I see that Friday’s Open Thread is bulging at the seams so here’s another to keep things readable…
DIAMOND JUBILEE OPEN THREAD..
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir Dec 19, 08:43
Midweek 18th December 2024
“The 20-year-old, from Croydon, was “inspired” by infamous high-profile stabbings and had made “provocative statements” to female students on his… - atlas_shrugged Dec 19, 08:42
Midweek 18th December 2024
> “Bournemouth: Asylum seeker killer could be deported after life sentence” Could? Could? Could? There must be three certainties: Death… - MarkyMark Dec 19, 08:40
Midweek 18th December 2024
650 MP’s expense to go up? 650 MP’s pay to go up? 805 Lords pay to increase? [img]https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/03/14/12/55334663-0-image-a-7_1647262311709.jpg[/img] - Fedup2 Dec 19, 08:38
Midweek 18th December 2024
Excellent news – water prices to go up from April at the same time as council taxes … pound down… - Zephir Dec 19, 08:34
Midweek 18th December 2024
[img]https://i.postimg.cc/RFvZwdSr/Capturezxc.jpg[/img] - Zephir Dec 19, 08:33
Midweek 18th December 2024
RE AsI above, some alternative suggestions for bbc tattoos or cubical signage: [img]https://i.postimg.cc/4N0yjp5t/karlkraus1.jpg[/img] - MarkyMark Dec 19, 08:33
Midweek 18th December 2024
“Mao did more good than Harm” comment will end Diane Abbotts career….. 2024 … Mother of the House is now… - MarkyMark Dec 19, 08:32
Midweek 18th December 2024
“No information as to Nasen Saadi’s immigration status is given in the Sky report”….. …. OLD CASE …. “Bournemouth: Asylum… - MarkyMark Dec 19, 08:30
Midweek 18th December 2024
“Your daily reminder that foreign funding to U.K. political parties is illegal.” “Labour donor Lord Alli breached Lords rules” “Developing…
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
If nothing else, the humor from the left about this Waste of Time and Money has also to be celebrated.
Gobshite Allibaba Brown’s – “What about the 166% of children starving to death in Liverpool ?” was a good start.
Followed by fellow gobshite Poorly Toynbee – “We should be celebrating Shakespeare’s birthday instead” was a good follow up.
And the week-end’s celebrations have barely started !
So a lot more fun to look forward to courtesy of the BBC.
you could say the same about the overseas money we give to india regardless of them wanting it. that would feed the children in our country.
Radio 5 live last night was shocking;
Foaming at the mouth Left Wing female “Comedian” that you’ve never heard of ? check
Presenter steering the discussion in a blatantly anti monarchist / Republican direction ? check
To be fair, they did have Sean Gabb on but I think he only got to say a couple of things which were very “un BBC” in tone, probably shocking to the ears of the producers, so that was the last you heard of him.
The left wing “comedian” got to rant & rave against the Royal family quite literally till she was foaming at the mouth.
I had to Google to find out who this ‘comedian’ was. From her Guardian profile (quelle surprise)…
Kate Smurthwaite is a feminist campaigner and performer. She is the vice-chair of Abortion Rights UK and an active member of London Feminist Network
http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/kate-smurthwaite
…So far, ticking all the boxes, and at her blog she appears to have an obsession with the Daily Mail (quelle surprise)…
http://cruellablog.blogspot.co.uk/
…from her facebook page…
“I’d rather rally emotionally behind something that isn’t elitist, sexist, racist, and costing us millions of pounds.”
…she obviously ran out of knee-jerk ‘isms’ to shoe-horn in there, but it’s easy to see why she was invited by the BBC. Has anyone heard of her? I certainly haven’t, but someone obviously has at the BBC, no doubt on a list of ‘our kind of people’. It’s also noticeable that leftists only become fiscally responsible and concerned for the burden on the tax-payer when something like the Monarchy is discussed, but whenever someone complains about the government’s capacity to spend and waste in general they are just selfish, greedy, right-wing bastards.
One usually finds that the things that are “non elitist, sexist and racist” do cost us millions of pounds – ask anyone that runs a business.
I would included the BBC in this – but of course they are elitist (the modern, “progressive” liberal left elite)
Textbook
Would be interested to hear where she was educated, one word……Elitist
Hypocrisy
Where did you go to school Kate ?
Were there any poor people there ?
The Hypocrisy of The Left knows no bounds.
She went to Oxford University, & before that, I dont think it takes a genius to realise it was somewhere private & “elitist”
Amazing how rich, Left Wing Bourgeois types hate “Elitism” but are its main beneficiaries, Hypocritical Scum of the worst kind.
The very same people who want to shut down “elitist” grammar schools to deny poor children the opportunity of tasting success.
Exactly, Bourgeois Scum of the worst kind.
Given the not un-pertinent information now becoming apparent on this young lady’s interesting past, was the ‘Presenter steering the discussion’ unaware of this somewhat contradictory stance, and if not, what did they not raise it?
Erm, from sympathy with her views showing a slight Leftist bias, perhaps?
Does this comedian have a name?
And somehow, you could tell she was “literally” foaming at the mouth – on the radio.
Will BBC-NUJ show as much critical interest in WARSI and Islamic organisations, as it does in HUNT and News International?
“Tory peer Baroness Warsi and her secret business”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/9308031/Tory-peer-Baroness-Warsi-and-her-secret-business.html
Andrew Gilligan, ‘Telegraph’ (March, 2012)-
“How taxpayers are still funding the extremists.
Millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money is still being paid to groups linked to Islamist extremism, more than a year after David Cameron vowed to outlaw the practice.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/andrew-gilligan/9121313/How-taxpayers-are-still-funding-the-extremists.html
‘Millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money is still being paid to groups linked to Islamist extremism’
One presumes this is a millions of pounds ‘unique’ exception Ms. ‘rally emotionally behind something that isn’t elitist, sexist, racist, and costing us millions of pounds’ Smurthwaite (above) could get behind, if in an hilarious way?
Here is a good report on the organised jihadists (who aim to subvert British society), Hizb ut Tahrir, that the government and Warsi seem to be so cosy with.
Click to access 1257159197_1.pdf
Absolutely farcical
“Jesus, what a waste of my time that was! The buggers turned the microphone off when I mentioned the EU, Typical Beeb”
Sean Gabb facebook comments on his appearance on last nights 5 live Diamond Jubilee discussion.
…not for the first time…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Gabb#Controversy
Worth posting to invite factual follow up/counter as the BBC rigging the mechanism of debate it conducts to suppress any views that don’t suit its narrative seems quite serious and more than a concern:
‘The Libertarian Alliance did a press release stating that Sean Gabb had been invited to take part in a talk taped for the BBC on multi-culturalism, debating with Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. Alibhai-Brown objected when Gabb said that the Libertarian Alliance believed the government’s Commission for Racial Equality should be shut down, saying that without laws meant to control discrimination, it would occur more frequently. Gabb asked her, “Yasmin, are you saying that the indigenous majority in this country is so seething with hatred and discontent that it is only restrained by law from rising up and tearing all the ethnic minorities to pieces?” To which Alibhai-Brown answered, “Yes.” Gabb asked if Alibhai-Brown seriously thought that Gabb wanted to murder her, at which point Gabb’s voice was faded out, 20 minutes prior to the end of the debate. After this debate, it was alleged by the Libertarian Alliance that Gabb’s microphone was shut off.
Jesus, that Telegraph story is shocking!
Thank God she will be sacked immediately……………………………!
You literally couldnt make that up, beyond satire!
I doubt she will be sacked. She was raised to the cabinet, unelected, for a reason, and it wasn’t because of her talents (or her honesty).
Yeah, I was being facetious, She is a Muslim, of course she wont be sacked, it is a complete impossibility that she will be sacked, she knows this as well as anyone else, hence her “dealings”
What is the worst that is going to happen to her ? Er….Nothing is going to happen to her, this is probably a major factor in her getting up to no good in the first place, Britain 2012; one rule for one, one rule for another.
Another betrayal from the President on the Falklands:
The Obama Administration knifes Britain yet again over the Falklands
In his talks with President Obama in March, David Cameron reportedly gained assurances from the White House that Washington would stop pressing for negotiations between London and Buenos Aires over the sovereignty of the Falklands. If such an assurance was given, it was surely worthless. As Mercosur Press (South Atlantic News Agency) has just reported, the State Department is once again calling for UK-Argentina negotiations, ahead of next week’s Organisation of American States summit in Bolivia:
“Our policy is unchanged. We believe that this is a bilateral issue that needs to be worked out directly between Argentina and the United Kingdom. That’s what we are encouraging both sides to do” said Acting Under Secretary for Press Affairs at the State Department Mike Hammer during an exchange with reporters on Twitter.
Likewise “we are encouraging Argentina and the UK to work this out peacefully, to work it out through negotiations”.
The only reason someone requests negotiations is to gain something. Argentina doesn’t want to negotiate over how to keep the Falklands British, so the President must be supporting the other side, and lied about it, if Cameron is telling the truth.
Once again, I apologize on behalf of the US for this continued betrayal. BBC report in 3….2…..ZZZzzzzzz
Maybe someone in the British Government shgould start calling for talks between the USA and Mexico over the sovereignty of Texas, New Mexico and California. If they did that every time one of His officials starts this up, they might shut up.
…and yet the BBC reward Obama with endless uncritical coverage.
Sorry, messed up putting in the link:
The Obama Administration knifes Britain yet again over the Falklands
‘Daily Mail’ –
“Has any country ever changed so much in 60 years? Enchanting photos show what life was like when our Queen came to the throne”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2153438/Diamond-Jubilee-Enchanting-photos-life-like-Queen-came-throne.html#ixzz1wflSE0h2
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18208434
From the 31st of May. Clearly the BBC can do something very similar.
Uh, chose not to get involved in the Gabb discussion (above)? Any reason?
SAUDI ARABIA’s arch jihadist murderer, Osama BIN LADEN in Oxford, 1971:
“Bin Laden’s Oxford days”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1595205.stm
Paul WESTON, of British Freedom Party, has the following on role of Saudi Arabia in Oxford today:-
“Saudi Arabia Buys Oxford ”
by Paul Weston.
