Further to David’s comments on Bland…..
Savile was said to have got away with what he did because of his reputation and celebrity status……I would suggest that the very same effect is allowing the BBC to get away with its own sordid, illicit liasons…its finger prints all over several crime scenes of political and cultural vandalism as it snuggled up with the Labour Party.
Bland’s comments on the Today programme perfectly showcase the sheer arrogance of the BBC mindest….the self righteous belief in their own goodness, their sense of entitlement to lecture us and yet be free from any need for transparency or accountability themselves because….
….as Bland told us….‘Given the BBC’s reputation we should take it on trust that it would never do anything wrong.’
He maintains that BBC editors and producers are completely independent of management and do not take direction from them as to what programmes to produce and whether to broadcast them or not.
Now that is obviously no where near the truth…..no organisation can work like that. We know for certain that the BBC operates an internal consensus driven narrative on certain subjects…Climate, Israel, immigration, Toryism, Europe to name a few…with guidelines being passed along the chain to mould how programmes are made, what programmes are made and what the agreed line is intended to produce in the way of affect on the audience and its perceptions and thoughts.
The programme makers are not independent…and nor is the BBC…..their coverage of abuse in places such as Rochdale, before the truth finally came out, followed the official Establishment line of ‘nothing to see here….and if there is then the girls are just trash and not to be believed.’
The BBC essentially colluded in covering up a shocking series of crimes for years.
This line is still coming out in places…Nicky Campbell when discussing Savile asked if it could still happen now….and his answer was of course it could…look at Rochdale….why did it happen there?…because, he says, the girls weren’t believed.
Really? That’s not true is it. The reason nothing was done was because of sensitivity about race and a certain religious minority….the police knew it was true…they just didn’t act because they were afraid of charges of racism….a legacy that can be laid at the feet of the likes of the BBC who have driven that particular line of thought…that any talk of immigration or race is ‘racist’.
Jimmy Savile seems to have got away with it because those who knew kept quiet, the gangs in Rochdale got away with it because those who knew kept quiet, Labour were allowed to impose mass immigration upon a crowded nation that didn’t want it and didn’t get asked because the BBC kept quiet.
The BBC has failed and failed again, and again, to do what is really its primary purpose…to inform and educate the Nation….it has hidden not only its politically favoured friend’s dirty secrets, but it has hidden its own using its world class reputation for trustworthiness, honesty and accountability to fool us all.
An organisation that lectured us on gender issues and even has its own ‘Woman’s Hour’, was found to be operating an ‘ageist’ and sexist policy for older female presenters.
It has berated bankers, businessmen and politicians for tax avoidnace and yet has been found to be operating its own little scheme on an industrial scale….never mind paying banker style salaries to some of its stars.
This is a BBC that would be horrified if the Army were to have a regiment just for British Black soldiers….and yet the BBC has its very own ghetto radio…the Asian Network….staffed by Asians. Are Asians British or what? If British, why do they need an ‘Asian Network’? Does a brown skin mean they can’t like fish and chips, Eastenders and Dr Who?
Mark Thompson admitted the BBC had been left wing once and had failed to report on Europe and immigration in a balanced way. And yet even now we get the same old stuff coming out of the BBC. Thompson’s legacy is a BBC that if anything has become even more polarised, anti-Tory, pro-Climate Change, anti-Republican, anti-war, pro-Muslim, pro-Europe and pro-immigration.
Its historic failures with Savile continue and the results are the same…..the failure to ‘hold Power to account’ has allowed The Power, in one shape or another, to corrupt and damage our society, culture and democracy.
The BBC has allowed one political party to do enormous damage to the economy and the makeup of society. The BBC’s betrayal of its duty, the faith and trust placed in it, has served to undermine nearly every aspect of this country’s being, from its economy, its welfare system, its political and cultural values, and even its very ethnic makeup….the ‘whites’ being too hideously white and British to be allowed to ‘dominate’ in their own land….so much so that Labour were allowed to import literally millions of foreigners to break the ‘dominance’ of the natives…as well as to serve a calculated political purpose….the new arrivals would, Labour believed, vote Labour, vote for ‘Europe’ and never vote Tory.
The BBC has in effect collaborated in a quiet coup that has attempted to gerrymander the voting system and deliver up an almost one party state…that one party being Labour….as well as a peverse sort of ethnic cleansing to dilute the whiteness and Britishness of Britain.
It still works to that end…even now Labour surge ahead with around 10% more support…..Labour’s past has been pretty much erased from BBC history…..the most likely BBC culprit for the credit crunch, if not the Banks, is Mrs Thatcher.
The BBC cannot be trusted. It cannot be trusted to hold itself to account and it certainly cannot be trusted to reform itself.
The BBC Trust can no longer be the body that is the ultimate arbiter in disputes….it cannot be both BBC cheerleader and chief critic. Only a completely independent, politically and intellectually diverse body, can hold the BBC truly to account and make it answer for its actions.
It maybe that this body infact needs to be weighted towards the ‘Right’ to balance what is the very difficult problem to solve of Left wing bias within the BC given where it recruits from, the sort of people likely to be attracted to journalism and the dominant culture within the BBC that ensures anyone who goes against the internal cultural ‘stream’ sinks….slow promotion, rubbish jobs and a career reporting from places like Bogota.
Whatever the solution is it is one that needs to be found…and soon….as well as a pair of balls for the politicians who have so far run scared of tackling the all too powerful BBC.
If the TV License were to be terminated, the BBC would be filing for bankruptcy within 24 hours. I would love to see the likes of music-teacher-turned-economic-guru, Paul Mason, find a job outside “BBC time” (NB “BBC time” is the antithesis of the space-time continuum that we mere earthlings have to inhabit; in “BBC time” self-indulgence, pure fantasy and the frittering away of endless wads of other people’s cash is reality).
Brilliant write-up. I have just sent a link to it to the BBC telling it that I await feedback. Will post the reply, if I get one.
They are crapping themselves at the BBC, now if other media decides to park their tanks on the lawn of BBC HQ…..
Oh forgot to say, one site maintenance people
“Tell us about examples of BBC bias that you see and hear.
Email the Letters Editor or submit your contribution as a comment to the most recent ‘General BBC-related comment ”
Thats under “Get in touch” (right hand side) , the link goes to “page not found” .
Thats all 🙂
Thanks, Billy. Fixed.
Actor Ben Fellows on the BBC pedophile ring, parties, as well as drugs being delivered via a BBC courier. Inquiry what inquiry?
http://21stcenturywire.com/2012/10/11/i-ran-the-gauntlet-of-pedophiles-in-the-entertainment-industry-says-former-child-actor/
If you are still looking for a reason not to buy a tv license then you need to look no further than this article. Powerful stuff. This is proof that the BBC (and others) are engaging in criminal activity, therefore license payers are complicit in this criminality by supporting it.
