Ed Miliband made his speech on immigration and said nothing that would commit him to anything at all, and the apology was a touch insincere as he had no problem with the numbers of immigrants ‘flocking’ here.
The BBC was naturally delighted…Labour coming out fighting in a passive aggressive way defending mass immigration whilst at the same time apologising for it…..A fair chunk of air time was given over to this exercise in smoke and mirrors.
However, of course, despite Mark Thompson’s admittance of BBC failure to handle the topic of immigration in a balanced and comprehensive manner old habits die hard in the bunkers of Broadcasting House.
We had the Today programme, Victoria Derbyshire and then Sheila Fogarty not so much poking a stick into the dangerous viper’s nest of immigration but gently prodding it with a hesitant toe reluctant to delve into the realities of what the vast majority of people in this country consider one of their major concerns.
Sheila Fogarty I thought was going to make a brave attempt to break out of the rhetoric and abuse and implied suggestions of racism towards anyone that wants a curb on immigration but she almost instantly fell back into the BBC comfort zone of denial and accusation even before Government immigration minister, Damian Green, had opened his mouth.
At around 41 minutes she picks out an email to read to Green…now I would suggest the BBC has received thousands of emails on this subject on that morning, most of them perhaps reasoned and ‘mildly’ expressed disapproval of mass immigration. Which one do you think she read out as an opening gambit to Green?
She chose ‘Rich the Sparky’s’ email which said…he would like ‘a blanket ban on anyone coming to the UK who was unskilled…most of my mates are pretty racist and I think people are broadly tribal and like people similar to themselves…I don’t think there are any positives to a multicultural society.’
Tone of voice was all when Fogarty then asked Green for ‘Your thoughts on that’.
It could be reasonably argued that that choice of email out of the thousands they received sums up succinctly the BBC attitude to the subject. Firstly they believe that all those not in favour of mass immigration are by definition racist in an evil, nasty sense, second that the Tories are similarly racist and are dancing to the Rightwing fanatics racist tune by acting to limit immigration.
This little game that Fogarty played was pure politics attempting to ‘smear’ Green, the Tories and any curb on immigration with the racist tag by association….we all remember that game from the Breivik case where ‘rightwing’ journalist and bloggers were all branded racists and the ultimate inciters of Breivik’s murderous actions.
However it seems when that game is played with them the Left don’t like it….after Miliband’s speech…..‘Mischievous messages of support came from Ukip’s Nigel Farage and even the BNP’s Nick Griffin, the latter gleefully retweeted by Miliband’s critics on the left, as if to suggest that the leader had taken the first step on the grimy slope towards fascism. But such guilt-by-association is not really defensible. Ed Miliband cannot stay off awkward topics just because a thug like Griffin will try to exploit it if he does.’
Owen Jones @OwenJones84 22 Jun‘This has been tweeted by BNP’s Nick Griffin: “Miliband joins ranks of BNP recruiting sergeants. Legitimation of our message by party . . .”‘
However is the BBC correct in denouncing people who express ‘racist’ views?…is ‘Rich the Sparky’ not right in reality? Is it not a fact of life that any ‘stranger’ regardless of colour, is likely to be met with suspicion and dislike especially if he doesn’t conform to the standards of the community he has moved into?
What does the semi God of the ‘Climate Change’ debate, James Lovelock, have to say on the subject?….
‘Our political system works because they tend to self-correct each other. What you’ve got to avoid at all costs is ideologues.
The problem with ideologues from Marx onwards is that they tend to imagine that human nature is very different from what it actually is. We’re still animals and we behave like animals and it doesn’t take much to knock our “civilisation” away. People are very, very sensitive about territory and if you move a new lot of people into their territory, they don’t like it one bit. Politicians are very stupid if they think they can get away with that sort of thing.
It’s not that people are racist per se. We’re naturally racist, you can’t get away from it. We try to curb it and be sensible. People are very rarely individually racist, but they don’t want a large culture dumped on them. I don’t know anyone personally who would be nasty to someone because of their colour or because they come from a different country. It’s not in our style in these islands.’
The BBC and its employees should take a less utopian view of the world and human nature and realise that what they call racism is a naturally occurring phenomenon that is an essential part of developing and sustaining any culture and society…it has serious downsides if taken to extremes but they need to recognise it is part of us…all of us, Black, White, Scousers and Mancs, and yes, even BBC employees.
Any doubts? Take note of the below presumably posted by a ‘Scouser’, a rather downbeat description of a ‘Manc’…..
| Manc | 320 up, 283 down | |||||||
|
An inhabitant of Manchester, officially the most run down, smelly and rat infested city in the UK.Statistically, it has been proven that all Mancs can be put into at least one of the following five catagories (although some fit all):1) Junkie
2) Rapist 3) Paedophile 4) Pikey 5) SlutLimited by a tiny gene pool, Mancs spend their time robbing, shooting, taking drugs and having sex with children. As well as being cursed with incredibly annoying nasal voices, they are stunted in growth by years of inbreeding. Was that posted by a Scouser? Maybe not:
This is purely an illustration of the ‘tribal’ nature of people and not the views of this blog!!…and that the argument about immigration is about numbers not race….though it does encompass important points about importing starkly different cultures and ideologies that are at odds with the native ones.
|
||||||||
I suggest you also listen to Any Answers with ex Guardian lefty lovey Anand on Saturday. All the time spent listening to anti Government views on bank liquidity and.O-levels then conveniently ran out of time after just one response to the Miliband U-turn on immigration attitudes because the BBBC just knew the comments would all be critical of their beloved Labour clients. No balance again!