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/saudi-arabia-buys-oxford.html#more
Will INBBC do an update on the influence of Saudi Arabia in Oxford? Perhaps the outgoing Director General, Mark THOMPSON, resident of Oxford, and provider of special preferential broadcasting treatment for Islam, could knock out a subservient piece?
so, the queens at the BBC are celebrating The Queen
Next week on the BBC, Michael Wood’s Elizabeth R the Hate Criminal. The year is 1588, hate criminal Elizabeth I and her xenophobic friend Sir Francis Drake stop an armada of poor Spanish boat people, in search of a better life, from arriving in England.
**Claps**
Guardian readers are so anti racism except when it comes to the Royals.
That’s when we get all the snide remarks about “our German” royal family.
All Celts. obvioulsy.
“obviously”
(I wish I could edit this)
I don’t think anyone in all seriousness is bothered by that. It’s not a particularly valid form of Republicanism.
That’s a somewhat Dandyesque comment from Whitman. Bothered by what?
Any serious Republican is not bothered by the Germanism of the Royal family, more the excessive cost and lack of democracy.
Okay, thanks. Wasn’t clear whether it was a reference to Queens or Hate Criminals or Germans mentioned above your comment.
Oh no, I like Germans.
What? All of them, or just the ones you’ve met?
So presumably you have been elected as the UK Republicans’ spokesman, Whitman?
I never claimed to be a Republican, it’s just pretty clear that nobody serious could think that.
You just know what they all think, then?
Read my previous comment. I could guess, pretty much, that people who are seriously against a Monarchy will not bring up the fact that she’s of German descent. They would perhaps bring up the elitism, the lack of democracy, the cost, but the fact that she’s German is not relevant.
My dislike of Barrack Obama has nothing to do with the colour of his skin, but any racist comment I make about him would be treated – rightly – as despicable.
That wasn’t the point. Snide remarks about ‘German’ royals was the point, exposing the hypocrisy of the Guardian on matters ‘racist’.
Now try answering again.
When do they make such remarks?
justinkyra
31 May 2012 9:43PM
Response to PeaGreenMonster, 31 May 2012 9:15PM
British history is something to be proud of – but not this mediocre ‘Germanic’ family of incomptents.
Recommend? (63)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/31/queen-diamond-jublilee-why-celebrate?commentpage=2#start-of-comments
Then that argument is weak, is it not? That’s not the Guardian’s attitude anyway, it’s that imbecile who seems to think that it’s a valid argument.
Dumb Beeboid reporter interviewing people on The Embankment seems puzzled why anyone would want to camp out overnight to see the 1,000 boat Royal flotilla. What a jerk.
Now if it were a different sort of Turkish ‘flotilla’ off the Israel coast….
I note that the Beeb are showing their utter contempt for the monarchy by filling their schedules with Jubilee coverage. Shocking.
They may be covering the Jubilee celebrations, but it’s obviously through clenched teeth judging by the snide comments from the beeboids out on the ground.
Have you watched the coverage?
I started watching the boat thingy on Sky but gave up because it was, frankly, crap. No-one seems to have told the presenters not to talk about things off camera or, possibly, the production crew weren’t listening to the presenters and kept missing ques. 4/10 can do better.
The BBCs coverage was technically streets ahead. When a presnter said ‘look at that’ the audience could because it was either on screen or there within a second or two.
Most of the BBCs coverage was neutral, some of it was enthusiastic (but not much) and some of it was the usual snide, lefty, grudging rubbish we’ve become use to.
For the most part the negative stuff was to keep constantly calling the event ‘the Peoples Jubilee’ something it plainly wasn’t. They also kept wondering at the size of the crowds, as if it wasn’t really a spectacle and they couldn’t understand why anyone would turn up in the pouring rain to see it.
Then there were the constant shots and vox pops with the extremes of Monarchism. The old ladies bedecked in sequines and multiple flags, the nutter in a Union suit, that sort of thing. Because all Monarchists are stoopid old bags, you see.
Oh, and not to forget the juvenile presenters mimicking what the Duchess of Cambridge was saying and tittering at their cleverness.
So the usual mixed bag from a BBC who just can’t help themselves and feel they have to be negative about everthing, there has to be a criticism to balance the descriptions. Pathetic really.
Perhaps I haven’t been watching continuously enough, for I haven’t discerned anything other than enthusiasm for the Jubilee celebrations. I did catch the embittered man from “Republic” ranting and raving to a seemingly bemused Emily Maitlis about that coverage.
The BBC some years ago decided that hacks must no longer refer to Wales as “the principality” for fear of offending anti-monarchists! (So now it’s “the nation”.)
They even allowed (against all precedent, apparently, for there seem to be no other guest blogs from outsiders) a guest blog from the head of “Republic” on their College of Journalism website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/journalism/blog/2011/02/bbc-royal-wedding-coverage-mus.shtml
A guest blog on CoJo! The rest of us should be as lucky!
Time for a quick round of ‘That Was Then, This Is Now.’
Then:
http://tinyurl.com/843srty
Now:
http://tinyurl.com/7vzsg46
Exciting Job opportunity.
A vacancy has unexpectedly arisen.
If you are a Guardian reader and incredibly stupid, this could be the career you’ve longed for.
You will need to be female and white, ideally in your mid 20’s.
You will be required to take donkey rides in remote parts of Afghanistan and admire the Poppy Fields.
A working knowledge of the BBC will be essential, for when, and you will be, taken hostage you can tell them how sympathetic Aunty is towards the Taliban.
Salary £145.50 per annum (less SAS tax)
Maybe a Biddisha/Bonnie Greer type appreciation of Taliban poetry would help too…the Late Review seems to have lost Tom Pailin, for who this gig would be the apex of an (admittedly rather bottom-fed) “career”…that the word?
Whitey shoottee
Umma brothers
In a cave
where laydees came
doling sweeties
guilty easy
Tory borey
Vote for Georgey!
Allah akbhar!
(From “Reflections from a Butchered Burkha”2012)
“If you are a Guardian reader and incredibly stupid”
Tautology.
For ‘balance’, presumably..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/the_queens_diamond_jubilee/9307361/Jeremy-Paxman-Were-all-monarchists-now-even-me.html
Or to score a better seat for the parade.
Quite how this sits with this I am less sure..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2153434/What-earth-doing-Jeremy-Vine-reveals-Paxmans-words-joined-Newsnight–downhill-there.html
Speaking of balance..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/9306577/The-BBC-needs-balance-over-organic-gardening.html
Trowels at dawn.
BBC News 24. Classic comment from a Beeboid looking a little uncomfortable and damp in his anorak just now. He said to Thames Pageant participants ‘Have a great day, even if I don’t’.
I’m looking forward to similar comments at the Olympic opening ceremony – should the weather be a little inclement.
Second thoughts, the Beeboids won’t be left out in the cold even if does rain on the Olympics – because that is not a grass roots outdoor celebration voluntarily participated in by hundreds of thousands of Brits. It is instead a carefully orchestrated corporate event to which the BBC is fully signed up. No brollies required, for the BBC there, go straight through to the VIP lounge.
So from a BBC point of view there will be no ‘balancing’ snide or carping.
Because Glasto isn`t on this year-it will have to be the Olympics where the likes of Snow and Krishnamurthy can exchange tax avoidance, prime Washington berths for November and how best to get Blair and Bryant greased and posed for the next election here in Eurozone 66.
I`d pay to see these lard arses be chased round the velodrome by Hamzas hook…Snow goes Gold for Team Europe…if he can claim a BBC type pension anyway.
Er…they’re at Channel 4, I believe, chris! Unless you mean Snow’s cousin, former Beeboid (manic swingometer man) Peter and his son Dan, of course.
Got the last of the Radio 3 concert from Covent Gdn last night-thanks Millie!
I know the Channel 4 hacks I name are not of the BBC…but I do imagine that the agenda is the same, so the faux-rivalry is a bit of a jape to them all.
In fact Snow was a soundbite of PM with Eddie Mair on Friday…can only imagine the Common Purpose dialectic at Hay, Glyndebourne and Gold Card Lounges for Coconut Airways passengers…
Aargh! You’ve just reminded me I forgot to listen to Geoffrey Smith last night. Must try to remember Sinatra, Voice of the Century tonight on Radio 2.
So he`s doing it voluntarily then is he?
We should get the anoraked turd to stump up his days pay for Help for Heroes!
Sick of these snides with their snide attacks….
I know that its only “anecdotal” and “unscientifically sound” but that never stops the BBC or Guardian does it.
It`s just that among all the Smurfwaites and Maguires, I`ve not yet heard any fulsome academic defence of the Queens last 60 years on the BBC.
They are a Royal Appointment type thing I`d imagine-despite their doctoring of film just to put the Queen in a bad light back in 2006.
I may well have missed some pieces that set her reign in context-like Sanbrooks in the Mail yesterday-but , for a national broadcaster, they`ve hardly informed or educated us in regard of the one rock that was here before I was born.
I`m no monarchist-but do respect the fact that she`s not corrupt or thick like 95% of our political class have been since 1990.
She ever been to Israel I wonder?….see, the BBC have told me nothing!
More on WARSI and her Islamic connections:-
‘Telegraph’
“Baroness Warsi: Radical past of man at the minister’s side”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/9308047/Baroness-Warsi-Radical-past-of-man-at-the-ministers-side.html
Of course, INBBC sticks to its political targets of Hunt and News International, with Warsi and Islam connections nowhere.
‘Daily Mail’-
“Now Tory chairman Baroness Warsi faces questions over Saudi trips funded by the nation’s government”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2153787/Now-Tory-chairman-faces-questions-Saudi-trips-funded-nations-government.html#ixzz1wimujynL
Watching appalling bias on The “Big” Questions where Nicky and some members of the hand-picked audience are, pretty much, enlisting for military intervention in Syria – completely ignoring the fact that we don’t really know who these rebel liberators are, that our previous expedition in Libya has descended into mass violence and militia civil war, and that many observers have recently noted that Syrian rebels are also committing atrocities; the evidence also suggests that many in Syria do not wish for western intervention with Christians terrified about the prospect of Muslim extremists gaining power. The BBC are completely ignoring these fundamental facts in their populist, rabble-rousing frothing-at-the-mouth propaganda.