Following a couple of links from the comments here and who’s name should pop up twice?
The Paul Calahan article from[ Gearge R’s comment]
“The flames of dissent were fanned further yesterday when the BBC said that Peter Rippon’s decision to drop the programme will not be investigated, as the Savile scandal reached Kenneth Clarke, who was Health Secretary when Savile was appointed to a senior role at Broadmoor, where he is alleged to have abused girls.”
Ben Fellows article [from comment by capriole, peter]
“On one separate occasion, I was summoned Ian Greer’s offices where Ken Clarke was also present. Greer gave me a two glasses of whiskey and was acting a little, lets say, “over-familiar”. Ken Clarke and Ian Greer were well aware of my age – because I told them. Now, I’m not suggesting that either Sir Michael Grylls, Ian Greer or Ken Clarke are pedophiles, however, it’s not over-the-top to describe what transpired as very questionable behaviour towards a minor – by anyone’s standards – let alone the standards expected from our public officials and government inner circle members.”
.
I hope the police read this blog.
.
Its about time the BBC was culled. They doing everything they can to destroy White European Christian/Judeo civilisation.
They are mentally ill for wanting to do this. If there is a Global civilisation collapse they would be the people who would suffer the most.
Excellent article.
{’ and his answer was of course it could…look at Rochdale….why did it happen there?…because, he says, the girls weren’t believed.
Really? That’s not true is it. The reason nothing was done was because of sensitivity about race and a certain religious minority….the police knew it was true…they just didn’t act because they were afraid of charges of racism….a legacy that can be laid at the feet of the likes of the BBC who have driven that particular line of thought…that any talk of immigration or race is ‘racist’}
Actually, the BBC was pro active in suppressing any discussion on the subject of Muslim men grooming young girls. Remember the undercover film by the BBC of Nick griffin of the BNP where he accused Muslim men of abuse of white girls? The BBC handed the film over to the police and CPS who promptly prosecuted him for racism.
That certainly put the cause of vulnerable girls back many years and must have been a contributing factor to the continued abuse.
What any decent and impartial public broadcaster should have done was to carry out it’s own investigation to ascertain the facts, with the aim of either showing that Griffin was lying, and therefore acting to stir up racial tension, or they should have launched a full scale Panorama investigation. In fact I find it hard to believe that the BBC and local media could have been totally ignorant of what was going on.
To the BBC it appears that motive is more important than truth .
“Nick griffin of the BNP where he accused Muslim men of abuse of white girls?”
Many people outside the BBC, including a few here I’m sorry to say, don’t want to accept this. A little research would have revealed that stories of grooming had a relatively sound basis in places like Bradford and Keighley, and were not the ravings of some right wing lunatic.
He was right about this and he was right about the 7/7 bombings. I’m not a member of the BNP, but credit where credit’s due.
Celebrity is EVERYTHING!
Now that Fox-hunting has been banned, as is badger baiting-seems we`ve nothing else to do but kill the odious BBC by a thousand cuts!
It does go wider though-that muppet from Luton Poly(sorry Uni of Bedfordshire innit?) who Cable foisted on the nation for his “office For Fair Access”(screw the toffs at Oxbridge, and more Riot Sciences Courses) gave an HONORARY degree to Sir James Savile!
This mans judgement is now in a dangerous place-and he isn`t fit to confer anything on anybody-that Cable thinks he is says plenty about the poltroons we`ve put in nasty places to do us damage.
And Adair Turner may yet be Governor of the Bank of England-a Labour creature who begged us to join the Euro and carried Mandelsons pooper scooper as he did so?
Luvaduck…there`s GOT to be be some Chinese conspiracy her-the likes of Ebdon and Turner would not have sold ladies shoes in Alnwick, only thirty years ago!
Those who God wishes to destroy, he first makes mad…and we`re a long way up that road by now!
Excellent post.
I hope that Murdoch et al decide to give the BBC a taste of their own medicine on this and hopefully some the politians who are scared to death of the BBC will be emboldened to get stuck in as well. I will watch with interest how the BBC keep trying to close the story down and/or spread the blame . But lets hope that court cases and the like keep it going and that they get a thoroughly deserved media beating ( minus their overwhelming share of the media of course) and some legal sanctions. Then perhaps the British people will wake up to what the BBC have been doing for the past 30 years and decide to get rid of them completely.
Goodness me! The cherry vultures seem to have migrated early this year – perhaps they are expecting a harsh winter.
Anyone seen any around lately?
The BBC Trust looks hideously white.
Very, very pale, Sir Arthur!
So would I if the sort of journalists employed by the red-tops were after me and my ilk…
Ooooh, such pleasure in watching the bloody squirmers squirm!
BBC Trust is an oxymoron.
Perhaps the likes of Louis Theroux will get a knock on the door, just to maintain laura norder you understand of course!
Nothing to see here, move along – YET…
So much is happening, that Patten bloke will wish he’d just stayed and got pissed in Hong Kong after doing the handover! He really is the pits nowadays.
The entire liberal /left establishment is institutionally corrupt. The worst generation in recent history ( the 60s one) having risen to power and influence has ensured this .
We have to hope that the natural rebelliousness of our young will surface and sweep away the misdeeds of a generation mired in decadence ,greed and fantasy.
If not then this country and the West is finished.
From what I see of the young, they still think its cool to be “Left”. Was it always thus. Young people should be rebelling against the Liberal Left Establishment. Instead the LLE peddle class war disinformation about Old Etonian heartless Tories who just want to grind the faces of the poor in the dirt, just enriching their rich friends, in the grand tradition of Nazi Jew smears. Rich pop stars desperate to look “right on” quack the same LLE party line. Activist journalists have replaced investigative journalists.
I don’t see youth coming to the rescue. Their votes are in the Labour bag along with the ethnics
Aren`t they just?
Brainwashed by their Guardian-reading teachers, given a hollowed out curriculum to pour Blunketts piss into for twenty years or so, exams not worth Steve Wright wiping his arse upon and all that Horrible Histories Horrid Henry shite on cBBC.
They know everything about Star Wars and Dr Who, Harry Potter, but nothing about God or that little bloke on nanas crucifix.
But plenty about homo, Islamo, paedo, Marxo, Paxo, SuBo etc….not Oxo though(uses beef extract urgh|!
You sow the wind…you reap your Maxwells, Saviles, Peels and Blairs….the most amoral and thick generation ever-and not even a prescott to lower the average IQ!
But they do lotsa running for charities…like Jimmy Savile would have wanted!
Brilliant, Chris!
It will get worse, the scots are going to give votes to 16 and 17 yr olds in the forthcoming referendum. Huge % of these are idealistic and revolutionary.
