Friday open thread. Have at it.
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- atlas_shrugged Dec 24, 12:43
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
… meanwhile the scum Far-left thugs are: Harming our pensioners by increasing fuel bills Trashing the economy with extra taxes… - MarkyMark Dec 24, 12:09
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
Fiery but peaceful far right who you kneel to? [img]https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2020/09/1200/675/Stelter-CNN-screen.jpg?ve=1&tl=1[/img] - tomo Dec 24, 12:05
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
[img]https://i.ibb.co/FVbQCb8/chrome-d-U7l-SCe-Rn6.png[/img] - Rob in Cheshire Dec 24, 11:53
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
The BBC seem not to have heard of taqqiya, nor of false conversions. The man who attacked a woman and… - Eddy Booth Dec 24, 11:49
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
“Protests erupt in Syria over Christmas tree burning” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx27yx1y0deo 2 weeks in, and they’ve already come for a Christmas tree.… - Rob in Cheshire Dec 24, 11:42
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
It’s all right when they do it. - Eddy Booth Dec 24, 11:12
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
You can’t beat a good hard luck story at Christmas! ‘I won ยฃ18k in online prize draw – but haven’t… - Zephir Dec 24, 11:09
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
It is one of the William books, not sure which one, some great pics from them available online, just look… - Zephir Dec 24, 11:07
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
Thanks GC, I may try and find it for this evening ! - MarkyMark Dec 24, 10:45
Start the Christmas Week 23rd December 2024
Happy Christmas and everyone have a great New Year ** copied from 2023 message, sorry! HA HAH!
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
Poll gives Obama lead, BBC US online news editor thinks “voters are now paying attention to the election”.
So when the polls are close or show a Romney lead the voters are obviously not paying attention. The only choice for informed voters like clever Claudia is to support Obama. When the editor has this partisan mindset is it any wonder that BBC US online avoids negative stories about Obama and hammers Romney?
Reminder – her hero is a Jimmy Carter speech writer:
Obama just does not come across as Presidential. He does not even seem very American. He looks and sounds out of his depth.
But so entrenched is the curse of modern liberalism on our opinion formers etc I suspect he will get elected again.
Some of you may be interested in this:
http://hillbuzz.org/prominent-members-of-chicago-black-community-confirm-those-closest-to-obama-know-there-is-no-second-term-coming-42773
I guess the voters stopped paying attention to their betters in the media again – Rassmussen has Romney up by 3 today.
Rachel Chucklehead on Radio 5 Hopeless.
‘Dyer think Irvine Patnick was instructed by a higher power?’
No, luv, I don’t think he was, but *you* certainly were’.
Just because your pretrendy leftie producer says to you in the earphones, ‘Hey, Rache, why don’t you say…’ you don’t have to say it.
Yer could always yer know, think for yourself.
I see the BBC has shown off some of its most appalling Islamic groveling over the film that the savage and medieval part of the Islamic world find so offensive. The sympathetic and anti-semitic tone of their articles is in stark contrast to incidences of anti-Christian satire, much of which emanates from the BBC. The BBC make me sick!
i see that conveniently, the ahem! “debate” on al bbc 5 live
this morning has sidestepped the issue, for the third day, as yet another islamic hippocrite, get 15 mins of airtime, to spout he s organised, an … erm … march? ๐
to occur straight after the insane incitement hour … oops i mean friday “prayers” :-D.
panto dame nikki, (surprise surprise) can t seem to remember any “difficult” questions?
The BBC will NEVER criticise Islam, because they are shit scared that some bearded mullahs will arrive with a scimitar (or Kalashnikov), cut off their wobbly dangly bits, stuff them in their respective gobs (or someone else’s, and bugger them – which I’m sure won’t be a first for many of them) and murder them.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/i/b01mk3c6/
a wonderful example, just listen from
1hr 40 in …. meister of pap Jeremy Whines indepth ? ๐ …
discussion with al bbc s absurdly grovelling expert on security
(u couldn t make it up) … wank gardener
And because they are historically illiterate, analytically retarded and generally thick-as-pigshit they don’t realise that’s gonna happen anyway!
Interesting to look at the BBC News front page and see that we are allowed to comment on topless pictures of the Duchess of Cambridge but not on the continued anti-American protests by a bunch of backwards people because of a film they probably haven’t seen but don’t like anyway.
Can’t help thinking priorities are a bit wrong.
Wonderful Tweet this morning:-
‘There has been a significant ‘hardening’ of William and Kate’s response to the publication of the topless photos’. Peter Hunt #royal
Oh eaarr missus! What a silly bunt.
BBC Royal ‘correspondent’, not for long!
They know what they are doing. They giggle and snigger about it in the back offices. They have a game of ‘who can get the best double entendre into a report and get away with it.’
All on your dime.
‘Canโt help thinking priorities are a bit wrong’
Yet, uniquely, they do seem to get them 110% right when the yearly stats are in.
Mind you, they do compile them themselves.
I put Radio 4 on this morning for the 9 oโclock news and accidentally caught the last 5 minutes of Toady, which I have been studiously avoiding for the past year or so. Too many has-been dreary presenters airing their bias is not good for my health.
