Here is a new Open Thread, I have loads of stuff to share with you after listening to “Today” this morning so more to follow. In the meantime the floor is yours….
MONDAY OPEN THREAD..
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Guest Who Dec 22, 23:11
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
There might be a smidge of irony here. https://x.com/rrrrnessa/status/1870495794236977278?s=61 You people are deeply, dangerously unwell and evil. The majority of… - JohnC Dec 22, 22:54
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
I always go to the user reviews then sorth them by date so you get the ones after the initial… - BRISSLES Dec 22, 22:49
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
Also a non white detective in new season of Death in Paradise. The diversity directive that has infected the drama… - JohnC Dec 22, 22:44
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
Children among dozens killed in Israeli strikes, Gaza officials say https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz9g4yl8j17o Here’s a new low: The BBC went from telling… - Deborah Dec 22, 22:22
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
I used to be a Covid numbers junky, from watching Valance asking for the next slide please to still regularly… - StewGreen Dec 22, 22:14
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
BBC presenters “we are IMPARTIAL IMPARTIAL IMPARTIAL” BBC presenter Paul Lewis Money tweets An interesting list of broadly good things… - Deborah Dec 22, 22:12
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
I am reading John C’s first post, and I am watching Wolf Hall at the same time. Cromwell’s daughter has… - wwfc Dec 22, 22:11
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you all https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7_F9wr-xnA&list=PLgo9WexfEcK2ZmqGd_-MR8aRDoWIz4CRC&ab_channel=RichardProulx-Topic - non-licence payer Dec 22, 21:37
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
When will the bBC wake up to the fact that their preferred Government and government is driving the UK into… - JohnC Dec 22, 21:36
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
And here I am : Christmas No. 1 !!!. Well, Christmas Eve at least if Fed is still sober enough…
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 music be the food of love … play on…
17 dead in beheadings in afghanistan over music event
is ramadan over … i hadn t noticed.
al bbc 5live – your call … obama sez!? … re – neil armstrong
oh brother ….. actually he, (armstrong) did speak about the space program under
obama, leaving behind a shadow space agency: “embarrassing and unacceptable”.
ooh yes! … were talking about the space race and ittssssss panto dame nikki :-D.
so much reverence to armstr… – obama this morning wetting his pants whilst lauding that
apparently he had actually .. phoned nasa? … hurrah!, (but its not quite the same nikki 😀 ).
wait a minute … wasn t it c.bolden – obama appointee who declared that, “diversity and inclusion are integral to mission success at nasa”… because how can we possibly reach the stars unless there are mandated diversity targets among the launch crews and the conflict management specialists? … and had declared that the agency’s chief goal was outreach to the Muslim world?
Its says everything that is wrong with obama/nasa not something to be lauded.
This was getting lost towards the end of Friday’s Open Thread.
Compare b-BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19384330
US President Barack Obama has led tributes to astronaut Neil Armstrong, the first man on the Moon, who died on Saturday at the age of 82. Mr Obama said on his Twitter feed: “Neil Armstrong was a hero not just of his time, but of all time.”
with
Sky News http://news.sky.com/story/977135/neil-armstrong-global-icon-reluctant-hero
in which the only mention of Obama is Armstrong’s criticism of the Sainted One.
However, he stepped back into the cameras in 2010 to voice his “substantial reservations” about President Barack Obama’s space policy that shifted attention away from a return to the moon, with an emphasis on private companies developing spaceships. Along with more than two dozen Apollo-era veterans, he signed a letter calling the plan a “misguided proposal that forces Nasa out of human space operations for the foreseeable future”.
Here are two rather better comparisons:
Obituary:
Sky News: Neil Armstrong: Global Icon, Reluctant Hero (the piece you link to above)
BBC: Obituary: Neil Armstrong, Moon landings astronaut
Tributes
Sky News: Obama: Armstrong Was ‘Great American Hero’
BBC: Obama leads tributes to Armstrong, first man on Moon (the piece you link to above)
If you are going to compare stories compare like with like.
(sorry for not putting in the links, but too many links in a post and you end up in moderation limbo)
As worshippers of the Moon God I would have thought Obama/BBC would be keen on a pilgrimage or Haj there.
It’s probably a good idea to have a sick-bag, or even bucket, nearby if you’re going to read http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19366000, where b-BBC gives Dave Spart free rein to rage against ‘right-wing ideology’ in yet another Breivik-inspired pseudo-academic ramble.
He actually asks a sensible question –
In a country as famously tolerant, integrated and wealthy as Norway, what could have motivated such mass murder? – but then proceeds to ignore it.
The sub seems on message too…
‘Breivik made a fascist-style salute in court just before he was sentenced’
Now it’s been a while since Nuremberg or Benito’s Balcony broadcasts, but google gives me this…
http://ivarfjeld.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/palestiniannazisalute01.jpg
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/images/2011/05/479948.jpg
However, if we are talking ‘in the style of’ per the picture captioned, I seem to get more…
http://www.endtimesroundtable.com/ETRT/forms/files/file_1_02170318022011.jpg
http://www.worldpress.org/images/20080205-americas.jpg
http://previous.presstv.ir/photo/20120522/reportint20120522134031483.jpg
Not the most noted ‘right-wingers’, if that’s what they were aiming for, in history.
Seems that, as part of BBC ‘enhance the narrative season’, bolting ‘style’ after something can turn whatever is into whatever is wished.
For information or education and trust purposes, that is many things, but professional, objective ‘news’ it is not.
I keep waiting for the BBC to do like they did after 9/11 and 7/7 and tell us we need to try to understand his grievances.
In a nutshell – brilliant observation, David.
The truth can be pretty inconvenient, especially for the BBC.
BBC-NUJ omits this:
“Minister raps politicians’ silence on immigration”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2194008/Minister-raps-politicians-silence-immigration.html
From INBBC report:
“Seventeen civilians have been killed by Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan’s southern Helmand province, reportedly for attending a party.”
Of course, INBBC’s Quentin Somerville does not even speculate that the Islamic Taliban murdered 17 civilians attending a party because of the Taliban’s Islamic motivation.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19388869
Perhaps the champagne corks at Broadcasting House will have to remain unpopped if the BBC get their wish for a Taliban Government to be installed in the UK.
If we ever got a Taliban Government in Britain then BBC employees should stay away from lamp posts and cranes or it will be the last thing they ever do.