I found myself agreeing with Mehdi Husan, from the New Statesman, and an SNP spokesman with their completely destroying Nicky’s hopelessly simplistic promotion of the rebels’ cause. This programme, long ago, disregarded any pretense at impartiality and has fallen into complete and downright bias.
I would like to urge those bleeding heart Left-wingers at the BBC who would quite happily see our soldiers enter into an other blood conflict, to carefully consider what happened when we blindly armed the Islamic warriors in Afghanistan against the Russians – they are now killing our sons and daughters in that war-torn country. Also, what happened in Iraq? Complete chaos! What is happening in Libya? Complete mayhem! If Syria, why not Zimbabwe or North Korea? The BBC is an Islamic sympathizer willing to promote Holy Jihad in the name of its own twisted socialist agenda.
“Nicky’s hopelessly simplistic”
Yes, he is a simpleton.
Where’s Whitman? Now you see him, now you don’t. Difficult to spot, sometimes. Bit like ‘Where’s Wally?’ Hah, got it – Wally Whitman!
Shit, think it’s time for bed.
BBC News are, I notice, most concerned about events in Syria. Oh please….the UN…. Russia…. The West….someone do something!
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, as most British people celebrate the Jubilee some Londoners or should I say ‘Londoners by birth’ (?) are keen on their own form of street party.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18310908
Not much bunting but plenty of stabbing.
http://sites.google.com/site/londonstreetgangs/borough-pages/croydon
Worth a quote at some length (the BBC won’t be telling you this stuff). Gives a little of the flavour of the sort of diversity fostered during the oh-so-PC Blair years.
‘The current gangs of Croydon began to emerge in the late 1990’s in the north of the borough around areas such as Norbury, Norwood and Thornton Heath. Here groups such as the Young Nastie Squad (YNS), Dogs To Kill (DTK) and the Croydon Tamils (unofficial name, usually quoted as Jaffna Boys) began to come to notice for large scale fights.
The emergence of youth gangs in Croydon occurred for numerous reasons including protection from longer established gangs in neighbouring boroughs such as Lambeth and Southwark and influence and/or recruitment by those gang members at the time in schools across the borough (such as Stanley Technical High School, Selhurst High School for Boys and Ashburton, also in Croydon College and the referral unit of Coningsby). They also emerged as extensions or new generations of already established gangs and due to the migration of families with gang links out of inner London boroughs such as Lambeth, Lewisham and Southwark.
Examples would include the DTK gang from Thornton Heath who fought with the Dirty Dozen Camp from Brixton and Stockwell and much later the ‘Don’t Say Nothin’ (DSN) gang who came together and claimed Croydon town to ‘defend’ against gangs further north of the borough such as Gipset and the Ninerz (SMN). Many of the current named gangs began to emerge from 2003/04 onwards, at which time up to a dozen crews became known in Croydon such as Dem Twisted Soldiers, Take Them Out, Til Death, Bury Dem Crew, Down 2 Murder, Lick Man Down, Get Money Gangsterz and Strictly Merkin Niggaz (also known as Shine My Nine and Ninerz) with other crews going by the acronyms FDS, MDS and NWS for example. ‘
Those rascally young cockney scamps, eh?
And a triumph of diversity my dears!
Enterprising young Darwinists that add to the colourful pageant of racial and cultural harmonies.
Hell-even in the hideously white school here on the south coast, mi Year 10 “homi`s in da hud” are all showing me maps of sunny Croydon.
And the cultural exchange with the BDG( black `danna gang) continues-they seem to be here for the sailing regatta, so I`m told!
Ah bless `em!
Another in the long line of BBC Obama lovers here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18297812
“While most of the city is pro-Obama, there is a corner of New York that traditionally votes Republican – the city’s holiday destination, Brighton Beach.”
pro-Obama?
Surely the opposite to Republican is Democrat, and not Obama?
“But why is that slightly scary fellow staring at me? Then I realise it is the “Re-elect Obama” button on my jacket.”
If you say so.
Good to know BBC correspondents quite literally where their biases on their sleeves….
It’s unusual for them to be so upfront about it!
Reggie Nadelson may be a freelancer but she’s now a regular on the BBC’s ‘From Our Own Correspondent’, so is surely part of ‘the BBC family’ now. She’s done twelve reports for them on that programme in the last year.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/search/schedule/?q=Reggie%20Nadelson
So someone who openly admits to wearing a ‘Re-elect Obama’ badge to add to the list. She joins current BBC Washington reporter Matt Danzico who toured the U.S. campaigning for Obama in 2008 and former chief reporter at BBC Washington, Katie Connolly, who – after months of writing highly biased articles on the BBC website – left to join a company of Democrat strategists.
Does anyone who supports the Republican Party get to become a BBC Washington reporter or a regular reporter for ‘From Our Own Correspondent’?
They were all openly campaigning and cheerleading for the One in 2008 – for example on Newsnight and on Andrew Neil’s programmes, The Daily Politics and This Week. And remember Anita Anand wearing an Obama hat.
Not once in the BBC coverage have I heard how hard The Queen works on State papers and other correspondence. We see The Queen at endless public engagements – her diary is still very full for an 86-year old – but also she receives every day more of those Red Boxes of papers than any of her Ministers, whwrever she is in the world. For instance she gets a copy of every Foreign Office report from abroad, as well as all the domestic stuff – minutes of Cabinet and Cabinet Committee meetings. letters between Ministers etc.
I believe she is at work on all this paper from 8am each morning. I am only 70, and I don’t have to get up that early !
http://www.royal.gov.uk/HMTheQueen/DayInTheLife/TheQueensworkingday/Morning.aspx
………………….
I have a certain smugness – or pride – this weekend. Back in 1975/77 I was working in the Cabinet Office, and one of the tasks I had was acting as Secretary to the Ministerial Committee planning for the Silver Jubilee. The original plan was a Thanksgiving Service at St Paul’s, a Gala Night at the Royal Opera, and Royal Ascot. I piped up in briefings “What’s in it for us plebs ?” I suggested why not a Bank Holiday – and why not street parties ? “We can’t afford it” – Britain in 1976 had the IMF bailiffs in. But I retorted that street parties did not involve public expenditure – just feed the idea out, the people will do the rest. And eventually a Bank Holiday was conceded – damn the “cost”, I thought, this is an occasion of national unity that we sorely need.
………………
As an aside, the road leading from my place towards Kingston town centre has loads and loads of bunting. But oddly – not a trace of bunting at the mosque halfway down, or even on the Muslim Community offices next door. Integration – what integration ?
I don’t have a flag outside my house, am I not fully integrated into modern Britain?
Of course not all houses have bunting. But the Muslim Community Office serve many many people – not one flag seems a bit odd to me, as they are always claiming to the local newspaper that they are working for community cohesion.
My church only has a st. George’s cross flying, maybe that’s against the spirit of the event.
No – it is entirely in the spirit of the event
The CofE church round the corner from me were prime movers in a big street party.
Just making sure. Anyway, it’s weak anecdotal evidence and not necessarily representative of the whole population. Like much of the presentation of Muslims and Islam on here.
On the topic of ‘just making sure’, how is anyone to know when you’re you?
http://biasedbbc.tv/2012/06/01/open-thread-395/#comment-30108
Once confirmed best it can be, then the question becomes whether comment is designed in the spirit of debate or under instruction to disrupt.
On current performance, looking a fair bet on the latter… in various incarnations.
I noticed two different alternating identities on the old thread last night, where one answered a question addressed to the other, as if he were the other – someone had forgotten which hat he was supposed to be wearing at any given moment. It was a little startling and confusing.
Well believe what you want, but I’ve given you the honest reason. Still refusing to engage with the facts?
‘a truly impressive CV…’
Not to mention stamina.
It’s like the BBC has knicked Joe 90 from Gerry Anderson, and spliced the poor kid with Boba Fett to produce some hyperactive multi-tasking clone army of 8 year olds, all inspired by being jacks of sod all and masters of nothing.
I am beginning to see how the attrition strategy used by BBC CECUTT is structured.
The best thing to do is tickle their tummies until they lose control, have an accident and retire.
‘Whitman says:
June 3, 2012 at 3:51 pm
‘Noggin’, just because you say something is the truth does not make it the truth.
You know, that’s exactly what the head of The Trust in charge of complaints said on Newswatch recently.
I play it to BBC CECUTT drones to show the irony bypass in failing to appreciate that such an argument can work more than one way, and it’s fun to find their heads explode as they try and confront the inescapable logic they can’t, or are not allowed to process.
Nothing on any issues? Who’s giving the piss poor arguments now?
sorry you don t enjoy so much truth about islam, being put in a matter of fact way … never mind, 😀
must be a bit of a shocker, if you read the bbc news pages, hey … but
😀 you ll get used to it.
It’s not the truth about Islam. Most Muslims do not believe in everything the Koran says. It’s what a bunch of misinformed people think is the truth of Islam. I’d be interested to know how many philosophers, theologians, and people who generally know things abou religion there are on here.
My how the airspace around the low-hanging fruit trees is filling up!
Now we are joined by the exalted Whitman, who in addition to being the (democratically elected) spokesman for British republicans, and being an oracle on theological doctrine, is also now the arbiter of what qualifies others to presume to post on this site!
We are truly in the presence of greatness. I, for one, am in awe.
I should add that he also knows most Muslims in the world and what they think; a truly impressive CV…
well whitman,
I m afraid, it IS the truth about Islam, you read here for the most part, like i said you may not like it …..
but no hard feelings 😀
oh and seeing as you, have changed, the emphasis to muslims … they have very little kudos, as far as Islam is concerned if they do not :-D.
“It’s what a bunch of misinformed people think is the truth of Islam.”
really! … 😀
oh please “slim” – do enlighten us, to which parts?? of the ahem …
“weak anecdotal evidence”,
you are refering
look forward to it 😀
I’m sorry, are you 7 years old? I have replied to your qualms about Republicanism. Things are just stated about Islam which are just generalisations and untruths. Come back when you want a grown up debate, instead of just witless sarcasm.
‘Noggin’, just because you say something is the truth does not make it the truth. I’d be interested to know how you know enough to say with any sort of credibility that it’s the truth about Islam. This is ridiculous, most Muslims are moderate, and all religious texts and religions have hatred in them. It’s a part of religion, but people ignore that bit, mostly, apart from the extremists, who are dangerous in any religion.
