A Biased BBC reader observes…

“File on 4 Alcohol Fraud has been discussing the rise of the problem this week. No mention of course of the close link with immigration, not only in the fraud itself, but the huge numbers of immigrant run corner shops selling dodgy alcohol and putting honest British businesses out of existence.

Perhaps most telling is that they chose to focus on this case of high end fraud, run by Brits (although with assistance from a Pole):

They ignored this Lithuanian run operation, where people actually died, even though it was more of a news story at the time!

They also fail to warn against the risks of such brews,  or reveal  horror stories such as:

Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to CHEERS?

  1. The Highland Rebel says:

    Oh to have a workplace where there is no need for cheap alcohol, where the public pay for all the booze you want and empty champagne bottles litter the corridors.


  2. Alex says:

    Political correctness (peddled by the likes of the BBC/Guardian etc) has turned this country into a nation of self-censoring infants. If we wish to discuss immigration, we cannot say the ‘M’ word; if we wish to discuss extremism we cannot say the ‘M’ word. It’s pathetic! One only has to witness politicians, journalists and celebrities turn pale with terror anytime they are put on the spot and faced with discussing immigration. I’d love to be on SML or QT – people would certainly get a shock hearing my opinions on immigration, Islamic fascism and the inverted racism of ‘the black man can say anything about the white man but not the other way around’ etc.


    • Londdon Calling says:

      Up in London’s Victoria this lunch time I came on around a thousand Muslims, many dressed in the usual pillowcases, in a demo against I assume some latest defamation of their sky-pixie. Posters damning Google., and a huge TV screen on which an imam was whipping the crowd into a hate-frenzy in Arabic.

      Police stood around bored, unable to know if anything said qualified as incitement to violence. I guess they were there to arrest anyone who challenged the demonstrators with their own right to free speech.

      Blair’s unforgivable legacy: Londonistan. As you might say but for fear of arrest by our thought police: Who the hell are these people, and what thehell are they doing in my country?


      • JimS says:

        Concern is being expressed about Jimmy Savile’s activities and backs are being covered by suggesting that he was physically dangerous, at the top of the talent tree, altogether impossible to challenge.

        Wicked thought:: Who else do we know who is top of (some people’s tree), too dangerous to challenge? Isn’t 1400 years of enforced silence long enough to wait to find the ‘truth’?


      • Dysgwr_Cymraeg says:

        ” Who the hell are these people,”

        Barbarian Savages I’m afraid my friend, just that.
        Oh I can’t say that? Oh dear, how sad, never mind.


  3. john in cheshire says:

    My solution? Give all 5 million or so immigrants a month to get the hell out of our country and then it’s free shoot (not sure that’s the correct term but I’m sure most people know what I mean). I want to live in a country free from socialist persecution; from muslim infestation. I don’t want to be labelled as a racist/xenophobe or whatever for wanting to live in a country that is populate by people who have a blood connection to our land. I have relatives who are black and chinese descent but because of bloodlines, they are as English as me. But the muslims are an invading force and must be repelled, together with any other foreign bodies that are infesting our national body.


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Here we go again. Cue calls for censorship else the entire history of this blog is discredited, editors put in the dock for inciting hatred and abetting racial violence, etc.

      You want population controls based on race, throw in the One Drop Rule for good measure, but don’t want to be called a racist for it? Not going to work, I’m afraid.


      • john in cheshire says:

        David, is this me that you are focussing on? I’m not anti-democratic. I am in awe of the USA. But I can’t countenance the despoiling of my country – as i’ve witnessed over the past 60 years and say that immigrants aren’t the major problem, because they are. And the bbc are a significant player in prohibiting normal people from expressing their disagreement about how my country is being balkanised.


        • David Preiser (USA) says:

          I agree with you up to a point, john. Thanks to Neather’s admission, we know it was done deliberately. I was just trying to pre-empt the concern trolls and point to that flaw in your argument. Needs to be expressed a different way.