True, but they think they will be controlling them rather than the reverse which will happen.
I mean we jest but the last (excuse for a) government were minded to allow shariah ‘law’ in certain areas.
This might be a Newsniffy, as I am pretty sure this is not what I (or, possibly you) read earlier, when it was a masterpiece of vagueness when all other media seemed pretty clear on details that did not really paint the followers of the RoP in the best light, whilst highlighting the odd moral equivalences and priority sets of the rush-to-twitter Pussy Rioting marketing teams.
Still, the BBC still has that way with words one can only know and loathe…
‘Seventeen civilians have been killed by Taliban insurgents… They were either beheaded or had had their throats cut…. The Taliban disapprove of men and women mixing socially.
That’s quite some disapproval at work for those folk to end up dead in such a way.
The BBC’s Quentin Somerville, in the capital Kabul, says some reports suggest the 17 were killed because they were local government workers.
Good taste prevents developing this one further.
As a ‘report’ goes, about on par with most BBC efforts.
Supplementary:
-so INBBC can be clear on Islamic Taliban’s Islamic motivation for mass beheadings.
‘Telegraph’:-
“Taliban behead 17 caught dancing to music at party –
“Taliban militants beheaded 15 men and two women for holding a late night party with music and dancing, according to Afghan officials.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/9501478/Taliban-behead-17-caught-dancing-to-music-at-party.html
It will be difficult for Alex Akhbar of the SNP to blame Mossad for this.
But he’ll find a way. He always does.
This train lark lumbers on.
And Mr. Branson does seem to have had a fair old crack of the whip, to say folk who have no experience don’t deserve their crack like wot he did when he wanted to play with his set.
Frankly I do think the whole thing bears discussion to ensure the public are well served at least, if not billionaire sulkers. And those whose petty tribal point-scoring missions he serves… for now.
However, there may be some value in finding out who doesn’t get to have a say, and who does…
BBCSundayPoliticsMid @sunpoliticsmids
@PatrickBurnsBBC interview with Lord Peter Snape about @VirginTrains and #FirstGroup over West Coast mail Line contract http://on.fb.me/OiblVv
“Why won’t the BBC come clean over its bias against Israel – a moral country that deserves our support?”
By ALEX SINGLETON
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2193845/Why-wont-BBC-come-clean-bias-Israel–moral-country-deserves-support.html#ixzz24kKxXTtW
£333k of the TV TAX spent on preventing you seeing the Balen report.
Not sure, but when I see the words ‘Government’ and ‘attack’ in a tweet, it’s almost like the author is saying ‘Oo… me, sir, me!’ to catch the attention of the BBC Anger and Protests Editors seeking a ‘quote’…
Owen Jones @OwenJones84
Celebrate the Paralympics, but shame a government attacking disabled people – my piece for @IndyVoices http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/owen-jones-david-cameron-praises-paralympians-but-his-policies-will-crush-them-8082036.html
Owen Jones and his ilk never explain why they indiscriminately speak up for those who are lazy and workshy alongside the genuinely sick and disabled. Get rid of the former and there will be more support – and more money – for the latter.
But it makes for better left-wing politics to lump them all together.
Why is Owen Jones always on the BBC. Does he fill the BBC’s mentally challenged homosexual diversity quota?
young Shoutie certainly doesn’t *fill* the quota.
He certainly is a part of it though.
And where is his right-wing equivalent – you know, ‘balance’ and all that?
Every time there’s some noise about means testing for benefits (like disability), the BBC wheels out some actually disabled person to cry about how she’s going to lose her benefits. Last time it was a very legally blind woman who said she was going to lose her guide dog because of the evil Tories. Oh, wait….means testing wasn’t mentioned in that report. All I heard was nasty Tory cuts to benefits.
“Gerald Warner: Statue of George at the BBC would be truly Orwellian”
http://www.scotsman.com/news/gerald-warner-statue-of-george-at-the-bbc-would-be-truly-orwellian-1-2489657?
I see the BBC are having orgasms in this link, the reason being that they are getting the opportunity to dissect and ‘expose’ right-wing extremism in the Brevik case. You compare the BBC’s analysis here with that of Islamic atrocities; in the case of Muslim extremists (a term which the BBC have openly admitted makes them uncomfortable – value judgements etc.) the BBC look for sanitizing reasons and they use an apologetic tone; remember the despicable anti-American 9/11 OT? They, and the handpicked extremist socialist audience blamed America and Israel, like they similarly blamed young white girls for the paedostani epidemic on a recent edition. But an evil and twisted psychopath (I don’t care what the doctors say, in my opinion… he’s a nutter!) who acts alone is linked to all of these extremist right wing ideologies, movements and undergoes copious analytical dissections.
The BBC is playing politics and is, as so often is the case, trying to brainwash us into thinking that the Right is some enormous mass movement threat, bubbling under the surface. Well, if they and their liberal fascist friends who are in power across Europe, stopped imposing multiculturalism on the populace and stopped making excuses for Islamic violence, and stopped undermining our traditional values, maybe you wouldn’t get evil madmen going wild with a shotgun. But, their socialist and left-wing march moves on relentless… the left will NEVER listen.
forgot the link…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19366000
The last line of that article:
” Such anti-liberal doctrines can be – and have been – defeated by robust discussion and debate.”
Exactly the kind of discussion you WONT hear on the INBBC!
“Robust discussion and debate” = “shouting down”
Also “You cannot say that“ and “The debate is over”
Accompanied by hysterical screams of ‘Waaaaaacist!’
For a second there I almost thought this was going to prove me wrong and the BBC actually was spending a moment trying to understand Breivik’s grievances the way they did for the 9/11 and 7/7 mass murderers. But no, it’s just an attempt to catalog far-Right themes and point the finger of blame.
If the ‘extreme right’ were the threat the BBC always claim them to be, where were the tit-for-tat murders after 9/11 and 7/7?
Three Israeli children have been arrested on suspicion of fire-bombing a Palestinian taxi.
The incident is the second high-profile case this month where young Israelis have been accused of attacking Arabs.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19389914
Yet overnight on the BBC’s World Service 50% of the news headline report of this incident has been used to tell the audience (c)”Human Rights Groups say that it is rare for Israeli settlers to be arrested”
Yeah, I heard that Will.
Still, it fills in the time and saves them having to mention the Teleban beheadings or Christian persecution.