I did have a laugh though. Sarah Montague had an unknown European lefty on who was proposing to ban fishing for between 4 and 9 years to allow stocks to recover. I listened, thought a bit, and then waited for the insightful questioning form Montague. You know, what will the impact be on tens of thousands of fishermen and their families, the economies of fishing ports, the fish processing and transport industries, health and so on.
What did the arch metroprole head girl ask? โDoes that mean all the fish restaurants would have to close?โ She clearly has her own priorities in life!
The lefty you refer to is the author of a report for the New Economics Foundation. “New” is a misnomer here because the NEF are propagandisers for a very old economics indeed: economics which caused the ruin of the USSR and would reduce the West to penury. Oddly, for a tiny, politically extreme pressure group, the NEF’s members and policy recommendations are regularly heard on the BBC. If I didn’t know better I’d think that the BBC (which steadfastly ignores organisations, the policies/objectives of which they disapprove eg GWPF*) had an agenda here.
* Yes, I know, the GWPF is mentioned a couple of times a year somewhere on the BBC dial which, to me anyway, is “ignoring” on a massive scale
The BBC are past-masters at ignoring the GWPF, as you say. This, despite the growing number of informed, erudite and factually correct reports Lord Lawson’s admirable organization produces. Still, we know now beyond all doubt that the BBC have an established editorial line to shut out all climate dissenters, except when an opportunity to take a cheap swipe at them presents itself.
It’s laughable how so many ‘journalists’ in the BBC politburo can take themselves at all seriously. I mean, do they really consider themselves, when it comes to issues of CAGW, ‘unbiased’, ‘objective’ and ‘independent’? No? I don’t think so, either. For the past ten years every BBC natural history and ‘science’ programme has, by diktat, to include the obligatory CAGW lecture in the final reel. It’s really getting very tedious – especially in view of the fact the much-promised global climate catastrophe steadfastly refuses to materialize in any way whatsoever. What will future generations make of such nonsense when, many years from now, they comb back through the BBC natural history programme archives..?
I note with dreary disappointment that the usual suspects at The Corporation have been flogging alarmist hogwash regarding ‘unprecedented’ ice loss in the North Pole this year. One really has to ask these journalists just why they are so selective with their facts. Yes, it’s true the SUMMER melt in the North Pole is particularly extensive this year (although by no means an unheard of event), but it’s odd how I haven’t seen one of these BBC drones report the fact that, meanwhile, in the South Pole this year’s ice extent is setting all-time records.
Funny, that.
Mind you, Today couldn’t wait to get Roger Harrabin on to announce breathlessly the writing of a new computer programme by the Meteorological Office which is going to allow the Met to forecast weather accurately for months ahead. Funnily enough Harrabin didn’t mention Piers Corbyn at Weather Action who for years has been able to make a comfortable living selling his seasonal weather forecasts to a demanding corporate market.
Moreover Harrabin forebore to comment that at the same time the Met consistently fails to forecast correctly weeks let alone months ahead, it is mysteriously able to forecast confidently the weather (well “climate”, which is a 30-years average of weather) for the end of the 21st century. I bet Harrabin (who is not unintelligent despite the distortions and exaggerations necessary to hold his job) mumbles “suckers!” under his breath every time he collects his (generous) monthly salary cheque from the BBC personnel department.
The BBC’s position on Corbyn is, according to David Gregory, that he is not worth their time because he makes odd predictions about earthquakes as well as all his correct stuff about weather. No word on whether they think Linus Pauling was a crank lunatic whose work on molecular biology and so forth can be dismissed out of hand because of his whacky theories about the power of Vitamin C.
Of course, the BBC’s contempt for “the market” is general among its staff since the market they “trade” in is political and not commercial. In other words, the BBC has to satisfy the politicians not the ordinary viewers and listeners. Mr Corbyn has to satisfy those who consume his services: since, as I wrote, he makes a comfortable living without recourse to the taxpayer (who, indirectly, pays Roger Harrabin and, as it happens, David Gregory) his customers must be happy with those services.
Unfortunately I cannot watch TV (contemporaneously as it is broadcast) legally in the UK without paying a part of David Gregory’s salary. Were I to want a reliable source of weather prediction I would be happy to pay Mr Corbyn his fee and I wouldn’t care what his take on earthquakes (or vitamin C for that matter) is because he’s not charging me for it. As it is, I have to buy the BBC’s political and social agenda – and David Gregory’s reportage – along with the very few things for which I might be prepared to pay the BBC direct.
I think that is due to a change in the Hale magnetic cycle. But to prove the CO2 Greenhouse Theory, the warmists should be cherry picking the Atmosphere six miles above the equator.
I am more interested in the science than the politics and the fuel policies of the GWPF. But for scientists the GWPF does seem to be the best hope for the future resolution of this ideological madness at the BBC. After the people in Mensa made a complaint to the BBC Trust they told me of a report by the GWPF called โThe BBC and Climate Change a Triple Betrayalโ it goes into the background of what is known about the extraordinary bias at the BBC.
