. But headlines obviously also have to accurately reflect the main thrust of the story. This one evidently didn’t.
Re the question itself, no matter how the examiners try to wriggle out of it it definitely was inviting the expression of prejudice against Jews.
From your link I followed this link
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-18207323
to a related clip where the BBC interviewer was apparently so unwilling to listen to anything that might challenge his preconceptions that he interrupted the interviewee often enough to crowd him out and shut him up.
Par for the course for the BBC.
‘will be given the standard excuse that there is a strict word limit.’
The ‘accuracy won’t fit’ excuse is risible enough, but then there is the hard to prove bias aspect of how, when not fitting, it only seem not to fit one way.
Sadly, that is a BBC complaints weasels semantic wet dream, so best left alone.
Leaving the accuracy part.
However they have an ‘answer’ to that, too.
First, simply express how they have looked really hard, but are still ‘comfy’ they think it is all OK.
Then, tell you are showing poor faith by pointing out that is not an argument but hogwash.
It must be nice to control the ref and the ball, even if you get others to uniquely fund the stadium.
Yes, it’s been a while since I could steel myself to sit down and write a complaint to the BBC, which will simply be flushed down the loo. (The complaint, and not the BBC, more’s the pity.)
However, in the past they have acknowledged the complaint at times and even entered into brief correspondence.
But I’ve found that to get that reaction, one has to approach the culprit directly as in:
firstnamesurnameofbbcshmuck@bbc.co.uk
The “complaints” website is of course designed to frustrate the complainant till he/she throws up his/her hands in disgust and gives up.
They don’t even provide a reference number for your complaint, when you first submit it. That’s how seriously they don’t take it.
Whilst channel surfing I caught the back end of a news item on the News Channel about the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee. The report was about the popularity of the Royal Family and the number of people who turn out at Royal visits.
If you had looked at the visuals with the sound off it looked like a report of a Royal visit with crowds of well wishers waving union flags. Listening to the commentary, however, betrayed the item as a republican polemic. They interviewed a po-faced representative of “Republic” who blamed the media for hyping the Royal Family and, whilst the reporter referred to the overwhelming number of people who preferred a monarchy to a republic, he said it in such a way that made it plain he couldn’t understand why people thought that way.
The whole item it seems was subtly slanted ( moneyed aristocrats vs poor commoners, age of austerity, etc.) to give the impression that being a monarchist is delusional and that republicanism is the only way forward.
Even my wife, who thinks I sometimes read too much into some news items, agreed with me about the tone of the piece.
If anyone else has seen the piece I await your thoughts.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/help-wanted.html?
‘BBC 1 Controller Danny Cohen talking to Mark Lawson in the Radio Times: “I haven’t had a single email saying that Breakfast is worse for the move.
He’d do well in BBC Complaints.
Then again, as a senior BBC mukky-muck, is it possible his PC is configured the same way as Helen Boaden was proud to let slip hers was… namely ‘we are comfortable that we are getting all about right because… the only way anyone has to tell us otherwise goes nowhere and is read by no-one [girlish giggle]’.
Unique. Not very smart, mind.
This ‘all is fine because the echo in this bubble reassures me it is’ would not stand up long in a Levenson-style inquiry, really.
“We only read emails we like.. tra-la-la-la-la. And if we don’t read bad ones, nothing bad can be happening, can it?”.
Good job no one holds them to account… at all, much less in the same way they claim to do with others.
Islamic Republic of PAKISTAN.
In reporting this story, INBBC does not relate it to the interests of the British people.
“US cuts Pakistan aid over jailing of ‘Bin Laden doctor”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-18201077
The only person we hear from is INBBC’s Mr Ilyas Khan.
Mr Michael Burleigh, in’Daily Mail’ appropriately has this:
“We should respond to the sentencing of Shakil Afridi by cutting all aid to Pakistan”
By Michael Burleigh
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2149800/We-respond-sentencing-Shakil-Afridi-cutting-aid-Pakistan.html#ixzz1vuQ1LJTj
The BBC news website’s lead headline: ‘Millionaire’ riot student jailed
Their second most prominent story: Spanish bank asks for 19 billion euros
No-one can accuse the Beeb of not getting their priorities right… What’s a massive financial crisis compared to the news that a rich kid got jailed for two years?
Jeff
Anybody watching BBC’s “A People’s History”. All it seems to have been so far is an unbelievable piece of pro-multicultural propaganda. It has spent the first 15 minutes talking about how multicultural we are, and were. Instead of focusing upon our Celtic roots, it has chosen to focus on the foreigners who came here (similar to how it reports today, actually). It has somehow managed to whitewash the first part of our history with comments like this (I kid you not, this is what he said):
21:15
“Don’t forget there were black people in Britain before there were English”
He even managed to throw in a bit of pro-gay propaganda, when talking about a relationship between a black slave and his master:
“A very intimate relationship between the two men, gay perhaps”
He then went on to talk about a Syrian man:
“An Arab, an underneath carved in Arabic..”
Now that everybody is included in Britain’s history, we can forget any sort of identity ourselves. According to the BBC we have been multicultural (in the same way we are now) since the Roman times. This is Marxist history. “Unusually” the name of the program, “A People’s history of Britain”, takes its name from a famous book written by the prolific English Marxist historian A.L.Morton (albeit with ‘England’ replaced with ‘Britain’ in the BBC version, to be inclusive, of course. And not to remind us of the nasty EDL).
This is backed up by the fact that they are now rambling on about class, how job’s are lost, and environmental catastrophes. They have managed to fit all of their prejudices in the first 25 minutes.
BBC rule number 2. There are no such people as the English.
Directive number 2. It is essential that we rewrite the past so that we can control the present and the future.
I think they all sit in rows and chant this at their induction and training course.
Take no notice of them. Their day is ending..
As someone with a great interest in the history of this country I started to watch this programme but switched off after the first five minutes once it became obvious it was going to be a love letter to multiculturalism.
Just as the BBC uses junk science to push its CAGW narrative, so it uses junk history to push its “multiculturalism is good for us” theme.
Michael Wood – who must be desperate for money to front this kind of crap – actually used the word “enrichment” when mentioning immigration into this country without seeming to realise the word has now achieved an ironic meaning being used to describe the unwelcome, and in some ways, dangerous, consequences of unlimited migration to these islands.
The mark of a true historian is to dispassionately interpret historical events and personalities, without ascribing to them modern sensibilities or imposing their own personality and prejudices on their subjects.
No true historian with academic pride would touch programmes like this with a bargepole.
Nobody can make up history like the BBC’s golden boy Dan Snow. After watching a couple of his offerings several years ago I gave up – the man talks complete piffle.
You all seem to have noticed the same things I did. The English all come from the Anglo Saxon invasion, that they then say only made up 10% of the population.
I was told that the bBC thought police vetted any new project to give its service level of bBC dogma. Do they should interfere with the final script, if so then they are doing a bad job as they are palpable tripe.
