Better late than never, a new OPEN THREAD to detail the bias. Did you catch the BBC on Today heralding the Labour Party conference as “a display of unity”? Ohhhh – such a tough intro to this week of pro Labour propaganda!
OPEN THREAD….
Bookmark the permalink.
Just a post from me, http://kebabtime.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/a-disgrace.html the founder of childline closed her ears to rumours Saville abused a child.
“I also await the left to come out and demand the BBC be shut down, after all covering up sexual abuse on a child is far far worse the hacking someones voicemail!”
Loving this line Billy.
Is anyone else picking up on the BBC’s attempt to deflect the Savile flak with a piece on the undercover police officers having sex with women climate protesters and calling it “state sanctioned abuse.” It’s on 5Live as I write this.
The irony is unreal. Allegedly the BBC hushed up the Savile stories which puts their actions firmly in the same “sanctioned” category, but as we all know the police are fair game for the Beeboids unless they have been verbally “abused” by a cabinet minister when they become the innocent victims.
Now I know without doubt the Beeb think we are stupid!
Saw a nice quote from St Esther of Rancid in yesterdays Times.
She says that her comments about the medias collusion with the activities of Sir James are “not aimed at any one broadcaster…but it is aimed at all of them”.
Well I`ll be…bloody Russian Television and Wessex FM Radio also have some culpability in just how Jimmy Savile managed to use his BBC platforms and his BBC shows to abuse girls invited to the BBC by Jim in his BBC caravan or dressing room…and was protected by the BBC editors of Newsnight when this story looked like a runner last year.
No…see no link with the BBC over Saviles 50 year involvement with them as being anything but a slur on hospital radio, freesheets and the local paperboys…the BBC like to keep the love but share the blame don`t they?
Sorry, you Childline creeps that hound priests and scoutmasters to an early grave, if at all possible-but you Beeb groomeens are finally on the radar.
Let us hope that
1. No more childrens programmes get made now unless EVERYBODY in the sweets chain has a CRB check…from latte monkey to Director General and all Trustees.
2. Nobody covering the disappearance of that little kid in Wales should be on the case from the BBC-unless they too have CRB checks falling out of their Samsonites.
3. Closure of the BBC until,we have mucked out the barns there in both Salford and Wood Lane…after all if it saves just one child from abuse, then it`s a small price to pay…is it not?
4. All our licence fees saved to go to Surestart-it is what Esther, Camilla, Harriet, Jenni and those other wimmin of the Gynocracy surely would want if they were on message would they not?
Better to be safe than sorry-and the BBC is no safer now that a priests confessional so it seems!
Jim would have received an “all clear” from the CRB (as would the Soham murderer who was the proximate cause of this overreaching nonsense). Jim was never convicted of anything nor, for that matter, even tried. He was though “interviewed under caution” in 2007 according to this article in the Telegraph this morning.
The CRB farce was little more than a ‘working with children’ tax. It has bugger all to do with protecting children.
A good mate of mine who was a producer at a big TV production company told me all about Jimmy Savile 18 years ago. I’ve been telling people ever since and none of them believed me. Shows you how good his cover was. He said he was “a Sacred Cow who can’t be touched until he’s dead; he has too many rich and powerful friends in the media and the establishment generally. He’s totally juiced-in”. This was common knowledge in TV land. He also mentioned another ‘Sleb’ back then who shall remain untouched for the same reasons, but it’s not as juicy. We’ll have to wait a while for that one…
” another ‘Sleb’”
Go on zemplar, tell us, you know you want to!
Oh, go on then… Cliff Richard/young rent boys etc. Not altogether surprising, and not as ‘bad’, if it can even be called that, as Savile’s case. Everyone knows, but no-one will say a word. The Praetorian Guard won’t allow it. It’s just staggering that Savile’s tale hasn’t come out properly, until now. Everyone I knew in TV, and when I worked for major record labels, knew it, and joked about his appalling behaviour. I found I was late to the game in ’94…It was “oh, is that it? That’s old hat, I knew that years ago. Tell us something we don’t know!”…
my provincial mother in the ’70s always reckoned that Saville was ‘a bit odd’. If she could see it why couldn’t the senior bods at the BBC see it and at least ensure that children were kept well away from him?
They did see it, but chose to ignore it. That’s the point.
Lefty policy through and through. RBS, Savile, Vaz, Iraq Dossiers, Climate Change, Brown bullying, all “too big to fail” so they remain under the carpet until they are investigated externally. It is little surprise that the Beeboids are pro-statutory regulation on the press and anti FOI jurisdiction of the BBBC. It boggles my mind that they continue to escape natural justice.
In passing a TV set this morning I saw part of a discussion on BBC regarding a time capsule being prepared as part of the Queen’s Jubilee celebrations. Some blonde, connected with the preparation of the time capsule, was being interviewed alongside an aging wannabe-again member of some rock group, sporting a mohican. He might have been a former member of ‘The Clash’, becuse he commented on music (‘London Calling’) being played behind film of Margaret Thatcher, to the effect that he wouldn’t want any of his music being included in the capsule if anything about Margaret Thatcher was…. Fair enough – if it was included, kick any of his stuff out if that’s his view.
The blonde bimbo and the interviewer (off camera at this point) both said that, of course, reference to Margaret Thatcher would have to be included in any time capsule relating to the Queen’s 60-year reign, the blonde commenting that, perhaps divisive, Mrs T. was nevertheless an iconic figure.
Mr Mohican then chipped in with ‘Like Hitler….’.
Cue chortling from the bimbo, and the Beeboid quickly noted that perhaps they should move on and changed the subject.
Several things here – the has-been mohican-cut can denigrate politicians all he likes, but comparing Margaret Thatcher to Adolf Hitler is an absolute disgrace. Secondly, the blonde bimbo who laughed along with the has-been’s comment apparently has something to do with the capsule, but surely shouldn’t be involved in that role given her obvious political leanings. And finally, I do believe the BBC interviewer should not have let any comment of that ilk pass without comment.
Unfortunately, he probably concurs with the follically challenged former band member.
Hello Richard, can you remember the programme/time/channel. I wish to know to make a serious formal complaint.
Sorry, Span Ows, but I have been away for the bulk of the week, and hadn’t checked this board since Monday. I tried to check today via the BBC website which programme this was on, but couldn’t review any of the morning programmes of the 1st October. The TV was just on in the house and as I said above, I noticed this session in passing, so I don’t even know which specific BBC channel it was, and it could have been any time of the morning, so I’m afraid I can’t really be of much help on this one.
That was a pretty disgusting display on R4 this evening. Eric Hobsbawm, the vile apologist for Stalinism, has finally done humanity a favour and died.
The BBC’s response? To scrap an hour’s scheduling from Radio 4 to allow that other socialist stooge, Schama, to sing his praises.
Hobsbawm was a man who openly supported the cause in the name of which millions were slain, tortured and repressed during the last century.
No doubt they will be awarding David Irving a similar panegyric?
Sadly Hobsbawm is responsible for the mess that has become History teaching in Britain. His unreadable drivel was required reading for my A level History course. I used to read History books cover to cover in a day the subject fascinated me so much but could only manage a few pages of his before I got bored.