In the scientific method, once you make an assumption, you then try to prove that assumption right or wrong. We have three groups of people. (1) Unbiased Scientists trying to prove the assumption right or wrong. (2) Left-wing warmists trying to prove the assumption right. (3) Right-wing sceptics trying to prove the assumption wrong. The BBC censors groups (1) and (3), providing the most obvious evidence of BBC bias and also providing the evidence for future action by a Government Committee. But at the moment we have the irony of the fact that the only scientist on the Governments science committee is a Labour MP called Graham Stringer, and he is the only MP that understands this position regarding the scientific method, and is at the moment the only MP would support action to deal with the BBC. But the rumours are that fellows of the Royal Society could persuade the other members of this committee to undergo an unprecedented investigation into the BBCโs extraordinarily ideological position on the coverage of Climate Change.
I am not all that political, but to understand why I have come down as someone who would be regarded as more right-wing than most people on BBC Bias regarding the issue of Climate Change. We have an assumption from the IPCC of 0.76 Kelvin. But we have now obtained three facts that should mean that this assumption has been proved wrong. (1) The lack of a formula for feedback because the feedback is negative (2) The use of the CO2 Atmosphere of Mars as a proxy using the conventional Theory (3) The use of the Unified Theory of Climate. These prove that the reason that there is no evidence that CO2 causes a change to Climate Change is because the increase in temperature at the Earths surface due to an increase in CO2 is far to small to be detected. It is the โSUNโ or the โEarths Cloud albedo changesโ STUPID.
Just one observation: a scientist – a genuine scientist – puts his hypothethis into the public domain with the basic data and how he has used that data to support his hypothesis. The warmists, until Steve McIntyre put his spanner in their works, refused (to those outside the charmed circle) both access to the data and details of the algorithms of the computer programmes used to manipulate the (concealed) data.
It’s not a matter of left- or right-wing, it’s a matter of science and non-science. It so happens that the BBC has decided to enable this particular travesty of science: the BBC also happens, in a wider sense, to be a transmission belt for generally left-wing beliefs. A few of my friends and a few more acquaintances happen to be left-wing but, despite that disability, are honourable men and women. I disagree with them on many things but of those that understand the practice of science not one is a warmist.
Accordingly, you can be left-wing and a genuine scientist: you can be a practising Christian, Jew or Moslem and be a genuine scientist. What you are not able to be is an employee of the BBC and a genuine journalist providing honest and disinterested reportage and analysis of those pseudo-sciences blessed by the BBC.
Spot on, Richard and Umbongo. The sceptics insist on the scientific method, the challenge to hypotheses by making (in this case) data and modelling code available. The warmists insist the science is ‘settled’, and refuse to share their ‘findings’.
But when you realise ‘warmists’ are in fact, first and foremost, ‘environmentalists’, it all becomes clear.
It’s all here:
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/my-book/
Also on Today we got the sea green incorruptible – well, he must be, he was SecGen of the UN after all – Kofi Annan giving an object lesson in the delivery of fatuous bromides to the listening public. Naughtie just sat there listening to this dildo (who, among other things instanced his birthplace, Ghana, as the object lesson in revival of democracy after a succession of military coups) speak nonsense. Even if Naughtie agreed with every pearl of ignorance dropped before the swine of the Today nomenklatura he has a duty (not just statutorily but to his “profession” as a journalist) to give Annan a going-over for the failure of his mission in Syria.
My favourite bit was when Naughtie put the words in Annan’s mouth that the tension between Israel and Iran was due to the rhetoric used in the statements of Benjamin Netanyahu…
And clearly absolutely nothing to do with The ongoing nuclear weapons programme designed to wipe Israel off the map.
Yeah, I listened to that. Annan is a supreme example of total and utter miserable failure being rewarded time after time. I anticipate his successor, fellow tool Ban Ki Moon, will be replaced by King Dildo himself, Barack Obama.
Not Gordon Brown then!
He’s already saved the world once, time for someone else to have a go. Step up, Tony…
“I anticipate his successor, fellow tool Ban Ki Moon, will be replaced by King Dildo himself, Barack Obama.”
Hopefully in about 3 months’ time!
INBBC (Bowen), following Obamessiah, politically endorse Muslim Brotherhood (MB), but censor that MB leads the Islamic mass hysteria against ‘infidels’ and free speech today.
‘Sky News’:
[opening excerpt]-
“The Muslim Brotherhood is calling for a million-man march in the Egyptian capital Cairo after Friday prayers as anger against a film mocking the Prophet Mohammed spreads across the Middle East.”
http://news.sky.com/story/984913/million-man-protest-over-anti-islam-film
INBBC: of course, pro-Islam Bowen tries to emphasise role of amateur film, rather than the Islamic jihad murders of Americans.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19596026
Just caught BBC live reporting from Cairo a couple of minutes ago. The reporter is repeatedly stating that the Muslim Brotherhood is trying to diffuse the situation, to cool things down. For a moment I thought they had been stirring things up in the ME. I guess it must be those Jews to blame for the trouble.
GCSE History
As she’s back on the front pages, interesting to note that Lady Thatcher busted the miners because she regarded the mine subsidy as ‘underground unemployment benefit’.
Now the difference between the money we got from selling the coal and the money we paid to extract the coal was about ยฃ2.5 billion a year. Negative ยฃ2.5 billion a year that is.