Expect the next commie government to follow suit.
Yeah, but if Scotland gets independence we will never have to see a Liebour government ever again! No offense to my many great Scottish friends but as an Englishman I will be praying for Scottish independence!
A yes vote there would only lead to a transfer timetable, during which time Liebor scum will be back. Dopey Dave is conspiring to make it happen by ensuring that anyone who wants an EU in/out referendum has to vote UKIP( he said just that on Marr). That action will consign them to the dustbin of history.
Just saying that’s all.
I’d like to see some sort of deal where Scotland has its own parliament, a proper one. Where socttish mp’s sit in it and not the houses of parliament.
They would have certain powers but not be fully independant.
Anything that stops the Cultural Marxists in the Labour party being in government is a good thing.
“Yeah, but if Scotland gets independence we will never have to see a Liebour government ever again!”
I thought exactly the same and hope you are right, but there is no discussion on our favourite broadcaster about this. The fly in the ointment is the conservatives. They should be in enthusiastic about seapration, but worryingly, they are not. So what is going on?
What is going on? The leaders of all three parties are the same corrupt liberal/left corporatists who are totally sold on the EU agenda and the global corporatist corruption that could make each of them personally, very rich indeed.
The Tory, labour and liberal leadership, the BBC, guardian and most of the civil service and public sector are still run by these traitorous scum.
It is impossible to vote for a change from that agenda in this county by voting for ANY of the established Parliamentary parties. They are all the same.
However to ensure that the agenda of destroying this nation is pursued, unchallenged, each party leadership pretends that there are real differences between the parties. The mainstream corporate media and the BBC, all share the same agenda and wilfully lie to the people everyday to present an entirely false impression that the people have a choice at the next general election between what sort of country the main parties will create. It is a lie. There is NO significant difference.
IF the tories were in favour of a different outcome, they would have taken on the BBC, the EU and backed THIS country and her people over the vile agenda to sell out and destroy this country and allow what is left of it to be broken up into lots of different, overlapping EU regions, whose borders are set by each specific “area of competence”.
As a Welshman i await the the split with gleeful anticipation. I liked most of the Scots i met whilst living up there in the 90’s, but as you say complete decimation of Labour in England. We can then concentrate on destroying them in Wales.
Well said, Alan. Did Campbell really try to pull such nonsense?
It gets worse David:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9607754/Jimmy-Savile-Former-BBC-Trust-chairman-criticises-hysteria.html
‘The BBC has been the victim of “hysteria” over the Jimmy Savile scandal, according to a former head of its governing body’
Well that clearly knocks the ‘arrogant’ aspect of this thread’s headline on the head.
Have to say though, that getting the BBC as the real victims here is a real work of genius.
The sooner they get back to their publicly-funded, sober and impartial attempted destruction of competitive media and unfavoured political foes, the better.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9607754/Jimmy-Savile-Former-BBC-Trust-chairman-criticises-hysteria.html
I was just about to comment on this story.
Typical reaction isn’t it. Using mental gymnastics to reverse the morality of the two opposing sides in this case. The BBC is not and never was the victim. The victims were the countless girls who were sexually abused with what seems like BBC complicity.
WHAT DOES THIS REMIND YOU OF?
Rochdale? Where the BBC QT nearly went as far to blame the girls for the grooming.
Israel? Where daily anti-Semitism, blood libels and the preaching of hatred is brushed over.
London Riots? Where the rioters were described as “protestors”.
etc.,
Murdoch shut the media outlet which caused a scandal, and we now have people from it on criminal charges.
I suggest we shut the BBC and get some ex-employees in court.
The phone hacking scandal enabled the BBC and Guardian to go to town in their efforts to report every last allegation and to showboat their insistence on the highest moral standards from the media.
Funny how they are very quiet now its all happening at the BBC, and to a much worse degree.
You are missing one very important item. The BBC acts on behalf of the state in reporting what is going on in Scottish politics. They don’t have to represent the Tories- they are irrelevant, but they represent Labour at every opportunity and pursue the anti SNP agenda with impunity.The Trust does nothing to maintain balance. They are a disgrace!
Labour – SNP –
two spamheads fighting over a Toni ‘n’ Guy salon
A joy , though to watch the bitchslapping fest that was News 24s interview with Esther Rantzen an hour or so back.
The rising young hackette was miffed with our Esther for telling ITV her acquiescence in not passing on those faamous “rumors” that we all knew about(well not in real life, you understand…where the likes of us live).
I sensed this hackette realised that she`ll not be able to blag a do-gooding career like Rancid did, now thatnks to the old trouts blabbing on wee Jimmy to ITV…as opposed to waiting for Patten to get back from the Atheneum.
Don`t think Esther was used to being treated so sharply…she normally gets puff pieces like Childline and old women doing terribly out there-but(Like the Bakewell tart) doing rather well at the BBC.
Hopefully they`ll rip each other to shreds like the spineless rats in a sack that they are.
Will the BBC make it to Children In Need day I ask myself?…no more money for the life support machine please!
When St Esther’s programming days at the BBC ended they stuck her on a ‘retainer’ of £250,000 a year just for being yer know BBC royalty and all that.
Seem to remember her winning a libel case as well.
I must google it and see which party was potentially liable for the cost of the case if it lost – and which party was likely to collect the proceeds if it won. Just to see yer know if the two parties were the same.
… and must google to see when that young Pak lad Shami Chakrabarti threatened Andy ‘Guyliner’ Burnham with a libel suit – f. me gently – whether Shami was going to be paying his own costs or whether it would be (the National Lottery funded) Liberty picking up the bill.
I wonder.
No I don’t.
Two weeks after the publicity of an MP’s apology from the BBC , that MP resigned and left the country. Was this merely a coincidence!
who was this please?
It’s recent. The outgoing Chairman of BBC publically apologised to MP Louise Mench over the lack of reporting of the Itamar Massacre. Her sudden decision to leave for the USA was put down to family commitments (but she knew about those when she became an MP two years before ! )
Welcome to Conspiracy Central. This theory has presumably been aired nowhere in the mainstream media only because they have failed to make this obvious connection.
David Vance, if you want this site to be taken seriously outside its circle of regulars, get rid of Alan. There’s the hint of a decent point to this post, but it’s the sort of incoherent, badly punctuated rant that embittered retired expats write every day on the Daily Mail message boards.
I couldn’t disagree more.His post is, by far, the best thing Ive read on this site (but then I am new to it)
I never read the Mail (torygraph old boy) I am not retired nor an expat (except in the ‘white flight’ from london sense)
But his polemic came close to encapsulating the reasons for my growing hatred of the, self appointed,self righteous,self obsessed, bourgeois liberal inquisition and its ‘Pravda-esque mouth piece The BBC
It left me wondering “where is Girolamo Savonarola when you need him?”