Even worse his Marxist interpretation of History infected thousands of History teachers. I remember mine telling us the details of the Napoleonic wars was unimportant it was the class dynamics (?) that was the important bit. Instead of learning about battles and Prime Ministers we spent hours and hours considering the living conditions of Lancashire loom workers. God knows how long (if ever) it will take for History teaching in this country to recover.
Many of you may have read Burleigh’s piece in the Daily Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9579092/Eric-Hobsbawm-A-believer-in-the-Red-utopia-to-the-very-end.html but it would be worth scrolling down to the comment by ‘franklyhellish’, who notes the willingness of the BBC in a couple of interviews to nail Hobsbawn for his support of mass murder.
As per GCooper would the BBC have let Irving off the hook on this question.
Cleary I meant the ‘unwillingness’ of the BBC to nail Hobsbawn!
Conclusion from Michael Burleigh:-
“Hobsbawm’s implacable refusal to recant his views when faced with their grotesque consequences tells us something about the belligerent mindset of the wider British Left. But the eminence that he and his fellow travellers have enjoyed also speaks to the bovine complacency with which, since Mrs Thatcher, the Conservatives have allowed such dubious figures licence to dominate the soft culture of the BBC and our universities.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9579092/Eric-Hobsbawm-A-believer-in-the-Red-utopia-to-the-very-end.html
Thanks for the link to the Telegraph
Great piece wich lead me to this
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9491024/George-Orwell-is-too-Left-wing-for-a-statue-BBC-tells-Joan-Bakewell.html
Now I can think of many reasons Mr.Thompson might not want a statue of Orwell outside of the ‘Ministry of Truth’ but none of them include his being too left wing
Next week: lovely jazz tribute to the necessary deaths of 20 million people. A doddle for those who hold the approved thoughts.
There’s a new face in Hell this morning.
Wherever he is, he’s probably meeting up with his heros, Stalin and Mao, as well as his good friend Ralph Miliband – two mass murderers and two apologists for mass murder: an eternal four for bridge
Given his surname he is merely returning from whence he came …
“Hobsbawm was the Marxist version of David Irving. Why is his death any more worthy of mourning?”
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1730/the_life_and_death_of_eric_hobsbawm/page/1#article_content_top
The BBCs coverage of the Labour Partys Laugh-In is an absolute disgrace.
Watched the first half of Newsnight-wall to wall lefties and quislings…Professor Miliband bit too brainy for the likes of us and all that.
I hope someone`s got the stopwatch out to compare the unfettered suckups to all things Lefty, with the contrarians of the left who`ll be all over the Tories next week like a rash.
Not one Tory idea or policy will get away without a slew of lefties pouring scorn on them…I really hope that someone is checking just how the BBC are letting Labour get away with their crap, as opposed to harrying the (admittedly equally crap) Tories, next week.
Newsnight tonight: celebration of its communist hero followed by taking everyone back to the deep south in the 60’s. Very Modern, wonderful history lesson. No time at all for St Jimmy tho’?
That is because this story is dead and no one is investigating it any further ..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/9580096/Jimmy-Savile-Questions-about-why-BBC-dropped-Newsnight-investigation.html
🙂
We are now seeing standard BBC procedure for dealing with a story they don’t like (Climategate etc) first ignore it and hope it goes away then weeks later just say it is old news.
BBC breakfast forced to mention St Jimmy this morning, albeit thro’ gritted teeth. poor old Charlie Staytt, I felt so sorry for him when he mentioned an elephant in the room!
This is really off topic, left wing dating site? check how inclusive it is > http://kebabtime.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/left-wing-dating.html 🙂
Did anyone catch ‘7/7 Bombings: Conspiracy Road Trip’ on BBC3? Surprisingly decent for a BBC3 documentary, presumably because Stacey Dooley was nowhere to be seen: http://durotrigan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/review-77-bombings-conspiracy-road-trip.html
note the hijabi 7/7 denier – much exposure as the “moderate” muslim on the big questions
the issue I have with this kind of thing(down with this kind of thing) is that it exposes the public to the notion that it might be a conspiracy. IT WASN’T IT WAS MUSLIM TERRORISTS. Having had past experience with other looney (in my opinion) conspiracy believers, no matter what evidence you present they will not accept it.
exactly … to flippantly have such a programme, headed by a so called comedian, intimating that young “hipsters” tv bbc3 – are “relevant” by doing so ….
to re iterate your last point even when
when of the poor victims, who saw a bomber detonate himself, (i m sure she ll never forget it) …
is sidelined with, a shrug, “well, there are other people who didn t see it … so”
– its really gone to “paranormal tv” level pap
Hi all,
I have been thinking about our beloved BBC in the past few months & I have come up with a theory for which I need validation from the good people who visit this site regularly.
With apologies to the authors of this website, I now believe that the BBC’s true identity is to take an anti-britain stance in all its programmes. By taking this approach of rubbishing the entire country through the words & deeds of a minority, the BBC has successfully managed to create more division in British society. All of this is of course done under the smokescreen of “press freedom”. Now, I’m sure some of you would argue that the newspapers do the same. Maybe they do. But all of us have a choice when it come to buying or not buying a newspaper. However, with the BBC, you have to pay the “TV tax” if you want to watch any TV & even if you don’t have a TV, radio is free & we know the BBC dominates there.
So why does the BBC want to bash Britain? This is to justify their existence. If you take politics as an example, we know that no political party has polled more than 50% in opinion polls or more than 50% in actual votes in elections for quite a while now. But if this were to happen, then the BBC would have to accept that a real majority of the population supports that party. That would create a problem for the BBC because the politicians would be in a very strong position & poor old Paxman & Humphrys couldn’t conduct interviews like they do today.
You can also see this in the news coverage. When the Chancellor announced that the govt. was not going to go ahead with the fuel-duty increase, Paxman had a good time hammering one of the ministers working at the Treasury. Any right-minded person would simply have said, “thanks for that George” & gone about their business. What scandal did Paxman uncover by questioning or grilling Chloe Smith? Nothing. But in the process of doing so, he managed to engender some dislike & suspicion of the govt. & that is his real motive. I’d even say that he doesn’t care which party is in govt.. All he wants to is create & grow suspicion. Indeed this is what Nick Robinson does as political editor as well.
I’m going to stop here because I don’t want to go on and on. I would be interested in what others think of this theory. Please don’t come along & hammer me for the sake of it. By all means disagree with my theory, preferably with valid reasons. I might learn something.
Meanwhile, Britain Bashing Corporation (BBC) carries on….
While I agree with you Steve that the BBC is a cancer on our society, the reasons for it are not to simply destroy it for its own sake, but to pursue other paths.
For example, the BBC wants to dominate world media. They can’t do this if they’re not accepted within the Muslim world, so they must make sure their output will be received well by them.
In doing so they fail to identify the negatives that our society needs to be aware of to counter the threat that exists. So the BBC appears to be a fifth column.
I think if you consider what the BBC is trying to achieve with its agenda as evidenced by its bias, you will have a clearer idea of its true direction, and sacrificing anything and everything to achieve it, even out of ignorance, is par for its course.