First of all are they automatically calling ‘Africans’ black? Because in Roman times ‘African’ refered to the Punic peoples of NORTH Africa. Sub-Saharan Africans were Ethiopians and quie rare. Did they then go on to observe that those ‘Blacks’ were part of an army of conquest and occupation? And quite frankly a drop in the bucket compared to the Celtic population. As for the ‘intimate’ reltionship between a Roman and his black slave are they SERIOUSLY promoting the possible sexual abuse or at the very least sexual explotation of a black slave as a ‘Good Thing’????
All good points unlikely to ever get an answer.
Without meaning to I heard Will Self on R4 this evening. Points of View I think the show is called.
Bog standard “edgy” left wing stuff. Showily said and Self seemed to be inordinately proud of never standing for the Loyal Toast at a function -as if anyone cares outside the Guardianistas circle.. Throw in a few jibes at the Queen and you soon get the drift. Poor stuff and so so dull.
Now it would be interesting to know if this show ever has a serious conservative on it expressing views that Self and his BBC mates really couldn’t handle without risking burst heads.
What do I think?. Never in a thousand years.
There were many years when Bill Self couldn’t stand for any toast, Loyal, or not. He was a smackhead: & a drunkard. The prodigal fool. A decadent, screwed-up freak. Frankenstein’s monster, without the charm, decency or looks. Another Oxford PPE degree, conditioned to loathe Britain, & himself, & therefore ripe for the backstabbing leftoid Establishment, & his designated & lucrative role as a ‘bad boy’. The Joey Barton of the ICA. Wow! Heavy. Really he would have been happier as A A Gill. Never mind. He did his duty. Another cloned haemorrhoid to nestle up against all the others clustered in the BBC’s rectal corridor awaiting evacuation. Always ready with the approved ‘nuanced opinions’, sealed with a sneer. The hard case hack. Yeah, yeah.
I wonder how ‘edgy’ he felt a few months back when a young black man called his agonisingly right-on wife, ‘A fucking white bitch’? That’s ‘enrichment’, Billy Boy. Enjoy it. Before ‘diversity’ really gets tired of poncey, white, well-heeled, solipsistic, voyeuristic hangers-on, all the deluded liberal hipsters. When that happens you might be glad to see some ‘little Englanders’, glad to see the good old coppers. Then you’ll have to get a Plan B, mate. A crash course in Societal Reality For The Indigenous. ‘Viva Multiculti!, Bill. OK. Maybe not. You’re not moving out of London, are you? There’s a shame. How much did you make on your house? Blimey. That ‘Champagne Socialism’, way to go.’
His house is worth a bit less these days…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2148792/Author-Will-Self-family-flee-lives-roofs-1-million-houses-street-collapse.html
Thankfully, no one was hurt, but being a snide, sneering, relentlessly cynical lefty has clearly paid well. If these houses were owned by ‘bourgeois little Englanders’, Tory Toffs, bankers or some other hate-group, he’d no doubt be sneering about some sort of poetic justice.
Well, Reed, what a coincidence. Self will take this as a warning to change his leftoid ways. Look out for upcoming news flash: Tall, rich, ex-cultural Marxist, dressed as Crusader, thrown out of Toynbee dinner party. Violent affray. Gays jostled. Beeboids assaulted. Islam mocked. AGW denial. Many arrests.
…praise of Mrs. Thatcher, expressions of admiration for Rupert Murdoch’s contribution to British media, anger at the scape-goating of ‘bankers’ for the creation of Labour’s wreckless debt mountain…
It never fails to amaze me how these so called champions of the common man who during their young wild years are so against the establishment. Yet when they grow older they have no problems subscribing to the the very tenets they bitch about:
Gelldof.
Prescott
Sex Pistols
Westwood
The Beatles
Sting
Any trade Unionist
Blair
As for Self not standing during a toast to the Queen, yes that is his prerogative in this day and age. But you’d think that such a champagne socialistic, instead of harping on about how middle class people in the Uk try to act above their pay grade, would simply have refused to attend. He didn’t and all he did was ensure he isn’t invited to such further shindigs.
Self, a leftwing tosser who best hope he never bumps into me, as he’ll be in a wheelchair for the rest of his natural.
I heard the talk too and thought o myself that what ever else they instill at Oxbridge colleges, they certainly teach them how to sneer – an skill of somewhat dubious value as it can sometimes get you a punch on the nose.
We all, however, know that the odds against you actually bumping into Will Self are extremely long and that you’re talking hyperbolically and thus only in a figurative sort of way for literary effect- but I think it’s best to avoid images of violent behaviour on a serious blog as it makes us look intemperate.
Brilliant! But you forgot to mention how god awful his books are. They’re on a par with Rushdie’s. Grape juice packaged as fine wine.
You forgot to mention that he’s also a class traitor …
About ten years ago I was at the Vauxhall Cross junction at the end of the Albert Embankment waiting for the lights to change. When they did I drove off, only to slam my brakes on as some lunatic cyclist rode right in front of me against the lights.
With hindsight I wish I hadn’t braked because the mong on the bike was Self.
“Now it would be interesting to know if this show ever has a serious conservative on it expressing views that Self and his BBC mates really couldn’t handle without risking burst heads.
What do I think?. Never in a thousand years.”
Looking through the ‘A Point of View’ archive since Feb 2007 (when it starts) shows there has never been a single serious conservative on the show. There have been plenty of serious liberals and quite a few open supporters/members of the Labour Party, but not one serious conservative.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qng8/episodes/player
Going backwards chronologically, these have been the presenters of ‘A Point of View’:
Will Self
David Cannadine
Lisa Jardine
Simon Schama
Will Self
Sarah Dunant
John Gray
Lisa Jardine
Mary Beard
Will Self
John Gray
Alain de Botton
Joan Bakewell
Sarah Dunant
Lisa Jardine
David Cannadine
Simon Schama
Lisa Jardine
Clive James
Katharine Whitehorn
Harold Evans
Clive James
Lisa Jardine
Katharine Whitehorn
Lisa Jardine
Lucy Kellaway
Clive James
David Cannadine
Lisa Jardine
Tim Egan
Lisa Jardine
Clive James
Title should be:-
‘LEFTIST Points of View’.
Very interesting. Thanks for that, Craig.
From the dark (ie non-BBC Narrative) side Clive James’ swansong – he hasn’t been back (illness or censorship? You choose) – was to the effect that since there are eminent (and respectable) scientists who don’t buy into the CAGW fraud the idea that there is a “scientific consensus” on CAGW is laughable.
Also I didn’t hear the Lucy Kellaway contribution. Admittedly she’s married to the editor of “Prospect” (as good a leftie publication as any: its readership voted in 2005 for Chomsky as the “greatest public intellectual”) but her columns in the FT are, almost without exception, a fund of good (apolitical) sense.
Having said that, the contributions I have listened to over the years (I’ve now given up listening to the BBC on Sunday mornings – my heart needs a rest) comprise what I imagine is acceptable small talk at Islington dinner parties or backstage at the Royal Court or National Theatre or the “green room” at any BBC programme you care to choose.