Hows that for a rant ?
sorry about the spelling and grammar ,manually worker wouldn’t you know
Bloody manual labourers…how dare you even attempt to post…
True I fear. A paranoid rant, full of glib assertion.
The problem for this site is everything is viewed from a series of extreme political viewpoints and all issues must fit that narrative. Even Savile, which really doesn’t fit the liberal conspiracy narrative must yield to it.
Unlike the HIGNFY team who are trying to blame Fatcher!
The BBC covering up for Savile is the same as their covering up for leftie politicians.
“Even Savile, which really doesn’t fit the liberal conspiracy narrative must yield to it.”
Savile is not an aberration . His behavoir is right at the centre of BBC thinking. What have the BBC lefties been telling us for the last 50 years – the traditional family is dead, All forms of non traditional lifestyle must be celebrated, while traditional values must be questioned.
Yes you are quite right. It is self-evident that this corrupt organisation has been broadcasting subtle propaganda in favour of child abuse for the last half-century, and that Savile was encouraged to do as he liked in order to further a progressive agenda. Congratulations on the most fatuous post of the day.
Many left-liberals (at the BBC) have been promoting a “do whatever you feel like doing” culture of sexual ethics for over 40 years.
In the same period although it was well known (within the BBC) that some of their stars were using their celebrity to take sexual advantage of underage children, the BBC did next to nothing to stop it.
It isn’t “fatuous” to make these claims, nor is it “fatuous” to suggest there is a connection between them.
It is utterly fatuous. Predatory paedophiles are also known to have thrived in the two most morally illiberal institutions in the country, viz Islam and the Catholic Church. Making a connection between socially liberal attitudes and child abuse is cretinous and bears no relation with the facts.
As many on this blog, and many others in other media rightly point out, the fact that the amount of time and effort the BBC put into the phone hacking scandal, in contrast to its coverage of this news item, should tell us all we need to know about the BBC and its arrogant view of the people who pay for the retched thing.
Nothing but utter contempt.
Lets remind ourselves again what has so far happend:
1. Allegations of widespread child sex abuse by a leading employee of the BBC.
2. Allegations of an editorial cover-up by CURRENT senior members of the BBC editorial team.
3.There are now other allegations of sexual misconduct within the BBC, which no doubt will come to the fore in the next few days and weeks.
The explanation so far offered by the BBC has been, that ‘it was a different culture back in the 1970/80’s’ although I fail to recall sexual child abuse (even allegations) ever been socially acceptable.
Other organizations, which have been subject to the BBC gaze, have had to put their house in order-from the Catholic Church to S Yorks Police and criminal investigations of former employees have followed.
Yet this taxpayer funded body has now accused everybody else of whipping up ‘hysteria’ and following form, seem resistant to being held to the same standard that everybody else has to play by.
In two weeks NewsCorp closed a paper down on the strength of a far less serious allegation, yet not a single senior employee of the BBC has offered to get their P40.
Greg Dyke, Michael Grade and Mark Thompson also have questions to answer as they were in charge when JS was alive and well.
Even their comrades in Lairbour are starting to turn their guns on the BBC.
When Red Ed starts calling for a independent inquiry-you know you are phuqed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19957143
This is all very nicely argued. But it wasn’t the BBC’s handling of the case I was defending. I merely pointed out that blaming ‘liberal values’ for the deeds of a serial paedophile – as the poster did – was idiotic. I certainly don’t exonerate them blame, far from it.
No more fatuous than you are naive
Jim Dandy is right in so much as the Savile scandal doesn’t fit the (my) narrative.
I can imagine the bien-pensant bourgeois socialists that run the BBC, hated Savile but were forced to tolerate him (in much the same way they had to tolerate Noel Edmund’s)due to to his popularity with the hoi-polloi. A quality in very short supply at an organisation desperate to maintain it’s public funding.
So that begs the question why defend his memory,long after his usefulness has passed?
It would clearly suite their (the BBCs) narrative to demolish the populist, thatcher loving,Sun friendly ‘Icon’ Savile
There can only be one answer,that to expose Savile would be to expose some,perhaps many,more favoured sons’.
As with the suppressed muslim grooming scandal, I suspect that this is the tip of the iceberg.
Scrappydoo is right: For the post modernist,moral relativist BBC, child
abuse (at least the sexual variety) is
less a crime than the ‘thought crime’ of believing in traditional marriage and paedophilia is only an issue when political expedient (labour 25 anyone?) at other times the BBC act as apologists for paedophiles
This post wins the prize for most contorted logic. So the BBC prefers child abuse to traditional marriage, and Savile was ‘protected’ because he was but one member of a BBC-orchestrated child sex ring? Any other paranoid fantasies you want to add?
Sorry you found naive so hurt-full
Any of my other views you wish
to misrepresent?
In the meantime feel free to take issue with what I actually said
Point 1: “There can only be one answer,that to expose Savile would be to expose some,perhaps many,more favoured sons’.
As with the suppressed muslim grooming scandal, I suspect that this is the tip of the iceberg.”
Point 2: “Scrappydoo is right: For the post modernist,moral relativist BBC, child
abuse (at least the sexual variety) is
less a crime than the ‘thought crime’ of believing in traditional marriage and paedophilia is only an issue when political expedient (labour 25 anyone?) at other times the BBC act as apologists for paedophiles”.
I virtually quoted you. I certainly didn’t represent your views, which are barking.
BBC-tolerated, not orchestrated. They tolerated it at the time because the BBC was massively Left-leaning (which had a slightly different meaning then) and corrupt and lived in a protected bubble, in a slightly different way than they do today. Hislop and the rest of them realize this, and (rightly, on one level), don’t feel they should be tarred by association, hence the mass wagon-circling.
Unfortunately for them, we’re learning that more and more people who are still working with/at/for the BBC (or are still active in media in general) were around at the time, and kept silent in exactly the way that Jo Brand didn’t about Carol Thatcher’s golliwog remark.
This should also make today’s Beeboids take a good hard look in the mirror, but I’m afraid they won’t.
kept silent in exactly the way that Jo Brand didn’t about Carol Thatcher’s golliwog remark.
So are you agreeing that things have moved on? Are you saying Jo Brand was right, or wrong, to reveal Carol Thatcher’s remark?
If turning a blind eye to behaviour is wrong (and I am not equating child abuse with stupid comment about a golliwog before someone goes off on one) then presumably you applaud Jo Brand for what she did?
” I am not equating child abuse with a stupid comment about a golliwog before someone goes off on one”
That is precisely what you are doing.
“Making a connection between socially liberal attitudes and child abuse is cretinous, and bears no relation to the facts.”