Impressive thinking.
Hadn`t occured to me about the BBC mattering for as long as no party has a majority…for then it`s role is to massage the inbetweenies, and therefore get coddled by the political class.
Point about Chloe Smith well taken too…just aimless controversy and bile poured on anybody not on Paxos pay grade.
That said-think it does matter to the BBC who wins…they want perpetual socialist revolution, but with plenty time to slake off the blind trusts, the Tuscan villa taxes and cream the public purse of all they can get-they are virtuous and will spend it on the right sort of rent boy or Filipino maid. It` the peoples money-and as Papa Toynbee or Hobsbawm, Miliband or Prescott trousers it…so surely should little Benn and Blair, little Dimbleby and Straw too.
Breathtaking oxygen thieves and hypocrites-but as long as we sit here and fume, then they`re safe enough.
Time maybe to bring home the Revolution as one Beeboid once wrote of…he felt Obama was that solution, but then again-it`s so safe when its outside NW1 isn`t it?
Good post sir!
It is a standard left-wing tactic to critise and wreck what they want to replace. they do this because their replacement doesn’t hold up to scruniny and can only be prefered if the alternative is worse.
For example: they dumb down and wreck the ‘A’ level because they want to replace it with an English baccalauriat (sp?). This aids the ideal of a Europe wide qualification – necessary for the formation of the EUSSR. However what was on offer, the baccalauriat, was inferior to the old ‘A’ Level, which was the world’s most challenging exam at that level.
To replace it they have to damage the perception of it, which they have achieved with such success that the Tories are now proposing exactly what Labour want.
Non of this could have been achieved without the help of the BBC.
FLANDERS on MARX:
– her ‘Plan B’ script she never used:-
‘Of course, although political dreamers at BBC-NUJ, New Left Review, Open University feel that they want Marxist socialism to be imposed on Tories, (and not themselves), in reality, 150 years on, Marxist class analysis has failed.
‘So, we at BBC-NUJ try to help a Marxist ”revolution” along by imposing ”cultural” Marxism on British society via ”political correctness” and ”multicuturalism’ ‘(inc mass immigration) in our broadcasting proaganda.’
Of course, Ms Flanders’ title of series, ‘Masters of Money’ is a misnoma; her overall disguised theme is ‘criticism of capitalism’.
So far away did she drift from the ostensible title that by programme three, inevitably on Marx, she is so keen to dumb down and use ‘lego men’ to misinterpret a story about a tendency of the rate of profit to fall, that what Marx actually said on money, following Goethe and Shakespeare, is missed out:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/power.htm
(First line: ‘misnomer.’)
anoon 5live r.bacon
intimating mitt romney maybe a psychopath, according to his ex guardian ,,, (is there any other paper?) journo buddies new/old book …
before griping in disbelief over j saville …
… “he hasn t been dead 12 months!” ….
oh but … p. gambachini s been waiting 30 yrs for it to come out? …
9shakes head) … only at the bbc
‘“he hasn t been dead 12 months!”
Best I can judge, by the evidence of Helen-frowned upon ‘views my brother’s’ tweets, most comedy shows and memorabilia from the Labour concession stand in the BBC canteen, Mr. Bacon and his fellow travellers have appeared rather less concerned about a still living old lady who merely had opposing political views, as they fill their bladders with bile for a secret in-house golden shower edition of Strictly Come Hypocrisy.
The ‘how dare anyone raise questions from history as we’ve moved on’ precedent in news investigation being only their latest double standard.
The BBC is becoming totally unwatchable for me. Any time I try and watch its news & current affairs I just end up with an uneasy feeling that The Corporation is attempting to take the p*ss out of me. Its blatant leftist bias is now so brazen, so unashamedly naked, that only a blind monkey could fail to spot it.
And yet what can any of us do about this complete abrogation of its legal responsibilities to ‘remain impartial’ and ‘balanced’? It’s a charade; a travesty, and it leaves me (and I’m sure many of you) feeling angry and yet unable to actually do anything about it.
I watch Sky News mostly now. It’s amazing what a real news programme, presented by journalists rather than party apparatchiks, looks like, compared to the BBC’s nightly Marxist propaganda bulletins.
And yet I must go on being forced, under threat of the Gulag, to pay this hateful Corporation their blood money. In this day and age I consider this state of affairs nothing less than a violation of my civil rights and a total disgrace.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19779395
Ed Balls speach yesterday. on the comments number 160 below. It’s not just us that think they are biased! ha ha
160. ProfPhoenix
1ST OCTOBER 2012 – 11:30
Yes. Labour will return. Get people on the property ladder. BBC please continue to support the people’s party – critically of course, as they say in the SWP. Well done Mr Balls, ready to return to government. Down with the coalition. Don’t forget tomorrow the UAF will be holding a fringe meeting supported by Labour MPs at the Conference. Victory is in sight
“Ed Balls: I have no shame over my Nazi uniform”
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4567073/Shadow-chancellor-Ed-Balls-No-shame-over-my-Nazi-uniform.html#ixzz288nDIT9Y
Unlike that Conservative who had to resign his position because he happened to be somewhere where another person was wearing one.
And people scoffed when some BBC types admitted there was a culture of arrogance…
Evan Davis @EvanHD
@dtb200 Respond? I generally find that people who feel strongly about things, are uniquely ill-equipped to assess whether we are impartial.
Another unique precedent there, this time from Evan.
Sooooo…. next time the BBC feels the need to stir things up, it will not be deploying its anger and protests editor out and about to get vox-pops from folk with strong views ill-equipped to suit an impartial narrative.
Or is this just another uni-directional effort from one of the more uniquely-equipped, self-elected Eloi in the bubble chamber?
One presumes the only people suitable to ask questions of the BBC or hold it to account are the BBC. They however, are supposed to be entitled to roam free and tackle anyone.
Talk about digging a hole.
I guess Evan feels strongly that the BBC is impartial. Which makes him uniquely ill-equipped… oh dear…
A very sympathetic report from the BBC together with a sad and distressing photograph of Captain Hook who is claiming mental health problems as a reason for not going to the US. Can we assume that there are no psychiatrists in the US? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19796019
Ah…the Al Magrabhi defence!
Those Islamic scholars of jurisprudence will be working overtime to copy out words like “oppresive”, “injurious to human rights ” “emotional well being”-and , of course “Matrix Chambers” into perfect Arabic; ready for the next “Islamist Cookbook with ricin recipes to the fore”.
In truth_I don`t blame the Muslim muppets-if YOU had a spineless legal system and the BBC, and no end of schmoozing shit surfers creaming a jolly from the idiot taxpayer…wouldn`t YOU “take the piss”?…another phrase needing Allahs hand for calligraphy
Oh Lordy…NO!
What about an appeal to raise funds for him and his boys….possibly replace Children in Need for a sponsored event to send him off with a tin of Brasso.
Funny isn`t it?…all this In`shallah and Britain is a toilet stuff-all this kaffir law meaning nothing compared to Black Flag Sharia and all that…yet there he is with a toilet funded unlimited supply of arse wipers, loo paper dispensers and all manner of kaffir creeps who`ll defend him to the death…well of other people but theirs at least.