They’ve also omitted to tell us how many Qassam rockets were fired from Gaza into Sderot today.
tut tut
They may be released by monday, “this means the suspects’ lawyer said there was “no meaningful evidence” against them”,
sooooo
and “hamas flexes its muscle after period of calm” bbc now … why? do i get a hint of admiration?
AS BBC DG Mark Thompson heads off into the sunset at the NY TImes, his pockets filled with millions of dollars, the outgoing ombudsman (allegedly a public advocate sort of position) has this to say about the staff at the Grey Lady:
But for journalists at The Times, the opportunity to flood the Web with content is a compelling one in its own right. Encouraged by the company to exploit social media, many Times journalists have become extraordinarily prodigious publishers on Twitter, some with thousands of posts to their credit.
Consider this sign of the froth that surrounds social media: A few weeks ago on NYTimes.com, a Times editor conducted a serious video interview with a BuzzFeed writer about the day Twitter was down for an hour or two — and the political, journalistic and (dare I extrapolate?) metaphysical implications thereof.
Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? But that’s not even the best part (emphasis mine):
I also noted two years ago that I had taken up the public editor duties believing “there is no conspiracy” and that The Times’s output was too vast and complex to be dictated by any Wizard of Oz-like individual or cabal. I still believe that, but also see that the hive on Eighth Avenue is powerfully shaped by a culture of like minds — a phenomenon, I believe, that is more easily recognized from without than from within.
When The Times covers a national presidential campaign, I have found that the lead editors and reporters are disciplined about enforcing fairness and balance, and usually succeed in doing so. Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times.
As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.
Sounds like Thompson will feel right at home.
“Radicalised” – that’s all yer gonna get from the BBC when atrocities and potential acts of terror are committed by Muslim extremists: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-19390055
We all know that if this bloke was a white British man, we’d be lectured and patronized with all the ‘Right-wing, Christian extremist’ crap.
The just magically became radicalized, it seems. No word on how or where. Just by osmosis, maybe?
It’s the racism of anti-racism.
The perp is brown and therefore not expected to live up to white standards. He is therefore more easily influenced by other brown nut-jobs.
The dispicable double standards of the left …
I’m shocked, shocked to learn that the police in Tampa, FL, arrested a 31-year-old man on Sunday who they say brought a machete to protest at the Republican National Convention.
The BBC told me the Tea Party people were the dangerous and potentially violent ones.
“Insurgents”? How about barbaric and fanatical animals?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19388869
yep, thats 17, …. terrible …. not shot,
but held down. slowly throats slit, slicing deliberately back to the bone and beheaded.
in accordance with the quran/sharia
i do hope we re going to get one tenth of the blanket coverage that Breivik got, for his shootings, the constant droning condemnation,
commentator after commentator, examing the links?, the manifesto? why? …………… well?
NO i didn t think so either.
” i do hope we re going to get one tenth of the blanket coverage that Breivik got,”
If you hold your breath while waiting they’ll have another death added to the total !
They will censor it out well and truly, gone poof! just like that !
The bBBC just can’t help themselves with the pro-Obama, anti-Republican ‘news’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19391003
US Republicans are to open their national convention as they prepare to formally nominate Mitt Romney as Barack Obama’s White House challenger.
But Monday’s events in Tampa, Florida have all been cancelled amid concern over the path of Tropical Storm Isaac.
The storm will miss Tampa, but is set to hit the Gulf coast while the rejigged convention is in full swing.
Concern remains that the storm could overshadow key speeches by Mr Romney and running mate Paul Ryan.
The highly organised convention had been meticulously planned to highlight the personal story of Mr Romney, a former business star and governor of Massachusetts.
But Monday’s events will be limited to a symbolic opening and an immediate adjournment, with the evening agenda compressed on the following three nights.
Mr Ryan, a Wisconsin congressman known for his work on Republican budget plans, will face by far his biggest national exposure when he takes to the stage on Wednesday night.
But he could make his speech against a backdrop of images of high winds and storm surges lashing the Gulf coast virtually seven years to the day since Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans.
After the obligatory reference to Saint Obama in the first line, they go on to show ‘concern’ that they will give Tropical Storm Isaac more coverage than the ‘highly organised and meticulously planned’ Republican convention, and that they will then try to link Paul Ryan to the Hurricane Katrina disaster in New Orleans. Getting all their negative ‘reporting’ planned.
On Friday’s open thread, there were some comments about the BBC putting the President before Neal Armstrong in a news brief about Him leading tributes. While they may not really have been guilty of doing it deliberately, I think we can safely say that the President’s campaign is:
That photo was attached to an Obama 2-line post on tumblr about the late great Neil Armstrong.
Obama’s narcissism knows no bounds. It is a joke, an insult – except to Beeboids who love giving him headlines, and their fellow-travelling visitors here.
Here’s Colonel West on Obama :
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/08/27/rep_allen_west_obama_has_fed_america_a_crap_sandwich.html
Has West EVER been on the BBC ? He’d be great entertainment on the Today programme, for example
The BBC mentioned him once, but I think they got away with it.
The BBC hate people like Colonel West he doesn’t their narrative of what a African American should be .
Supplementary.
-With BBC-Democrats’ political endorsement:
a photo of their Obamessiah looking at His heavens:
“White House commemorates Neil Armstrong’s passing with photograph of… Obama.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2194404/White-House-commemorates-Neil-Armstrongs-passing-photograph–Barack-Obama.html#ixzz24nCZpAdC
Obama staring in awe at a crescent moon and one star. Hmmm, maybe those rumours are true then.
Demon……Brilliant!
I imagine that is precisely the point of the picture. To most, it looks like a picture of Obama in front of the moon – big deal. But to others…
Maybe he’s wondering when the promised back-up is going to arrive?
http://www.ironsky.net/
At least he doesn’t seem to be howling at it.
OT on the bias, but for hoot on the competence I feel worth the share.
When it suits the entire MSM seems pretty chilled on saying whatever it likes the moment it likes.
So when a helicopter evidently suffers a bird strike whilst engaged in a tourist fly-past over a well-defended section of town it is as well to be cautious on the details..
From, on the home page..
‘Syrian helicopter down in Damacus’ to..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19389028
with…
‘..Unverified amateur footage shows an aircraft on fire, apparently plummeting into the Al Qabun area of Damascus, as the BBC’s Barbara Plett reports’
Apparently plummeting?
Bless.
‘There’s no sign of the pilot’
Double bless.
