Clearly rain has stopped a lot of play…you’re all online chatting….here’s some more space….
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Scroblene Dec 22, 06:34
Weekend 21st December 2024
Great clips there! Was Rik Mayall the voice of Bliar? - Scroblene Dec 22, 06:26
Weekend 21st December 2024
Stay up on your soap box, Lazers, you sum up what most legal citizens in the UK feel, and it’s… - Yasser Dasmibehbi Dec 22, 03:46
Weekend 21st December 2024
I found this interesting. https://youtu.be/tA8zz7niOy0?si=YwrTyvtMxLn2vVvH - StewGreen Dec 22, 00:14
Weekend 21st December 2024
Youtube just pushed a video at me that invading North Korean troops had been smashed cos they were using 19th… - StewGreen Dec 22, 00:09
Weekend 21st December 2024
“Jawdropping” propaganda from woke-Supremacist BBC and police https://youtu.be/IMuafLX0xhQ - Greencoat Dec 21, 23:22
Weekend 21st December 2024
Mantel was a deeply unpleasant, dishonest person. And her books? Next to unreadable. - tomo Dec 21, 23:12
Weekend 21st December 2024
Trump shooter…….. https://x.com/TonySeruga/status/1870474697676325217 - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:39
Weekend 21st December 2024
And that ‘Let’s get ready to rumble’ announcer is still going. He was doing the Tyson fights back in the… - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:35
Weekend 21st December 2024
Right going to watch the Fury fight now. The build up has been about 5 hours long. I think 4…
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
Thought Andrew Neil was quite reasonable this morning on the topic of the extremist socialist council in Rotherham, which is at the centre of the storm over the foster couple. Unbelievably, I also thought Evan Davis was something approaching balanced in his interview with Ukip leader, Nigel Farage, yesterday. What does everyone else think? Perhaps, the BBC supporting this politically correct tyranny would be the final nail in its coffin, so it chooses to tread carefully. Your thoughts?
Not really, he tried to silence any mention of labour, tried to bring in the BNP, tried to sully Cameron: mind you, that probably is Davies ‘approaching balance’.
..this from Guido comment
Hang The Bastards says:
November 25, 2012 at 1:53 pm
ANDREW MARR this morning on reviewing the papers said
“The foster couple in Rotherham had extreemist political views”
You may ask yourself WTF is this adulterous man talking about ?
Answer: He’s connected to the Common Purpose Gestaop so obviously springs to the defence of Fuckwit-Thacker !
What was especially interesting about Evan Davis’s interview was how nervous he was, and his obvious uncertainty about how to approach Farage.
There were two thoughts in his tiny head: how to bring in the BNP and how to distance Labour from the council.
Threshing around, he decided to call Cameron in aid, not someone he would normally, if ever.
He managed to get all the assertions out but it wasn’t pleasant listening to his thoughts, spoken out loud in a jumble of words.
Unwittingly revealing.
He is a complete worm.
If he is interviewing a Labour politician – does young Evan try to link him with extremist views on the left ? No, of course not. But trying to link UKIP to the BNP just comes naturally to BBC “journalists”.
It is called “guilt by association”. Another way to smear UKIP or anyone who stands up against the leftie groupthink at the BBC.
“does young Evan try to link him with extremist views on the left ?”
Nope, because they don’t consider any leftist views as extreme. One only has to view the testimonies of BBC people at the bottom of this page for evidence that the centre of BBC ideology is well to the left. Any opinions that are even slightly right-wing are therefore deemed to be extreme – well away from their notion of ‘centrist’.
Neil is a loose cannon, and his views can vary a lot, depending, but on this his tweets were perhaps the most devastating of all, being ‘Brillo-on-Red’ and pretty much realtime as the whole sorry farce crashed around Millipede’s carefully BBC-PR’d resurgence. I think he was even amongst many slaughtering The-little-Ed-that-didn’t (University era humour) for his a) Default inquiry knee-jerk and b) asking why it was for an internal one this time and not using as much taxpayers’ money as possible to serve a higher purpose again.
As to Evan Almighty, I heard an interview with Mr. Farage with who I think was him, and at the point the fact Labour was pretty much the party to be in the frame on all this, the in theory impartial interviewer was morphed into a shill Labour PR semanticist trying to put as much distance between the latest soon-to-be-sacrificial rabid nanny (fully deserving of ending up the stew of her own stirring) GOAT and those she reports to.
So no… Mr. Davies still buffing Toenail’s toenails somewhere up the Labour fundament still.