Unfortunately, the Lucy Kellaway pieces are no longer available to listen again, though most of Clive James’s pieces are.
Next week an American writer new to the programme (and to me) will take over from Will Self – Adam Gopnik of ‘The New Yorker’. I’m guessing this might be the start of ‘A Point of View’s American election coverage.
Googling suggests that he will fit in nicely with the BBC’s outlook. This critical piece by David Boaz of the conservative Cato Institute presents him as a pro-state, pro-Obama type:
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/adam-gopnik-fails-the-ideological-turing-test/
And Adam Gopnik himself has made his position clear: “I am a liberal”.
http://www.karimbitar.org/gopnik
The bias is now beyond blatant. But had the coalition had any guts the BBC could have been reined in. Unfortunately not: after a brief nervy patch following the formation of the coalition when the BBC feared that its place in the lefty firmament might be in danger, two events convinced the BBC that it would after all remain untouchable:
1. The licence fee settlement This was “sold” as a money saving measure by the coalition (and the BBC) and indeed it froze the fee for a few years. What was never mentioned – and is far more important – was that the settlement guaranteed both the mechanics of the fee and the BBC’s charmed existence (on the taxpayers’ dime) which enables its bias to be uncontrolled by financial concerns.
2. The dream appointment (for the BBC) of one of the ur-members of the political class as head of the BBC Trust.
The results of the coalition’s – make that the CINOs in office – failure of nerve are plain. As we see here daily, the bias just rolls on and, as recorded here from time to time, any complaints – unless from favoured minorities – are either thrown into the memory hole immediately or dismissed after a patronisingly contemptuous exercise in non-engagement.
The New Yorker is the print version of NPR: stuff white people who fancy themselves as the intellectual left-wing elite like.
Read this from Gopnik about what he thinks will happen in France under Hollande. It could very easily be a BBC piece.
After he mentions the Socialist Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who not long ago seemed to incarnate the best of the rational middle, he says this:
What would an actual, honest-to-God Socialist President do in office? Probably not anything particularly socialist—nationalizing the means of production or the like—but, rather, something more along the lines of striking a protective stance. Hollande would defend French “solidarity”—the expensive social programs that make life pleasant and predictable for the vast majority of working people, though they seem to insure high unemployment even in the best of times. But a protective stance, as Muhammad Ali used to demonstrate, is in its way a fighting position. Defending solidarity means fighting austerity, and this seems likely to lead Hollande into conflict with the Germans and their tight-lipped (and walleted) bankers. The hope of American liberals that an Hollande victory would vindicate their position that austerity is bad policy—even though that may be the case—seems unlikely to take hold here. To the American right, anything that goes wrong in Europe does so because Europe is wrong, and not because of austerity, because austerity is right.
This anti-European bias is producing an indecent-seeming amount of schadenfreude—on the right but also on the left—about the prospect of the dissolution of the European Union.
He’ll fit right in. Once again we see that there doesn’t need to be a directive from on high, a memo handed down, or a deliberate editorial bias ordered from the top. The BBC can be too large and disorganized, but the bias will still be institutional because everyone they hire has the same political leanings. They don’t realize what they’re doing, and simply can’t help themselves. It can’t be fixed without a complete purge.
Did not realise he is the husband of ….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/25/deborah-orr-roof-collapse-insurance
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/25/deborah-orr-roof-collapse-insurance
I once saw a chart of who in Hollywood had or was boffing whom, and it seemed pretty sewn up between just about all of them, with a nice exclusion zone to the real world around it all.
Be good to have one for the BBC’s extended ‘family’ of contributors and ‘expert guests’.
I’m still trying to reconcile the headline with ‘A 70ft section of the frontal parapet that had enclosed the attic space of our Victorian terraced home, and of three adjoining houses, had crashed to the ground’. It seems pretty close to the roof collapsing for the ‘truth wouldn’t fit’ generation, and the picture one is looking like tends to support that (even if the loft timbers didn’t). If the snark is that 4,000 slates didn’t land in the au pair’s jacuzzi, I think she’s being a bit literal.
But a media luvvie having a hissy fit on media excesses is… quaint.
For all of you who are not Rugby League fans – don’t worry !
If you visit the BBC’s chaotic website you’ll never become one.
Light years away from the new BBC Salford Mosque the Magic Weekend in Manchester is about to take place.
However, should you be interested in the 13 aside game, all is not lost as you can listen to it on, and get ready for this one, BBC RADIO LEEDS.
I lose track of when the BBC Super League Show is on – I think it’s 3.45am on a Monday, but it’s subject to change. Thank God for Rupert Murdoch’s Sky Sports, particularly now that they seem to have quietly shelved Phil “Well Eddeh” Clarke’s margin meter.
Come on The Wire!
When I heard the multcult word within the first five minutes or so, my heart sank. Then when he went on to read from an inscription which he said meant that someone was a Moor, he added, just in case we missed the import of this: “He was a black man.” It was such clunking, obvious Beeboidery that it was funny.
If he really is an academic / historian and not some actor puppet presenter, he should be embarrassed to be so obviously Beeboid-led and so cliched.
Questions:
1. How does he know the race of the man from the inscription on a tomb stone.
2. Were the Romans so prophetic as to see the need to identify a stiffs skin colour once it had rotted away?
3. Why should anyone care?
‘Moor’ is a word used to describe the inhabitants of NORTH AFRICA which in Roman times would mean the Punic inhabitants of their ‘Africa’ Province as well as any descended from Roman Legionaries settled there. They were certainly NOT ‘black’ in the sense we mean it today – unless you call Libyans and Algerians ‘black’. Darker complected then the Celts yes, ‘Black’ no.
Hard-pressed to get too excited about an outbreak of logic and, better yet, cojones from a senior global entity boss, but Ms. Lagarde is proving an interesting source of soundbites one suspects the BBC will not be so keen on turning its ‘unique’ ‘reporting’ skills upon again or, as can happen if the narrative suits poorly… not.
Beyond her telling the Greeks to grow up and stop playing a victim card they dealt themselves, I cheered to hear her turning the inevitable cloying MSM ‘what do you say to…’ question from rich media luvvies on its head, and show them for the selective hypocrites they are.
If a pol here grew a pair they’d be hard to beat. But the minute some £100k (no matter what, plus guaranteed pension) peroxide sink reading a teleprompter (or a Mason, on more) cranks out a ‘think of the poor children’ line, our lot lose collective bladder control and flounder about trying to be loved and get minority media approval from the twitterati as opposed to doing their jobs properly.
The ‘Breakfast’ paper reviewer this morning is DV’s old sparring partner, Stephen Lowe, the self-declared “socialist” who used to be the Bishop of Hulme.
Last weekend it was Kevin Maguire, Labour-supporting hack from the ‘Mirror’, on Sunday and Olly Mann (who has previously described himself as ‘liberal’) on Saturday.