Western Democracy Abu?…thought Allah was your judge, not a tossed salad of lefties, Eurobeans, Wig and Pen greasers who seem to think you in need of mental health.
Reckon Yemen or the USA should give us that second opinion before we agree to tag you sometime hence.
Imagine Saladin popping over to Canterbury because he feared a junket to a nice berth to continue his studies?…that`s how low the Caliphate have slunk too!
Allah Akbar?…when Gareth Peirce or Geoffrey Robertson are your Gods, God help you!
Anybody heard from Shami lately-she still carrying that flame until the real heat dies down?…Very Gordon Brown huh?
Another example of promoting a particular agenda by omission. The BBC green clown retards are quite happy to publish on the news website some nonsense about fish becoming 25% smaller with global warming, but make no mention of the fact that Antarctic sea ice is currently greater than has ever been previously recorded. They’re happy to publish fiction but seemingly are not interest in facts. Thank goodness the fish are safe after all!
Amazing, isn’t it? The moment the annual summer melt in the Arctic shows signs of being rather more expansive than usual (thanks to a huge cyclone earlier in the year in the Arctic Ocean which effectively broke up huge swathes pack ice ahead of the melt – a fact still not reported by the BBC anywhere) the BBC can’t proclaim this a sign of impending CAGW.
Meanwhile, down in the South Pole, satellites have accurately recorded the largest ever sea ice expanse around the Antarctic continent.
And what have the honest, impartial journalists at the BBC had to say about this truly record-breaking fact?
You guessed it. Not. A. Word.
INBBC acts as Abu Hamza’s doctor:
“Abu Hamza’s health has deteriorated, High Court hears”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19796019
‘Daily Mail’:
“Like father like sons: Five of Abu Hamza’s children convicted of offences ranging from bomb making to attacking police.”
By LEON WATSON
“Hamza’s criminal dynasty: Five out of nine of Hook’s children convicted of offences ranging from bomb making to attacking police (and they aren’t going anywhere!).
Four of hate preacher’s sons have already served time behind bars.
The fifth is awaiting sentence for an armed robbery.
Only two of his sons, who are all over 18, haven’t been in trouble with law.
Extremist will launch a last-ditch attempt to avoid extradition this week.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2210748/Like-father-like-sons-Five-Abu-Hamzas-sons-convicted-offences-ranging-bomb-making-attacking-police.html#ixzz288dkfex0
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Britain’s political class, via Muslim WARSI, allies with Islamic enemies of free speech, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.
(INBBC has been taking this implicit political line for some years.)
“British government pledges new cooperation with the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.
“On what, exactly, do Baroness Warsi and her British government colleagues intend to ‘cooperate’ with the OIC?”
By Hedar Sela.
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1726/british_government_pledges_new_cooperation_with_the_organisation_of_islamic_cooperation
And, of course, INBBC’s Obamessiah enables OIC’s suppression of criticism of Islam globally:-
“The Obama Administration and the OIC: The Anti-Free Speech Coalition”
Posted by Joseph Puder
Link to above:
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/joseph-puder/the-obama-administration-and-the-oic-the-anti-free-speech-coalition/
INBBC adopts an attitude of virtual ‘conspiracy of silence’ on the
Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)’s campaign to ban criticism of Islam, and to ban free speech.
But ‘JIHADWATCH’ doesn’t succumb:-
http://www.jihadwatch.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/br0nc0s/managed-mt/mt-search.cgi?search=organization+of+islamic+cooperation&IncludeBlogs=1&limit=20
glad you re keeping on this here george
not only tories … another on the getting longer all the time … traitors to britain
http://www.melaniephillips.com/simon-hughess-final-solution
of course al bbc just lap it up
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19508827
and trumpet this too? … are they happy to see “blasphemy” stylee panic on tv channels .. you bet!
Jesus wife’ documentary delayed US TV channel delays a documentary about a 4th-Century papyrus fragment that refers to Jesus having a wife. ….. well? … so? … honest inquiry? … and …
anybody would think they were thinking islam ?
wouldn t they?
Warsi is part of a spineless, weak, party without a clue, that is one half of a cynical, self-serving government that would do absolutely anything to appease the agended scum of the OIC … looks more like a planned sideways promotion to assist this …
all the time, and cue w. vague and more pointless prattle
It’s not surprising that INBBC doesn’t report OIC’s continual campaign to implement a global ban on criticism of Islam; INBBC’s UN correspondent in New York is that Arafat sympathiser, Ms PLETT.
Off topic here but I have been astounded at the level of BBC management expenses and accompanying salaries. I worked for many years in several large corporate entities. When I ran a very profitable organisation of more than 1 000 persons there was only one person paid more than the Prime Minister. There were a few corporate bosses paid more too. Given the size of the BBC and the number of persons paid more than the PM can anyone suggest a comparable private sector entity with a similar number of employees to the BBC where there are hundreds of senior people paid more than the PM?
Plenty of investment banks and pharmaceutical companies do. Of course, many of them actually do something useful….
Newsnight, Monday 1st October. A discussion on the looming crisis of care for the elderly. With Paxo, the Guardian’s George Monbiot (aka Moonbat), Prof Heinz Wolff, and some chap from the UN.
Prof Wolff discussed his excellent care4care scheme in which able bodied people earn future care credits by putting in time caring for today’s elderly. Needless to say Paxo and Moonbat were rather dismissive of this practical solution requiring individuals to take responsibility for their own future care. Instead Moonbat called for increased immigration of foreign care workers. Prof Wolff countered that elderly English people would prefer to have native English carers due to their greater empathy and common heritage. Camera cuts away to a rudely incredulous Paxo looking to Moonbat as if to say “what a silly bigotted old bugger”. Moonbat asked what’s wrong with Polish carers? Wolff replied that in his experience English elderly would prefer English carers with whom they share a common language and heritage.
I imagine Wolff will not be seen on the BBC again.
even a gentleman like prof wolfe, (a genuine intellect) – looked irritated by (a pseudo intellectual wannabe) paxo –
particulary when he started gurning and looking up at the ceiling, i don t think he appreciates the bbc s erm “gutter” … style? …
still … thats what you get when someone who reads questions on uni challenge, becomes a legend in his own mind.
Good grief. Is that the same Prof Heinz Wolff who used to present The Great Egg Race? I didn’t realise he was still around.
I don’t recall him having a particularly strong English accent.
Prof Wolff is a first rate gentleman, a polite but knowledgeable academic, who is too well mannered to tell the BBC fools and jackasses what they sound like.
I wonder if Paxman gurned his way through this story (providing it was in the Guardian of course) which kinda confirms what Wolff was saying. Here, a foreign-looking nurse displays absolutely no empathy leaving some poor old bugger to suffer and die. These stories are surprisingly frequent and it’s noticeable that the patient and nurses often do not share a common language and heritage.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2211590/Nurse-attempt-save-man-dying-cardiac-arrest-bad-hurt-bend-down.html
“Prof Wolff countered that elderly English people would prefer to have native English carers due to their greater empathy and common heritage.”