Brillo has been boiling about this issue on Twitter since it broke. Davis and the Today team weren’t remotely balanced. They clearly considered what Rotherham had done was appalling, gave Farage good opportunity to make his case and pulled Thacker to pieces.
He quickly associated UKIP and BNP. Fact, and discussed at length on a previous thread. Repeating your views ad nauseam won’t work when you’ve left points unchallenged elsewhere. And at when did they ‘consider it appalling’? Evidence, please.
But I understand your tactic, and it’s SO old New Labour.
Did you listen to it? I did. He gave Farage the opportunity to distance ukip’s views on immigration from the BNP’s. the issue that goes to the heart of this incident. And Farage did just that.
Don’t just parrot what you want to believe happened. It did not.
You miss the point! Why was the BNP even mentioned! Davies was flapping about to change the subject from Labour.
Did Evan also give Farage the opportunity to distance himself from the IRA or the Mormon Church? How about the Fatcher government of the 80’s then?…they are usually to blame.
How about an oppotunity to distance himself from Hamas? or Al Qaeda?
Need I say any more ” what abouterisms ” Jim? Yes they are dumb aren’t they, just as dumb as asking Farage about the BNP I reckon.
So, Jim, for how long have you been a paedophile rapist?
(Just giving you an opportunity to distance yourself from paedophile rapists, mate; I expect you are very grateful for the opportunity).
Maybe it is because the BNP take most of their votes from Labour, while UKIP take most of their votes from the Tories.
Okay, Jim, your position is nonsense. Before the BNP question, Davis put words into Farage’s mouth and clearly misrepresented UKIP’s position on immigration. After a lengthy explanation by Farage of his position that unlimited, mass immigration was a problem, Davis summed it up by saying, “So you’re against immigration.” This is patently false, and Farage had to then reiterate the point about unlimited mass immigration.
This is in fact the same kind of dishonesty the BBC displays when discussing opposition in the US to amnesty for illegal immigrants and against mass illegal immigration. The BBC simply censors the word “illegal”, even going so far as to hire a legal immigrant – Franz Strasser – to do an entire series of reports during the height of the fuss over Arizona’s law and similar noise, celebrating “immigration” in the US, without once mentioning the word “illegal” – even in the two segments done from “Sanctuary Cities”, so called because the local authorities deliberately flout State and Federal laws and harbor illegal immigrants.
Last month, the Radio 4 played the same game with that “Open Borders” piece.
The bias in institutional on this issue, and Davis was showing that mindset even before we get to the BNP question.
His question about the BNP was not meant to help Farage, either. He was trying to bait Farage into approving the removal of non-white children from BNP foster parents. This, of course, is a ludicrous fantasy scenario which couldn’t possibly happen, but Davis or whichever producer came up with the question doesn’t care. The goal was to get Farage to approve of discrimination against good foster parents for holding unapproved thoughts, and then nail him for his hypocrisy. Yes, I say hypocrisy because, as Davis revealed in the previous question, the official correct BBC-approved position is that UKIP opposes immigration, full stop. An unapproved thought.
Total bias all the way through. The only way the charge is wrong is if we believe that Davis ad-libbed that misrepresentation of Farage’s position in order to give his guest an opportunity to repeat himself and clarify his position for the audience. Then we must additionally believe that the BNP question was similarly asked with the intention to once again help Farage. If true, this would also be bias, and you, Jim, should be condemning that rather than using it to defend Davis.
As for myself, I’ve already had my breakfast and it’s too late in the day to believe impossible things.
You may have only just had your breakfast but don’t wait up for a response to that, David.
I stand by my view.
Evan Davis deals with a similar allegation in his twitter feed here:
https://mobile.twitter.com/EvanHD/status/272393957420445696
Rather like standing on the rearranged deckchairs of the Titanic, but kudos on the loyalty.
How Mr. Davis ‘deals’ with things, seems less a matter of views and more a matter of the degree of rose-tint in the observer’s glasses.
Just dropped my boys off as I wanted to snag some snow chains from Lidl.
So I was ‘treated’ on the way back to 15 mins of R4, which is a nest of professionally-bent vipers.
First your hero was ‘discussing’ the choices for the new BoE Guv.
Despite the fact (which he was compelled to acknowledge) that all choices appear to have risen from meritocratic educational paths, as the script was written he had to inject that the process is ‘usually’ based on going to Eton.