The weekend before we had two other left-wingers, both self-declared Labour supporters – Simon Fanshawe on Saturday and Phil Redmond on Sunday.
This is a pretty standard pattern with ‘Breakfast’. A long line of left-wing, liberal or non-committal guests followed after a few weeks by a single right-leaning guest (usually Andrew Pierce of the ‘Mail’).
All these guests get to sound off on political topics with very little challenge from the ‘Breakfast’ presenters. so a more politically-balanced selection of reviewers should be an urgent priority for the programme…
…or they could just go ahead and hire that other ‘Breakfast’ regular, Mehdi Hasan, for tomorrow’s programme and have done with it!
It always tickles me that the BBC refer to McGuire as a “journaalist of integrity”.
Around the time of Smeargate when Damian McBride was conspiring with Derek Draper, Charlie Whelan, Tom Watson and Ed Balls to invent smear stories about Cameron and Osborne, It waas shown that Maguire was central to the plot.
I forget who, but at the time some person wrote of Maguire, “His idea of the moral high ground is the nearest passing floater in the sewer he inhabits”
‘the BBC refer to McGuire as a “journaalist of integrity”.
Well, this is an entity which, when assessing its own standards, rather uniquely does it itself and, amazingly, having done so, finds itself to be incapable of anything but 110% purity.
Hence, in the whole moral relativity scheme of things, when casting about the BBC infirmament, Mr. Maguire’s ‘integrity’ is probably a few notches higher than the pondweed that select him to be their one degree of separation when Mr. Hasan is not free.
INBBC’s Cairo Bureau: more oxymorons for Islam.
After Ms Y Knell has touted the oxymoronic phrase, ‘moderate Islamist’ to describe Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood-supporting Presidential candidate, Fotouh, INBBC’s Mr J Leyne follows this up with this quaint modification of the oxymoron: ‘independent Islamist’.
INBBC:-
“Egypt Muslim Brotherhood seeks presidential poll allies”
(-and INBBC is doing all it can to help.)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18213845
The BBC claim to give two sides to every story.
Of course for a media power as pervasive as the Beeb the trick of getting their own agenda across whilst still clinging to some flimsy modicum of balance is really very easy – it is all about what emphasis you give to each side of the story.
On a regular basis we notice here that for the BBC some stories are more equal than others.
For example:
1. Think about what have we learnt from Leveson?
2. Think about what side of the story the BBC have emphasized and what elements they have glossed over.
The News of the World tapped into voicemail messages – but so did the Mirror.
News International papers encouraged cops spill the inside track on certain criminal investigations – but so did the Guardian.
Some Conservative politicians got very pally with News Corps exectives – but so did Labour politicians.
News Corps lobbied the politicians for their own commercial self-interest – but so did the BBC.
Did the BBC bother with Leveson when Mandelson and Jowell were giving evidence on Thursday…or did I miss their detailed analysis somehow?
Anyone even mentioning the role of the BBC in lobbying for Murdoch to be nobbled?…again, I must have missed their candid critiques of their own schmoozing.
And as for that Laura Johnson ferrying rioters around London…surely her “minibus for looters” scheme is only being kinder to the environment, and reducing congestion…so it won`t be long before this eco-warrior gets released.
Quentin Letts noticed the same thing
Mandy blackout
Notable absence: Lord Mandelson’s Leveson appearance was strangely under-reported by the BBC
News coverage of the Leveson Inquiry by the BBC is almost endless. With one exception. Did you notice that when Labour’s Lord Mandelson appeared at Leveson this week, the BBC suddenly found many other pressing items of news with which to stuff its bulletins?
I literally could not care less about the 24/7 Leveson coverage. It is unbelievably boring.
The BBC should just finish they enquiry and tell us the findings so we can all get on with our lives.
For BBC-EU’s Mr R. PESTON:
‘Daily Mail’ –
“Why DOES France’s monetary madame reduce our men to mush?”
By Jan Moir
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2149644/JAN-MOIR-Why-DOES-Frances-monetary-madame-reduce-men-mush.html#ixzz1vxxJZaDO
‘Daily Telegraph’:
“IMF head Christine Lagarde is a ‘very seductive politician’,
says BBC’s Robert Peston.
“Robert Peston, the BBC’s business editor, admitted on air to being charmed by the ‘seductive’ head of the IMF, Christine Lagarde.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9286533/IMF-head-Christine-Lagarde-is-a-very-seductive-politician-says-BBCs-Robert-Peston.html
Clearly not seduced anyone into voting for her though!
Like Warnock and Williams, Leather and Slipman, Jardine and Beard…the kind of old gals the BBC likes best.
And Boadens, Thomsons and the like are still hanging up in the wardrobe as spares…a golden era for these unelected golden girls.
Bloody men eh?…
Compare and contrast, ‘Daily Mail’, and BBC-NUJ on
IMMIGRATION problems:
1.) ‘Mail’ –
“May pledges to stop Greek migrants flooding into Britain if they are forced to pull out of the Euro”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150270/May-pledges-stop-Greek-migrants-flooding-Britain-forced-pull-Euro.html#ixzz1vy18VGjQ
2.) BBC-NUJ:
“Euro crisis: UK plans for rise in immigrants”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18216538
The BBC flip flop with the above article, they go from legal migration to illegal immigrants and back again.
Sorry, Correction: they start on legal migration and go off track to illegal immigrants.
I think the first article I read flip flopped. I went back and read it again. I corrected myself because the same news was not there so thought i must have mis read it.
Then checked the updated time. Updated 2 mins after i had read it. Now I’m not so sure I should correct myself.
My morning surf always throws up a few odd comparisons, often as much for what is left out as what is skewed in.
Take the whole Leveson showboat…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18204074
Interesting how the comments shape up. Given the ratings are pretty down on any querying the slant, I wonder if, now the actual UK working force are able to share their views at the weekend, the plug will get pulled before the ratings get ‘spoiled’, as per…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18199553
Bad judgement by such as Mr. Robinson not being possible, according to the ECU , as he is an ‘impartial professional’. Uh-huh. I’m convinced now.
Or.. on matters EU…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18186977
Yep, comments on the latest from One Ed no longer welcome.
Meanwhile in the area of ‘no space to fit…’:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tomchiversscience/100160469/guest-post-the-green-partys-jenny-jones-responds/
Mr. Chivers not being a frothing, swivel-eyed right-wing demagogue, I wonder if, him asking questions, a few rather key ones will get answered? Guessing, given some are on ‘stealth edits’, these are not questions the BBC will be asking of a favoured green pol, either.
But I suspect we will be getting a lot more of the ‘independent tax expert’ mentioned here:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/timworstall/100017439/there-is-no-magic-money-tree-of-uncollected-tax-we-cannot-close-the-deficit-with-more-tax-inspectors/
And finally, on matters Muslim and Sisterhood, I noted this comment from the Egyptian election front..