Reading Whitman is like the early days of Scott/Dez… all over again!
Again, you don’t engage in the debate but just give ad hominem, which is apparently one of the worst forms of evil.
I’ve noticed over on Cranmer that an obsessive need to have the last word is a peculiarity of the gays who post there.It’s probably a bit of a stretch, but since he has the name of a gay American poet I suppose it’s possible our troll is one of those types who goes on holiday to Morocco or Tunisia , hangs out in the hamams there and feels a strong affinity with the Islamic world.
A Muslim who does not believe everything that is in the Koran is a Muslim in name only as a belief in the direct divine provenance of that text is part of what defines a Muslim.
Of course, as Ibn Warraq has pointed out, there are many moderate muslims – but there is no moderate Islam. It is the fact that so many Muslims are in denial over this (or find it expedient to deny it) that makes them so ineffectual in controverting jihadists and ‘Islamists.
As to our being ignorant about Mohammedanism – I never cease to be astonished by the way even the most elementary tenets of the religion come as a complete surprise to those paragons of progressiveness and pride and joys of the wally polys over at Harry’s Place.
As for the BBC’s reverential and fiercely protective attitude towards Mohammedanism, only someone deliberately playing the socratic idiot would want that described to them in any detail.
‘RCE says:
June 3, 2012 at 3:57 pm
Reading Whitman is like the early days of Scott/Dez… all over again!
‘Whitman says:
June 3, 2012 at 4:01 pm
Again, you don’t engage in the debate but just give ad hominem
Once the system gets in a tangle it’s hard to track, but are you saying being equated to Dez/Scott is akin to an ad hom? Not sure that conflation will please them one bit.
Whitman – it’s unfortunate for you but I expect you will not receive the meaningful engagement that you seek on this site. That is because your arguments are predictable, shallow and trite.
In order to assuage the feeling of injustice that this may give you, I suggest that you read back through your posts and consider that you claim to know what most republicans and Muslims think but then question others’ authority to make their own assertions.
If you are still struggling to grasp the point, then a lifetime of CiF beckons you…
“slim” so thats obviously a NO then, you re not interested in enlightening
me the “misinformed” to exactly WHICH parts of erm “weak anecdotal evidence” on Islam, others and i get sooo wrong here.
oh!, and there you go again, conflating muslims,( who most are moderate inspite of the Quran not because of it), with …
the totalitarian ideology Islam which can so easily and quickly poison their minds, as evidence has clearly shown … at any time, as they become more supposedly ahem “pious”
why do you do that?
Whitman?
I’m saying that all I’m being judged on is my general opinion and outlook. The amount of lectures I’ve been given on the subject, I should probably know it when I see it. And I have never claimed to know what most Muslims think, but if they were all extremists I don’t think the world would last much longer. Same with Republicans, I was challenging a totally unreasonable and stupid argument. You don’t listen and you are intolerant to the views of others.
Muslims believe in Islam. And I don’t understand quite what you’re asking me. I specified my point on the evidence earlier. You generalise on a massive scale and it’s a little disturbing. Tell you what, when you can speak English I’ll engage with you.
given lectures on what? …
Islam?
UH OH! 😀
‘You don’t listen and you are intolerant to the views of others.’
Finished my cuppa, and a few minutes’ worth here was much more fun in complement than watching bores bigging-up barges.
But that quote alone will get me through the next few hours sanding.
No, lectures on flaws in arguments, sweetheart. And Islam I suppose, which have all been enlightening.
And thank you for just proving my point.
“and islam, i suppose” 😀
thankyou for proving, mine
slim … 😀
“sweetheart”
Lectures on Islam from you, who I don’t believe are one of the foremost academics on the subject.
As for Wallygreenlinker, I’m not sure I should respond to that. I don’t think I’m gay, and I don’t think that affects my views, but of you’re that vile that you think so then fine. I won’t argue with you.
I recall British Jewish weddings where loyal toasts are taken to the Queen and to the President of Israel.
Would Mr Whitman care to confirm any similar expressions of dual cultural identity at British Muslim events? (Non-alcohol related of course).
Three cheers for the Queen and the President of Pakistan perhaps? British red white and blue beside Saudi green bunting?
Thought not.
One thing I don’t understand about this blog, if the BBC is the one issue which matters most, what’s with the undertone of anti-Islam and snide remarks about it?
Maybe because we are discussing a national event. Yes, some people are not pro-Monarchy, but many of them have the grace to conceded that The Queen does very well in the role defined for her. You dismiss my mention of the local mosque and Muslim Community Office is “weak anecdotal evidence”.
I take the simple view – when in Rome, do as the Romans do. Personally, I think the local mosque is being damn stupid. But they are very ready to raise claims in the local press of “Islamophobia”. Just anecdotal, I suppose ?
Yes, it’s your single example. In fact right now, as I watch the coverage, there are people in Pakistan celebrating the jubilee.
You have scored an own goal. Most attendees of mosques in the UK come from Pakistan or Bangladesh – both are members of the Commonwealth. So even if they feel more loyalty to their homelands than to this country – shouldn’t they at least acknowledge their links to the Crown ?
I have no problem in flying an Australian flag outside. And The Queen has been known to say she does not know who to support when England plays another Commonwealth country at cricket.
What I was showing was that our example wasn’t typical. And not necessarily, not everyone in Britain wants to acknowledge the crown or celebrate it.
‘One thing I don’t understand about this blog’
Pretty sure it’s more than one, and so far understanding seems low on the totem in deference to dashing out anything or simply lashing out.
Reminds me of one of those bucolic summer scenes in movies set in New York, where a chess master quietly moves around tables moving a piece for each opponent to mull as he moves on.
Only in this case a bag lady has crashed in, sacred most away, swept all the pieces to one side and is demanding an arm wrestle whilst heaving up bile on the boards.
better go to more islam lectures 😀
slim … you re pretty busted here,
Whitman, Dez, Scott, Jim Dandy, Jon from Oslo, how many aliases do you have? Wouldn’t it be simpler just to have one?
Yes, in common, the burning desire for an argument, not content to post an opinion and move on. Sort of a Liberal/Left Jehovah’s Witness on your doorstep.
It is possible that they are all individuals. Remember to a lefty, individual thought is a crime so you’d expect them to post all the same tripe.
To be fair, Mr Dandy (who doesn’t seem to have posted here recently) is of a different type to those various common identities mentioned above, IMHO. Although, as I said,in a previous entry, I disagree wth virtually everthing he says, I feel one can have a civilised discussion with him, and agree to differ, wth few ad homs.
No flag flying and this in the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames! This just reminded me of something. I live a couple of miles from Kingston and I remember reading recently in the free local newspaper about the death of the founder of Kingston mosque. http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/local/kingstonnews/9581436.Grieving_Kingston_mosque_honours__founding_father_/
I was struck by this: “Two police motorbikes led the funeral procession to the Muslim section of Surbiton cemetery where he was buried. …Kingston Inspector Jaiye Warwick-Saunders, representing borough commander Martin Greenslade at the funeral, said the police escort was “a mark of respect from the Metropolitan Police Service and an acknowledgement of the service Mr Ali provided to the community.”
Also noted: “The trial of nine men accused of being part of a mob who attacked the mosque on November 21, 2010, was delayed today to allow witnesses to attend the funeral.”
So that’s the integration you see. Other people, organisations and organs of the State doing the integrating, showing respect and accommodating needs. Now where’s the reciprocity – and the flag today?
Whitman,
Monstrously obtrusive people like you bring out my vile streak – I was in fact attempting to divine some rational explanation for this need you seem to have to treat Islam as a perfectly respectable religion when here is a mountain of evidence that it isn’t. It seems, in fact, tha your liberalism is so facile, that a simple application of Auster’s law would probably suffice. On this topic there are very few instances to compare with the way in which entire populations in the west have been let down y their academics.
And Christianity is perfect I guess? No mental extremists shouting about the end of the world, gays, abortion or anything. No… Oh wait, there is. Silly old me.
They’re not carrying out killings, in the name of religion, across a great swathe of the globe from Darfur to the Philippines. Christianity does not happen to come with its own comprehensive system of jurisprudence that has a built in discrimination on grounds of religion, sex and sexuality – to the extent that Islam contains two ethical systems: one for dealing with fellow Muslims and one for dealing with infidels. Christianity has no intrinsic and insuperable hostility towards freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. I might add that Christianity has no doctrines comparable with those of perpetual jihad, the acceptability of dissemblance when dealing with non-believers and the (Koranically ordained) control of women through violence, all of which are part and parcel of Islam. Your beloved academics gloss over all this for reasons that are partly to do with venality, partly to do with intimidation but mainly because collectively they feel they need to do so in order to be considered among the bien pensants – basically a kind of irrationalism.
But most people don’t believe in it, like most people don’t believe in the vilest teachings of the Bible. Making it irrelevant. Besides, anti-Islam and Christianity, to an extent, played a role in Breivik’s crimes. All religion has something to answer for, not just Christianity and not just Islam. None are perfect, and all have caused misery in this world.
“But most people don’t believe in it”
– if that was true then the populations ‘liberated’ by the Arab spring would overwhelmingly support secular parties -they are not doing so.
Believe in the most radical parts of Islam, like most Christians don’t believe in Genesis and that sort of abstract stuff.
Uhm… the one comment of yours today you forgot to ‘like’
Beware, my friend, of criticizing diversity, the Muslim community and/or integration or else you risk violent arrest at the cruel and harsh hands of the state-sanctioned Politically Correct Gestapo Squad.
EGYPT.
INBBC still touting for Muslim Brotherhood.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18313247
At the end of the article, INBBC asks:
“Are you in Cairo’s Tahrir Square? Are you protesting? What are your thoughts on ex-President Hosni Mubarak’s life sentence? If you are willing to be interviewed by the BBC please fill in the form below.”
The above needs politically decoding, thus:
‘Are you in Cairo’s Tahrir Square, famous for its ‘Arab Spring’ which we should all support? Are you supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and protesting? What are your thoughts on baddy ex-President Hosni Mubarak’s life sentence? If you are willing to be interviewed by the INBBC (part of leftist-Islamic political alliance) please fill in the form below.”
Watching Jubilee coverage on Sky News, then turn over to BBC News and they are showing an anti monarchy protest. Absolutely shocking!