Only he couldn’t quite come out and say that, so he alluded to a mystery collection of ‘cheeky’ folk who ‘might’ say that. No mention of who these people ‘may’ be to claim such a thing.
If you can defend such a technique by a supposed impartial news provider you will earn your keep.
Next there was VD, on floods, and she was ‘interviewing’ an expert.
Her obsession appeared to be on what extent ‘the cuts’ had caused or contributed to all this.
Credit the bloke… he flat out said it was nothing to do with it.
Frustrated, she went on to whine that ‘he could surely see why she would ask that?’.
Yes, love, I think all of us by now are well aware of the reasons.
Though some seem blind to their consequences.
Okay, Jim, it’s good to know that you approve of Davis displaying a favorable bias towards his guest. What other forms of BBC bias earn your approval?
Dandy – please stop spouting rubbish. “He gave Farage the oportunity to distance UKIP from the BNP” – any intelligent BBC licence-payer knows that UKIP and the BNP are chalk-and-cheese. What Davis was deliberately trying to do – was link UKIP and BNP. He had no cause whatsoever to bring BNP into the interview.
It was an attempted smear of UKIP and Farage. Farage would have been entitled to smack Davis one in his smirking face.
I never rated Davis much anyway, But his Friday interview marked him even lower. I now rate him a s a slippery little creep.
Whom I am forced to pay for.
Jim – can you please confirm that you’re not a paedophile.
What you don’t seem to understand, or don’t want to understand, is that people remember the question, not the answer.
It’s a common BBC trick.
Jim – yes I did hear it. And here’s my post you missed from the earlier thread:
Actually, Jim, when Davis raised it Farage sounded like he was about to explode – forget the words he used (‘preposterous’ one of them?) – but managed to steer Davis away. And anyway, why should Farage need an opportunity to put clear blue water between UKIP and the BNP? There is no sense, that I’m aware of, that the UKIP has any whiff of racism about it except in the eyes of the Left who will close down any debate on mass immigration – which brings me back to Davis and the BBC….as I said, they’ve got previous, and loads of it.
This was an opportunity to expose another example of the increasingly fascist thinking amongst some of our public servants who penalise decent, law-abiding citizens simply because they do not conform sufficiently with their PC world view, and it’s a worrying and dangerous trend.
Unsurprisingly, the opportunity was declined.
‘…gave Farage good opportunity to make his case”
Except for the bit where Labour high command needed defending, and pronto.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/9700543/UKIPs-Nigel-Farage-very-upset-and-very-angry-over-Rotherham-fostering-row.html
“hit out strongly at the Labour party, despite Today host Evan Davis commenting that the decision was made by “officials” at the council rather than elected representatives.”
So clearly, ‘we’ should stress here… except for the murky bit.
Nice to see the BBC acting to place distance between employees’ actions and those at the top who they may feel they are serving. Don’t recall them being quite as keen in distinction when NI was in the spotlight.
Who will rid us of this troublesome harpie?
To my ears the BBC were getting very keen to ensure ‘the facts’ are here, clarified, to suit, semantically and less than credibly, when they can be pretty vague elsewhere… when it suits.
So this ‘did too, did not’ playground lark is to now be a feature of your debate?
[sigh]
“Rotten boroughs like Rotherham are poisoning British politics”
By Robert Colvile.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/robertcolvile/100191312/?
Made the silly mistake of switching on Radio 4 a little earlier than 07:00 this morning, to catch the weather forecast and “news”.
I caught the tail end of Living World, and was not surprised, even at that late juncture, to catch the inevitable references to CO2 and climate change. One Ray Woods ( a very earnest botanist type chap) was explaining to a spellbound James Brickell about how the pores (or stomata) in bramble leaves have had to adapt to the increased CO 2 in the atmosphere. He failed to mention, however, that there was far more CO2 in the atmosphere throughout history, than there is now, and that adaptation in plants (or anything else, for that matter) doesn’t happen in a few years. The poor brambles are, apparently, going to have to experience far more CO2 in the future, due to climate change. Again, he forgot to mention the fact that the climate has always been changing, and wasn’t a new phenomena to the poor brambles.
Mr. Brickell hung on his every word, and said “wow – I didn’t know any of this” or words to that effect.
Save the brambles, I say, and educate the botanists and BBC people, who should know better…
and i thought the only religion looked upon favourably by the bbc was the religion of peace
I say throw them into the brambles and let them feel the pain of global warming first hand.
When I hear bramble bush I always think of this.