Now for that, and some other stuff, she got thirty odd years of hate from Tired Old Trots, Polyversity Grants, the BBC, and sundry camp followers.
The BBC, David Cameron, costs us ยฃ3.5 billion a year, for something a lot less useful than coal.
Just thought I’d haul that one up the flagpole see if anyone salutes it/ put it in the microwave see if it pings/ toss it in a bowl see if it makes a salad/ and jog it through a park see if a gangsta shanks it.
Over to you.
Dave.
Mate.
Leaving aside the subsidy from the public purse (not insignificant, admittedly), how’s about adding: holding the country to ransom until outrageous pay demands are settled; aforementioned ransom including ordinary folk going without heat and light for the duration of any strikes; Scargill refusing to hold a strike ballot, a basic democratic mandate for his actions and last, but not least, Scargill’s determination to overthrow a democratically-elected government.
Not to mention the murders, rapes, arson attacks and general violence.
But hey, they just wanted more dosh so that’s OK then innit?
more dosh pah…yeah they only wanted pay increases at ‘the going rate’.
Or to put it another way – 25%.
Of course that was some time before you were born so I’ll excuse you for not having a clue.
What?
You are defending the NUM for asking for 25%?
After numerous failed ballets for strikes?
Changing the voting rules each time until they got the one they wanted?
Were you born yesterday?
Apologies if this is covered elsewhere, but there’s an interesting development regarding the BBCs enviro-skunk Richard Black. His twitter Bio now reads ‘Soon to be ex-BBC environment correspondent…’
About time he walked!
The question remains more his soon to be next perches, as it seems he is going via a bit of this and that, initially… ‘somewhere’.
And where afterwards might be… interesting.
I heard something to do with ‘Oceanography’ – perhaps a long swim after walking the plank?
On Toady at about half seven there was a serious, in-depth, balanced and credible analysis of the LSE Student Visa affair.
No! Wait! There I go again. It was actually an emotive, one-sided, shallow and self-indulgently laughable interview with one student, who by some miracle could assert categorically that there was not one single student with a dodgy visa in the whole university!
Not a one!
It was indistinguishable from satire, and I was half-expecting the ‘Our Tune’ music to start playing in the background. Absolute outright partisan garbage from the BBC.
Good God, the BBC’s treacherous Islamic brainwashing gets worse. Take a look at their current website headline- it has a massive photo of Kate in a Muslim headscarf. They could have picked loads of pics but had to choose this one.
Of course if the picture was her and nowt else but a headscarf they could at least nod at being ‘top..ical’.
Though those that seek to be offended would find the buffet of anger and protest near overwhelming in deciding which one to hit first.
But one is sure Paul Mason will soon provide a handy iPhone App to those not currently in work (or Uni) to plan their routes.
I do wonder how understanding the BBC would be if offended royalists attacked the French Embassy chanting “Death to the Frogs”? Would they condemn the magazine for printing the photos and give the royalists a free pass?
The photo has been widely published, as it was taken during a recent visit to a mosque. It raises questions of diplomacy, given the hostility towards the US among the islamics. The mail offers the following:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2203059/Kate-Middleton-makes-visit-mosque–wears-veil-attire-like-Princess-Diana-did.html?ICO=most_read_module
Is there really an argument that it is inapproriate for non Muslim women to wear head covering in a mosque? Do we extend the idea to insisting on wearing shoes in a Buddhist or Sikh temple? Men not removing their hats in a church? Women and men wearing immodest clothing in any holy place?
Surely the red line is not in respecting the dress requirements of a place of worship but insisting on nonbelievers obeying those rules outside of one?
Agreed, I took off my shoes at The Golden Temple, covered my head at the Qutb Minar. Non Jews wear a kippah at synagogues. It is a matter of politeness and respect for other religions. The problem arises when one religion demands that everyone else abides by its rules at all times.
When in Rome …
I see the British Embassy is under attack from the religion of peace. Could someone tell the mob that our Prime Minister, Cameron, is a founder member of the UAF who organise mobs to disrupt meetings which express opposition to sharia. Worth noting too that a KFC store has been torched in Lebanon, which suggests that the muslims may be are supporting the Beeb’s campaign for healthy eating.
http://news.yahoo.com/sudan-protesters-attack-german-british-embassies-131032349.html
If I were Prime Minister I would have our Embassy heavily guarded with any extreme violence being met with an appalling hail of bullets. Problem immediately solved- simples! These savage, Luddite barbarians are the world’s major roadblock to universal peace… they have to be kept in control!
There’s a learning curve aspect that those whose history is hazy need to get back up to speed on.
My Dad was telling me about some experiences during the war.
Initially they all obeyed the Geneva Convention & decency. Human nature and common sense (you may get captured too, later).
But when it became apparent the other side had no intention of living up to the mostly sensible, honourable standards it tried (not always successfully… sometimes war is hell no matter what) there really was no motivation to comply either.
Initially this was because when the other side were ‘winning’ it ended badly anyway.
Later on, as he said, they discovered just what a terrible resolve sleeping dragons can have when you piss ’em off.
Of course, then you didn’t have the politicians and media ‘on side’ that we do now.