          • john in cheshire says:

            david, thanks. I don’t agree, mind. I believe that there will be a pogrom of muslims, because if there isn’t we are doomed.


            • David Preiser (USA) says:

              If you want to live in a country free from being persecuted by Socialists, though, I’d suggest you’re focused on the wrong crowd.


              • john in cheshire says:

                David, upon whom should I be focussed?


                • David Preiser (USA) says:

                  The Socialists and “Equality” fascists in media and government plus the Warmist movement and Watermelons everywhere.


            • wallygreeninker says:

              I think calls for pogroms are unacceptable in any serious discussion and mass deportation is something that should stay associated with total wars and their messy aftermaths .
              It’s probable that there are no problems of assimilation of immigrants that are, in the long term, insuperable – as long as the numbers don’t become too large – with the exception of Islam. I’d like to live in a country where sharia was a dirty word, anyone practicing polygamy was either imprisoned or deported and asserting that no-one should insult the prophet Moped should be treated as hate-speech: expressing hatred of free speech.Just to establish a principle, I think that teaching a doctrine in which the males of a faith may marry women of other religions but the females may not should be stated to be illegal. Needless to say, the Beeb, collectively,would treat such a common sense attitude as unacceptable and contemptible.


              • joshaw says:

                Immigration was imposing huge strains on places like Bradford long before Islam started throwing its weight around in earnest. Unfortunately, it went largely unnoticed because the largest metropolitan centres were largely unaffected.

                I agree with John in Cheshire: “But I can’t countenance the despoiling of my country – as i’ve witnessed over the past 60 years and say that immigrants aren’t the major problem, because they are.”

                Spot on, in my opinion. And I’m not going to be told by an American how my own dissatisfaction with immigration should be expressed. Butt out!


                • Brother Duquette says:

                  I think David only has the British people’s best wishes at heart. I think he cares more than many who are from this country!


                • David Preiser (USA) says:

                  joshaw, surely you understood my comment was not about the sentiment expressed but that one can’t express desire for a race-based country while at the same time saying it’s not racist.

                  If you think it’s okay to actually want a pogrom – next logical step, extermination – of any group of people, I’d say my nationality is the least of your worries.


            • johnnythefish says:

              John, whilst I agree with most of your observations I can’t buy into your solutions.

              To my mind the problem we have is not immigration per se but mass immigration and lack of integration. These are the two crimes we must lay firmly at the door of the last government, who not only opened the floodgates but stifled any debate on the subject through its cynical, totalitarian methods – poilitcal correctness being at the forefront.

              Government should be asking more ‘what are you doing for your (mainly adopted) country’ as opposed to ‘what can we do for you’, and not pussyfoot around them all the time.


              • joshaw says:

                I’d like to add just one more comment on this.

                John in C has relatives of black and Chinese descent, so I don’t think he’s fundamentally racist. I think it’s implicit in his original comment that his issue is with numbers, and lack of integration is a direct result of this.

                I don’t agree that the last Government should carry all the blame for this. The writing was on the wall long before 1997.

                It seems to me that any debate on immigration is doomed to fail because, although it’s acceptable to wring hands about the situation, Godwin’s law applies to any discussion about solutions other than vague notions of improving integration. We’re well past that stage, in my opinion.

                I have no time for hypocrites who wring their hands (which has only just become respectable), but express disgust at people who actually stick their heads above the parapet and suggest doing something.

                Talk of pogroms and extermination (DP’s words, not mine)? My mother’s family is largely Sephardim, but it’s not me they’re worried about.
                I feel that the future of some of our northern cities is very bleak indeed.


                • joshaw says:

                  Just noticed that “pogrom” was in fact J in C’s word.

                  Apologies for that. The rest stands.


      • Guest Who says:

        ‘Here we go again.’
        I merely note how those who suddenly emerge here to suggest a lack of response from the ‘you lot’ (hate to oblige them, but John, while I support your right to a view, the one you have shared here I cannot in the form expressed) tells them all they need to know about everyone on this site.
        These are of course the same BBC apologists who appear to feel that career-based omerta is entirely understandable, and indeed waiting until retired to speak out is a betrayal.
        Holding a free, independent blog comprised of diverse individuals to a higher standard than a uniquely-funded national broadcast monopoly comprised of Borg-hived corporate line-toers seems perverse at best.