THE BRAMBLE BUSH
From the film “The Dirty Dozen” (1967)
(Frank De Vol / Mack David)
Trini Lopez – 1967
The bramble bush is lovely, it fills you with delight
The flowers on the bramble bush are all so pink and white
But if you reach to pluck one, as sure as you are born
The bramble bush will stick you with it’s prickly thorn
And the pretty girl is like a bramble bush
Yes, a pretty girl will thrill you very much
Oh, a pretty girl is like a bramble bush
But you’ll get stuck if you should touch
The girl I fell in love with was such a lovely sight
So beautiful to gaze upon, so soft and pink and white
And as I reached to kiss her, beneath the summer skies
I was so much in love, I didn’t realise
That a pretty girl is like a bramble bush
Yes, a pretty girl will thrill you very much
Oh, a pretty girl is like a bramble bush
But you’ll get stuck if you should touch
The summer soon was over and autumn chilled the sky
The flowers on the bramble bush began to fade and die
And with the faded flowers, my true love travelled on
And I can feel the thorns now that my lover has gone
But the pretty girl, yes, is like a bramble bush
Yes, a pretty girl will thrill you very much
Oh, the pretty girl is like a bramble bush
But you’ll get stuck if you should touch
Oh, the bramble bush
Yes, the bramble bush
Oh, the bramble bush
Yes, the bramble bush
Don’t feel sorry for the bramble bush because ‘it will stick you with it’s prickly thorn.’
Love is teasing, sure, Love is pleasing
Love is a pleasure when first it’s new
But as Love grows older – it grows much colder
And fades away like the morning dew.
Marianne Faithful did a good version years ago, with the Chieftains I think. Begorrah.
The funny thing is that high production greenhouse growers actually pump extra CO2 into the greenhouses to increase plant and food production.
http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-077.htm
So this “oh so dangerous” gas if reduced would cause a reduction in plant growth.
The thing is this “greenhouse” gas does not work in the same way when in a greenhouse, it does nothing to the temperature, it merely provides additional food for photosynthesis.
Anyone with half an education in the sciences would know that CO2 is NOT a pollutant. The problem is that the arts graduates have commandeered the global thingy and bastardised it to suit their own nefarious purposes.
That is why Professor David Bellamy is no longer invited to comment.
The BBC wants the children to think that carbon dioxide poisons the plants.
If there is more CO2 around now, it could be nature’s way of coping with population growth. CO2 stimulates the growth of food plants, after all.
In fact if CO2 levels fail to rise swiftly enough millions could die, particularly in the fast-breeding third world.
Warmism – a collective suicide cult.
Brambles…like all plants will just love a bit more CO2.
The ‘pores’ or stomata vary in size dependent on CO2 availability and will take what they need…and they’ll enjoy a bit of extra in what is a CO2 starved world…..counter-intuitive but true!
Meanwhile in a greenhouse near you……
“Not only is it important to prevent CO2 depletion, but enrichment to levels much greater than atmospheric levels is known to boost plant growth by over 40%. The level of enrichment and the timing of enrichment, since all methods of CO2 enrichment have a cost involved. Obviously since plants only require, take up and use CO2 when photosynthesizing in light, enrichment only needs to occur when the lights are on or during day light hours. Enrichment at night is pointless since the extra CO2 won’t be taken up by the plants and will just accumulate. Secondly, enrichment levels need to be high enough to replace the CO2 used by the plants and to increase the levels of CO2 in the environment to a level where it will accelerate photosynthesis and therefore plant growth. Levels of 800 – 1800 ppm have proven to be optimal for the majority of crops grown under protected cultivation and having CO2 monitoring equipment then becomes important to make sure this level is reached and maintained.”
Also a bit of observational science about CO2.
The CO2 greenhouse effect is weakest at the poles and non-existent in the polar winter. As well as the fact that the Arctic has far more heat input than the land locked Antarctic region, due to the jet stream, even though Antarctica has 7 percent more direct solar irradiance input, due to the Earth being closer to the sun in January.
There was a large increase in cloud cover over the Arctic this summer.
Reflected solar radiation in the Arctic in July 2012 was considerably higher than July 2011 according to the CERES instrument on the Modis satellites.
So the above information indicates that there was an increase in the Arctic albedo not the assumed decrease in albedo causing the warming.
This means that the warming of this years Arctic summer was caused by clouds trapping heat, not by a decrease in albedo and you also need the sun to shine on CO2 to warm up, which would be strongest in Antarctica not the Arctic.