No, it would be “cretinous” to rule out making a connection between [BBC promoted] socially liberal attitudes and [the BBC] turning a blind eye to staff having sex with 14/15 year olds.
Just as it would be cretinous to rule out making any connection between unmarried Catholic priests and homosexuality, or Islam and domestic violence against women.
This does not mean that all (or even most) social liberals turn a blind eye to sex with teenagers, or all (or even most) underage sex is by social liberals, it simply means that to call somebody “cretinous” if they were to make that link would be cretinous,
Nonsense, top work Alan, an excellent post.
As always, leftists try to play the man and insinuate some, ‘shudder’ ,unspeakable link to bnp ‘thought’ crime
As always, anybody who dissents is incorrectly labelled a ‘leftist’. Not everybody who disagrees with you is at the opposite end of the political spectrum. I frequent this blog because I have right-wing views and get hacked off by liberal bias, but some of the most frequent posters seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that their, ahem, *niche* political views in some way represent the mainstream of right-wing thought.
Redwhite and blue wrote:
“but it’s the sort of incoherent, badly punctuated rant that embittered retired expats write every day on the Daily Mail message boards.”
I’m a little confused how somebody who uses a patriotic Nationalist tag “Red White and Blue” can opine about people who are patriotic to the Flag of the United Kingdom the colours of which are:
Red
White
Blue.
P.S
Not only do I read the Daily Mail, (online only) but I purchase the Guardian on a daily basis.
Well, I’m the sort of patriot who thinks that living here, paying my taxes and getting involved in society is preferable to sniping from an apartment in Spain while moaning about how everything was much better in the seventies. The fact that Alan’s posts make him sound like one of these amateurish individuals does the blog no favours.
RWB,
I was actually aiming my post at the finger pointing at the Daily mail angle. I’ve noticed that if we wish to disparage somebody we don’t state the bleeding obvious, instead society uses tags in which to character assassinate their target I quote:
Banker
Zionist
Tory
Daily Mail reader
Ex Pat
However nowhere do we find people been slandered for:
Reading the Guardian
Belonging to the Labour Party.
I just find all of this very onesided ,strange and very disturbing. Right must go as I have just brewed a pot of Earl Gray.
I was finger pointing at the DM because that’s where these people hang out. For balance, let me add that the Guardian comments are full of humourless, sanctimonious, champagne-quaffing pseudo-socialists. And there are plenty of places where Guardianistas get ripped apart – read Viz recently?
Ugh. The obligatory ‘Little Englander’ label. Try harder, Bore.
Since when did ‘punctuation’ have anything to do with representing a wide spectrum of political views you blithering buffoon? Incidentally, the Daily Mail has the highest readership in the world for a news website so those illiterate message-board rants, you refer to, could so easily translate into a sizable portion of opinions the totality of which could prove invaluable in influencing future generations to make a stand against enforced institutions such as the BBC. Your posts, as usual, offer nothing to this site. So please, either get lost with your patronizing mouthfuls of Greek salad or try to get behind the team in their efforts to post in form that promotes substance over style.
I like “patronizing mouthfuls of Greek salad”. My criticism is simply that Alan’s posts are verbose and ill expressed and do not do the site any favours. And his general level of sophistication is about as high as that of a message board bore. DV should consider spending more time here.
Listening to the Ten O Clock News.
Only the BBC could disperse the Savile case into some ReThink womans moan about the last Government doing more surveys of Mental Heath Users than this lot of cutting Tories.
Have a heart Jeremy Hunt!
Jimmy who was that then?
And this is the NEWS from the BBC tonight?…more questionnaires for Broadmoor, more voting mechanisms so the likes of Savile can get a democratic mandate then?
See-it was nothing to do with the BBC sprinking fairy dust on their home-baked paedophile…Tory cuts!
“The Savile affair has exposed the sorry chaos at the heart of the BBC.
“The corporation’s shambolic response to the saga demonstrates the unfit state of its management structure”
By Peter Preston.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/14/peter-preston-bbc-management-exposed-as-unfit?
Blimmin’ right wing rags at it still.
Maybe get Ian & Paul to work them into to next week’s show?
There is some material they can use…
‘Call for Lord Justice Leveson? No, anything but that.’
This time.
Comments will be turned on later
Can’t wait.
Thanks for that link – so it’s not just paranoid, right-wing, Little Englander, ex-pat ranters who think there’s something seriously wrong with the management culture at the BBC.
…one of the comments…
amsams :
I remember, several years ago, Carol Thatcher saying something racist in the so called green room and has not been seen since on BBC TV. Yet Savile could abuse and in some cases rape for decades. Were the lives of young people, particularly girls, not as important as the BBC appearing to be racist.
…and another good one…
freespeechoneeach:
When the BBC’s proud of itself, it says it’s in a category of one. But when it’s very seriously in the wrong, it tells us that it only does what others do.
Savile would never have had his power, nor his privileged access to victims, had it not been for his “national treasure” status, bestowed summarily by his employer the BBC, for its own purposes.
There may be reasons to avoid climbing quickly onto a soap- box of sanctimony. But there are certainly also reasons to suppose that a vast national institution which has always covered something up, would want to continue to do so. And should therefore not be conducting its own enquiries into its part of serious wrongdoing, in its own way, in its own time.
‘Independent’:-
“BBC boss’s Savile claim ‘barely credible’
Programme editor dropped ‘Newsnight’ report and director general didn’t ask crucial questions.'”
By PAUL CALAHAN.
[Opening excerpt]:
“The BBC director general’s claim that he did not ask what Newsnight’s Jimmy Savile investigation was about has been described by BBC insiders as ‘barely credible’ and ‘ridiculous’ as the growing row threatens to split Newsnight journalists.
“George Entwistle’s insistence that he never asked about the nature of the Newsnight investigation has been derided by commentators and journalists.
“There is also evidence of ‘extreme tension’ in the Newsnight newsroom after its editor, Peter Rippon, not only dropped its Savile investigation but then did not follow up on Newsnight for nearly two weeks after ITV screened a documentary.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bbc-bosss-savile-claim-barely-credible-8210470.html
And another Tory title puts the boot in.
HIGNFY will need to draft in another trustee from the BBC whose career depends on getting the ‘correct’ comments across next week as well.
‘he would have to be “pretty brain dead” not to investigate the programme’s subject matter’
To be fair, there may be a defence possible on this basis.
‘News that the investigation was not to be broadcast was delivered verbally. There may be no email trail, said the insider. ‘
Which, in the unique semantic world of the BBC, will possibly mean no evil was seen, no evil was heard, and hence no evil can be spoken of.
They may yet survive. The trust aspect… not so much.