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/richardspencer/100160657/revolution-what-revolution-asks-egyptians-but-the-liberals-lost-for-a-reason-we-can-all-learn-from/
‘So the candidates in Egypt who were against the imposition of sharia law are liberals, but the people in Europe and the US who are against the imposition of sharia law are islamophobic, right wing bigots?’
That would be according to whom… again?
ps: I had this for a few hours this morning (not for the first time):
Service Temporarily Unavailable
The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.
Additionally, a 503 Service Temporarily Unavailable error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
Do I need to check my ISP/Browser?
BBC-NUJ still not interested in these Olympic issues:
“Britain must speak out against Olympic bigotry on women, and Israel.”
by Robin Shepherd.
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1247/britain_must_speak_out_against_olympic_bigotry_on_women_and_israel
Nah…the Great God Sport always deserves the necessary sacrifices…like the Great God Celebrity/Pop. Both are part of the One World New Order-will keep our mind off the terror centres and the fact that an informed opinion will land you in jail or sent to Riyadh for reprogramming.
So it is that a Button or a Humperdinck is buttonholed to give an opinion on “human rights”…right up to the point where the BBCs film crew get their angles, then it`s all consigned to the cutting room…we`d not want to trouble the sponsors would we?
Just like the Delhi Commonwealth Games…the little urchins might as well sew footballs as make bricks…so long as the balls end up on Match of the Day as opposed to Primark or JJB.
The little ragamuffins cause must be the greater one than turning out tat for the chavs…now a photo op with Adrian Chiles or Gary Lineker?…definitely worth missing a few years of school for eh?
I wonder when the bBC is going to expose this story.
http://the-eyeontheworld.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/is-iran-behind-spate-of-scientist.html
Instead it continues to paint the picture that the former head of Libyan intelligence jailed for the biggest terrorist outrage over British soil was an innocent man.
The bBC, the traitors in our Midst.
The bBC, and its promotion of hatred towards the Jew.
Israel denies African migrants’ rights, says US
The US state department has criticised Israel’s treatment of thousands of African asylum seekers who it says are being denied basic social services.The US annual report on human rights says that many are refused refugee status, so cannot access health care.It is estimated that up to 60,000 migrants, most from Sudan and Eritrea, have entered Israel in recent years.The report also criticises Israeli government officials for referring to migrants negatively as “infiltrators”.
So reading the above do you get the viewpoint that Israel has pissed off its so called American bankers with its so called xenophobic and racist polices towards Non-jews.. it does until you read what the Americans write up.
The bBC says:
” The US state department has criticised Israel’s treatment of thousands of African asylum seekers who it says are being denied basic social services
The US writes:
The country’s laws provide for the granting of temporary asylum, and the government has established a system for providing temporary protection for most asylum seekers; however, there were complaints about the system’s accessibility and reports of discrimination. The UNHCR and NGOs criticized new asylum regulations released on January 2 that require applicants to submit claims within one year of arriving in the country, allow the Ministry of Interior to reject applications without appeal even at the registration stage, and exclude “enemy nationals” from receiving asylum. The regulations fail to establish an independent appeal process.
Sudanese and Eritrean asylum seekers, who constituted approximately 85 percent of all asylum seekers in the country, were not allowed access to asylum procedures but were given renewable “conditional release” documents that deferred deportation and had to be renewed every few months. According to the UNHCR, during the year there were 4,603 new asylum applications; the government rejected 3,692 and approved one. There were 6,412 previous cases that remained pending at year’s end.
Persons held in immigration detention rarely were released prior to judicial determination of their status. Moreover, if the detainee’s country of origin had no diplomatic or consular representation, the individual could remain in detention for months.
Government officials often negatively referred to asylum seekers as “infiltrators.” According to NGOs, officials periodically characterized asylum seekers as directly associated with rises in crime, disease, and terrorism. On December 8, in an interview with Army Radio, Minister of Interior Eli Yishai said, “I will safeguard the Jewish majority of the state, and I ensure that the last of the Sudanese, and the Eritreans, and all of the infiltrators, to the last of them, will return to their countries.”
The bBC, and its promotion of hatred towards the Jew.
Israel denies African migrants’ rights, says US
The bBC writes:
The report acknowledges that once recognised refugees are allowed to work and access social services, but non-governmental organisations are campaigning for greater access to health care, particularly for victims of abuse.
The US writes:
Recognized refugees received social services, including access to the national healthcare system, but the government did not provide asylum seekers with public social benefits such as health insurance. NGOs were critical of the process of victim identification and the lack of medical treatment upon arrival for asylum seekers who had been abused, raped, and tortured in Egypt. The UNHCR and NGOs advocated for greater access to health and social services for asylum seekers, particularly victims of abuse.
The bBC, and its promotion of hatred towards the Jew.
Israel denies African migrants’ rights, says US
The bBC writes:
The report acknowledges that once recognised refugees are allowed to work and access social services, but non-governmental organisations are campaigning for greater access to health care, particularly for victims of abuse.
The US writes:
Recognized refugees received social services, including access to the national healthcare system, but the government did not provide asylum seekers with public social benefits such as health insurance. NGOs were critical of the process of victim identification and the lack of medical treatment upon arrival for asylum seekers who had been abused, raped, and tortured in Egypt. The UNHCR and NGOs advocated for greater access to health and social services for asylum seekers, particularly victims of abuse.
Anybody else experiencing issues with this website?????
pounce, issues? Yes, when I post a comment of more than a moderate length, I keep getting forced back up to the beginning of the comment, while the cursor stay where it is, now hidden. This has happened a few times over the past few weeks.
I hope someone has managed to import the archived comments over from the old site. Be a damn pity to lose all those years of feedback.
I find it mangles my spellings …
Just for the info, Here is what the US had to say about the Uk. A write up which is worse than the one Israel received from the Americans, but the bBC never bothered mentioning any of this:
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the UK) is a constitutional monarchy with a multiparty, parliamentary form of government. Citizens elect representatives to the House of Commons, the lower chamber of the bicameral Parliament. They last did so in free and fair elections in May 2010. Members of the upper chamber, the House of Lords, occupy appointed or hereditary seats. Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales each have elected legislative bodies and devolved administrations, with varying degrees of legislative and executive powers. The UK has 14 overseas territories. Each of the overseas territories has its own constitution while the UK government is responsible for issues relating to external affairs, security, and defense. Security forces throughout the UK and its territories reported to civilian authorities.
During the year there were significant reported incidences of sexual crimes, including the sexual exploitation of children. Racial and ethnic discrimination continued to be a problem in many areas. Child labor was a reported problem, both in the UK and in some of its overseas territories.
Other human rights problems include reported deaths in prison, threatened eviction of rioters’ families from their public housing after the August riots, unequal pay for equal work between men and women, child abuse, anti-Semitic crimes, relations with Travellers (a distinct nomadic ethnic group with its own history and culture), trafficking in persons, homophobic crimes, and limitations on the freedom to strike. In Bermuda the law provides no protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation or age.