I also presume it didn’t land on anything, or anyone, of importance.
Normal wild guesses will be resumed as soon as credible.
An anniversary of sorts.
Few BBC Editors seem able to resist the siren call of the school hols, sparing us their craft for protracted periods as they spend quality time, one presumes with family or, maybe the hierarchy of the NUT in some clement location.
So I merely note that champion of the people, Paul Mason, who seems to enjoy holiday time that most in the UK could only dream of…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/correspondents/paulmason/
And counting.
al bbc 5live breakfast.
Re:-
17 beheadings, yet another islamic atrocity,
the (expected), bbc appalling protectionism …
calling it a “bizarre, grisly” unfortunate event stylee palava, note no muslim/islam anywhere…
oh it was caused by a “falling out”? between two warlords, erm! a taliban fracas?, adding shamefully “over a woman”
adding a fog of inference, around the news of more islamic driven murders, of security staff by people they were helping to train, loving the (enforced pc armyspeak of), ahem! “green on blue”, nearly as much as “al-qaeda based” terrorism obviously
and
giving nearly 10mins of free airtime, to a “rebel/freedom/insurgent/islamist” spokesman over syria
unbelievably, still extolling the “arab spring” propaganda, they, have been told/are drawing up the new constitution, they have been for OVER 2YRS … this so called interview ended with a wistful “are you talking with your head or heart though? ” afterthought …. ie. is it just the usual islamist bulls-it.
to follow … the rail/branson/gov phone in ?
The Today programme had two pieces on the court case in Israel about Rachel Corrie (St Pancake) the “peace activist”)
I really can’t see why this case justifies any coverage in a UK news programme. But it is a casue close to the heart of Palestinian supporters.
Jon Donnison’s first report described Corrie’s death and the accusation that the bullzozer driver could both see and hear her. Her presence was described as an intention to obstruct the bulldozing of Palestinian homes – no mention of them being cover for tunnels to bring arms into Gaza.
Jon Donnison’s second report sounded a bit crestfallen. The court threw the case out, saying that the driver could not see Corrie, that she had deliberately put herself in harm’s way – and the so-called “peace activists” were actually trying to act as human shields to Palestinian terrorists.
But the case may well go to appeal – letting the BBC play again the story of the dastardly Israelis and the poor innocent young woman.
The other day, David Preiser ran a piece about the BBC shilling for Obama. Not that he was after a puff piece on Romney, but just a call on at least a semblance of genuine balance and not one which included a straw man.
That same plea sprang to mind when I read this report:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19391809
Not being able to look at the report (no link supplied) I went looking for the report and found Haaretz also running the story so went to double check. The similarities in terms of flow and paragraph content pointed to both being a cut and paste of a press release. Further research found it was indeed from Reuters. There were some differences in between the BBC and Haaretz that suggested the BBC report was more cut, than paste
See for yourself:
http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/08/27/palestinians-gaza-un-idINDEE87Q0CY20120827
Let’s take aquick look at what didn’t make it into the BBC report that still even made it into the left leaning Haaretz:
Since 2007, Gaza has been under the control of the Islamist Hamas organisation, an armed political movement which rejects permanent peace with Israel. They fought a three-week war in January 2009, and Israel is resisting international pressure to lift its blockade, which it says prevents arms reaching Hamas.
and
Israel partly eased restrictions in mid-2010, and Gaza’s crippled economy began to revive from rock bottom. Real GDP is estimated to have risen by 28 percent in the first half of 2011 as unemployment fell to 28 percent in 2011 from 37 percent.
and
Israel in fact withdrew from Gaza in 2005, removing troops and settlers after 38 years of occupation.
as well as
There is as yet no sign of an end to the conflict between Hamas and Israel. The Islamist movement is shunned by the West as a terror organisation and there is no prospect of diplomatic contacts leading to peace talks as long as Hamas rejects Israel’s right to exist.
and finally
The border is tense, with frequent clashes over rocket or mortar fire from Gaza and air strikes by Israel. Gaza rockets hit Israeli land on Sunday, damaging a factory in the town of Sderot, east of the enclave.
No wonder that Balen report is kept under lock & key. These are facts that give some sense of balance and even other left leaning and arabic news sites included these aspects that the BBC felt the need to omit from the report.
Mark Mardell is now openly dismissing Mitt Romney.
What he has in common with the cartoon sailor man is the declaration: “I am what I am.”
This shoulder-shrugging, take-it-or-leave-it approach has more gravitas than the teenage “whatever”.
It could either seem endearingly self-deprecating or arrogantly smug. It is also the very meaning of the name of God in the Old Testament.
Ever seen Mardell even use the word “smug” in a report about the President? Never mind suggesting something He said might be perceived as such. Romney is obviously not comparing himself to God. Nothing in Romney’s past or present behavior could suggest that he’s this massively arrogant. Only a someone with a negative, biased perspective could think of that. Mardell would never dream of suggesting that his beloved Obamessiah is arrogant, but he has no problem suggesting that about Romney.
Now the mocking:
Even this latest tactic is better suited to the rumpled and rumbustious, brawling seaman or jealous gods, than this stiff and awkward man.
Could he be more obvious about trying to portray Romney as a loser? Notice also how Mardell just can’t bring himself to actually write that Romney is tied with the President in a WashingtonPost poll. The best he can allow himself to do is say that the Republicans will be excited by it.
Just a thought: is Mardell trying to line himself up with a job at the New York Times when Thompson gets there as Chief Executive?
Richard Bacon this afternoon talking about Prince Harry to one of his guests: “So when you see him [Prince Harry] on that documentary, do you have a mental image of him naked now?”
Well, no, Richard. No more than I have an image of you snorting a line of cocaine when I hear you on the radio.
Talk about people in glass houses…
Not a TV programme for Islam Not BBC (INBBC):
“Islam – The Untold Story”
(Channel 4, 9 pm TONIGHT)
– presented by Tom Holland.
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/islam-the-untold-story/episode-guide/series-1/episode-1
Of course, Robert Spencer, of ‘Jihadwatch’ has been writing about this for some time:
“Did Muhammad Exist?”
For non-Muslim critics of Islam to be broadcasting their arguments is anathema to INBBC.
Where’s INBBC’s Muslim mouthpiece, Rageh Omaar of Al Jazeera? – No doubt ready to do for another TV series of Islamic apologetics on INBBC.