I`m a Manc, and have absolutely no problem with this stuff-whether it`s by a true Scouser or not(and it`s unlikely that it is really).
Why so?…because I have a sense of humour, because Liverpool and Manchester have a rivalry since Ship Canal days-and because Liverpool is an architectural gem with the funniest people in the country on a good day.
I`d no more tell the Human Rights lot about this than I`d squauk about anti-Irish prejudice as imagined by the BBC in the 70s.
Despite the IRA and “boycott Kerrygold” stuff, this was and is a generous, tolerant country that saw the IRA as something abhorrent to true Irish people…and not the BBCs favoured rent a gombeen traitors like Adams and McGuinness.
About time we told the BBC where to get off…long live the mutual loathing/respect engendered by these two great northern cities!
They`d take a bomb for us much as we`d do for them…as Warrington showed as did the Arndale….so stuff the Beeb!
I’ve still not got an answer out of any politician who believes in made made global warming, when asked why they wish to move millions of people from countries with low rates of consumption to ones with high rates of consumption.
Yep…always a BBC contradiction….telling us immigration is vital for economic growth and conversely saying we must cut back on economic activity to save the planet…consumerism is bad.
Fogarty’s tactic was utterly predictable, and yet she and her comrades at the BBC are blissfully happy to use such cynical nasty insinuating tactics time and again. Why are they never hauled up over this by their victims? As for Ed Miliband’s alleged u-turn on immigration, I would urge people to read the actual text of his speech rather than the headlines and the mock outrage that it generates. The sly devil has actually managed to pass off a speech reiterating Labour’s commitment to mass immigration whilst pretending that he’s concerned about it! Moreover, the only immigrant group he selected for criticism happened to be white Europeans from the EU accession countries. Why? http://durotrigan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/ed-miliband-and-peter-sutherland-united.html
Parkinson wrote an article in the Sunday Times in 2010 ..’He floats like a butterfly, froths like a zealot’..in which the ‘affable clown became the ranting, raving monster, defying interruption, destroying logic.’
The man had changed…’perhaps because the disciple of the Black Muslim movement had become its avenging angel.’
‘In the past his admirers have accepted his religious and racial propaganda on the same level as his ticket-selling ballyhoo. They have catalogued his declaration of making each fight a holy war with his inspired clowning. Suddenly they have been confronted with an angry, fanatical, irrational zealot and they have recoiled.’
‘A lot of people changed their opinions about him.’
Except some at the BBC…last week by coincidence one BBC female presenter (who shall remain nameless…as I can’t remember which one) said she thought Ali was the most beautiful human being she had seen.
Wonder if Nick Griffin is jealous…or confused?
Can you imagine if a white man were to speak this truth today? The wrath of massed socialism would come down on him like a ton of bricks. And Mr Parkinson showed where his loyalties lie. He’s one of the self-hating whites that Mr Ali was describing.
I have to say that i did’nt see that interview at the time, but hey, old Ali is dead on the money there, he showed Parkinson up as the wishy-washy BBC type personified. Well done Ali, agree all the way.
‘I would suggest the BBC has received thousands of emails on this subject on that morning, most of them perhaps reasoned and ‘mildly’ expressed disapproval of mass immigration. Which one do you think she read out as an opening gambit to Green?’
Doubtless a uniquely-funded phalanx of FoI exclusion lawyers on standby to prevent it, but an analysis of what comes in vs. what (is chosen and) goes out is overdue.
It must be possible, as with their bent competitions and rigged winners, supposedly from the ranks of the ‘public’.
The BBC uses these ‘we want your views’ filters like any tin-pot despot sets up a border incident to justify an invasion.
Who is even to say that Richard the Electrician isn’t a staffer mate of the BBC producer’s setting the whole thing up?
As with unmodded comments here, it’s not like the name ‘Rich’ confers any certainty on any aspect of the poster, including agenda. The difference is, ALL go up, to live or die on their merits, or lack of. The only time it falters is when silly games are being played by heat over light merchants seeking to stir up or distract.
The BBC seem to excel in doing it to deceive, which is much darker.
I am always puzzled by the way every culture but ours is praised whilst ours is ignored or worse. This applies to politicians as much as to the anti-BBC.
Absolutely true.
The reason people enjoy travelling to different parts of the world is to experience the many cultures on offer, yet when some of those travellers return home they will deny that there is any such thing as a host culture in their own country. I think it’s partly that some people fail to recognise the unique characteristics of the society which surrounds them daily, and only notice the sudden difference when they are away from home. Their realisation that there is a different between home and away doesn’t seem to alter their lack of awareness of their own culture. Then there is another group, whose wish to deny the obvious is driven by the political ideology of the left – those who recognise and actively encourage strongly defined foreign cultures within their own nation, but refuse to accept that their country possess such a thing itself. We are the bland, unremarkable pizza base, to which all the toppings must be added before you have anything noticeable or worthwhile. It is, to use their own language against them, bigotted and racist.