The government investigated all allegations of official wrongdoing, and there were no reported cases of impunity.
Just before the 2010 general election I commented that BBC1 London news at 10:30 pm (“news where you are”) had unprecedently turned over most (all?) its 5 minutes to a critique of a play in London. (I don’t think the programme before or since has given such – or any (?) – publicity to a play). The play was “Posh”: a thinly disguised attack on the existence and members of the Bullingdon Club (ie a party political attack on Cameron and friends).
This morning, on Today, using the justification that “Posh” is now opening in the West End, another few minutes were spent discussing with the play’s writer how she has adapted the play to suit the political atmosphere two years on and giving a few soundbites of “toffs” cutting up rough. In other words, it was more free publicity for an undistinguished, vaguely amusing but clearly anti-government, anti-Conservative tract.
There was no reason for its inclusion in the Today line-up except its political stance. It’s subject matter is no longer news except at the BBC and points left where Mrs Thatcher – let alone the “toffs” – gets a walk-on part in every discussion of the cutz, social (im)mobility and the lack of taxpayer-subsidised housing. Rewritten or not, the play is 2 years old after all.
That reminds me of the recent item on Today about Taliban poetry. No reason for that to be on Today – a flagship daily news and current affairs programme – either. Or the French footballer on Newsnight recently. There was no news in that either – just a Beeboid agenda to prmote and an attempt to manufacture something out of nothing. If they had succeeded in getting what they wanted, they would have promoted that even more widely across the Beeboid empire as “News”.
Yes, and they kept plugging it right from the start of the programme.
The ‘Today’ website blurb says: “Sarah Montague went to meet Laura Wade, the play’s creator, to find out whether the play is still relevant two years on.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9724000/9724075.stm
For starters, this presupposes that the play WAS relevant in the first place. Worse, Sarah Montague didn’t challenge the play’s relevance (or query the playwright’s motivation), despite what that blurb says. Instead, Sarah M. blatantly asserted that the play IS relevant (which was very helpful of her):
“What’s clear from watching it is that this is a play for now”, she said.
Who needs to pay for publicity when ‘Today’ will give you it for free – if it suits them to?
Maybe one of us should write the story of the Milibands when they were babysat by the Benns at Goldsmith College PIE support meetings back in the early 70s.
Good old Ralph the dad, Uncle Tony and all the rest of them…Jack Jones and his roubles, Tom Driberg mincing through with a Kray or two on his arm.
Did it happen?…well what`s truth got to do with it, because I myself think its a play for now.
Or if that does`n t do it…what about Jack Straw bringing his son to the police station with his drugs..apparently because Pinochet wanted some hash brownies to alleviate his back pain?
I`ve already seen them both…and they`re brilliant.
Yes…I like my head!
120 Afghan girls have been poisoned in a second anti-school attack by the Taliban.
Does anybody need or care to hear more of their ‘poetry’, like the BBC seems to think we need to ‘know our enemy’?
The mindset that would entertain such a notion fills me with such revulsion – perhaps even more than the Taliban themselves. One can think they don’t know any better, what’s the BBC’s excuse?
Re the Egyptian presidency:
In an extraordinary World Have Your Say programme soon after Mubarak’s fall, two leading Muslim brotherhood members were asked questions by the listeners and by the BBC host, who put the following question to one of them:
Is it still the case that the Muslim Brotherhood has no desire to win the presidency?
This was the response:
Oh yes. We have declared many times that we will not nominate a person for the presidential campaign.
And who was the Muslim Brotherhood leader who uttered those words? None other than <i.Dr. Mohammed Morsi.
Well, he wont be the first politician to lie, that’s for sure. Still, that statement may well come back to haunt him.
The theme promoted throughout the programme by Morsi and a spokesman from London, Dr. Ahmed Fahmi, was that the will of the people must prevail and that the Muslim Brotherhood would be quite content to stand aside and allow it to prevail.
Neither of them would directly answer the following question, which was put to them repeatedly by the frustrated host:
Does the Muslim Brotherhood accept Israel’s right to exist?
Fahmi claimed that they would accept a Jew as president if that was the will of the people. (Easy to say that, since the veracity of the statement will never be tested.)
On whether a Moslem could convert to Christianity, Morsi claimed that was fine, unless he made a movement out of his choice, thereby threatening the society. If he was prepared to become a Christian in the privacy of his own home, no problem – which of course begs the question: how would he be able to worship?
On intermarriage, a Muslim man was free to marry a non-Muslim woman but the reverse was unacceptable.
On a woman assuming the presidency, that was not really OK, since there are “small” differences between women and men which would preclude such an option. Besides, women have domestic duties.
Guy who hosted the programme was Ros Atkins, one of very few BBC journalists worth his salt. Credit where it’s due.
Radio 4’s Book of the Week, Hedge Britannia, a book about the history of hedges in Britain, yesterday treated us to a long, boring tirade, rubbishing the Union Jack (as the author called it) as a symbol of Britain and its identity – it launches into this straight after the intro music, at 55 secs in and drones on tediously till about 4mins in:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01j6qz4
I don’t object to his alternative suggestion for a flag based on hedges but that tirade about the Union flag was something else. Why did the abridger of the book leave such a longwinded section of appallingly, unoriginal, tedious drivel in? To make a point, Beeboids, and further an agenda?
. . . and on the Radio 4 “news” at 2:00 pm, re May’s (illegal – and the BBC and labour know it) threat to restrict Greeks entering the UK after eurodoom, the item is spun as Labour “doing something” rather than reacting and, to boost the picture of Conservatives as hate-filled and uncharitable, the BBC chooses to quote and big up Dennis MacShane – EU looney, proven liar and, I believe, non-holder of the Labour whip (so not a Labour spokesman at all) – to “shame” the Conservatives.
Now in the real world – in the one our leaders have signed us up to in Brussels – in the absence of dire emergency (and this isn’t one) the UK government has no power to stop people from other EU countries coming here. So May is playing to the gallery and lying her guts out. If the BBC (or Labour) want to make May look stupid (barn door I know) they could have quoted this law. But, of course, this is the BBC. Nothing which makes the EU look bad must be broadcast – so it isn’t – and the major parties (and the LibDems) conspire to give the impression that we have control over our borders and play party political games with the BBC’s connivance.
BBC-NUJ TV News continues to give uninterrupted propaganda to
‘UK Uncut’s street blockage/political harassment outside Lib Dem Mr CLEGG’s house.
You know the sort of political interview which BBC-NUJ reserves for its political chums, such as ‘UK Uncut’ e.g, starting:
‘What’s the purpose of this occupation?’
And three uninterruped minutes later from Beeboid:
‘Thank you very much.’
BBC-NUJ joins in the illegal ‘fun’ and propagandises for illegal occupation (as indicated above).
“UK Uncut protest targets Deputy PM Nick Clegg’s Putney home”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18219101
The bBC, and how it rewrites History to substantiate its left-wing bent.