Commissioned by INBBC’s Muslim head of INBBC religious broadcasting…
By the way, you cannot comment on the Ch 4 link unless ch 4 approves it. Not my idea of an open debate that, rather more of a censorious system.
wonder if my comment will make it?
Yes; it’s all like walking on egg-shells.
Tom Holland has a big set of brass balls, however sensitively he gave the message, it was loud and clear.
But luckily no one watches Channel 4.
tom holland is that “shadow of the prophet” chap
sorry but the r.spencer book is much more on the money, oh and he doesn t try to make some kind of arabian nights out of it either.
might even be “shadow of the sword”
any way so so book.
A (surprisingly) perceptive review in
‘The Guardian’:-
“TV review: Islam: The Untold Story; ”
by John Crace.
“Historian Tom Holland tried to get to the truth about the birth of Islam, but was his quest was hampered by a surfeit of religious sensitivity?”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2012/aug/28/the-untold-story-islam-accused?newsfeed=true
I’m all for cultural and religious sensitivity, but the degree to which Holland tiptoed around the subject and apologised for his findings went way beyond what was required. Or would have been on offer for any other religion.
*Gasp!* How very dare you.
The gap between western liberalism and Islamic liberalism suddenly looked frighteningly large.
Racist! Islamophobe! BNP! And assorted other epithets hurled our way when people here say the exact same thing. Cue defenders of the indefensible to say that Crace just wanted Holland to bash Islam, say only what Crace wanted to hear and not the full story, in 3…..2…..ZZzzzzzzzz
Another review:
“Can Islam ever accept higher criticism?”
By Ed West.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100178337/can-islam-ever-accept-higher-criticism/?
http://youtu.be/VUC5Su5P8D4
the author of actually a much
better book, full of interesting facts,
oh …
and no handwringing apologies
Saw the last 20mins of Citizen Khan, the Beeb’s new sitcom about a Pakistani family in Sparkhill last night: it reminded a lot of critics of old 70’s sitcoms full of stock characters and innuendo but I notice that of the half dozen main characters, one is an English convert. It was unfunny enough to require a lot of canned laughter and the most memorable joke I heard was ‘there were seven mentions of Pakistan on the news tonight and two of them were good’- struck me as unlikely. When did any good news ever come out of Pakistan? At the end of the show the hero had to drive a gaggle of women to Alton Towers (or similar theme park)which struck me as not seeming a normal Islamic way of doing things. Also it reminded me of how there was some controversy a few years back when Alton Towers were going to do a Muslims only day, which failed eventually to materialise, but not before a non-Muslim couple, who had booked a wedding there on the same day were told they would have to obey Islamic restrictions.
The guy who created and starred in it,(it was written by the Kumars at number 42 people) Adil Ray, made a documentary about Pakistani street grooming for BBC3 last year:
The guy is obviously well meaning enough but does not regard Islam as anything other than a force for good, as can be seen from his documentary that includes interviews with some (apparently) more enlightened imams. The impression given that the immigrants came from a rather backward part of Pakistan (with the implication that they would behave better if they came from a more sophisticated region) struck me as a little comical.
A documentary which opens by telling you that the Muslim community is well aware of the problem and are taking steps to fix it. Yeah, the news this year totally backs up that assertion. Not.
I never cared much for the Kumars (probably just the format didn’t hold my interest), but I love Goodness Gracious Me.
Oh Dear…
BBC accused of insulting Muslims with new sitcom Citizen Khan as 200 complain about first episode
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2194972/BBC-accused-insulting-Muslims-new-sitcom-Citizen-Khan-200-complain-episode.html#ixzz24t5Hr2L9
‘BBC accused of insulting Muslims with new sitcom Citizen Khan as 200 complain about first episode’
Instant proof of what a jolly good sense of humour this community possess and of how wise the BBC were to commission this series, purely I’m sure, for reasons of its inherent entertainment value and not out of any political box-ticking motives.
I watched about ten minutes of it.
Plenty of in-jokes aimed at the community in question, inoffensive, no better or worse than the rest of albeeb’s dire comedy output, ten series already inked in, and the sort of comedy whitey gave up on in the 1970s.
1970s production values, flimsy sets, canned laughter, broad acting, dodgy outdoor shots….
Religious comedy? Unlike Father Ted or the Beeb’s own Vicar of Dibley – where we happily josh about Jesus – you will search high and low through the script to find a Mohammed joke.
Normally I warn against stating absolutes, as it just takes one example to bring out an “Aha, you’re wrong” repost.
However I rather like the idea of Dez being forced to watch the entire series trying to prove you wrong.
wally i saw that doc, that dudes total disbelief and horror, when he was told that pakistanis were now getting called paedostanis, shaking his head and closing his eyes 😀 … just a tad removed from reality eh!
you know the real problem is, these are just not, another community, that with a couple of blips over the years, kinda fit in. they will tell you that themselves … everything, every pore of them reeks of separation, isolationism they are not in it to gain any position for the common good … ever. and that is through the ideology
any corruption part maybe on the money and hey how come they re making jokes about pakistanis? thought that was an al beeb no no
maybe bernard manning will get a reprise.
Oh, dear. I do hope they got complaints from both sides, as per usual…..
I expect they got it ‘about right’ but the BBC now has ‘evidence of a lobbying campaign’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19395994
But hey, if the lobbying campaign grows, how long before a fatwa is issued against the BBC? Then the whole BBC is closed down and goes into hiding? And they all live happily ever after in their Muslim utopia?
Am I dreaming?
This ‘lobbying campaign’, which I take from the tone is deemed a bad thing (and possible grounds, at least internally, to refuse to pretend to play any more)…. would this be anything like the entirely legitimate lobbying campaign BBC employee Stuart Hughes used to stir up things over Addison Lee, or is there some difference, perhaps a unique, FoI-exclusive one, that applies to one but not, it appears, the other?
However, some do seem happy: ‘”It is good to change the stereotyped image of Muslims always being serious and shouting that has appeared so often in the media”
Maybe a quick word in the news depts’ shell likes may establish quite why that might be the case?
About time there was Fatwa issued to the BBC. The BBC is a degenerate organisation anyway you look at it. BBC employees are easy to find go round Islington or Hampstead or any other London area that is hideously white they are there. Also any metro trendy place or any gay place.