That’s in the interest of balance! At the Royal Wedding there was something like 2% of coverage given to anti monarchists, which isn’t balanced. They’re trying to give some balance, which is what this site is campaigning for. Don’t knock it when it’s not the kind of balance you want. Anyhow, there’s 6 hours of ceaseless pro monarchy programming coming up this afternoon. And God only knows why you’d watch Sky.
Oh, lots of reason why I will watch Sky today.
The best one is that they are more cheerful and seem to be enjoying it.
The BBC however has the air of, “I have to be here”.
It is of course a pity about the adverts on Sky but then they are not subsidised by the tax payer to the extent of a few billion pounds a year. And.. I don’t go to prison if I do not want Sky.
It is simple logic. Not something BBC sycophants have much of really.
The point I was making, was the timing of the coverage, if they’d had a short piece about the anti monarchy stuff earlier before today’s jubilee events got going or after they’d finished fair enough, but not slap bang during the middle of today’s events.
Well it’s happening today, is it not? There are demonstrations on the Thames now. It’s the news, I don’t see now you can complain about that.
When the main coverage of boats down the river is just getting going, surely that’s a bigger story than some minor anti monarchy protest. A small protest is not a big enough event to stop the main jubilee coverage for.
The main coverage didn’t start until half past 1. Because of the 24 hour coverage which mr Murdoch brought over here, the time has to be filled with something.
Ooh!
A tasty bit of Murdoch-bait.
(scrolls past)
Deny it then.
I was watching boats well before half one.
Good for you, but the actual flotilla didn’t begin until gone 2.
It was a wedding! Not a political debate about the monarchy! For “balance”, shouldn’t it be anti- weddings anyway?
Besides, when the Beeboid Corporation shows the Opening of Parliament or a General Election or PMQs, does it show anti-Parliamentarians, anti-Election folk or anti-PMQers? No, it doesn’t!
Who would they consist of then? Fascists and Communists perhaps? And although it was a wedding, it was a tax payers one, and so why shouldn’t it provoke some debate.
Debate at a wedding! And if it was about tax, did the Beeboids have the Taxpayers’ Alliance on? I guess not.
And if they and you are as keen on balance as you’d like to make out, surely you’ll agree that they should show some anti-Beeboid Corporation, anti-forced licence tax protesters every time the Beeboid Corp broadcasts.
Well we have sky who aren’t keen. And anyway, I don’t think we should, give it’s unbiased. I think the tax payers’ alliance have bigger political motivations than they let on, and I find them utterly irritating. Alan Duncan on question time was quite good against their leader.
What does sky have to do with your argument that the Beeboids should show some sort of anti-Monarchists on the day of a wedding or jubilee celebration to provide “balance”?
Watched Sky to avoid the sneering and snide remarks of the Beeboids. I take it Whitman doesn’t watch Sky because it’s part owned by “Murdoch the Merciless”.
Also couldn’t abide the Beeb boasting about its “unrivalled” coverage.
Well if you had you’d have been most content. No snide remarks at all. No scepticism about the monarchy. Just happiness, in spite of the rain. And yeah partly, and I don’t want to watch adverts particularly.
Despite its many faults the BBCs coverage was way ahead of Sky. They are very good at covering this sort of thing.
That doesn’t stop the snide remarks, impressions of the Royal Family talking to each other and vox pops with the deranged though.
8 a.m. Radio 4 news – ineptly wound into the Jubilee report was where the Republicans are demonstrating today. Call to arms or just because they need a decent number when they show the demo later?
While we’re celebrating the Jubilee, don’t let’s forget that the warmist shysters at the world’s great scientific institutions carry on regardless, possibly noticed by but certainly not commented on by their fellow-shysters at the BBC. Here (H/T Bishop Hill), Tony Thomas writing in the distinguished Quadrant Magazine rips into the Australian Academy of “Science”.
Furthermore, TT implies that the AAS is such a sink of dishonesty that even the Royal Society looks good by comparison (well “good” is slightly OTT – rather, “less dishonest”). Concerning the Royal Society, Bishop Hill himself notes that another station on the gravy train line has been opened there (cf those at the BBC and climate “science” departments everywhere).
Romney supporters will no doubt rally here all summer long, though it is hard to imagine those political suits noshing their way through borscht and herring and smoked tongue at Restaurant Tatiana, or partying all night at the Rasputin Nightclub, where the dancers are hot and the clothes Armani.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18297812
Obviously, being Repulicans they will be way too square to eat borscht or party in a trendy nightclub…
‘Gay marriage is now not just a liberal principle but a liberal piety – and one knows a piety from a principle because even those who oppose it have to pretend to honour its core point.
No one is any longer allowed to say that they do not think that homosexuals should be allowed to decide to live together, even if Mitt Romney believes that they should not be allowed to rent tuxedos and pay for a caterer when they do.’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18279345
Yet another liberal A Point of View. All we ever seem to get are lefties writing these things, and I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for them to give someone like James Delingpole or Janet Daley a shot, just to introduce a bit of balance…
Jeff
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18015135
How does that work for you? Both points of view presented fairly.
No comparison. Your reference is to an article tucked away on the BBC website. Point of View is played twice on BBC Radio 4 – including Prime Time Sunday morning. So a swipe at Romney is de rigeur, I suppose
It was clear on the front page of the BBC website a few weeks ago, because I read it then. It probably gets more hits than A Point of View.
“on the front page of the BBC website ?
You mean – a LINK to it was on the front page – according to your weak anecdotal evidence.
And it is odd that the Point of View in the Jubilee weekend – with a lot of emphasis on the old-fashioned faith of The Queen – is about gay political issues in the US. Another jarring note by the BBC.
If they want to give us Points of View from across the pond – why not choose someone other than the nonentity they served up this morning, spouting a load of convoluted mush ?
The initial link was about prejudice and Shakespeare, who was quite British.
And yes, a link was on he front page, quite clearly, I fail to see what that adds to the argument. And it may be one example, but all you have is one example too, mine being more typical of the balanced BBC.
Whitman – Although Rod Dreher is a conservative, he comes down in favour of gay marriage:
‘Prejudice … is the only thing keeping gay marriage at bay’.
So by presenting his views, the BBC are showing the pretense of balance rather than actual balance…
Jeff
Here’s Mark Mardell’s unbiased take on gay marriage:
‘If Christian conservatives feel the South is under siege, gay activists feel similarly beleaguered.
Mitt Romney at a campaign event in Jacksonville, Florida 17 May 2012 Mitt Romney affirmed his opposition to gay marriage in the wake of President Obama’s announcement
It is wrong to see the South as monolithic or unchanging. I have been surprised at how many little pockets of liberalism there are – in college towns or just areas of cities.’
So in other words, illiberal views (including opposition to gay marriage) are monolithic…
Jeff
I take your point, but he’s hardly in favour of it. In fact, he’s probably on this blog’s side, blaming Liberal media for the ills of the world.
That really takes the biscuit for nonsense. Mardell himself echoes liberal sentiments all the damn time – and seldom portrays Republican views in a fair manner, if he reports them at all. He comes across as a de facto member of Team Obama, relaying their talking points on cue, as numerous examples on this website have shown.
I was talking about your first snippet. The second appeared after I had written it.
‘I was talking about your first snippet. The second appeared after I had written it.’
Best, then, to post a context para. But along with links and sources, that seems a step too far, uniquely.
Dreher’s Right-wing point of view was more about accepting defeat than it was a policy statement or coherent position against homosexual marriage. On the other hand, the Left-wing voice was full of praise and explaining why it’s so great.
Showing one side trumpeting victory and the other side glum in defeat is not the same thing as providing a balance of perspectives on the issue itself.
That’s his perspective on the issue, though isn’t it. A social CONFUCKINGSERVATIVE!
“A social CONFUCKINGSERVATIVE!”
1 likes
Like yourself?
Tedious
No mate, not in the slightest.
This web site is not subsidised by the tax payer. It is run by volunteers on a non-profit basis. Compared to the power and might of the BBC that receives billions of pounds a year it is a very small flea on the back of the British Broadcasting Corporation and yet it seems that it must be “put down” for showing an alternative point of view.
This site may not suit the likes of friend Whitman but it is free and publishes everything from its contributors and is I understand only moderated for offensive material. The BBC however will remove at will anything it does not like or close down a blog if it does not agree with the majority of comments. Nor will it ever, ever, ever agree that it is wrong about anything. It is in in fact the closest thing to a propaganda machine for wacky new age communism that there is now on the planet except for perhaps N. Korea and a few die hard dictatorships.
Criticise not the few for finding the truth but cut down the subversive, unregulated, traitorous monster that is the BBC.
In the words of my good friend Jeff, that takes the biscuit for nonsense.
Whitman –
I think you mean your good friend John – We have not corresponded before today, so I am not your friend, and I didn’t use the biscuit phrase (but John did).
Jeff (not John) 🙂
Jeff
So he did, I thought it was given you were posting before that, apologies.
‘ I thought it was given you were posting before that’
This acting before thinking before checking is a problem elsewhere from within the ‘Aunty always gets it about right’ zone, too. With much more serious consequences.
Here, all this multi-tasking simply seems to be causing rather funny overloads.
Or, if more hi-tech, maybe there’s a glitch in the Matrix.
Guest Who –
Whitman is either a troll or someone who is unwilling to consider evidence that he might be wrong. Not only that, but he makes unpleasant remarks (such as accusing me of wetting myself) and then complains about people being abusive to him. I’m not going to repeat my mistake of trying to engage in rational discourse with him…
Jeff
I’m the one guilty of that? Have you considered the article which might suggest that you all might be wrong? And I am so sorry if you were offended. Jesus Christ, I’ve seen worse on here about immigrants and Islam.
I wonder if Whitman, Scott, Dez, Jon from Oslo and Jim Dandy all have the same IP address?
Maybe TWO – Salford and Television Centre.
‘I’m not going to repeat my mistake of trying to engage in rational discourse with him’
No should you, Jeff, for there is no point. And as many others are discovering. I am frankly amazed at the constraint and engagement still be attempted by some.
Now there is some sense in hoping the machine will run out of meter money and wind down, but from the look of it that’s not likely any time soon.