Viewpoint: The time Britain slid into chaos
The news from Europe is getting worse by the day. Economic gloom across the continent and multiple crises in the currency zone. With rising unemployment and inflation there are riots in the streets with forecasts of anarchy in some parts of western Europe. And along with the simmering discontent there is a worrying rise of radical groups and populist right wing movements. In the fringes, secessionists are pushing for independence, indeed for the break up of the whole European order under which we have all lived secure and comfortable for so long. At home in Britain there are worrying signs in every town – cuts in public services have led to closures of public baths and libraries, the failure of road maintenance, breakdowns in the food supply and civic order.While political commentators and church leaders talk about a “general decline in morality” and “public apathy”, the rich retreat to their mansions and country estates and hoard their cash. It all sounds eerily familiar doesn’t it? But this is not Angela Merkel’s eurozone – it is Roman Britannia towards the year 400, the period of the fall of the Roman Empire.
That people is how the bBC writes up the fall of Rome around the year 500AD. Yup according to the bBC Christian leaders opined about the general decline in morality” yet and a big yet, Christianity didn’t take root in the Uk until 100 years after the Romans left. Mind you that doesn’t stop the bBC from promoting this viewpoint:
Edward Gibbon, in his great book Decline and Fall, famously blamed the collapse not only on the barbarians, but on Christianity. He thought it had undermined society with its focus on another, better world.
or from parroting this bBC staple:
The British went back to an Iron Age rural farming economy. The population declined from its four million peak to maybe only a million, devastated by the great plagues, famines and climate crises of the 500s.
Err bBC the great Plague Transpired in 1665, and the climates crises, lets see the only two that are reported are the medieval warm period 1050-1400 and the mini age age 1250 to the start of the 20th century.
I do like how the bBC talks about right wing politicians
Gildas talks about right-wing politicians advocating glibly attractive solutions that appealed to the populace while “any leader who seemed more soft, or who was more inclined to actually tell things as they are, was painted as ruinous to the country and everyone directed their contempt towards him”.
Yup leftwingers really did offer an alternative lifestyle in those days. Peace not war and not the North Sea kept the Uk safe from the Huns, Vangoths and their like.
Then the bBC really out does itself with this eye opener:
So, the Roman Empire didn’t fall everywhere or all at one time. Indeed you could argue that the last part of the Roman Empire to fall anywhere was Gwynedd in the English conquest of 1282.
1281, Constantinople (the seat of the East Roman Empire) fell to Islam in 1453.
Gee I wonder why the bBC don’t want to mention that.
The old chestnut of Britain slipping into a “dark Age” where social, intellectual and cultural development ceased after the Romans left is an old, and inaccurate chestnut.
Recent archeological evidence indicates that many areas thrived, trading with Europe and many other parts of the world. Ports and market towns were built to exploit this trade.
All the new evidence points to the people of this country developing a society after the Roman period. There was no “backward” movement – our culture developed nicely, thank you very much.
To describe the period between the 5th and 9th centuries as “The Dark Ages” is a myth based on incomplete historical evidence that became accepted by many historians as fact.
Conclusion
According to the bBC, the fall of the Western Roman Empire had more to do with:
Right wing politics
(But leave out the Ultra rightwing views of the Huns, Visgoths and their like)
Climate Change
The Church.
Not only is the bBC incorrect in all of the above, they then claim that small groups of foreigners employed in the country as security guards, mercenaries, field workers and street cleaners. saved the British Bacon by not mixing, not speaking the local language and living in their own little ghettos, yeah right. Street cleaners after the fall of the Roman Empire bBC, that doesn’t fit in with this snapshot of Post Roman life in the UK you relate in the same article:
Some towns survived – Carlisle for example still had a town council and a working aqueduct in the 7th Century – but in most of them, with the rubbish piled up in the streets and the civic buildings left to decay, eventually the people left.
These is nothing more dangerous than the rewriting of history infused with political correctness that is the law at the bBC.
Oh and for your leftwing wankers at the bBC, if you want to read a real piece of fiction about the fall of society, then read the first 3 Foundation books by Asimov
The bBC, the traitors in our Midst.
The Britons were all Christianised by the time the Saxons arrived but were, of course, marginalised in a celtic fringe by the time Augustine arrived and started converting the Saxons, in 597.
I’m not surprised that they didn’t stress the figure of Vortigern – a Celtic ruler who invited a few Saxon mercenaries over for his own purposes only to find they got their mates back home to swarm over as well and ended up running the place. I’m sure some BBCspeak ‘Asians’ entertain fantasies of doing a repeat.
MUSIC:
Mozart’s Marriage of Figaro just about to start on Radio 3.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01hz7rs
Supplementary, popular music- still available:
‘Frank Sinatra’ 7 of 13; the arrangers.
(60 mins audio)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01hpt93/Frank_Sinatra_Voice_of_the_Century_Episode_7/
Thanks for that, George. I wish I hadn’t missed so many of the episodes. Still I have loads of Sinatra.
Also worth mentioning, for any jazz lovers, the new Saturday midnight programme on Radio 3 presented by Geoffrey Smith has been very good so far – last week featured Louis Armstrong and his influence. I haven’t looked at this week’s prog info.
How the bBC is becoming Renowned for re-writing History.
Nazi war criminal Klaas Carel Faber dies in Germany
Dutch-born Nazi war criminal Klaas Carel Faber has died in Germany at the age of 90. Faber, who served in an SS unit, was second on the Simon Wiesenthal Centre list of most-wanted Nazi criminals. He was sentenced to death in 1947 for the deaths of 22 Jews at the Westerbork transit camp. His term was later commuted to life. Faber escaped in 1952, was given German citizenship and died in Bavaria, where he had been living….Originally from the western Dutch town of Haarlem, Faber served in an SS unit known as Kommando Feldmeijer during World War II. The group was renowned for killing around 50 Dutch civilians considered “anti-German” as reprisals for attacks by the resistance.
Renowned bBC? Shouldn’t the correct word be, Infamous.
But hey to a certain religious group, the Nazis did well, gee I wonder which group that is, I wonder if it is the same group the bBC quite literally bends over time and time again in which appease. Maybe there lies the reason, the bBC feels that a War criminal did good in murdering people in cold blood.
The bBC, the traitors in our midst.
Dunno, it’s probably more a reflection of the BBC’s slipping standards. Probably whoever wrote the piece didn’t realise “infamous” was the correct word to use and that “renowned” was way out of line.
On the other hand, I could be giving the BBC too much credit here.
It’s just sloppy writing. I’d have gone with notorious…from Google…
Notorious – Famous or well known, typically for some bad quality or deed.
Infamous – Well known for some bad quality or deed.
Renowned – Known or talked about by many people; famous.
…unless they were trying to avoid those ‘value judgements’.
Ree, I think you may have hit the nail on the head there. It’a value judgement avoidance exercise.