Very good Chilli, except Prof Wolff never actually said any of that:
Monbiot; “Why shouldn’t a young Polish student be just as companionable to an older person…”
Wolff; “It just doesn’t fit. There has to be a certain amount of empathy between the people…”
The suggestion that empathy is dependent on nationality is patently ridiculous. And I’m not surprised that Paxman smiled, because he knew that Wolff had just offered a huge open goal.
But Monbiot chose to let it pass, and Wolff survived with his dignity intact. Something which probably wouldn’t be the case had Wolff been twenty years younger.
“I imagine Wolff will not be seen on the BBC again.”
Yeah, because they had absolutely no idea what he thought before asking him on the programme. Duh.
yawn! …. goodness
here … over here … everyone look at me … time already 😀
Yeah Dez, I was paraphrasing since the iplayer hadn’t been posted. But I’m pretty sure that Wolff was referring to a common language and heritage when he said foreign carers ‘don’t fit’ ( he’s an engineer so tends to say what he thinks without sugar coating it ). I can confirm Wolff’s concerns having spent some time in a hospital in Hong Kong. They did a good job but the lack of empathy due to the language barrier was a problem.
As for your idea that Moonbat and Paxo choose to spare Wolff’s dignity for his thought crime of stating the obvious. Give me a break.
Here’s a new development in the Fast & Furious scandal the BBC will censor:
Cartel boss captured with Fast & Furious weapons
Maybe a couple of Beeboids are currently discussing how to spin this as a success story for the President and the ATF. Or are waiting for the Washington Post or Politico to show them how. After, all the alleged goal of the scheme was to find out where those guns walk to, right? Result!
The President has plenty of blood on His hands over this, but you won’t hear about it from the BBC because they follow the Left-wing US media on things like this. If their Democrat friends don’t report it, they don’t have to, either.
John Pienaar, who (as I have previously drawn attention to) appears to dream of a future Lib-Lab pact, reassures BBC listeners that Ed Miliband’s speech was a success.
Ok John, I suppose I could take your word for that. Or I might believe Peter Hain, Harriet Harman or some of the other Labourites in the glee club which you interviewed.
Oh here comes some ‘balance’, some disinterested opinion. Richard Bacon has had a look at his Twitter and apparently ‘conservative journalists’ reckon it was a good speech.
Only one name is named…..Tim Montgomerie
Must be true then?
The BBC: You heard it here first – Ed Miliband made a good speech.
‘The BBC: You heard it here first – Ed Miliband made a good speech.’
More a case of the first which was not cringeworthy… at least in delivery.
Tom Bradby did seem smitten though.
Trouble is, some from what one might presume to be a more empathetic end of the press granted him points for style, but still struggled on any substance. Like actual policies. Or how the numbers get to add up. Me, I’m old fashioned enough to still figure words are cheap. Not our market rate media elite though, oh no.
But all this making sense and looking out for the country is of course so last statesperson-era.
That Mr. Bacon has suddenly discovered a Conservative voice he likes in complement is rather telling given the reasons why.
Anyway, stick a question mark at the end and you can punt out anything..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19798489
Rather enjoying the current highest rated, though.
One is sure that will change when the faithful get back from the conference. And in addition to most Beeboids there, the Labour party PR teams too.
The Jimmy Savile affairs bothers me greatly.
In the Daily Mail Paul Gambaccini speaks about how Savile used his power in the BBC to dodge sex abuse claims. Gambaccini says “the world of showbiz” had been aware of the claims of abuse by the flamboyant celebrity for decades. But Gambaccini revealed the Savile warned investigators their inquiries would hit the millions he raised for charity. On one occasion he was heard threatening to stop giving donations to Stoke Mandeville Hospital in Buckinghamshire.
As a result of Gambaccini’s comments, a number of questions arise:
1. Will someone – anyone – please describe the nature of Savile’s “power”.
2. If it was his money, how much is a child’s innocence worth?
3. If it was his connections, who were they?
4. Specifically who are the people in “the world of showbiz” who knew about Savile? Did some people in the BBC trade children’s mental health for audience figures?
5.. If it is true that Savile blackmailed (person unnamed) and threatened to withdraw donations to Stoke Mandeville Hospital, who was it who was the subject of his wrath? It sounds like someone made a deal with a devil.
More concerning is the role of “Newsnight” in suppressing the story about Savile. Does Savile still have “power” to manipulate the BBC from the grave? Or is it more important for the BBC to keep its reputation rather than reveal the truth. And I thought journalism was about truth.
The only defence in this terrible affair is that the evidence against this monster was not available. Yet we hear that someone said at the time a radio one DJ (unnamed) was the “most dangerous man in Britain”. Did no-one ask ANY questions?
The fact is that producers work closely with presenters. Believe me, someone knew.
Meanwhile here’s the sanitized version of his obit from Matthew Bannister: (between 6 – 13 mins)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b016lkgq
“How did he get on with the children who came on the show?” “It was said that he hated children…”
“Jim had plenty of girlfriends…”
“I think he was just a fun guy”.
And why did Gamborcini not say anything until now?
From Peter Rippon’s apologia (posted by Billy on the NHS thread):
We had no evidence against the BBC. In her original statement our key witness said she was “perfectly certain the BBC had no idea whatsoever of the goings on”.
This is obviously not true. Quite a few people at the BBC knew, as we keep learning. But because there was no formal complaint made, i.e. no official record anywhere, he can claim that the Corporation itself didn’t know. It’s a watertight alibi. Suck it up, girls.
Yet there were formal complaints made about Carol Thatcher and Sam Mason, both of whom suffered professionally for it. Classic BBC twisted priorities.
Ah… the old ‘when in doubt, head for the comfort zone’ that is The Editors, as used for time immemorial by such as the DG and Hugs Boaden.
Not sure why they open it for comments as they sure don’t answer any questions they don’t fancy (or any at all), and when things really get hairy they can pull the plug on a poster… or the thread…. because they can (and, it seems, already are).
Because they are the BBC, and any account holding that goes on around this fair isle is not of them… ever… but only by them, always.
Be interesting to see how long it stays open once others get wind of it and maybe even navigate the House Rules ‘catch-alls’ to get awkward with actual facts and relevant concerns.
For now I tip my hat to…
RobinsonMJ
Fascinating. Just so I understand, what you are saying here is that if the institutional failure had been either the police or the CPS, it would have been a story, but not if the institutional failure had been the BBC’s.
I’m glad that’s all cleared up.
Yes, MJ, that’s about it.
But all is explained, and indeed excused, by the BBC being ‘unique’.
Apparently.
And in BBC unique world, what is truth becomes ‘truthiness’, or a semantically twisted version of it that would make Bill Clinton blush.
Or, Mr. Rippon, what you as a senior BBC executive are coming out with is of a standard of veracity that the BBC would not let stand of another, ever, unless engaged in damage control for ‘family’.
And for this… I am compelled to pay?
Meanwhile the defenders of the indefensible seem unable to resist digging more holes, and are getting pwn’d on logic and precedent.
And as it all doesn’t appear to be going away like it has been meant to, ex-BBC staff (why now? Er… pay, perks and pensions maybe?) left, left and left of centre are popping up to say they either heard of it, knew of it or plain witnessed it. So if you didn’t know before Mr. Rippon, you surely do now, unless you don’t read or listen outside the BBC bubble. Also, does BBC ‘news’ operate a double jeopardy system on whim?