Oh noes, not another complaints campaign egged on by the Daily Mail……;)
Amazing who would of guessed it. Err..we did when they were trying to hype it on BBc breakfast. O notice it was obviously so brilliant that they repeated it the next day. Sadly I missed it both times, what a blow to morale. Funny as banging nails into your eyes from what I saw on breakfast.
Since most of us here know the BBC doesn’t do anything without trying to further its own agenda. What I see from the following story is the BBC having the potential to spend £1Bn of public money a year to make those independent production teams that they decide they want to make successful.
Like for example the way the BBC spends way more advertising in the Guardian than the more popular newspapers that have a different mindset than that desired by the Beeb.
The BBC looks for every way to shape this country to their sick world view, and there’s nothing to which they won’t stoop to achieve their ends.
Way past time to end the damage done by this self serving behemoth by casting it off from the public purse.
BBC may axe ‘in-house’ production and open up to competition
i note that resident anoon chimp r. bacon on 5live is following on from stephen (the pies) nolan this morning
in dishing it out at mitt romney, “is there any benefit to him just wheeling out his wife” he sneers, would he say that about fishsmell obama … no i don t think so.
The pretty much all wheel out the wives these days: Laura Bush in 2000, Hillary Clintonin 1996, and Barbara Bush in 1992. Maybe Bacon should follow the example of the rest of his colleagues and read the Washington Post once in a while.
Michelle Obama has been campaigning relentlessly for her husband, making a multitude of appearances on national talk shows, and you can bet she’ll make a speech next month.
In fact, a certain other Candidate wheeled out the wife in 2008.
Is Bacon that stupid, or just that blindly partisan that he says this kind of crap without thinking?
‘ that stupid, or just that blindly partisan”
Given what he appears to have said, and what you have shown via links to be what is common, accepted practice with (Aspiring) Presidential partners across the board, one would have to err on both.
Which, given a position of some influence as a BBC mouthpiece, would seem ‘unique’ on both professional and objective counts.
One is sure the BBC has it reasons.
Copied by Sarah Brown in 2009 … ‘Gordon Brown: my husband, my hero’.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/sarah-brown-introduces-my-husband-my-hero-1794923.html
Pass the sick-bag.
Good catch. I forgot about that.
” Is Bacon that stupid,”
errrr…yes!
Could be both…
Lawyers in a news report. How does that old joke go?
‘…and, I’m happy to report, only lawyers were hurt in the incident….’
This evening at 6.15pm on BBC Radio Five Live Aasmah Mir brings us yet another anti-Tory-Cutz story.
A QC is on hand (free of charge?) to bring us scare stories about the withdrawal of Legal Aid from family court disputes. No balance anywhere in sight and no declaration of self-interest.
Encouraged by our Aasmah the lawyers’ shop steward conjures up the ludicous spectre of angry blokes – bereft of their tax-payer funded briefs – conducting their own defence and inevitably becoming so overcome with frustration that they leap up to assault the female Judge.
Surely someone should have forseen these would-be amateur Rumpoles would cause ‘Court rage’.
How could the coalition be so heartless?
Just when one imagines BBC balance must eventually kick in our Aasmah tees up a real soft ball for the brief.
‘Is there not some additional level of security to deal with such incidents?’
Oh no, is the reply, the Court staff have been cut back as well.
A cynic might think that the QC and the BBC set up that question and answer beforehand.
Help! Have absent mindedly sat through half an hour of a Radio 3, 45min hagiography of a mother of the Cuban Revolution, Celia Sanchez, rumoured to be Fidel Castro’s lover and described by the woman who wrote this stuff as ‘a precious national icon’. Fifteen mins to go and am rapidly losing the will to live.
The BBC are loving the Paralympics. Only one narrow message on offer. Our bigoted attitudes are to be changed. The Government must cough up funding. How precient – indeed saintly – were the last lot to have bid for this!
“BBC rebuked over £6,500 fees paid to Diane Abbott for appearances on late night political programme”
[Excerpt]:
“The BBC has been ordered to stop paying senior Labour MP Diane Abbott thousands of pounds in fees for appearances on a late-night politics programme.
“In a landmark ruling, the corporation has been found to have breached its own guidelines in the way it employs the shadow health minister on the BBC1 show This Week.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2195551/BBC-rebuked-6-500-fees-paid-Diane-Abbott-appearances-late-night-political-programme.html#ixzz250vFv1tp
But…but… they got it about right, because… she’s worth it!
Love that this complaint at such a level still had to go through the inevitable CECUTT blow-off mincer before actually getting a sensible hearing.
‘Mr Thompson responded by saying that the guidelines did not apply in Miss Abbott’s case because This Week is ‘not a traditional political programme’.
How many more ‘unique’ weasel exclusions will the market rates try to pull out of the zero accountability hat of theirs?
But if this ruling means we get back to politicians sticking to politics and not being handed covert ways to issue party broadcasts… fine.
Now if we can just get back to news broadcasters getting back to reporting news… and not using them as covert ways to issue party political broadcasts… even better.
And yet I am still compelled to pay for all this… why again?
I’d also forgotten she was Shadow Health Minister. Heck of a roll model.
Not the first time.
In 2004, following a complaint made by Andrew Rosindell MP, Abbott was investigated by the Committee on Standards and Privileges regarding payment she had received from the BBC. They found she had failed to declare earnings of £17,300 on the Register of Members’ Interests which had been received for appearances on the television programme This Week. The Committee upheld the complaint and required Abbott to apologise to the House.
But the bBBC would have difficulty finding anyone to replace Diane Abbott – black, Labour, woman, London, single parent, racist … If only she were a handicapped Lesbian as well, they’d have the lot.
Before you get carried away with thinking that there will be one less Labour snout in the BBC trough, please note the last line of that BBC report…
‘A spokeswoman for BBC News said that they “note the findings” of the Trust.’
Newsnight showing it has lost none of its renowned skill in getting the right person for the message…
BBC Newsnight @BBCNewsnight
Shannon Murray, actress and trainee lawyer, disability assessments are insulting #newsnight
ps: Considering the £4Bpa BBC cannot seem to update its flagship ‘news’ programme’s FaceBook for a week, this site does pretty darn well for free in comparison, but maybe time for a new ‘Open Thread’ soon?
Would that have been about the protests against a Paralympic sponsor who carries out assessments for Disability Benefit? That story was covered in yesterday evening’s PM. Included was an interview with someone who claimed that 11 of her friends (or some such preposterous number) had committed suicide in the last year as a direct result of these assessments. At that point I smelt bullshit, but the interviewer neglected to press the point.