This is in line with the past records and predictions of a future cooling due to the calculations for the length of the Solar Cycle and the science of Cosmoclimatology.
‘So the above information indicates that there was an increase in the Arctic albedo not the assumed decrease in albedo causing the warming.’
The assumed decrease in Arctic albedo being one of the positive feedbacks built into their climate models, and one reason their predicted temperature rises have been exaggerated and proved wrong.
Tricky Dicky is still at it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2009/copenhagen/8386319.stm
Point of order: that’s from 2009.
Tsk
Alan… got it one:)
Shame the weekend shift seemed to be getting short versions of same yesterday as a consequence.
Sadly, the sun has made an appearance and those leaves won’t get raked on their own.
Speaking of which, it will be interesting if the Flokkers will see this as an opportunity to dive out of the sun to strafe some stragglers while it’s safe?
http://cdn4.spong.com/artwork/s/n/snoopyvsth204069l/_-Snoopy-vs-the-Red-Baron-PSP-_.jpg
“Spinning out of sight..” Apt:)
No sooner out there but it started tippin’ down.
I may be a rain god.
But it was worth it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/9700384/Quiet-please-says-news-presenter-John-Humphrys.html
‘The man who cancelled his long-standing membership’
Guessing uniquely funded, no alternative Jon does nae do irony much?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9701577/3250-fee-for-disastrous-Newsnight-Lord-McAlpine-story.html
Not sure, but guessing the BBC may soon ‘rebrand’ the term ‘fee’ as it seems to be playing badly in any direction they take it.
In other news, £3k? Isn’t that Helen Boaden’s lawyer’s proof-reader’s hairdresser’s dog walker’s weekly taxi claim?
In other idle afternoon hands’ news…
‘A BBC inquiry has already fund …’
Freudian… or is it?
‘Lord McAlpine has greed a £185,000 libel settlement with the BBC…
Hardly fair, but when dealing with the BBC and hush money, that word must have been top of mind.
Speaking of which…
‘The bureau’s new editor Rachel Oldroyd confirmed that the arrangement was for the money to be paid directly to the BIJ. So far it has not received it.’
No worries love… a screw up like this you can expect £6500 at least soon. Even a pension you didn’t ask for.
A documentary called You’ve Been Trumped will be screened on the BBC for the second time next week. It’s about Donald Trump’s golf course in Scotland. I haven’t seen the programme, but from this page I’d say that it probably isn’t very balanced: http://www.youvebeentrumped.com/youvebeentrumped.com/TAKE_ACTION.html
‘THE 1% v OUR NATURAL WORLD’ kind of hints at bias IMHO…
Jeff
This probably would be better in the preceding thread.
Just got this email from Uncle Ernie’s ‘Niece’:
‘Hundreds of homes flooded, Environment Agency says’
Awful. Truly. And as I look at the Wye a lot closer to my window than I’d like, trust me.
Thing is…. the rather quaint respect for the source and possible inaccuracy.
This is flooding of the UK here. Monitored by a multi-million quango. And we’re in ‘they say’ territory in headlines still?
Yet, in a war zone not noted for its fog clearance at best of times, how come many ‘reports’, often based on a bloke telling a bloke who faxed a bloke who… decided the heck with watertight just this once today… do not seem to have such up front context laid out?
Just askin’
C4 – “Two people are killed and over 800 homes are flooded as heavy rain and gusts of wind continue to hit parts of the UK.”
Telegraph – “Weather: More than 800 homes flooded as heavy rain and high winds batter Britain”
Still askin’
Maybe some of those high-integrity fact-checkers on the ME desk can help?
http://bbcwatch.org/2012/11/22/bbcs-jon-donnison-ceasefire-holds/
Of course, JD didn’t actually conceal anything factual or use ‘sources’ when that headline was created; he simply ignored what he didn’t like.
As to what the BBC ‘says’ or ‘says someone says’, it may be best to check further if when they say it their lips are moving.
Just watched this:
An animated journey through the Earth’s climate history – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2009/copenhagen/8386319.stm
Interesting that the BBC presents the hockey stick graph as incontrovertible scientific fact rather than as a hugely controversial theory…
Jeff
it’s actually completely discredited Jeff
but don’t let the bbc let that get in the way of peddling fanaticism tarted up as “science”
“Saudi scientist says Jews are pigs and monkeys….confirmed by Gaza peer review….UKIP in denial……the science is settled….delete those emails….grab those kids….see you at CP lodge…”
£3,250 fee for disastrous Newsnight Lord McAlpine story – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9701577/3250-fee-for-disastrous-Newsnight-Lord-McAlpine-story.html
You know the old saying….show me your friends and I’ll tell you who you are……….applies also to outfits like the BBC.