So, it being a wet Sunday, with nothing worth a stuff on the TV (I’ll watch the highlights for a bit of spectacle, but too many peroxide sinks with too much dead air to fill means a level of mind-numbing commentary I have been unable to stand since early this morning), during decorating breaks I play here meeting attrition with cheerful response, after response, after response.
And usually, something the other end snaps. The principle of ‘can’t take what is dished out’ can apply. It can be fun, like a complete error, a hit and run that backfires as trying to spin so many plates usually means broken crockery or, sadly, something a bit more serious and nastier.
The sheer hypocrisy is actually a joy as it is there in black and white to be seen and/or exposed for what it is.
What’s less edifying is when the mask slips and the nasty (the sado in complement to the masochism that prompts any of limited debating ability deliberately coming here to get flayed by rigidly sticking to a contrarian strategy no matter what) side is exposed.
No idea how many manifestations we are being exposed to here (at least two admitted), but I just gave up on one (oddly no longer active as another in a similar vein picks up the baton) when the ‘hard enough’ talk started getting too kindergarden level from the other side to make the sport worth it. I almost expected to be told his Dad was bigger than my Dad.
If such things are within the ken of the site owners, if this is one or a limited pool trolling, as BBC-style exile is not favoured (rightly) it would be useful to at least have a handle on who might be a person who disagrees and articulates why and well in the spirit of civilised discourse… and the near denial-of-service, bot-level efforts infesting this thread today.
If nothing else it shows the paucity of counter-argument out there, and even the usual cherry vultures (who can, on occasion, make a thought-provoking point) seem to know enough that riding shotgun on such a kamikaze strafing run is best avoided.
Very grand I must say. I don’t know what it meant, but it sounded excellent. Bravo.
Whitman is Jim Dandy, as is Potsdam and Redwhiteandblue. That’s enough for one day, surely!
I’m not Redwhiteandblue, promise, just changed from Potsdamer to Whitman, okay?
Happy to confirm that I am not Whitman. Have been out watching the pageant, first by the river and then on TV, and the idea that the BBC coverage has been anti-monarchist is just deluded. Firstly, there have been hours of it. Secondly, the commentary may have been witless at times, but if anything it was witlessly craven rather than sceptical. And that comes from somebody who spent the afternoon in the pouring rain waving a union flag. Interesting that some of the paranoiacs on here can’t take in that there might be more than one person who doesn’t agree wholeheartedly with their conspiracy theories!
Alex Salmond to promote Scotland in California – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-18308335
This reads more like an SNP press release than an article by a politically neutral broadcaster…
Jeff
It reports the facts.
The facts of his itinerary, and of official statements, which is basically reprinting a press release. Probably lazy churnalism more than bias, but they could have toned it down a notch.
Toned what down a notch? There is no conceivable bias in that story. It’s pretty boring but not biased.
I look forward to ‘the facts’ of David Cameron’s next overseas visit being reported in an equally ‘pretty boring but not biased’ manner.
They will be and routinely are…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18317786
Hopefully that addresses concerns about the BBC’s coverage of the Muslim Bortherhood and the reaction to Mubarak’s sentence.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC), Knell, Leyne, Cairo Bureau, BBC Arabic Service (London, Cairo) and their unswerving political advocacy of the Muslim Brotherhood, is part of the broader political ‘left’s alliance with Islam globally.
Was it really necessary for the BBC to interview Harold the homosexual cross-dresser as a mark of “celebrating diversity”.
Why do the BBC have do everything using a Paint by Numbers approach ? i.e. let’s resource our show with a rep from every ethnic background, and sexual orientation, then write our script around it. (ignoring of course any who are Christian or Jewish)
Proof that Whitman is posting under different monikers! I’ve looked on the previous Open Thread and he makes a comment under the name of “Potsdamer”. Someone replies to it and then Whitman answers and refers to his original comment posted under the “Potsdamer” name.
Say it isn’t so, Whitman.
This has been established and I’ve justified why I’ve changed my name. Bravo though, top investigative skills I must say.
Why have you changed your *name*to three names?
I haven’t…?
Anyway back to the pageant. Before it started my wife and I debated which side to watch, BBC or Sky. She likes the BBC as it does not have adverts and so, being a gent, we started with BBC. Two minutes in we are inundated with minor celebrities talking to each other and then little babies called Mohamed. The pageant was secondary so we changed over to Sky. No adverts all afternoon, it was cheerful, informative and nonstop just what we wanted to see.
I did change back a couple of times, when the good lady made tea, but there we were in a pub oop north with a few boozers waving flags about, so we stayed on Sky and thoroughly enjoyed the afternoon. Thank you Sky.
Yep. No adverts all afternoon, I was well pleased with the Sky broadcast. Apart from Eamon Holmes moaning about the state of the covering over his head. Poor lamb.
Glad to hear that Sky was good for the Flotila, the BBC coverage, ha, bloody ha, was disgraceful. It was the worst outside broadcast I have ever seen. Poor picture quality except of course when the “presenters” were on camera, far too often. They should not have been seen, it wasn’t about them, they should have provided the extra information we did not get from the pictures. But no, the pictures were poor and the commentary worse. Let’s see, how long have they been doing O/B? On that showing they should shut down!
What a wonderful & heartwarming sight it was to see those well known Monarchists Sandi Toksvig, Omid Djalili, Griff Rhys Jones & Maureen Lipman living it up on a barge at the taxpayers expense.
What a wonderful and heartwarming sight it was to see those well known Monarchs, Queen Elizabeth II, The Duke of Edinburgh, The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall living it up on a barge at the taxpayers’ expense.
commenter A: statement A
whitman: contrariwise
commenterA: you haven’t disproved statement A
whitman: contrariwise
commenter A: you’re just wasting our time
whitman: contrariwise [thinks: if I keep this up long enough I will have had the last word and that will mean I have won]
All I can do is repeat that the only time I have seen this technique employed so systematically is by the gays who patrol at Cranmer’s blog.
But I haven’t. Say what you fucking well like you homophobe, racist, islamist, sexist, black supremacist, idiot. I can’t believe that what you wrote about me being gay, it shows the true colours of this blog, quite frankly. The undercurrent of lazy homophobia and racism which underpins it all is quite frankly disgusting.
Go on then all of you, on your high high horses about you not being racist.
“I can’t believe that what you wrote about me being gay”
What’s so wrong with being gay, homophobe.
I think you know full well what you wrote, the stereotyping and general clear dissatisfaction with someone homosexual being on this blog, and how that devalues opinions, moron.
That was my first reply to you – I’ve not mentioned gay people before. What you on about?
I see it wasn’t Wally, apologies for that, but that man’s a moron.
I don’t think anyone knows whom you are referring to. At least I don’t. Why don’t you put the name of the person you are replying to, in future?
This man has a thing about Islam which he believes causes a fantastic amount of unnecessary misery in the world. I also think a streak of silliness runs through gay culture like a scarlet thread and that there is a serious amount of silliness about you’re activities on this thread. Having seen rational exchanges ruined in the same way by the gay protagonists at Cranmer and knowing the fondness of many gays for the blokeishness of Muslim societies I drew my own conclusions. I have no time for the wilder shores of anti-racism: any sensible person is against racial prejudice: my only very strong views in that area are to deplore the anti-semitism consciously, or unconsciously, fostered by the BBC and much of the far left (don’t get me started on Islamic anti-semitism). It’s nice to see you drop your mask and show yourself as the left wing bigot, as steeped in stereotypes as anyone on the right, that you are.
In a post above Whitman says it is “vile” to accuse him of being gay.
Truly disgraceful homophobia.
Why don’t you read the comment that was sent to me before this sort of stupidity.
Tsk tsk…language, my dear! Disgusting.
I am sorry in a deep and meaningful way.
Mr Whitman, could you tell me whether Muslims have a high opinion of homosexual people ?
I hope you mean that most sincerely.
PS: Whitty, Do you think you are the only homosexual on the blog? I mean, if you are such. You said earlier you don’t *think* you are…ever thought about finding out? Aren’t you even a tiny bit curious to know?
Oh I’m not, I know, don’t worry about me. And no, extremists don’t, but do extremist Christians? Do Bishops or Archbishops indeed?
My dear, I mean nothing sincerely.
Only
a
suggestion
but –
everybody hitting the same reply button makes posts
a
bit
ha
rd
to
re
ad
Whitman; arch manipulator of the media & all round spin meister extraordinaire, I bet his Idol’s Mandelson & Campbell would be proud!
Just came in from the Jubilee street party we’re having and switched on BBC “News”. Nicholas Witchell, dull as dishwater, bemoaning the rain. Cuts to anti-monarchy protesters. Jimbola switches to Sky.
It’s been a great day of patriotic fervour. And we’ve caused the leftists a day of bitterness and defeat. Enjoy it while it lasts, normal service will be resumed shortly.
Hurrah to you all.
Got me thinking there!
Wasn`t Witchell the one that Prince Charles referred to as an awful man…creep and the like.
Now wouldn`t you think that the BBC would have pushed him into Top Gear or some other place, after being so mocked and reviled by our walking wingnut?
Instead, he`s STILL hanging round royalty like one of Jenni Bonds old hankies, and so thick skinned that he follows them round too.
Presumably, because Royalty don`t like him, then he`s just the man the BBC want to bug them.
That`s why we`re still stuck with the BBC too…the more we hate them, the more their mission to cultivate us all is redoubled.
Still-it`s Prince Charles BBC too isn`t it?…so why`s Witchell still trailing them all?
Here you go…
Oh and I forgot to mention, has anyone else notices the BBC’s eagerness to seek out muslims in the crowd for interview?
They must have sniffer dogs out looking for them, or else they’ve been to rent-a-mos.
I’m sure somebody at the BBC will say they were doing it to show their growing Mohammedan audience that some of them do support the Queen and are just as British as anyone else.
The Manchester Mosque has a congregation which supports the monarchy and are keen to express their patriotism, says the Beeb. Manchester happens to be near the BBC’s Salford HQ, so I understand.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-18310190
Then they should be showing that to Mohammedans around the country, in the true interests of Social Cohesion. not use it to tell you that they’re all like that.
“Fake Tears for SYRIA.”
By Peter HITCHENS,
‘Mail on Sunday’:
“Why do William Hague and the BBC want to help Saudi Arabia set up a fanatical Islamist state in Syria? Have we learned nothing from the failed hopes of Egypt and Libya? Don’t we realise that the ‘activists’ we support are just as capable of conducting massacres as the pro-Assad militias?