Which got me wondering. Who decides what protests are to be given the full BBC treatment? Does someone trawl the papers, or Facebook or Twitter for protests and decide “Aha, that one will fill the requirement for impartiality”? Or do they get a little telephone call from someone saying “We’ve got a protest going on, like to come a cover it?” At which point things become a touch self-selecting, don’t they? Let’s face it, protestors against, say, a carbon tax are unlikely to notify the Beeb of their intentions in expectation of a favourable review.
‘the interviewer neglected to press the point.’
A skill BBC ‘interviewers’ seem to perfect as circumstances dictate.
Who decides what protests are to be given the full BBC treatment?
If I recall David P’s exchanges with the Director of ‘Let’sKeepAllThisOffTheBooksShallWe?’ over the Addison Lee Anger and Protests, before handing over to Paul Mason as Editor on this beat, pre-selection is handled by Stuart Hughes. And still is.
And if nothing seems to be getting generated outside the BBC, his remit appears to be spinning it up anyway from within.
Whichever way, you know it happens, I know it happens… they know it has to happen… heck, even the cherry-vultures-currently-in-ostrich-mode know it does, but try and make a case and some other Director of Fudge will either claim there’s no case to answer because ‘all BBC staff are professional and impartial, they just are’, claim the 5th ‘cos he can’t talk to the guy at the desk opposite, or try to close the whole thing down before more questions get asked they can’t answer on holding to account issues they feel they are immune from.
ps: what you also said the other day… totally agree.
How to import a cultural richness and diversity:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/08/man-crucified-by-muslim-group-for-allegedly-directing-us-drones-in-yemen-video-posted-on-youtube-war.html
That Clive Stafford Smith geezer a bit busy on other cases to take an interest in this bit of due process skirting?
And hence not hitting twitter in outrage?
May explain why £4Bpa ‘news’ gathering outfits appear to have so far either missed out or opted to re-engage that rather variable ‘watertight oversight’ filter.
The BBC are loving this wealth tax idea put forward by Clegg. All day yesterday, on the Freeview Ceefax service, it was running at the bottom of the welcome screen as the lead story. It was still running as the lead story at 8.55 this morning. One would almost think they had an agenda…
Far be it from me to defend our beloved National treasure of a broadcaster, but I don’t think there were any updates at all on the ceefax-replacement after yesterday a.m. – same news headlines, two-day old sports stories at the top of the page etc etc. – I just think something went wrong with the updating once again, though it seems to have been resolved now.
Feel grubby now. Ugh.
I received thise-mail this morning – complete with the cry of ‘why don’t we hear a report of this on our TV – Biased BBC anyone?
It was a good job that this guy was tried in the US – In the UK he might have got 14 years, with the possibility of appealing to the European Courts and then god knows what might have happened.
Remember the guy who got on a plane with a bomb built into his shoe and tried to light it?
Did you know his trial is over?
Did you know he was sentenced?
Did you see/hear any of the
judge’s comments on TV or Radio?
Didn’t think so.!!!
Everyone should hear what the judge had to say. (Especially UK judges!)
Ruling by Judge William Young, US District Court.
Prior to sentencing, the Judge asked the defendant if he had anything to say His response: After admitting his guilt to the court for the record, Reid also admitted his ‘allegiance to Osama bin Laden, to Islam, and to the religion of Allah,’ defiantly stating, ‘I think I will not apologize for my actions,’ and told the court ‘I am at war with your country.’
Judge Young then delivered the statement quoted below:
Judge Young: ‘Mr. Richard C. Reid, hearken now to the sentence the Court imposes upon you.
On counts 1, 5 and 6 the Court sentences you to life in prison in the
custody of the United States Attorney General. On counts 2, 3, 4
and 7, the Court sentences you to 20 years in prison on each count,
the sentence on each count to run consecutively. (That’s 80 years.)
On count 8 the Court sentences you to the mandatory 30 years again, to be served consecutively to the 80 years just imposed. The Court imposes upon you for each of the eight counts a fine of $250,000 that’s an aggregate fine of $2 million. The Court accepts the government’s recommendation with respect to restitution and orders restitution in the amount of $298.17 to Andre Bousquet and $5,784 to American Airlines.
The Court imposes upon you an $800 special assessment. The Court
imposes upon you five years supervised release simply because the law requires it. But the life sentences are real life sentences so I need go no further.
This is the sentence that is provided for by our statutes. It is a
fair and just sentence. It is a righteous sentence.
Now, let me explain this to you. We are not afraid of you or any of
your terrorist co-conspirators, Mr. Reid. We are Americans. We have been through the fire before. There is too much war talk here and I say that to everyone with the utmost respect. Here in this court, we deal with individuals as individuals and care for individuals as ndividuals. As human beings, we reach out for justice.
You are not an enemy combatant. You are a terrorist. You are not a soldier in any war. You are a terrorist. To give you that reference, to call you a soldier, gives you far too much stature. Whether the officers of government do it or your attorney does it, or if you think you are a soldier, you are not—–, you are a terrorist. And we do not negotiate with terrorists. We do not meet with terrorists. We do not sign documents with terrorists. We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice.
So war talk is way out of line in this court You are a big fellow.
But you are not that big. You’re no warrior. I’ve known warriors.
You are a terrorist. A species of criminal that is guilty of multiple
attempted murders. In a very real sense, State Trooper Santiago had it right when you first were taken off that plane and into custody and you wondered where the press and the TV crews were, and he said: You’re no big deal.’
You are no big deal.
What your able counsel and what the equally able United States
attorneys have grappled with and what I have as honestly as I know how tried to grapple with, is why you did something so horrific. What was t that led you here to this courtroom today?
I have listened respectfully to what you have to say. And I ask you to search your heart and ask yourself what sort of unfathomable hate led you to do what you are guilty and admit you are guilty of doing? And, I have an answer for you. It may not satisfy you, but as I search this entire record, it comes as close to understanding as I know.
It seems to me you hate the one thing that to us is most precious. You hate our freedom. Our individual freedom. Our individual freedom to live as we choose, to come and go as we choose, to believe or not believe as we individually choose. Here, in this society, the very wind carries freedom. It carries it everywhere from sea to shining sea. It is because we prize individual freedom so much that you are here in this beautiful courtroom, so that everyone can see, truly see, that justice is administered fairly, individually, and discretely. It is for freedom’s sake that your lawyers are striving so vigorously on your behalf, have filed appeals, will go on in their representation of you before other judges.