  4. GCooper says:

    The BBC also ignores the socialist-applauded drive for ever higher taxation, which has now reached such extortionate levels that people are tempted to crime to avoid it.


  5. chrisH says:

    There goes the BBC again…worrying about anybody having a drink outside their buildings and their thought pods , creative exchange spaces.
    And of course, it`ll be granny and Uncles that they`ll concern themselves with-whitey on her estate, or in suburban areas where Tories live and vote.
    Nah, don`t ever remember that Bakewell tart getting voted onto any forum that speaks for that generation she claims to speak for…just another Beeboid on the lam, and biting Jimmys medallion(oo er)
    Now as for khat, coke, knife crime, hypothermia etc…nah, nothing to say really.
    Ban Advocaat, Enva Cream….but let the immigrants blow us all up with dodgy stills, let the Muslim shopkeeper sell it cheap and to the teenie tots…then send for their pals in the flat upstairs.
    It`s no race issue until the BBC tell me that white old ladies having a drink is a problem to me. Funnily enough I tend to fear the tanked-up Vic and Vicky Pollards…but the BBC seem happy for them to express themselves upon the old and the unlucky.
    Luvaduck-the BBC eh?…maybe if Jimmy Savile had had the keys to the minibar and not the BBCs dressing rooms, we`d have had less trouble!


  6. Ian Hills says:

    Yes, customs and police only target English shopkeepers. It’s enough to make you black up and drive to Dover..


  7. chrisH says:

    Think it`s now important to apply the Savile Test to all BBC output.
    Baileys for old folk at Christmas in the care home…what would Sir James of the BBC have said about it?
    Would he have cared…No!
    Therefore,neither do I?

    That said he`d have liked Sharia and Leveson…but he`s a pervert, so I`m diametrically opposed to creepy C***-Click on these issues!
    Am I A Beeboid in embryo?…and should I abort myself?


  8. chrisH says:

    I`d say the nastiest little programme on Radio 4 is “Thinking Allowed”…. at least Libby Purvis doesn`t always tow the Beeb line when she writes elsewhere.
    Laurie Taylor seems to be employed as the superannuated poly lecturer who never got to grips with life after 1968.
    The man is a rancid furball of libleft luvvery,but always willing to incite the pastel revolution from Tracey Emins bed.
    His last offering to the Great God Ariel was some puffery about the pale, interesting Arab Man-and the author from Yale ( a woman amidst Muslim men)ought to know!
    For she had researchers outside Lebanese IVF facilities-and even inside, once she found some burkhas.
    Her conclusion-that theyr`e impotent , infertile and don`t breed enough-maybe too much incest marriage etc?

    Not at all-basically the Danish cartoons, Regensburg and the YouTube fracas are nothing to do with Arab Men..despite what we see daily.
    And Shia are much more liberal that Sunni in regard of all this?…when Iran is cited as “progressive”, you know you`re back at Muhammads cave on the timeline.
    A ludicrous dance through the Afghan poppy fields and IEDs of Iraq…and this lady of Yale reckons a Beirut IVF clinic represents the face of real Arab men?
    The faces of the women of some of these “New Arab Men” unfortunately were not improved by the acid baths these self-loathing ladies chose to undergo-hence the burkhas.
    This is “sociological and anthropological gold” from Yale?

    How fascinating, how timely, how absorbing?
    Her survey of Arab Men would be Beirut, Dubai and a stray shepherd from Syria-did she get to Saudi ,Helmand or Mosul? Course not-she`d have needed the manly Laurie with her to do any such thing!
    Nah-but imagine how groovy it would all be if we gave them all free IVF or paid for three cycles her in Britain for them?….oh, hell here`s the Womans Hour cause de nos jours anytime soon…,