“It is our diplomatic intervention, and that of the USA, that has unleashed sectarian civil war in this complex country. Those who want to stampede you into supporting British interference in Syria know that ‘weapons of mass destruction’ won’t work any more. So they seek to bamboozle you with fake humanitarian concern. Do not be fooled.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2153728/Their-dream-British-FBI–reality-KGB.html#ixzz1wkro0sNE
“How Can Obama’s Middle East Policy Possibly Get Worse? Answer: Look at Syria.”
by Barry Rubin .
http://pjmedia.com/barryrubin/2012/05/29/how-can-obamas-middle-east-policy-possibly-get-worse-answer-look-at-syria/?singlepage=true
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/15/leftwing-bias-bbc-myth
Seen it already. Don’t buy it. Listing a handful of people doesn’t balance out the other 19,000+ people who are Left-wing. The Twitter feeds of BBC employees makes it quite clear which side of the spectrum all of them are on.
For every Neil, you have a Maitlis and a Naughtie and a Webb and a Derbeyshire and a Bacon and a Campbell. For every Robinson you have a Peston and a Flanders and a Davis and an Easton and a Smith and a Black and a Harrabin.
For every Lansdale there’s a Mardell and a Mason and an Anand and a Bowen and a Connolly and a Dymond.
And so on.
Even if the BBC really is too large and too disorganized (it’s more that there are too many fiefdoms and people not willing to walk down the hall to ask a question) for there to be an institutional bias, it doesn’t matter because the vast majority of Beeboids are all on the same side of the political spectrum. You don’t need to send out a memo if everyone already thinks the same way.
Except, you know, when there is a memo handed down from on high to take a specific perspective on issues such as AGW or Mohammedans or using the word “terrorist” or on diversity and multiculturalism.
You choose to believe that then, don’t worry. Ignore the proof. And Maitlis? Seriously? None of those you listed display bias, I promise you that. But I don’t think your mind could be changed. I think it’s pretty clear proof. Maitlis, Easton, Landale, they just aren’t. And Neil’s as right wing as they come.
Just repeating that Neil is right wing doesn’t even begin to address my point that he and a couple of others can’t balance out the rest of them. All the names I’ve mentioned display bias from the Left.
James Naughtie: If we win the election…”
Robert Peston: Gordon Brown’s biographer. His commentary favors Brownian economics, and takes policy positions on things like bankers’ pay and transactions
Stephanie Flanders: Dated both Eds, mentored by Larry Summers, repeatedly advices Keynesian policy, told us the Greek bailout has worked, and told us that lending billions to another country costs next to nothing, and said she found it “mildly nauseating” for George Osborne to say that Britain was a better place to invest than other countries.
Justin Webb: Suggested on air that Sarah Palin is unfit for high public office due to what he thought were her religious beliefs; used elision and dishonesty in an attempt to show that the Republican Party has gotten worse and unfit to govern due to the influence of the Tea Party movement. Webb has admitted to an anti-American bias in his reporting. He also spent the bulk of his reporting on the 2008 election suggesting that the US was too racist to elect a black President.
Mark Mardell: Just click on his name in the Category cloud in the sidebar of this blog
Emily Maitlis: click here for photo. I’ve also seen her laugh at someone on air for suggesting that Islamist extremists believe they are at war with the West. She displays her bias rather often.
Anita Anand: click for photo.
If you want to spend time searching through the archives, there’s much, much more. BBC Tweets, for example.
I think you successfully shut Whitman up there David. He couldn’t argue with your evidence that showed the overwhelming left-wing bias of al beeb. Well done!
Has anyone mentioned this on here re Newsnight? I’ve just come across it on a TV listings site:
‘In the introduction to a segment, Paxman explained that “like a bad kebab”, Greece faced the prospect of being “vomited out of the single currency”.
The host was quickly shut down by one of his guests, Giorgos Papakonstantinou, a Greek minister, who was appearing live from Athens, who reacted angrily to the comments. “Can I take issue with your ‘bad kebab’ analogy, which I find offensive,” he said. “The Greek economy is in a crisis and the Greek people are going through a lot, and deserve some respect, and I really did not find that very appropriate.”
Nobel Prize-winning economist, Paul Krugman shared the Greek politician’s dismay: “I think that was, actually, quite inappropriate, to say that the Greeks have done something terribly wrong,” he said.
The Beeb confirmed that there have been a few complaints about Paxman’s unpleasant analogy, yet a spokesman explained that Paxman was a pretty big deal and could do what he wanted.
“Regular Newsnight viewers will be aware of Jeremy’s provocative style and use of humour,” came the statement. “The comment was firmly in that tradition. The guests responded to the comment within the debate, which quickly moved on to a wider analysis of the situation.” ‘
Charming people, these Beeboids, eh?
‘Regular Newsnight viewers will be aware of Jeremy’s provocative style and use of humour.’
Mocking a nation who are facing an extremely serious economic crisis isn’t exactly what you’d call in good taste!
Jeremy Paxman once previously asked a guest why the Greeks are so dishonest. That smacks of racism…
Jeff
How great it is to watch the stirring & patriotic coverage coverage on Sky News right now, even moreso when it comes completely free from the odd snidey & “devious” comments from the usual rich left wing person from North London aka BBC Presenter, “Expert” / Interviewee
I listened to some of Radio 5 Live’s coverage of the Jubilee flotilla this afternoon. Richard Bacon could barely conceal his contempt for the whole thing; in fact, at times he just couldn’t help himself, and the sneering got the better of him. Why even give him the job if he is just going to mock and sneer the whole time? Do they really think that’s good radio? Sadly, they just might.
This may have been mentioned before but the other day “Today” had Plan B on shooting his mouth off. The right-on hack who’d interviewed him enthused about how ‘interesting’ he’s found the fellow (toeing the party line, then)
Excerpts from the interiew had the rapper repeating the leftist view that chav-hatred is class-hatred (I call BS on that one). Also how he’d “seen people trying discipline in the classroom and it doesn’t work!”
Ridiculous. He hasn’t seen anything like classroom discipline in his lifetime. He doesn’t have the first idea what he’s talking about, and as for being ‘interesting’
Plan B = a less intelligent version of Joey Barton that The Left has chosen to “big up” because he’s “wrote” a song about those horrible unjust Tories / white people
Erm.. Steve I think your a little confused the BBC bias is vastly Right wing as are most rich people not left wing. I dont know many communist’s went to Eton, most left wing people would not care if we had the Queen and her family or not. Right wingers are the one riding there little boats today. working class people struggle to afford the cost of there car never mind a boat.
No, I dont think I am confused, I think the purpose of this blog is to discuss Rich Left wingers & their left wing prejudices that they force upon us “plebs” under the guise of an “impartial” state broadcaster aka The BBC
Like all those wealthy Guardian columnists – so right wing…and I guess you’ve never heard of the Cambridge Four – not Etonians, but still students at an elite institution who had communist loyalties. I’m not sure you can break down the left and right in simple class terms – it’s much more complicated than that. There were plenty of working class Tories drawn to Thatcher’s council house ‘right to buy’ policy. There are many upper middle class leftists – you’ll find many in residence at the BBC/Guardian.
It costs as much to go to Cambridge as it does to anywhere else. They are intelligent, it doesn’t mean they’re elite. It’s stupid, that somebody can’t get the best quality of education without being accused of elitism.
You’ll get no argument from me there! I detest the cries of ‘elitism’ aimed at people who have been lucky enough to have had a good education. You’ve slightly misinterpreted my comment – I didn’t claim that the students were ‘elitists’, but that the university was an ‘elite’ institution. That is a statement of fact, not intended to be derogatory. Hopefully they will continue to be elite long into the future.
Good! Private school is elite, not Oxbridge. I’m glad we have some agreement on this issue.
Oh no you don’t ! You quickly threw in ‘private schools’, which I made no mention of.
…and then you confused the issue even further…
You previously said that, “It’s stupid, that somebody can’t get the best quality of education without being accused of elitism.”
…and then do just that with private schools. You also agree with me above that Cambridge is an elite institution, but next you claim that Oxbridge universities aren’t, only private schools. All over the place.
No, I was quite clear. It’s a matter of paying. Same cost for Oxbridge as anywhere else, whereas private schools are a class issue, with those with the best means best able to pay. I didn’t confuse anything, Oxbridge and a private schools are two different issues, though are linked.
It’s a shame, and an indictment of much of the left’s hypocritical class agenda and cynical control of language, that words like ‘elite’ are automatically assumed to have a negative connotation. This has resulted in the dumbing down of our education system and so much of our public discourse.
Quite. These days, you get a prize for just turning up. Gone are the days of the notion that you have to knuckle down and work bloody hard to get a good mark.
The irony is that if everyone is special and lauded with praise, then no-one is special. Good marks should result from excellence and hard work, and not be doled out like candy…
Jeff
How long is it since either of you were in education? You can’t blag an A level, I promise you that. Students still have to work bloody hard to get the best marks.
…but nowhere near as hard as they used to.
Reed – Quite.
I simply refuse to believe that the improvement in GCSE and A Level results we see every year is due to rising standards.
I used to read through lots of school prospectuses as part of my job (I was in marketing), and you wouldn’t believe how many basic spelling errors there are in your average school prospectus. If even the teachers can’t write properly, what hope have the pupils got?
Jeff
Jeff – It’s not just us saying so, the head of one of the exam boards is saying the same, among many others. If it’s down to the students’ abilities alone (rather than grade inflation), someone needs to do a study – there’s some quite extraordinary evolution going on in the brains of the young!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9114278/Too-many-students-gaining-A-grades-top-examiner-admits.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/secondaryeducation/8870425/Fresh-warning-over-A-level-grade-inflation.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/6056447/A-level-results-one-in-eight-to-get-straight-As.html
Yes, I was looking at a school’s website the other day and it had this: “Please click on the photo’s (sic)below to find out more about our staff.”
This school has umpteen teachers and administrative staff. You’d think school staff would know how to form a simple plural and if not, that one or other of them would have noticed and corrected it.
I am doing A levels now and they require a hell of a lot of hard work. What does it matter if they aren’t as hard, you aren’t going to do them again, it doesn’t matter. I invite you all to come and sit 4 A levels if they are so pitiably easy.