He may just have been better advised to stay mute.
Seems they have woken up to the fact that the carpet this one was being swept under has a nasty stain spreading still…
Sir Jimmy Savile: BBC ‘horrified’ over rape allegations
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19801768
I guess they were pretty chilled about them before, but now things seem to be hitting rather high profile fans they have at least admitted that getting caught out is pretty awful for them.
Does seem a little ‘Us, us, us’-centric though, when not so long ago they were mostly, if briefly, ‘thinking of the children’, with others.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14123345
Well well, it’s kicking off everywhere!
“Quite a few people at the BBC knew” – you’re right David.
A presenter works closely with a production team. Production teams are families where gossip abounds, people get drunk together, dirty linen is aired. Someone in the production teams at R1, “TOTP” and “Jim’ll Fix It” must have had some idea. How many people, and how much they knew, we can’t tell – but it is impossible that it was a closed secret. SOMEONE KNEW! The production teams are keeping silent – but for how long? Confession is good for the soul.
The INBBC need a truth and reconciliation session!
Can some kind person remind us who the editor of Newsnight is?
If one considers the self-righteous vehemence with which the BBC went after News International over the phone hacking affair, this has the potential to do far worse, and rightly so, to the BBC. Consider too that the Catholic Church can’t be mentioned by the BBC without raising the element of sexual abuse going on there.
Now we see that the BBC has some sordid behaviour of its own that is coming to light, not that most here will be surprised, and certainly far worse in damage done than that by News Int’l. For one they must certainly fear that the media will hound them to the same degree that they have hounded others, which is going to cut their arrogant self-righteousness down to size, not to mention that if it can be shown that the BBC hierarchy purposefully concealed the behaviour of Savile, it should be possible for any citizen to refuse to pay the licence fee with impunity.
The ‘life’ of the BBC may well depend on what happens with this, and most of us would feel justice is being served by the BBC being dragged through the muck.
What goes around – comes around.
Here’s a one-sided piece from the BBC about the blocking of a Voter ID requirement in Pennsylvania.
The only viewpoint offered supporting the law is immediately countered by a supposed admission by the State that there’s no evidence of voter fraud by impersonation. The rest of it is talking points from opponents of the law, not only quotes but unquestioning summations from the anonymous Beeboid who put this together.
You don’t need to know how requiring an ID to vote would prevent the elderly or minorities from voting. Just bend over and accept it as fact. You’re told that voters currently need to show either a bank statement or utility bill as proof of who they are, but you’re apparently too stupid to realize that these people would have needed a photo ID and other forms of identification to open a bank account to get that statement in the first place.
The BBC also assumes that you’re too stupid to realize that people need a photo ID in order to register to vote or a lot of other proof of ID in the first place – unless it’s done by activist groups trying to pad the rolls with illegal voters. Even the online form (NB: pdf file) says if you don’t have a driver’s license you have to have a Social Security number, which requires a photo ID to get.
As usual, the cry against voter ID is a load of nonsense, and as usual it’s dutifully regurgitated by the BBC. Maybe someday they’ll have a moment of intellectual honesty and wonder why, if registering fake voters never leads to voter fraud, all those activist groups keep doing it anyway.
Perhaps the BBC would like to suspend its photo ID staff membership cards?
On a different topic. I was watching BBC news early this morning, had one of their ethnic minority newsreaders who was so poorly integrated into British society that he did not know that my country is Scotland not Scots-land as he repeatedly pronounced it.
That was imediatly followed bt a weather man who started with ‘I’ll be honest with you…’ that is the least I would expect. Accuracy no honesty yes.
How long before the BBC relises it stuill has a lot of white weather people and starts replacing them with people who would be supprised by a bit of rain in October?
If you’re going to criticise peoples’ grasp of English it might be an idea to learn how to spell and type yourself first.
Why should he? Typos are very common. If I’m typing quickly and press ‘post’ without reading back there are often dozens of typos yet I would say my grasp of English is in the top 1%.
It was even worse on Radio 4 the Today programme at 7.30.
Evan ‘Davoid’ announced we have ‘One Nation’ weather today. How droll.
The brainwashing continues!!
The recent spate of paedophilia stories and the BBC’s various responses to them exposes the sordid nature of this totalitarian organisation.. I hope the message is getting out despite the BBC’s control of the news agenda.
First, I pray that the little girl in Wales is recovered unharmed soon and clearly the BBC is entirely correct is leading with this. I was surprised however that in the following Saville story the phrase “so-called historic allegations of rape”. So called? That’s the first time I’ve heard that on a BBC news report.
The most shocking story was of course that the police and social services colluded to cover up Muslim paedo gangs in Rochedale. The BBC was implicated in this too, choosing to hand over a video of Nick Griffin “whistle blowing” to the police rather than investigate. The BBC is still effectively suppressing this story and I doubt whether Griffin will ever get an apology for this,
The war against the BBC must be conducted on many fronts. There are huge numbers out there who don’t care how biased the BBC is as long as they get their favourite shows and “free to air” sport. The revelations that the BBC is complicit with child abuse will shock many out of their cosy view of “auntie”.
I’d like to hear a BBC interviewer, when interviewing a Labour politician, asking ‘why is that whenever Labour is in power, your party always fucks things up?’
so Ed refers the those at the conference as ‘friends’ rather than ‘comrades’, what a load of bollocks
and that Chuka bloke on Newsnight talks a load of bollocks too
i think one of the worst things about the bias at the BBC, is portraying the professional male dancers on SCD as straight acting
Notice how the BBC are trying to spin the Savile story. They admit they knew about the allegations, however they are trying to shift the blame on tabloid newspapers for not reporting these allegations. And I thought that the BBC had the best journalists in the world?
BBC ‘was aware’ of Jimmy Savile abuse allegations
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19808658
Looks like they have pulled the video. But from the man in the video it seems that the BBC were more worried about allegations against Savile being printed in the national press than for any sympathy for his victims.
The video is back and at the end there is a link to another with the editor of the Mirror. The first is more convincing than the second and is a first hand account of someone who reported these allegations to the BBC hierarchy. They cannot claim now that they were unaware of at least the allegations. Unless this chap is lying of course.
The second video is a leftist who, naturally, has to include Mrs Thatcher and the Pope in his unconvincing story; even he doesn’t look like he believes in it. The best bit in it is that they didn’t have enough evidence to publish! The Mirror worried about evidence? If only they’d thought of that when they published those fake photos of ‘British troops torturing Iraqis’ eh? Schurely schum mishtake?
Oh, man, it’s definitely going to kick off tonight in the US. Drudge is teasing that Fox News has dug up (possibly via Breitbart’s people) some video of a young Obamessiah putting on some preacher accent and giving a Jeremiah Wright-style speech about how the white wealth is built by exploiting the blacks and the government shouldn’t build bridges and roads but should instead invest in minority-owned businesses.
Not good, especially since tomorrow night is the first Christmas Panto….er….presidential debate.