“I am always puzzled by the way every culture but ours is praised whilst ours is ignored or worse”
Let’s see what’s on BBCtv this week:
Treasures of the Anglo-Saxons
Julius Caesar
Omnibus: Ray Bradbury
The Genius of David Bowie
The One Show: Best of Britain
King George and Queen Mary
How the Brits Rocked America
London on Film
Turn Back Time – The Family
Cutty Sark: National Treasure Reopened
The Secret History of Our Streets
Sea Fever
Rude Britannia
Macbeth
Brick by Brick: Rebuilding Our Past
Great British Menu
Time to Remember
Timeshift: The Golden Age of Coach Travel
Bomber Command: A Tribute
Chatsworth
Simon Schama’s Shakespeare
The Hollow Crown: Richard II
Derek Jacobi on Richard II
Illuminations: The Private Lives of Medieval Kings
So nothing about British culture there then. Nope, not one single thing…
‘I am always puzzled by the way every culture but ours is praised whilst ours is ignored or worse. ‘
Hey Dez….!
BBC Diamond Jubilee Thames Pageant coverage?
“BBC Diamond Jubilee Thames Pageant coverage?”
Quick, change the subject!
The Diamond Jubilee Thames Pageant. You reckon that had nothing to do with British culture? Was the BBC’s treatment of that event not a pretty good measure of their regard for British culture? Be honest for once, did you watch How God Made The English?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01dxrdz
Diarmaid MacCulloch set out to establish that Englishness didn’t exist. Can you imagine a documentary setting out to prove Italy or Russia have no culture other than what exists through their diversity? The idea is ludicrous and could only be suggested about Britain/England on the BBC (NB Scots Irish and Welsh are cool).
Derek said that [British Culture] “is ignored or worse”
My list of 24 BBCtv programmes in the coming week about “British Culture” has proved him completely wrong.
Why can’t you just admit that fact instead of desperately trying to change the subject?
800,000 is considered a very high audience for BBC4 “required by its licence to broadcast at least 100 hours of new arts and music programmes, 110 hours of new factual programmes and premier 20 international films each year.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Four
“800,000 is considered a very high audience for BBC4
Yes, very interesting Wally but completely irrelevant to Derek’s proposition that; [our culture] “is ignored or worse“
…or diverted as quota quickies to a ghettoized channel
“…a ghettoized channel”
What does that even mean Wally? BBC4 is available to everyone with a working television. All you have to do is press “nine” on your remote.
Is that to complicated for you?
I mean an audience share of 0.9% (for comparison C4: 5.7%, BBC2: 6.2% – the Beeboids are well aware that hardly anyone watches it .
yawn………….
That`s 24 , and if the average is one hour long thats one day out of seven spread across several channels ie 1 hour per day per channel .
Who is Roy Bradbury and what is Rude Brittannia ?
“ and if the average is one hour long thats one day out of seven spread across several channels”
Ah ha!
“Who is Roy Bradbury?”
Uh oh!
Hee hee .
Cant answer .
The weather forecasts show the BBCs contempt for our culture
dez, I fear most of those programs present the usual left-wing revisionist self-loathing view of our history and culture.
One program I did have the misfortune to see : Chatsworth. The focus was entirely on the ‘woman in a tarbard’ who lays the table and the army of immigrants who staff the kitchens. Very little about the house itself or the mighty empire that built it.
The BBC the left/cultural marxists will never win they are going against the natural order of things. They can try as hard as they want to change the natural order but they will never win. The Queen’s diamond jubilee proves that.
“what they call racism is a naturally occurring phenomenon that is an essential part of developing and sustaining any culture and society”
Superb! The good old “appeal to nature” fallacy.
Would you care to explain just how racism is an essential part of developing and sustaining any culture and society?
Go on, give it your best shot…
dez, young kiddie
Every Friday evening I babysit for one of my daughters.
They have unlimited bandwidth, so I go back over on iPLayer EVERY programme BBC TV has shown over the past week.
It is usually mostly rubbish. Or rubbish repeats.
This Friday, the only programmes I opted to watch were Trooping the Colour (a colourful spectacle laid on at nil cost to the BBC) – and a REPEAT of an Inspector Lynsley programme.
4 channels x 7 days . Just the evenings add up to about 72 hours per channel, times 4 channels = about 300 hours.
Out of 300 hours I find 3 hours worth watching ?
I am old now, but that looks like 1%
……………………
BBC TV is full of rubbish or repeats or biased “news”
Costing us some £3 billion a year
“This Friday, the only programmes I opted to watch were Trooping the Colour (a colourful spectacle laid on at nil cost to the BBC) – and a REPEAT of an Inspector Lynsley programme.”
I see, the BBC is so rubbish you only watched it for three hours one night. ROFLMAO!