Pompeii version! Excellent.
Yes, especially if one is warned in advance. Guess what won’t be making the next paper review on the BBC.
You’d actually need an Army for that. Dave is making sure we don’t have one.
Like the Libyans did to London Policewoman Yvonne Fletcher in 1984? Surely the best rule is still limited firepower in extreme circumstances? The problem in Benghazi was not that the Marine guards didn’t kill enough besieging Libyans but that there were no Marine guards?
When the Muslim brothers in these countries start attacking western targets does that mean they temporarily stop fighting each other? Otherwise, where do they find the time? Also, don’t they have day jobs?
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/douglas-murray/2012/09/the-muslim-brotherhoods-doubletalk/
‘The question now is whether the government in Washington will learn the lesson that its Embassy in Cairo has just learnt?
Maybe they just had a crash course in education and informing where what is trumps what is ‘hoped’ for?
Hey, maybe the President shouldn’t be skipping His security briefings any more. He skipped out on the last one before the attacks, and skipped the one on the day after the attacks so He could attend a fundraiser.
BBC: The US MSM isn’t reporting it, so we don’t have to. Yes, Mardell admitted they’re mostly liberal Leftoids, but screw you.
Jeremy Bowen just left Tahrir Sq for his own safety.
But.. but… what about the moderate non-violent Muslim Brotherhood?
Blimey, what with him on matters ME, Steffy 2 Eds on Econominix, Robinson on DomestosPoliticking, Mardell on Oneness, Nobody on Environment and Mason on whatever the heck it is he does, the front row of the BBC ‘analysis’ cabinet look like they’d have trouble covering a village fete accurately.
Bowen should stay.
A reminder of Bowen’s madness: He wrote on the BBC website that the Muslim Brotherhood were “conservative, moderate and non-violent.”
Then somebody pointed out to him what utter idiocy that was, and he deleted the “moderate” part. Now he has to flee Tahrir Square because of more “moderate” Mohammedans.
Perhaps his moment of enlightenment will come, literally, when one of the Islamo-nutters sets his arse on fire.
What role has the BBC played in the reporting (or not) of the Hillsborough tragedy and the Jersey Child Abuse Atrocities? http://youtu.be/4WUrVGTXNzw
Interesting site…. It seems that there is a growing opposition to the dangers and tyranny of radical Islam, if the countless websites and blogs are anything to go by.
http://americansagainstshariah.webs.com/
BBC-NUJ spends more time and space on ‘threats’ from European topless photos than it does on threat s from Barroso’s E.U federalism.
‘Telegraph’ blog:
“Barroso’s call for EU federation points to a British referendum and trouble for Cameron”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100180847/barrosos-call-for-eu-federation-points-to-a-british-referendum-and-trouble-for-cameron/
By Iain Martin
I see a a peace loving Muslim has been found guilty of abuse in Yorkshire. Of course the bBC only sees fit to relate how after people tweeted him to say they had lost family members he realised the error of his ways. Which explains why he never took the tweets down, the police did .
Yeah according to the bBC Muslims are full of remorse. But leave out only when in the dock.
The bBC, the traitors in our Midst.
Just thank the lord, I am not president of the US (Why not , I am Brown skinned. Had an Islamic father and wasn’t born in the US either) as I would have nuked 100 Islamic cities and every time there is a Terrorist attack against the West another city would glow.
Well the bBC does want the US to get rid of its Nukes.
Pounce,
ย
“I see a a peace loving Muslim has been found guilty of abuse in Yorkshire.”
ย
You mean a 19 year old has been found guilty of writing something “offensive” about soldiers on Facebook.
ย
http://bbc.in/R1t7RA
ย
Meanwhile, fantasising about nuking 100 Islamic cities, or going on a shooting spree of “Muslims and Left-wingers”, marks you out as morally superior…
ย
Lick my sticky wicket you leftwing wanker. May the last thing you ever hearvare the words Allah ackba as your so called best friend decides you must pray the price for offending his gay death cult. Sick to fing death of pricks like you telling me islam is peaceful.
Yeah, whatever Pounce; heard it all before. It was funny the first time – now it just sounds desperately sad ๐
NBC News
โThe bodies of four Americans killed in an attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, earlier in the week were returned to the United States and honored in a somber ceremony at Joint Base Andrews, Md., on Friday.โ
When they come for you, stick your fingers in your ears, think of Obama and wait for the pain dez.
Please correct me if I am wrong regarding the ceremony for the victims. An American friend informs me: ‘the bodies of the fallen are always brought to Dover AFB for mortuary processing? Today was no exception. The bodies of the four killed in Benghazi were rerouted to Andrews AFB, which is much closer to DC, offloaded for the media event, then reshipped to Dover. I understand the families of all four of the deceased chose NOT to attend the Andrews event’.
scezz … by your very definition then you consider yourself morally superior? (to pounce anyway).
you know the,(maybe your) narrative is that all๏ปฟ religions are the same, ya da ya da
Discussing just the facts/the details of Islam exposes this to be false.
we have seen numerous times, in relation to islam, muslims moving from posting hateful wishes, to acting on them – with only a gap of something like friday incitement hour … i mean prayers, in between, or maybe online chat.
if pounce exposes this, more power to his elbow, and if he, at all, should imagine he would need a moral arbiter anytime soon …… i shouldn t go calling ๐
So in the context of the murder and mayhem in ‘protest’ at a silly little film, and the on-going bloodlust across the middle east of Muslim against Muslim, please give us your views, Dez, on the ‘religion of peace’.