Andrew Marr this morning has Claire Balding and David Aronovitch on the review the papers. Well, they both talked about savilegate and followed the party line:
It happened over so many decades and organisations, that must somehow excuse the INBBC’s failure
The production team at newsnight would not have given in to any downward executive pressure and pulled the savile programme. Just as the “Today” saints have done in the past. And after all he david should know as he has been a INBBC executive in the past. Oh really, we know who plod can subpoena first then dont we. questions to answer old chap.
Then, unbelievably Claire dragged in Lance Armstrong to the argument. Pardon? Lance Armstrong? what the F*** did he have to do with savile?
Did she mention her disgusting HIGNFY performance? Did she hell. The cheque’s in the post Claire, well done.
As I read more about the pulling of the Newsnight investigation I am reminded of the infamous Pencourt File investigation in 1977-8.
That ended up with the two journalists sidelined, their office locks changed and their research binned. Luckily they kept copies.
Their work, did little to support the line that there was an elabborate BOSS plot to destablise the Government of Wilson, but rather gave truth to the claim that Jeremy Thorpe (Liberal leader QC, PC, establishment figure) was involved in a plot to murder Norman Scott. Too hot, Too embarrassing to the Establishment. Pull the plug.
If there is something that the powers that be want to silence the BBC top brass will do all they can.
Just remember, this whole Savilegate saga is about more than just the BBC. Many people are worried sick.
Dare I mention a certain David Icke, who has been going on about paedophiles in the highest levels of entertainment and politics and the police and judiciary, for many years?
This is another part of his wild conspiracy theories, which is being proven true.
Now that the lid is being lifted on Savile, all manner of victims of child abuse are coming forward with a massive charge sheet exposing the entire entertainment industry. At the centre of which, is the BBC!
Against my better judgement I read with interest your article about the horrid state broadcaster. We all know that what you wrote is true. But again and again I come back to the question: what are you DOING about it? I speak with MP’s. Why don’t you? Get some real publicity in the more responsible publications and then maybe you can justify your site, which at the moment serves little purpose!
Oh I don`t know sir!
It shows me that you regard “speaking to MPs” as somehow a substitute for a good rant amogst others not fooled by your “responsible organisations”.
Responsible for tax fiddling, for condoning child abuse, aiding and abetting paedophiles and tax dodgers…yes, very responsible.
You keep on writing to Points of View(or whatever safe channels of impotence the media allow for you) talking to MPs…Huhne?…Prescott?…good luck chief!
I learn a lot here-and to see the BBC hares and hounds banging into each other in their wish to avoid the curse of Jim is sure funnier than Hardy, Brigstocke, Thomas, Steel and the Godawfully unfunny Brand or Justin Lee Collins.
This is funny stuff-but irony and comedy aren`t noted by the Guardians shock troops…anymore than is that inconvenient hypocrisy blind spot you wear as an eye patch!
So you speak to the protectors and enablers of serious criminal activity, to complain about criminal activity?
The establishment in this country is corrupt, perverted and full of criminals ripping off the state for ALL they can take.
It is time for a total clear-out and NONE of the established Parliamentary parties will lift a finger to do so. Why would they, when they are enablers themselves?
This cleansing will have to come from outside, from grass-roots organised people.
The BBC is sick and should be shut.
Surely the problem with the BBC’s excuse as in HIGNFY is that if the rumours were rife at the BBC re Jimmy’s predalictions then those commissioning programmes should have stopped ‘Jim’ll Fix It’ or any other programme where he would come into contact with children. Indeed they could have passed on informally (a phone call perhaps?) to establishments like Stoke Mandeville, Broadmoor and Leeds General what they knew.
Way too logical.
Much better to write a HIGNFY script that kills the credibility and careers of Balding, Hislop and Merton… well, kicks the corpses… trying to spin up outrage that tabloids outside the BBC did not make more fuss about what was being carried out within a public sector news organisation that prides itself on holding power to account.
Can’t wait for Toadey, Breakfast Sofa Stains, Jezza ‘we want only certain views’ Vine and ‘Ve know nuzzing…nuzzing’ Newsnight tomorrow to find out what these cretins have cooked up next by way of headless chicken-sh*t.
Part of the BBC Ssrategy is the ‘it was all part of the culture in those days, everybody was at it’. The very same excuses the liberal left use for the appalling treatment of women in Islamic and African countries. They cannot use that excuse and at the same time claim to be better than the rest of us.
Being part of the public sector being non-commercial was always one of the main reasons they thought they were better than the little people, the people that helped create the wealth that gave them a lifestyle most of us could not dream of having. Yet where did most of the abuse happen with the exception of the Catholic church and some private schools, it was the BBC hospitals mental homes state run childcare
Just back from an overseas assignment (where curiously there was no talk of Jimmy Savile — so obviously the BBC’s attempts at sweeping it all under the carpet are working), and goodness me what have I missed?
How happy the little gang is.
The problem with this website is it an exercise in confirming the antecedent. It starts with a premise and then looks for evidence to support it, rather than testing the validity of the premise. Surely there is a Mensa special group talking about modus ponens and modus tollens?
Couple that with confirmation bias and you end up with this site.
The Jimmy Savile episode does raise some very significant issues for the BBC. But to suggest that it is in someway evidence of political bias is nonsense.
However I am sure you have all had lots of fun and the schadenfreude is oozing out of the site.
So don’t let me stop you lot (Hi Guest Who, and a wave to Earls Court and JiC on their knees at the back) from having your fun — so run along and play.
Overseas assignment?
Was that to the Socialist paradise of North Korea comrade?
Hi Nicked…
You say run along but don’t let you stop me, so they cancel out making whatever you say a bit redundant.
Which given your body of work (the rest clearly hasn’t resulted in any change) thus far is really me doing the same.
Good luck with trying to police a site you deem pointless and has no effect based on a cunning plan to shape the issue around what you think you have a chance of arguing.
Me, I’m off out in the sun.
ps: Love the ‘you lot’ again. Always a winner.
Hi Doctor Nick,
I too have just spent a bit of time away on an overseas deployment, but in my case it was only to Northern Ireland. (via Birkenhead) Anyway you wrote|:
“The Jimmy Savile episode does raise some very significant issues for the BBC. But to suggest that it is in someway evidence of political bias is nonsense.”
So how the bBC decided to excuse Jimmy Saviles wandering fingers and cock by saying Maggie Thatcher protected him isn’t political bias. Gee what next from the bBC, that Islam is a religion of peace.
‘I too have just spent a bit of time away on an overseas deployment’
It does all sound exotic and exciting, doesn’t it. The spirit of Hemingway, or Fleming, meeting sources in a speakeasy on the waterfront, getting the scoops under the noses of all those other media types who clearly don’t know how a news room should be run.