UPDATE: It might be old news and Drudge and Hannity got punked. Might be this video, which was shown then quickly forgotten in 2008, back when we were told that anyone who was concerned about the sentiments expressed just didn’t understand black people and was probably racist. Or maybe Hannity means this video but has an unreleased, more damning part. I don’t have much use for him, but maybe there’s a blind pig/truffle thing going on here.
“Oh, man, it’s definitely going to kick off tonight…”
33 minutes later:
“It might be old news”
Well done David; finger on the pulse as always. Although who’s pulse, and where your finger is exactly, is probably better left unsaid ;p
Hey dez, I realize that honesty and integrity are foreign concepts for you. Don’t let my efforts to update an evolving story confuse you. If it turned out that the video was nothing, you would have sneered at that mistake. Now when I correct it, you sneer anyway. I think that says more about you than it does about where I have my finger.
As for the original meaning of “finger on the pulse” (aside from your charming innuendo, a class act as always), posting a developing story and then posting an update is the very definition of it. Yet you can’t even get that simple concept right.
Now, pretending to take you at your word for a moment, can I assume that you equally hold the BBC to such a lofty bullsh!t standard when they update stories or rewrite them entirely?
Wow. Long time reader first time caller. Non Muslim, non BBC staff, non woman. You do yourselves no favours by spitting cliched rhetoric of the above groupings. Sad, bitter twisted lefties the rest of us. I went for a walk tody, fed ducks with left over bread. I will now turn in despite my insomnia. Gratified that I have at leased opined. My 10 year old knows tears from cheers.
David Vance who takes the BBC shilling?
Are you lot too daft to get irony?
Always happy to extend a warm welcome to a new poster, albeit one again finally motivated by the need to express how often they come here to get offended by a site so irrelevant that they are long term lurkers.
Some rather familiar script points being trotted out, mind.
And on a free, independent site comprised of varied individuals not employed by a single entity, the term ‘you lot’ is perhaps not the best choice being, by definition, you are now one.
You are Dez and I claim my £5 !
Please do not feed the ducks with left over bread; it plays havoc with their digestive systems, the bread attracts rats and spreads Weil’s disease which can be fatal for pets and humans. Most local authorities try to warn people of this danger but it continues. Just saying.
I suppose you will mention the vox pops from Eddie Mair’s take on Millibands speech? For the record they were as disaffected and unimpressed as me, but…
OK: there were “vox pops” on someone’s “take” on the latest British ( … ) wheedling undermining Marxist dilettante “Labour”zoid’s speech. [What’s a “vox pop”?]
Yawn. (In Gramscian: “yawnski”.)
I’m as disaffected and unimpressed by the BBC as I am by faux idiots like you.
But I get to do something – hooray!
I haven’t paid the information licensing levy for about 6 years. (As I recall.)
Maybe if the BBC cabal came over to explain what a “vox pop” was – or why Marxist nonentities should still be given the time of day anywhere after the complete collapse of communist oppression in the 90s – I’d feel happier about subsidising braindead post-Marxist nonsense.
Until then, I suppose my disaffected financial non-involvement will have to suffice. Chastened by your wisdom, of course.
BTW – what do you do? Pay the information tax twice?
Interesting contrast on TV news this morning over the west coast main line bid (paraphrased).
Sky: “Civil Servants have admitted getting the figures wrong”.
BBC: “The Government has admitted getting the figures wrong”.
Can’t be much fun being a Government Minister, when you are expected to rely and depend on that which you are handed by civil service competence and integrity.
Still, they wanted the job and enjoy being at the top, so the consequences are theirs to bear. And if you are top banana of a salad or rotting fruit, you can’t really complain if the stink taints you too if you have not addressed it over the last few years.
But true, the BBC’s ‘take’ on organisational blame can show where their sympathies and agendas lie.
Understandable perhaps in a fellow public sector body; inexcusable in a supposedly impartial ‘news’ organisation.
Perhaps a more even handed line would have been: “Government has admitted that Civil Servants got the figures wrong”.
Useless tories.
I’m sure Dopey Dave is running a grid, designed to hand victory to Liebor. who else would time an admission of incompetence like the west-coast bid debacle, to be announced right in the middle of the Liebor annual congress, oops conference!
Civil Service – unionised aren’t they? No surprise then that yet another ‘tory led’ plan gets sabotaged and CMD and his band are too dumb to realise.
I’m sure the bean-counters at the top aren’t unionised. Someone at the top should get it right.
Robert Peston seems to have understood the problem with the civil servants, although he doesn’t get the irony of a bBBC employee commenting on public sector staff assuming that we’ll keep on paying more and more every year into the future.
“There was no hint of impropriety around the Radio One building’
Well that’s ok then.
Wait a minute, why am I hearing this from BBC 5 Live at a little before half eight this Wednesday morning?
John Pienaar is saying “Ed Miliband rather looks the part”
Nicky Campbell is refering to “the right wing press” (I think he means the popular newspapers).
Our Nicky now is celebrating some kind of personal anniversary.
Nothing unusual so far.
Now Campbell is reminiscing about his formative years in radio. Some old stager from the BBC (Johnny Beerling) is shooting the breeze with Nicky about how he helped the Beeb to do away with the old ‘Smashy & Nicey’ image. This we are told was replaced with Nicky’s “passion for politics”. Youth issues, innit?
Oh for the days when a music channel played music.
Mind you, with all this talk of Nicky, Simon Bates, Si Mayo and the rest of the old crew I begin to sense a massive pachyderm about to mess on the BBC parquet.
Fearless broadcaster Nicky asks the Jimmy Saville question (as if the thought might have just occurred to him).
Of course Nicky is at pains to point out “He left as I joined”
Mr Beerling reassures us “I dropped him not because of any sexual misconduct but because he was old hat….I’m staggered”.
I’m still slightly stunned by what I’ve just witnessed.
Talk about watertight oversight. Ok, move along, we’ve done that. Or perhaps this was a case of……
…as it ‘appens, there’s nothing to see here, guys n gals….
The BBC: Alles in Ordnung
Not so OT as one might think…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9581615/Farmers-fight-back-against-BBC-bias-around-badger-cull.html
‘Mr Kendall said a feature on the BBC’s Newsnight was biased against the cull.’
So… Newsnight at least aware of a complaint this time then?
“The BBC’s clear partiality in protecting the identity of someone whose clear intent is to disrupt a lawful process by himself taking illegal action goes against your own Editorial Guidelines and is shameful for an organisation which purports to be impartial, accurate and trusted.”
Well, who the BBC pays attention to, and when, and who not, and when, can be ‘variable’ at the very least. To a unique degree.
‘But the BBC insisted there was a balance between the two sides, with farmers also speaking on the Newsnight programme.’
So who they invite on, and edit in what they say, solves all?
‘A spokesman explained that the protestor requested anonymity as he was concerned he would be targeted.’
There’s that odd precedent thing again, that appears to be observed or dropped on oddly selective bases.
“The information supplied in this piece came from respected organisations involved in both sides of this story. ‘
Claimed the BBC, about an un-named ‘source’ it happens to approve of this time. Shame if the same person ever gets back to them with a few Polaroids from when they were younger.