Dez won’t give us any further views, Johnny. His Beeboid handlers haven’t prepared his script yet.
Dez is only used for drive-by, hit-and-run postings containing diversionary statements, deliberate twisting of what other posters said, or if that doesn’t fly, then outright sarcasm or abuse.
I don’t think Dez HAS any original thoughts of his own.
Was watching the Six O Clock News on the BBC this evening. They had a piece about American embassy protests all over the world, they mentioned Egypt, Israel, Sudan, Iran, Bangladesh etc etc.
However they failed to mention the protest in LondON. Funny that, I mean London is not that far away from Salford.
The Huff Post covered it.
US Embassy Protests: Flag Burned During Demonstration Outside London Consulate (PICTURES)
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/09/14/us-embassy-protests-american-london_n_1884328.html
All we need now is the return of Question Time, for a display of hand-wringing and indignation by a panel and audience of insufferable, self-hating leftists, denouncing ‘we in the west’ for our culpability via the offence we’ve caused with our gross cultural insensitivity and lack of tolerance.
It’s all our fault…it always is, even when it isn’t. See how it works.
I’m think you’ll find that it’s actually the Met’s fault for not policing the event properly.
“Friday – Grosvenor Square outside the US Embassy London”
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/43900
I wonder what Richard Dawkins and his anti-Christian hangers-on make of it all? Does their secularism make them a target? Will the BBC ever interview him on the subject, I wonder? Will that herd of pigs ever stop crapping on my roof?
Don’t be silly !
Mormonism, though – Now you’re talking !
(Or rather Dawkins is, worse luck).
For me, this has to be ‘post of the day’ on the middle east, by someone called ‘n.a. palm’:
Ahhhh. Friday, the most peaceful day of the week in muslimland. Get up. Get ready. Go to mosque. Pray for the death and destruction of everything you don’t like. After mosque, go to cafe for some coffee and snacks and to reflect on the greatness of allah. No wait. Stop. Really, after mosque, it’s:
GO TO BOMBMAKER AND STOCK UP ON BOMBS, GRENADES AND HIGH POWERED WEAPONS AND THEN HEAD FOR U.S. EMBASSY. (DON’T FORGET POLE TO SHOVE UP INFIDEL’S ASS, PREFERABLY BEFORE KILLING THEM). THEN RIOT, MURDER, FIREBOMB, TORCH, RAPE, MURDER SOME MORE, RAPE SOME MORE AND THEN BURN EVERYTHING TO GROUND. THIS IS WHAT MAKES FRIDAY MY FAVORITE DAY OF WEEK.
ALLAH IS HAPPY FOR ME.
Can’t wait for BBC 2 Newsnight Review tonight, and the ad hoc gathering of cultural misfits. Rumour has it that they are going to attempt to review the latest “disgusting and reprehensible” film which is , “the talk of the town”. Said by some as being “tasteless and insensitive to muslims”, it has even been watched by Obama and Hilary who have actually gone out of their way to comment on it on Imdb. The film with its “hateful depictions” of a world religion has enraged the Muslim world, just like Rushdie’s book Satanic Verses, for those with short memories. In the cause of cultural balance and impartiality the BBC have actually gotten hold of somebody who praises the film for its cinemographic boldness, a film review has already been published, it neatly captures the crap.
http://www.lightlybraisedturnip.com/review-innocence-of-muslims/
Archipelago on BBC2 what a load of crap
Those of us who believe that the BBC is anti Israel may be surprised to find that some actually consider it <pro Israel! BBC Rachel Corrie coverage omits facts, lets lies go unchallenged
It’s pretty thin. But as the Hillsborough families show, there is an element of the human condition that allows one to become so convinced of the rectitude of an opinion that it takes on the characteristic of religious faith.
I’ve never known a left-winger, pro-Palestinian, or pro-CAGW complainant call for an end to the licence fee, though.
SKY news just now had a ‘report’ where ‘their man in ME’ seems to have had a cosy chat with his Taliban contacts, and is now trotting out that an attack (we are spared ‘daring’) on Camp Bastion was motivated in part by the Mo Movie and a bit of Harry being there.
So… how is this done? Do they have a % of mortar shells allotted to what offence they are protesting about or which symbolic Western icon they are seeking to slot?
The Western media have lost the plot.
I wonder what the BBC will make of the current crop of ‘justifications’ for trying (and too often succeeding) to kill people once they hear from their PR contacts in the Taliban?
Oops, I take it back.
Stuart Ramsay has now had an update from his mates in the Taliban, and they have confirmed the target was in fact Harry (hence hitting the Americans) in what this bozo calls an ‘audacious’ attack.
He and the anchor are now discussing how long before he gets yanked out for his own safety and for putting his colleagues in danger.
Like that wouldn’t send all the wrong kinds of message. on top of all the rest Western authorities are managing.