I thought I’d join in and informed my kids I was off on an ‘overseas assignment’ this week. Sadly, not being a generation informed and educated by the BBC (I may have had a smidge to do with that) they seemed duly unimpressed that an overnighter to Barcelona with EasyJet was getting described in such a dickwaddy manner.
They even called me a pompous git!
Kids, eh?
Funnily enough I did spend quite a bit of my time on a waterfront meeting sources. That’s what we call journalism (talking to people in positions of authority who know what they are talking about).
Blogging, on the other hand, is a lot easier. You just vomit up any old unsubstantiated crap, you don’t have to bother with facts, sources, analysis, reasoning, balance, integrity; none of that is required. Just bash out what ever the voices tell you.
‘ You just vomit up any old unsubstantiated crap, you don’t have to bother with facts, sources, analysis, reasoning, balance, integrity; none of that is required. Just bash out what ever the voices tell you.’
Says Biased BBC blog ‘source’, code name Nicked Emus, who might be an international jet-setting investigative reporter, or a budget airline stewardess called Hermione for all we know, given all the actual facts contained in his/her latest credibility excavation.
We are of course meant to believe and defer to all shared based on no more than what s/he says we must, which seems oddly familiar an attitude, though apt given the last word of the thread headline.
Facts: always Nick’s strongpoint, like on, um – let’s see – ‘Climate Change’?
Bloody ell, Nick, just re-read what you’ve written on this thread and try not to think of the words ‘prig’ and ‘pompous’. But then, if you are of the view that only left-wing pseudo intellectuals like yourself should be trusted with the vote, you’ll probably manage it.
“I did spend quite a bit of my time on a waterfront meeting sources.”
Hmmmm……sounds to me like John Pilger-travel around the world finding people that agree with you.
“talking to people in positions of authority who know what they are talking about”
Yes……of course, I forget that the UN, IMF, EU, British Government etc are really stuffed to the rafters with competent professionals who have never made a pigs ear of anything.
“Blogging, on the other hand, is a lot easier. You just vomit up any old unsubstantiated crap, you don’t have to bother with facts, sources, analysis, reasoning, balance, integrity; none of that is required.”
Where as journalists according to Martin Bell should ‘not stand neutrally between good and evil, right and wrong, the victim and the oppressor.’ and that you are engaged with ‘journalism of attachment’.
In other words over simplified, emotional, context free polemics….gosh that sounds very similar to a blogger to me!
Indeed it does “raise some very significant issues”. Once Georgie boy has fallen on Saviles sword of truth( with the shield of the NHS, Eurovision…hell, anything!) ; I reckon you`re a shoo-in for the next DG job.
Is that REALLY your own phrase, or have you been “paged” to say such?
To say that without a licence fee excusing you is wonderful!
Step away from the Guardian…I repeat …step away from the dark, and into the light , my child!
Nicked and Jim Dandy, I realise why you are writing such rubbish and trying to deflect criticism from the Beeb – you have got the shits up. You are terrified that the huge, left-wing conspiracy that is the BBC will be seriously, if not fatally, damaged by this story. You can see some of it already unravelling in front of your eyes.
Don’t worry, if you actually have a talent you will be picked up by whatever media organisation that will fill the void created by the exit of the world’s greatest propaganda outfit of all time.
Actually it may survive, but I hope that Uncle Rupert ensures that it is fully, and I mean FULLY, brought to account and many senior Beeboids imprisoned for their role in this shame.
I realise that for you lot facts are mere trifles, things to be picked up and discarded as you see fit, but perhaps one day it might actually get through to you that I do not, nor have I ever, been on the staff of the BBC. I have appeared on TV and radio as a pundit on numerous occasions (although not for quite a while — I do a lot more Sky for some reason now) but I have never been employed by them. But I am sure that won’t stop you saying it time and again.
As I have said many a time, but curiously everyone starts to look at their feet and gets a bit embarrassed by the all-too-obvious hypocrisy, the only person getting paid by the BBC round here is David Vance. I understand that he was, once again, broadcasting today. I am *sure* he declares to HMRC the £140 (plus taxi — that is right Dave, isn’t it? Or has it gone up since my day?) top ups to his holiday fund that the organization he despises so much gives him.
But off you trot now, I am sure there is so much more mileage to be had out of the Jimmy Savile story. I am sure that if you work really, really hard you can try and work in some Muslim angle into the story, or at the very least, general immigration?
You know you want to.
PS If you wouldn’t mind pointing out where I try to deflect criticism about the BBC over the Jimmy Savile business? I think it stinks.
There are a lot of people who work for the BBC who apparently “aren’t employed by the BBC” for tax evasion purposes. However, your increasingly desperate defences of an indefensible organisation pushing inexcusable defensive lines does make you appear like a BBC employee, not employed by them technically of course.
If you don’t work for them, this defence by you of them would indicate you have a moral position somewhere around the gutter. What they have allowed and covered up over the years is far worse than anything the NoW did – and you still defend them! Shame on you.
Oh, my goodness! Emus had no intention of playing the ball there and has taken Vance out with both feet. It’s a straight red, and he’s off. All a bit odd as Vance has had a low-profile game and if Emus has been needled by anyone it’s been the rest of Vance’s team, not to mention the home crowd.
(Blimey, Nick, you’re really rattled aren’t you?)
No of course not silly.
I love this site. It is my guilty lunchtime pleasure — seeing what ever more convoluted logical hoops you lot have to put yourselves through. This site is more fun than reading the bonkers comments on the Daily Mail, and that is saying something.
As for playing the man I am a mere novice compared to the likes on here. Dez is constantly attacked and someone wanted my plane to crash and me be killed in it, so I am afraid I don’t pay much attention to that charge.
But noted that no one seems to have a problem with our Dave and his holiday fund …
‘No of course not silly’.
You are Joyce Grenfell and I claim my £5.
The question isn’t really about DV and his holiday fund, but the goings on inside the BBC.
£140 is small change compared to say the pay cheque that Helen Boaden receives, or the fact that her old pal Greg Dyke gave her an ‘honorary degree’ from his University of York Chancellorship.
Nothing like back slapping nepotism is there?
Seeing as we are keeping to the facts, its not as though the BBC hasn’t got form either:
1.Fake Story About Dog Sentenced to Death by Stoning in Israel
2.Fake Child Labour Footage in Bangalore
3.Accusations of ageism and sexism by Moira Stuart et al
4.The Russell Brand Show
5.The Blue Peter Cat
6.A Year with the Queen
7.BBC Jam
8.Blue Peter phone-in
9.Balen Report
10.Butler Report
11.Hutton Report
12.Death of Dr David Kelly
I guess Robin Aitken, Anthony Jay, Justin Webb, Rod Liddle, Peter Sissons and Jeff Randall are also blow-hards with an axe to grind, and know nothing about journalism or reporting…….