We Americans are all about freedom. Because we all know that the way we treat you, Mr. Reid, is the measure of our own liberties. Make no mistake though. It is yet true that we will bear any burden; pay any price, to preserve our freedoms. Look around this courtroom. Mark it well. The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here. The day after tomorrow, it will be forgotten, but this, however, will long endure.
Here in this courtroom and courtrooms all across America, the American people will gather to see that justice, individual justice, justice, not war, individual justice is in fact being done. The very President of the United States through his officers will have to come into courtrooms and lay out evidence on which specific matters can be judged and juries of citizens will gather to sit and judge that evidence democratically, to mold and shape and refine our sense of justice.
See that flag, Mr. Reid? That’s the flag of the United States of
America. That flag will fly there long after this is all forgotten..
That flag stands for freedom. And it always will.
Mr. Custody Officer. Stand him down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, how much of this Judge’s comments did we hear on our TV sets? We need more judges like Judge Young. Pass this around. Everyone should and needs to hear what this fine judge had to say. Powerful words that strike home.
It appears another case of watertight oversight kicking in.
On broadcast I sense an outbreak of skateboarding turtles in the Force, whilst online and mobile as the unplatable won’t suit, either it gets ignored or ‘shaped’ to suit narratives in the edit suites.
Link to transcript here:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_richard_reid.htm
Waiting a full report or panorama special (not likely huh?)
There is also another fact associated with these cases.
Ever since these self detonating Muslims started their crusades in the 1970’s has anyone factored the cost of the security and lost production time associated with this little lark.
Take this joker and his other “British” brother jihadists that have developed the walk-on explosives. The cost to every person whether they fly or not in additional security must be mind boggling.
Panorama investigation into the cost of preventing insane terrorism. You have to be joking. Just more backward somersaults to understand them and appease them.
At some point there must be a tipping point when people say enough is enough and do something to get to the root and deal with it.
The BBC, they just can’t help the bias….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19423658
“The BBC Trust has ruled that Labour MP Diane Abbott should not have been paid for recent appearances on flagship political programme This Week.
Ms Abbott, a regular guest with former Tory MP Michael Portillo and presenter Andrew Neil, has been paid thousands in appearance fees”
Also when I looked 30 minutes ago I could have sworn the BBC blub said “Tory MP Michael Potillo” – which he hasn’t been since 2005. Sadly News Sniffer doesn’t help to verify.
Also when I looked 30 minutes ago I could have sworn the BBC blub said “Tory MP Michael Potillo”
You’re right – it did when Not a sheep blogged about this.
As a tireless, timely holder-to-accounter, a dedicated question-asker, and keen nemesis of conflicts of interest (staff excluded, uniquely, for some reason), the BBC will doubtless be all over this like the fearless investigative champions of public interest reporting they are…
http://order-order.com/2012/08/30/ippr-credibility-gone-with-the-wind/
…. or, given that this is one of their favoured whiter-than-white (hued) ‘think tanks’ espousing a settled subject in their minds, perhaps not. Even to a genetic degree.
Can’t wait for tonight’s Newsnight.
Even if it is likely to be a sudden interest in lesbian pole vaulting at the Paras.
Eh, Helen?
[Apologies if this ‘New Statesman’ piece has been posted previously.]
“Why the BBC is less sure of itself than ever.”
By David Herman (former BBC arts producer).
[Excerpt]:
“Thompson made his reputation in news and current affairs. He worked on Newsnight and edited Panorama and the Nine O’Clock News. Yet Newsnight and Panorama are in free fall in terms of ratings and reputation. It’s hard to see how either will survive in its present form. A liberal-left bias can be found in much of the BBC’s output. Barack Obama and the Arab spring were assumed to be unquestionably good in a pious, sentimental way. There has been too little hard thinking about what Obama has achieved or what rural Muslim voters (as opposed to liberal, English-speaking women in Cairo) might want.”
-Note the implication of Herman’s last sentence, above: –
-he wants INBBC to provide more hard thinking about what
rural Muslim voters might want!!!
http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/art-and-design/2012/08/why-bbc-less-sure-itself-ever?
The internet is destroying all forms of traditional media. The guardian hasn’t made a profit in 8 years. The more traditional media disappears the more likely the BBC will go as well. The soon the better for the BBC.
I took it that Herman meant that the Beeboids got Egypt wrong by obsessing over the handful of younger urban people and the liberal ex-pat journos and academics they spoke with about their desires, instead of grasping that the majority of the population were more interested in being like the cavemen of the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Reporter on BBC news just claimed foreign student industry was worth £40 BILLION to the UK economy. Yeah, £40 BN in benefits payments.
A reprise:
“London Metropolitan University and student visas:
the Government is doing the right thing on immigration.”
by Ed West
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100178565/student-visas-the-government-continues-to-do-the-right-thing-over-immigration/
‘Migration Watch’:
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/pressReleases#334
Apparently Clint Eastwood is going to be the surprise guest speaker tonight at the Republican convention. Time for the BBC to trash him.
Unless he’s already planning to retire permanently, it’s a good thing Eastwood is able to produce and direct his own projects, otherwise he’ll never work in Hollywood again after this.
he’ll never be a guest on The One Show
AAAh the BBc . I almost shed a tear at the news the the London Metroplitan (?) University (haven’t seen them on Universally challenged) has had it’s license revoked. Ok I didn’t I’m lying. However on the BBc website are these snippets of information that the Beeb failed to mention (when I’ve been watching) on TV.
More than a quarter of the 101 students sampled were studying at the university when they had no leave to remain in this country
Some 20 of 50 checked files found “no proper evidence” that the students’ mandatory English levels had been reached
And some 142 of 250 (57%) sampled records had attendance monitoring issues, which meant it was impossible for the university to know whether students were turning up for classes or not.
I also love the way the presenter mentions that the goverment thinks is an issue to the public. Thinks! From what I’ve seen it comes up pretty highh on most opinion polls.
It’s been emotional…not!
Squatters: Dontcha just love ’em?
INBBC breakfast running item on the soon- to- be law placing squatters in the criminal class where they belong. But don’t expect the item to sympathise with the dispossessed owners. Oh no, they wheel out the lefties.
They managed to get in that emotive word “occupy” too.
There were no victims in the item except for the homeless.