“What does it matter if they aren’t as hard”.
It doesn’t matter at all, if you have no concern whatsoever about falling standards…or providing students with a genuinely challenging education.
I’m happy that I have a genuinely challenging education. You not being in it, probably would know.
Erm… Can someone tell me when the purpose of education changed from… Well, education, and into an amusing pastime the value of which is inversely proportional to the quality of the education one received previously?
No! I’ve got it: 1997.
‘I’m doing my A-levels now’ – so you’re an teenage, oily-tick who seems to think he knows more than the combined intelligence of the people on this blog. You’ll have to tell us what your school is so we can see if it’s ‘elitist’ or not. I suppose you’ve got your future mapped out, A-levels, PPE at Cambridge and a job at the Labour Party. The thing is when I was eighteen I thought I knew everything and do you know what? I knew nothing. Let’s face it fellow BBBC bloggers, if Whitman’s the best they’ve got then we’ll win all the arguments hands down.
Sorry I missed this gem. I presume you still think you know everything though? I don’t claim to know everything, just see that evidence isn’t just someone saying ‘look how biased this is’. And my school is by no means elitist, it’s a state school, comprehensive, in the suburbs of Derby. It’s not Eton. And maybe I would do PPE at Cambridge, but it’s only Oxford who offers that course – how disappointing that is. Hopefully I could end up at Cambridge though, fingers crossed and grade pending.
Cripes, the value of this thread is just too good to be true.
Folk are still treating Walt ‘never met a non sequitur I couldn’t mis-apply’ seriously?
‘My dear, I mean nothing sincerely’
It’s like Monty Python’s Black Knight set in Stockholm, with Bonnie & Clyde simply needing a Band-Aid or two and Terminator coming out the press with better creases.
Savour the experience. It’s like dealing with the BBC CECUTT only without the sense they convey that they know their window of opportunity is closing fast.
If he goes all night I’ll know Turing’s test has at last been met.
My God you must be boring to spend any amount of time with.
‘My God you must be boring to spend any amount of time with.’
Must I?
Seems you have opted for some reason to spend a great deal of time spending time conversing with me (amongst others, true). Maybe you found the subject matter stimulating.
So I’d have say… boring… like a fox.
Good luck with the A-levels.
One thing.
In subjects that have no facts, and are assessed on other criteria, it’s the quality of the argument that counts as opposed to simply having one for its own sake.
http://biasedbbc.tv/2012/05/30/fauxtography/#comment-29751
There’s also sensible time management.
The chap there stopped, coincidentally, about the time you started up. Pure coincidence, one is sure. Or maybe a recognition at just how much he was shooting himself in the foot, culminating in a rather witless attempt to exit based on what was hoped (me being angered, which I wasn’t… simply amused and concerned) vs. the reality (him admitting to being a troll, which was pretty much as all had figured from the off).
You have a finite amount. Treasure what you have and use it wisely.
Not just in the exams, but in well planned revision.
My kids are working hard this 1/2-term for their mocks. Bit of deserved sleeping in, and bit of parental pandering on the cuisine front (& no chores for this break), a bit of TV and some Xbox. Inbetween they, and we if needed, knuckle down to the business at hand of truly get to grips with the subjects.
Or… you can blow your wad obsessing on quantity over quality trying to take on everyone or anyone at a blog that appears to share none of your values, simply getting worked up and having your self-esteem lowered in the process. The was a window of opportunity honing debating skills, but that was squandered early on. The descent into obscenity-driven rage in response is an indicator that you became aware of this, but too late.
Which may have a poor consequence on the grade average.
And I am not sure, yet, even with the new touchy-feely exam-board systems and the most empathetic of inspirational mentors, getting a purple heart in online obsession will cut much slack. If you are lucky you may stumble across a fellow-traveller in the ‘it’s everyone but me’ school of envy and bitterness, but some still may have enough integrity to still expect, well, talent over rhetoric.
But these days, you never know… already leader of any political party or market second-rater posting on The Editors beckons for sure.
And if your ‘special’ way of engaging can be elevated to a ‘unique’ one, and people have to pay you no matter how dire your abilities, you at least will be in the company of folk who will offer the option of closing the thread or at the very least referring the nasty folk away when it doesn’t go the way that was hoped for or intended.
Real life, at least in the competitive world, operates a smidge differently.
I’m anticipating yet another MSc in ‘nothing much of use’ vox poppette for their best chum at Uni Newsnight researcher’s FaceBook useful idiot list, for a 1 minute of fame whinge on how it was first Tory cuts but now Labour bankrupting the nation that has you sweeping out the Capita call-centre in Calcutta, as they try and plead for money since the BBC got sold off to cover Miliband & Co’s golden pensions before you managed to wangle onto the greasy pole.
I’ve done my exams. Thanks for your concern, but in the words of Louis Armstrong, We have all the time in the world.
So what are you going to do next?
I wonder what sort of exciting life our pimply friend Whitman has? Perhaps he likes to drink a bottle of cider down the local park where he can cop a feel with the local bike for a fag. Here’s a bit of advice, get laid, it might take that massive chip of your shoulder.
Ooh. How cutting, insightful and unpleasant. Luckily though, I lost my virginity when I was 7.
At first I thought we were dealing with a grown man and wondered what made him behave like an adolescent. We then find he is an adolescent and that this would explain the stunted sense of respect, callow obtrusiveness and a conceitedness no doubt boosted by being the cock of the local A level dunghill. But I have horrible feeling we may entering mental health territory here.
Are you trying to offend me or hurt me? I’m quite proud that you dislike me, can you imagine how awful it would be if we shared the same outlook?
Things must be bad if Stephen Fry thinks the BBC coverage of the Jubilee was awful.
BBC under fire over ‘lamentable’ Jubilee coverage
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/the_queens_diamond_jubilee/9309767/BBC-under-fire-over-lamentable-Jubilee-coverage.html
Watched it on Sky.
I couldn’t face any more BBC coverage after their warm-up acts – Polly Toynbee on Marr, Campbell, Hasan and seemingly most of the Big Question audience – had ensured that I’d had a bellyful of the bastards by 11.00.
As it happens, I had a ‘Guardianista’ with me today and amazingly even she lost her rag with them. Offended, she was, saying something along the lines that ‘today was the Queen’s day’…if they wanted to argue about a republic they should do it at some other time.
‘A spokesman said: “We’re very proud of the quality and breadth of the BBC’s coverage of this extraordinary event.”‘
In the face of criticism from across the home team to come out with that takes some delusion.
Maybe he was worn out by posting here too all day?
So he’s angry and doing 4 A levels (Sociology, Media Studies, Modern History and How to be a Successful Anarchist). Argues with everybody and hates everybody, particularly the monarchy it seems. Chucks abuse and insults about like a baby with a sore bottom and is not sure about his sexuality but loves the BBC. Needs urgent psychological help me thinks.
He/she/it should be a good Labour time waster, or a hack on the Guardian.
Welcome to the wonderful legacy of socialism.
French, German, History and English Literature, my dear. And you did?
Soft subjects Squishy Anyone could pass that lot df patsies.
I expect that is why who chose such soft and easy subjects
You could not face tough stuff.
Stuff like Maths or sciensxes
But please carry on trolling
You are more literate than most Beeboids
You’re the kind of moron I detest. Value knowledge in all its form you tit, not just maths and sciences. If you think two modern languages I’ll forward you all the work and then you can do them for me. Thanks you massive boob.
Oh and I chose to do subjects I love, rather than pursuing something for money. I did maths and sciences to GCSE and hated them, so I didn’t do them. Wanker.
‘cos you wouldn’t want to be qualified in anything that might be remunerative. Better to feel than to think, and not be some ghastly profitable, right-wing capitalist.
No need for the continual cussin’ – massive boob wanker.
No, I just don’t want to be a slave to money. I’m sure I could be an accountant I just can’t think of anything more shit than that. I want to do what I love to do so that I’ll be happy in life and work. Cock.
In fact, what am I doing justifying my life choices to a bunch of sad cocks like you. I’ll be happy in life, and will never return here. Peace out, twatends.
Cripes! I hope the tedious buzzard meant that .
They’re like the Sandmen – they’ll be back….and in greater numbers 😉
What a sad and nasty piece of work your noise has proved to be today. A day’s trolling and without any real substanceor anything gained – remember that this site has provided you with far more space and time than you deserve.
I hope you’re true to your word and stay away, but I bet some other alias of yours is back here within the week…
Good luck with your A levels, of course you’ll need more structure, a context and an ability to cite your source material when you become an undergraduate.
A lesson learned today, perhaps?
In fact, what am I doing justifying my life choices..
Said the person who made a conscious choice, presumably based on zero research, to crash in and around for a day and demanded everyone do just that, only on his (very limited) terms. Then, having failed, exits stage left, with sore head, like a bear with one. Or is it followed by one?
A fitting epitaph, until the next re-incarnation.
Which for the latest toys out of pram flouncer will be greeted with all such irony deserves.
Hope it was worth it for him.
I was far too engrossed with the Jubilee yesterday to read any of this. Sticking my unwelcome oar in I say good luck to young Whitman. They certainly don’t seem like easy subjects to me. German…French…History and English. There really is no need to be so unpleasant.
Jeff: Thank You. There really was no need on the behalf whoever it was to start criticising.
And Herr Who? This is not a life choice. We can both find something better to do, but on a Jubilee day with only a pageant to watch, it was well worth the laugh.
slim … good look with your islam lectures 😀
“sweetheart”
Pleasant fellow.
http://tinyurl.com/8225e69
Whitman –
You remind me of myself at around your age. I even was a bit of a liberal back then. 🙂
I wasted lots and lots of time getting in petty disputes on an internet forum, winding other people up and getting hot under the collar myself. Instead, I could have been doing stuff that was meaningful to me, whether it was making the acquaintance of charming young ladies or giving my university studies the focus they deserved. I genuinely hope you don’t make the mistakes I did. 🙂
Jeff
This Witlessman has amused me as well.
I enjoyed his reference to all students attending Cambridge as being intelligent.
Is this the same Cambridge that recently produced a History Scholar who hadn’t a fucking clue about the significance of the Cenotaph ?
Who cares what the Cenotaph is when you have rich parents ?