“The problem with this website is it an exercise in confirming the antecedent. It starts with a premise and then looks for evidence to support it, rather than testing the validity of the premise.”
Sorry, for a minute there I thought you were talking about Mark Mardell’s reporting.
Hey, Nicked, I’m enjoying a bit of Schadenfreude over the fact that the time when Savile was allowed to fiddle hundreds of pubescent girls on BBC premises is the exact period which ex-DG Mark Thompson has described the BBC as leaning massively to the Left.
Oh, wait, that’s not really Schadenfreude, is it? Thoughts?
It starts with a premise and then looks for evidence to support it, rather than testing the validity of the premise.
This sounds just like Prof Jones from UEA and the “experts” from the BBC on the subject of climate change.
“NEW BBC BOSS WAS VISION OF INDECISION”
By Peter Stephenson
http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/351997/New-BBC-boss-was-vision-of-indecision
Very good article Alan.
It is important to realise how much the BBC bias has damaged and continues to damage the lives of individual British people who are not members of an influential gang/pressure group.
I think it is fair to say that the BBC is partly to blame for the high cost of energy/fuel, the robbery by the EU and our own public sector, unmanageable immigration levels, serious crime being ignored because of race/religious sensitivities, decent people being criminalised etc.
The list is very long but most people still do not see that the BBC rewrite history and distort perceptions by very selective reporting and censorship.
What on earth is that strange shivering sound?
Oh, it’s Nicked emus whistling in the dark.
Indeed you are nicked Mr Emus!
Can`t be easy for you finding that your beloved BBC is just a nonce ring-after them telling you that that was the pretext for the Catholic Church!
Turns out the Beeb was a a paedopalace , even when Jim chose to do his worst in a parked detector van by the reception area.
You emus find yourself defending the indefensible….very Beeboid!
Tell you what…Jimmy worked his t`ang at Luxembourg in 1958…so it`s no longer a BBC problem but a European one isn`t it? tell them at the Beeb, this might buy them ten minutes for themselves.
Poor Mr Emus…twisting in the fetid wind and blowback that seedy Uncle Beeb has created for itself-hell, even Rupert wouldn`t have tolerated a Savile!
Desperate Mr Emus…but I`d expect nothing less.
But to more serious matters.
I note in todays Mail( see why the BBC and the left hate it so much?) that a woman who was to have been a source witness to last years aborted(oh yes!) Newsnight piece on Sir James of Fixit ; found that the BBC only wanted her letter to shaft the CPS( as opposed to caring one jot about the likes of herself, and other abusees(?).
This would be the Millie Dowler means of attack-use the victims not to help them, but to stick it to the police, the Tories…whoever isn`t with the Beebs programme, or is a site of alternative authority to itself.
The BBC have form on this-victims as stepping stones along their yellow brick road to Frankfurt or Pyongyang via Brussels-and a few shrouds hung out to dry along the way is all they require.
The BBC uses anybody who goes onto it-but thankfully, this Savile stuff and tax dodging won`t be going anywhere soon.
Parked at the BBC studios sure as Saviles Camper Van….they won`t forget Jimmy( with thanks to Benny Hill!)
This is an interesting article about Winston Churchill’s long battle with the BBC and Lord Reith. The frightening thing is that the comments broadly support the BBC.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9606384/Nick-Robinson-Winston-Churchills-bitter-battle-with-the-BBC.html
The BBC will now be forced to carry round the rotting corpse of Jimmy Savile on its back, just as Roman Law would have insisted upon.
No matter how much manure, lavender, patchouli or old dope they choose to spray around themselves…the stench of years of noncery won`t be masked.
The BBC will surely be dead meat within a few years-and it couldn`t happen to “nicer “people.
One Balding tyre for hire….and no BBC to fund the compulsory purchasing!
Thank you Jimmy!
What did Jim’ll Fix It say; Take me down and I’ll take you all down with me? Ironic or what?
Sky News just loving the Beeb’s sticky situation this evening. Presenter asks his colleague; So Helen Boaden tells George that they are pulling the Panorama program on Jim for “editorial” reasons? Do you know what “editorial reasons” means? Colleague; No. Presenter; So they could have had a program celebrating Jimmy’s life on one channel and sticking it to him on another? i.e. better just to have one program of celebration.
Poor George. Just got the job as the boss and already in the centre of a huge storm about what he did or didn’t do in his old job. Poor Helen. Not only didn’t she get the job but now she has a really hot object in her hands and the person she would have passed it to, has gone and taken the top job. Oops.
Nicked, (my reply is in a new comment as that thread is getting pinched off) my opinion of what Jo Brand did and how current BBC policy dealt with it is irrelevant. I’m comparing and contrasting the attitude of the BBC – policy and people – in two different eras. “Change” doesn’t necessarily mean improvement.
However, this change will most likely allow the BBC to successfully pass at least one of the looming internal inquiries. Whether or not it prevents on-air talent from fiddling young girls (or, in the interests of equality, boys) or snorting coke on BBC premises, I have no idea.
And the buckpassing continues. Stephen Nolan tonight has managed to find someone from an unheard-of ‘child protection charity’ who says that Savile is not the BBC’s problem, but ‘Society’s problem’, and that there should be a Royal Commission to enquire into what ‘we’ have been doing to ‘our children’.
How much more of this do we have to take? I have not been doing anything to ‘our children’ and I’d bet that 99% or more of British people haven’t, either. These people (like Esther Rancid) want to drive a wedge between us and children so that any normal activity is demonised.
And the BBC is only to happy to fill the airwaves with them in their attempt to avoid blame for covering up the sexual deviant in their midst. This is not ‘Society’s problem’: it is the BBC’s.
Pass the sick-bag.
I think I just heard a head explode – too much factual evidence of bias for Nick to deal with.
May as well post it here too…BBC/Savile smokescreen…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/culture/files/2012/10/ADAMS141012.jpg
“BBC boss under pressure over ‘barely credible’ Savile stance.”
Read more: http://www.theweek.co.uk/uk-news/savile-abuse-claims/49554/bbc-boss-under-pressure-over-barely-credible-savile-stance#ixzz29MutPVv1
Bascially, Barely Credible
Like it.
Though George might not.
Meanwhile…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9609141/Jimmy-Savile-could-be-one-of-the-most-serious-predatory-paedophiles-in-criminal-history-says-Jeremy-Vine.html
The book’s out, so it can’t be that.
Is Jezza ‘retiring’ soon, or is he just trying to balance out banning Notasheep for asking him why he only RT’s things that he hasn’t checked but support his prejudices.
Speaking of which, has Mr. Savile actually been found guilty yet to warrant..‘ Jimmy Savile will become known as ‘one of the most serious predatory paedophiles in criminal history,’ ‘
Questions still being asked.