The BBC seems to be having trouble getting its story ducks in a row too, and so seems to feel fudging out whatever the Taliban tells them as it spews out the fax machine, or beefs up ratings is probably the most responsible, newsworthy, professional thing to do.
Hence we have this on the home page:
Prince at attacked Afghan base
Yes, but the two poor sods who died were not him, or in the British sector.
Which links to this headline:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19608496
Prince Harry at Camp Bastion during Taliban attack
Which links to this copy:
‘A Taliban spokesman told the BBC the attack on the base in Helmand was in revenge for a film mocking Islam.’
Er… so what is the actual story focus?
One also notes (as have others) that the two top rated comments to this idiot, rushed out story have been modded out.
Par for a very sorry course.
From Ch4’s evening trailer email..
‘British defence forces are sceptical of that claim because it appears the Taliban didn’t mention Captain Wales (as he is known in the army) until after they were asked about him by the media. ‘
There’s a thing. With every scoop-happy media berk in the area flogging their dubious ‘sources’ and their claims, it’s a wonder they Taliban didn’t also have a credible claim to having Lord Lucan as a brigade commander.
I remain intrigued at what governs the opening and closing of BBC Editors’ so-called ‘blogs’.
Take Mr. Mason’s latest since his long summer sojourn…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19606239
Serious, discussable topic – broadcast only
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19545840
Daft – 24 comments, closed in a day
With the BBC I am always interested in matters of precedent, especially when the BBC sees fit to set one, and when it decides to not.
Steven Fielding โ@PolProfSteve
@BBCr4today Dear me, Lord Lamont, that’s a blatant fib. http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=103#1992 โฆ
Retweeted by BBC Radio 4 Today
I was not listening to know what all this refers to, but are we to now presume that what happens on broadcast will be open ‘correction’ by those the BBC sees fit to RT elsewhere on twitter?
I am all for accuracy, but one degree of separation versions via the BBC filter seems a tad ‘unique’.
Thinking about it, no matter what the validity of the correction, the BBC has opened up a direct route via their thread to a member of the public to call another person a liar.
Did/have they offer Lord Lamont right of reply?
Or will this simply stand as the last word?
I am not sure following up on twitter what is said on air in this manner would favour those the BBC like to get on to spout of on stuff they approve of… even if in error.
Or is this going to be another unique in their ‘getting it … about… right (so long as it suits)’?
I’m wondering if this week’s precedent of vitriolic railing against establishment cover ups will lead to the Beeb publishing the Balen Report.
What d’ya reckon?
Had that very same thought myself; if the BBC believes in full disclosure, how come it covers up it’s own secret reports?
BBC-NUJ uses BBC News site online as political platform for NUJ criticism of ex-BBC D.G Mark Thompson.
“Mark Thompson: A hard act to follow”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19584034
Note that the featured item at the right-hand side of the bBBC page has โMark Thompson: A hard act to follow?โ but the question mark has magically disappeared in the headline to the article itself!
And also that London 2012 not only brought the corporation huge audiences on TV, mobile and the web, but also the highest public appreciation levels ever seen by the pollsters Ipsos-Mori.
Which just goes to show what Lincoln is supposed to have said: “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time …”
We need this site to complete the saying and show that “you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”
Always good value..
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/jobs-done.html
‘Spookily, no ads were placed in The Daily Mail.’
Spooky indeed.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/citizen-space-fillers.html?
‘And who is in charge of quotation marks at the Trust ?’
Anyone care to let him know they are added for ‘the truth won’t fit the space’ reasons… apparently?
As in http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12897370
I had an interesting liquid lunch with a good friend of mine today. Hillsborough was much discussed and the alterations to history that the new narrative requires. My friend pointed out that mentions of the Hillsborough disaster used to be accompanied by some stock footage from that day of a mounted Policeman trying to beat back the surging crowds outside the ground. However now that footage appears to have vanished and we now just see stock footage of injured fans inside the ground. Odd that isn’t it !
We also remembered events at Heysel and other places where Liverpool fans rioted on the continent but no one else seems to remember those events so it must have the beer ๐
It’s ironic that the Scousers’ response to the official report, showing an orchestrated official ‘cover-up’, has been to mount a massive orchestrated cover-up campaign of their own.
To recap….
I’m a political refugee from the persecution I received at the hands of BBC Radio 4 left liberals.
Seeking asylum at Radio 5 I have put up with their rather PC take on sport and the dumbed down right on attitude to news and current affairs.
The palpable relish with which the Beeboids lapped up the newly sanctioned and rather adolescent-minded official take on the Hillsborough story (completely and utterly innocent footie fans v Maggie’s bootboys) has me looking for some new refuge.
The post football phone in yesterday evening ended with an obviously queued up scouser setting off on a comprehensive emotional rant which ticked all the boxes including two mentions of Fatcher.
Beeboid – admmitedly running out of time – instead of giving the suitable ‘thank you for your heartfelt views and opinions..’ actually said ‘I’m sure all ‘right thinking’ soccer fans will agree’.
Someone please direct me to a safe exit.
Sweden, rape, BBC-NUJ and the unmentionable perpetrators.