‘The BBC considers all requests for anonymity very carefully.” … said the BBC, whose record in finding it gets itself about right is stretching credibility in using this response beyond breaking point.
The era of having it all ways is rather over if on the same day you defend one source as credible on one story and throw the full weight of the BBC PR machine behind calling into question multiple sources (including ex-staff and one witness on record) on another.
That… is hypocrisy too far.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-19814034
The alive ‘person of interest’ Mark Bridger doesn’t look like the rest of his career is going to be worth much whatever transpires (like certain oddly behaving Landlords). He may well be not guilty of actions or involvements or actions in this instance, and certainly is until proven otherwise. Now, in case he was working in concert or with support of others, it seems an exception has been made to circumvent concerns over asking questions about what may have happened, and presuming it’s with good reason (yet to be shared), or to invite feedback from those who have yet to come forward in ways that can help, one can only support this. If guilty, the book should be thrown at ALL shown to be complicit. Because repetitions need to be avoided and messages need sending out.
However certain media seem good at rationalising such things and arriving at varied moral equivalences as it suits, accepting that kidnap (or, god forbid, worse) and still ongoing chances of resolution, are orders of magnitude different to other newsworthy events.
But the law is the law, and rules are rules, guidelines are guidelines and ‘news’ is news.
Start playing with them all on the basis of who is or is not in the cross-hairs, and those trying such a juggle can end up in a tangle.
INBBC’s reporting on SYRIA.
INBBC should not pin its political colours to the mast on this.
INBBC should support neither the Assad regime side (supported by Hezbollah and Iran), nor the opposition ‘rebels’ (supported by al Qaeda, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Obama).
As INBBC must be aware, its following report is just one side of the conflict:
“Hezbollah military commander ‘killed in Syria'”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19801884
INBBC must not neglect reports on e.g. Al Qaeda in Syria, even though this might politically embarrass Obama supporters.
Robert Spencer,
(two months ago):
“Dealing with the Devil in Syria”
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/robert-spencer/dealing-with-the-devil-in-syria/
E.g, INBBC will make it clear that this atrocity in Aleppo, Syria today was perpetrated by opponents of Assad regime?
“Syria conflict: Deadly blasts rip through Aleppo square”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19811829
“He hated Britain and excused Stalin’s genocide. But was hero of the BBC and the Guardian, Eric Hobsbawm a TRAITOR too?”
By A N WILSON
[Excerpt]:
“On Monday evening, the BBC altered its programme schedule to broadcast an hour-long tribute to an old man who had died aged 95, with fawning contributions from the likes of historian Simon Schama and Labour peer Melvyn Bragg.
“The next day, the Left-leaning Guardian filled not only the front page and the whole of an inside page but also devoted almost its entire G2 Supplement to the news. The Times devoted a leading article to the death, and a two-page obituary.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2211961/Eric-Hobsbawm-He-hated-Britain-excused-Stalins-genocide-But-traitor-too.html#ixzz28DyjIuIu
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
You towering intellects presume that anyone who dares challenge you must be a ‘sockpuppet’ for another naysayer? Claim your precious fiver elsewhere.
Like it or not, most traffic to this site is from nice people bewildered that such hatred exists.
I don’t see the point engaging with insults and nastiness, with we all no are all you have left in your arsenal.
‘most traffic to this site is from nice people bewildered’
What is it Drs. Scezandymanus from Oslo usually demands at such a point?
I forget.
But meanwhile, may I ask your source for such a stat?
Either the site owners are very generous with their data or have felt the site needs a bit of perking up with a contributor in the Mary Riddell or Geof Lean mould at the Telegraph.
“I don’t see the point engaging with insults and nastiness, with we all no are all you have left in your arsenal. ”
I’d suggest first engaging brain before posting gibberish like that.
However I’m always puzzled by people who say they see no point in engaging whilst doing exactly that.
Bye then and take your you towering hatred for us with you dear !
“I don’t see the point engaging with insults…most traffic to this site is from nice people bewildered that such hatred exists.”
If a nice person like you thinks that the BBC is not biased to the Left it must be true. But why should the horrible people who dislike the BBC be forced to pay for it?
“nice people bewildered that such hatred exists”
I guess Fionn won’t be reading CiF or the HuffingtonPost or any other Left-wing blog, then.
I think the hatred exists because everyone that is not a socialist must be superior to socialists, and therefore deserves to be richer than a socialist. Thatcher’s method of destroying socialism was to turn the Tories from the party responsible for working-class poverty to the party of working-class “loads of money” greed. But then that shows that the way to destroy socialism is to make everyone rich. Much better than the 20th century idea of killing everyone richer than a socialist, because after that the socialists started killing each other in purges and cultural revolutions etc.
Bless you for your niceness. And thank you for illuminating my humble stupidity. Comrade.
Personally I doubt you’d fit a sock; but then, perhaps, I’m biased.
Like the BBC.
PS If any of what I’ve written seems like hatred and / or nastiness, then I’m thankful you’ve led such a sheltered life.
Brilliant this morning on ‘BBC Breakfast’ as Ed thought he was appearing to claim the plaudits of the usually fawning BBC.
Unexpectedly Charlie Stayt threw him a curved ball which he clearly wasn’t expecting. After all the party euphoria of yesterdays unscripted and unprompted monologue, Miliband is completely tongue tied by one simple question.
http://order-order.com/
Credit where due.
Though no more and no less than any news interviewer should be doing.
Though I do have more time for Mr. Stayt than most, even if he can end up constrained by a few factors.
When he quits or gets the shove (seems that is the defining factor in ‘why no one speaks before’) his memoirs will be interesting.
Looking forward to the YouTube viral as it was all going soooo well for Ed ‘Father of the Nation’ M, but for that darn…
Maybe we’ll be getting Mr. Stayt’s book sooner than later?
link possible please?
hope so.
http://order-order.com/2012/10/03/multi-miliband-ed-refuses-to-answer-bbc-questions-on-his-own-wealth/
“Right…. well… what was the question?”
Or, if you have a sickbag or bucket handy, you could watch the whole lot at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtiuuSsP3no
Perhaps one of the bBBC presenters isn’t so biased after all?
Nice, he caught Miliband in his class war BS. It won’t detract from his statement about how wrong it is to cut taxes for the rich while supposedly crushing everyone else, but still, a rare touch score from a Beeboid.
http://www.terrysmithblog.com/straight-talking/2012/10/media-bias-1.html
I believe that the BBC is now unfit for purpose as its political bias is now so blatant, and this is particularly worrying given that it is a state broadcaster funded a compulsory levy on TV owners. However, there are similar problems in the US media as this astonishing speech from Pat Caddell, a former Democratic analyst and pollster, at the Accuracy in Media conference “ObamaNation: A Day of Truth”
Pat Caddell: Media Have Become “Enemy of the American People”
A question for BBC-Democrat’s Obama supplicants, inc Mardell:
“WHY WAS OBAMA‘S AUDIO BOOK VERSION OF
’DREAMS FROM MY FATHER’ PURGED OF ALL REFERENCES TO
COMMUNIST MENTOR?”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/why-would-obamas-audio-book-version-of-dreams-from-my-father-have-been-purged-of-all-references-to-communist-mentor/