Frankly, since the BBC decided to take on the combined roles of team PR and morale officer for perpetrators of terrorist attacks involving sneaking up on folk and shooting them in the back or blowing a bunch of civvies to hamburger, describing them more often than not, ‘audacious’ or ‘daring’, nothing would surprise any more.
I would imagine the group might have seen universal condemnation for its actions, acquired a lasting reputation for barbarity or found itself vilified for breaking every decent convention of war, but maybe all these terms, and others more appropriate as suggested, are better applied to those undeserving enough to be on the wrong side of BBC editorial uniqueness, so… hence… ‘renowned’ it appears it had to be.
One presumes Drs. Scezandy from Oslo are cool with this?
If deemed a bit beyond the pale by the home team (silence not so golden, and one can just guess the semantic weasel ECU would use to justify it), maybe some of the recent flouncers could be tempted back to explain why, when it’s a paid multi-billion ‘professional’ broadcast employee who is a bit off colour that’s just one of those things, but on a free independent blog of individuals, even the merest hint of a controversial view or… heaven forfend, error…. is enough to engage full hissy fit, toy/pram ejection and pan-threads tarring of everyone.
Have I missed something or has everyone avoided using that M word?
Dear me, just like the inbbc?
Come on guys, shout about the elephant in the room:
ISLAM !
DC, what M word do you mean? You used two “Missed” and “Me”. 😉
The financial turmoil in Europe appears to have a knock on effect that I hadn’t thought of. Greece is on the verge of going bankrupt. Unless more money is forthcoming by mid June, the Greek government will not be able to pay state employees, forcing millions into unemployment. Many will look to leave Greece and a mass migration may take place. Britain, with its most generous benefits and welfare system is now being touted as the most likely destination for most of the EU’s economic refugees and under EU regulations there is free passage between all EU countries, with two exceptions.
It’s now being reported that Britain is preparing contingency plans for such an eventuality.
“Theresa May: we’ll stop migrants if euro collapses”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9291493/Theresa-May-well-stop-migrants-if-euro-collapses.html
So how does the BBC cover this?
“Euro crisis: UK plans for rise in immigrants”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18216538
You only have to read to the fourth sentence before you come across this:
“Labour MP Denis Macshane said Mrs May was “stoking up tension”, and restrictions were impractical.”
Futher down the article the BBC gives further rein to Macshane’s burbling:
“Former Labour Europe Minister, Denis MacShane, says he was worried by Mrs May’s comments.
“Every government department has contingency plans for most things. It does frighten me a bit because Mrs May is stoking up tension and of course, if we ban every Greek from coming into Britain, the Greeks will ban every Brit from going into Greece – that’s a great start to the holiday season.”
The BBC is being disingenuous here, rushing off to get a “rent a quote” from someone they describe as a “Former Labour Europe Minister”, yet they neglect to inform us that McShane, a man who claimed for eight laptops on three years, who fiddled over £150,000 in Parliamentary expenses, is currently under criminal investigation by the Metropolitan Police has been suspended by the Labour party and is no longer under the Labour Whip in the Commons.
In a nutshell, the BBC scraped the barrel to get a derogatory quote about sensible precautions that are being taken by the Government. And why? Because these precautions run counter to the BBC’s stance on immigration.
I have to add that rarely have I seen a more ludicrous statement than McShane’s “if we ban every Greek from coming into Britain, the Greeks will ban every Brit from going into Greece – that’s a great start to the holiday season.”
The Greeks will be gagging for every penny that they can get, and Mcshane becomes more preposterous by the day, yet the BBC gives prominence to his febrile utterings.
Is he back in Parliament then?…having paid back his office expenses and the like as purloined from the taxpayer?
Vaz…McShane…let`s not mock the Roman Emperor who mad a senator of his horse any longer shall we?
‘more preposterous by the day, yet the BBC gives prominence’
Ratings gold and tribal knife turning.
No concern for how this may all adversely affect the country, which the government may have to worry about.
A perfect storm for our most trust national opposition PR agency.
‘Ed has no opinion on the matter… again.. and that’s good enough for us’.
‘Lost kingdoms of Africa’ on BBC2., just now. This week, Morrocco, and how The West owes everything to Islam. Next week, somwhere else, in Africa, and how The West owes everything to Islam. The following week etc. etc…ad nauseum.
Yes; this repeat programme was presented by Islamic apologist, one Mr Casely-Hayford.
He was taken with some of the buildings in e.g. Marrakech; he was impressed with some ancient books on Islamic law, he was impressed with some examples of irrigation. BUT-
although he used the word JIHAD several times, he did not indicate the nature of the Islamic jihad violence against the Berbers; but, instead, as an ‘art historian’ he totally separated the narrative of the Islamic jihad conquest of North Africa, and the subsequent setting up of an Islamic empire. Of course, this empire extended to Spain.
Instead we heard about Islamic buildings in hushed, reverential tones.
Compare the scathing political treatment which BBC-NUJ routinely provides on any programme on the history of the British Empire!
So, as confirmed by its political agenda in programming, INBBC prefers Islamic Empire to the British Empire. INBBC will never put out a programme critical of the Islamic violent jihad conquest in Africa, Asia or Europe.
This is censored history to INBBC.
this ‘documentary’ on BBC2 A Picture of London, couldn’t they put the words ‘It’s a Shit hole’ on the screen for 1 hour?
‘While our society may pay lip service to equality of opportunity, our fundamental values remain those of inherited wealth and privilege; and that while we may slap on a “call-me-Dave” democratising topcoat, beneath this lies a thick distemper of deference’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18205999
Yet more left wing commentary from Will Self…
Jeff
Indeed, I wonder when they will give Peter Hitchens the job.
While our society may pay lip service to equality of opportunity, our fundamental values remain those of inherited wealth and privilege; and that while we may slap on a “call-me-Dave” democratising topcoat, beneath this lies a thick distemper of deference……***sniffs cocaine***
Bizarre story on the news this evening. Baroness Warsi accused of being an expense cheat in 2008. However when covering the story it looked like a case of double letting.
I am not a big fan of Warsi, but the Beeb should at least look at the facts before trying to smear someone, rather than jump to conclusions .
But their excuse is that they are quoting the Times. Great, their news gathering source is a Murdoch newspaper!
‘the Beeb should at least look at the facts before trying to smear someone, rather than jump to conclusions .
But their excuse is that they are quoting the Times.’
Watertight oversight has long been a variable construct, and when able to use one degree of separation sources, if the cause is worthy, even if those sources are from the NI stable, exceptions can be made.
I wonder who will be invited on to read this out on Planet Marr today… time for further Mehdi support since the ‘not doing his job well enough, even at the NS’ malfunction? Or Baroness Kennedy? She’s always good for a ‘look what I have found on an impartial, non-tribal basis.
As our Andy is wont to say ‘Hmn-hmn’.
I wonder if the BBC will cover this one. Obama is hiring defrocked Catholic paedo priests to work for his TSA!
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2012/05/24/i-team-priest-removed-from-ministry-due-to-sex-abuse-allegations-works-at-phl/