“Sweden’s rape rate under the spotlight”
By Ruth Alexander
BBC News.
In contrast, some article on the subject at ‘Gates of Vienna’ in recent years:-
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=sweden+rape
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=sweden%E2%80%99s%20rape%20rate%20under%20the%20spotlight&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCoQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fmagazine-19592372&ei=VOdUUL3DGaWc0QXW4oCYDA&usg=AFQjCNHrzDZAS6CZ18VtePVu-qnvNsVDoQ
george, this warrants further assessment,
i really don t know why they, bothered with this report? as they immediately begin to conflate it with other issues?
as for the reason for the rape increase ๐ thats
al bbc – for you protect islam – half the news – doctored to the narrative …
ie a pointless page filler
Link to above BBC-NUJ obfuscating ‘article’ on increases in rape in Sweden:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19592372
The Beeboids probably think those women got what they deserved for supporting Israel.
As they turn up at one or other of the palaces for their first day at work tyro droids are directed to the classroom to be instructed in Shilling 101.
As they sit there at their thinkpods, notes of introduction from their mummies pinned to their lapels, the first thing they are taught is that when they have to get points A and B across in a seemingly impartial manner but actually promoting (or indeed shilling for) point B they should always style it
A but B – and never B but A.
Thus this a.m. we had a succession of gone troppo droids coming out with
‘Yes there are some of the usual suspects involved, but there is genuine deeply heartfelt anger at this film.’
You see what they did there.
Mistakenly they turned to a non-droid who went completely utterly and horribly off-message with,
‘the consulate for Khartoum is miles out of town. 5000 people were bussed out there. There was nothing spontaneous about it.’
Off – message and off the speed-dial as well,
Jim Nasty did his best with…
‘Riots in Yemen? which have been fairly significant in size, JIm’.
‘Not really,’ replied the other Jim, ‘a few hundred’.
Poor Naughtie’s disappointment was palpable.
I LOLed
#nicetrymate
i bet the male professional dancers on SCD wished they’d been paired up with Louis Smith
The Special Relationship on BBC2, what a load of bollocks
SHALE GAS.
More bad news for high-cost greenie Beeboid HARRABIN, and his anti-shale gas political campaign:
“Greens and Gummer routed as shale gas wins new enthusiasts.
Green lobby groups have been defeated, as energy minister favours massive investment in gas generation.”
By Christopher Booker.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9544677/Greens-and-Gummer-routed-as-shale-gas-wins-new-enthusiasts.html
Ex-BBC’s D.G, Mark THOMPSON will be politically at home at ‘New York Times’:
“New York Times praised Piss Christ, condemned Muhammad movie”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/09/new-york-times-praised-piss-christ-condemned-muhammad-movie.html
“Christianity gets less sensitive treatment than other religions admits BBC chief ”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2106953/Christianity-gets-sensitive-treatment-religions-admits-BBC-chief.html#ixzz26eU5uQLO
Jonsuk,
‘special relationship’ total bollocks, but the reach-around they gave bill and Hilary in ‘the clintons’ just before was even worse.
any questions
http://www.bbc.co.uk/i/b01ml0nr/
1st question – ian dale, proves he knows nothing about islam/mohamhead
“i know enough about mohamhead, to know he wouldn t be on the street protesting, he would turn the other cheek” ???
more? …
any answers from 14mins 20
http://www.bbc.co.uk/i/b01mn3kz/
worse – we re the new nazis, by offending islam, positively anti semitic – followed by a christian who immediately describes christians as “people of the book” yep an islamic term ๐
you literally couldn t make it up ….
excellent and clear concise facts on the issue, and the mainstream media, like the bbc, from the always great byline
oops wrong link
brian lilley – mainstream media lying about muslim riots
http://youtu.be/M86ndC4V7EQ
Funny how the BBC never hesitated to speculate that the Tea Party protests were actually not grassroots but were organized from a national puppeteer, even though there were protests before there were any national organizations and before it was even called a Tea Party. Yet now there are no BBC experts stating, like Kevin Connolly did about the first Tea Party protest the BBC dared to report (two months after they began), that it was possible to discern the guiding hand of some traditional campaign groups in today’s events about these violent acts.
Connolly is now a Middle East correspondent. I wonder what he has to say now? Ah, I see he’s warning against intervention in Syria by citing the Crusades and when the British were helping to split up the Ottoman Empire after WWI.
But don’t mind me, this is a professionally produced bit of character-infused story-telling, the kind of thing media types love. Never mind the bias: it’s a well made piece.
BBC say killer of Brit soldiers was ‘mentally ill.’ (Mmm .. not Islam then, although saying that anyone who believes in that shit must be mentally ill). Beeb seem more concerned with the bombing of Afghan women collecting firewood by nasty NATO.
Can you imagine if the BBC brought back an updated version of Howards Way or Triangle?
http://order-order.com/2012/09/17/bbc-news-channel-controller-runners-and-riders/
An odd bit of formatting taking place, but some choice comments already.
Don’t know much about the other guy, but Mr. Rippon’s contribution to Newsnight’s professionalism, integrity, information and education value should make him dead cert.
Not in a good way.
More of the Joys of multiculturalism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19622903