How about this?
Meeting your next-door immigrant in the EU
By Rob Cameron BBC News, Prague
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20428114
Oh supported by the European Union….Phares actually is Slovo 21.
Friendly folk. Internationalists.
But what do we find as after dinner chat.
Example…linked from Slovo 21 website.
“”Demonstrate outside Colnbrook”
Demonstration in London (GB)
organised by No Borders London
Get the drift!
or,
Fight the Players! Fight the Game! Make Capitalism History!”
Demonstration in Berlin (D)
organised by Antifaschistische Linke Berlin
Sounds like fun, doesn’t it.
Our money (taxes) paying for dinners for the comrades written up in disingenuous tones by our licence fee state Broadcaster!
Makes you laugh (or weep)
I was looking over a forum I like to visit for science and technology story’s and spotted these two threads on the main page and thought they may give people an insight into how the other side look at the BBC. (for other side see “loony Left Nut Jobs”)
And
I have to say I couldn’t get more than halfway down the first page of both without having to stop reading as I could feel the blood pressure rising and I’ve only just replaced this monitor.
The links are there, they just don’t seem to want to show up.
Here they are again.
BBC NEWS caught lying again. – http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread901987/pg1
Palestine Defended on The BBC (a rare moment) – http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread902159/pg1
abovetopsecret is full of utter whackjobs
it is good for a laugh
robbie williams used to post there about ufo’s under an alias
free range lunatic asylum
Agreed. The beeb’s style is far more subtle – occasional mentions of the truth, but the overall narrative tinged with distortions.
If it was as blatant as abovetopsecret it wouldn’t work.
Your right, that’s one of the reasons why the people that posted the stuff I linked to find a home there, that place is so full of anti Israel whack jobs it’s beyond belief.
I just go there because you can find the odd nugget of gold amongst the mountains of turds.
“COMING SOON: ASSISTED SUICIDE COMEDY SERIES FROM BBC THREE”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/11/25/coming-soon-assisted-suicide-comedy?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BigHollywood+%28Big+Hollywood%29
Any chance it could have a starring role for Prickstocke ? And for me, perchance, as “Guest Assister to Mr Prickstocke” ?
“UKIP foster carers banned: could conservative evangelicals be next?”
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/ukip-foster-carers-banned-could.html
(Or climate change sceptics?)
These are the people the Beeb is blaming for the defeat of the woman bishop measure in synod. Somebody said: ‘Why should you let the conservative evangelicals hold you back’, at some point on R4 Sunday this morning. I expect them to borrow the Democrat buzz-phrase ‘Christian Taliban’ any day now. The joke is:
“Church statistician Peter Brierley says that 40% of Church of England attendees currently go to evangelical churches – up from 26% in 1989.
He also notes that of the estimated 175 churches with a Sunday attendance of over 350, 83% are evangelical.According to the Ven. Norman Russell, Archdeacon of Berkshire, these churches also typically attract an unusually high proportion of men. The results were drawn from 300 churches in the Church of England who were contacted by researchers. Of the 142 that provided information, 38% of congregations were aged under 30; over 425 women were part of the staff team or working for a para-church organization and attending the church.”
http://www.anglican-mainstream.net/2012/07/24/conservative-evangelicals-on-the-rise-in-the-church-of-england-2/
The chiefs are all trendy-wendy bien pensants but the Indians want something else. For Beeboids, of course, no doubt including Dandy, there’s no room on this planet for anything except a straight, down the line feminist agenda (unless it involves Islam, of course, then such an attitude would be racist).
LOL
I heard the whole Radio 4 “religion” programme this morning. It kicked off with the presenter saying “Is the credibility of the Church of England toast ?”
The whole theme was that a handful of Neanderthals were blocking “progress”.
A more balanced view would be – yes, there are very strong arguments for having women bishops. But many CofEcongregants feel this is a worrying move, being pushed too fast, and the progressives are not allowing enough latitude of worship to those who disagree with the change.
There is a compromise position somewhere – but it has not yet been found. And it really is important for the CofE to find the compromise – even if it takes another couple of years. The progressive – nay gay – clergy may be all for change, but they are just one part of the Synod vote.
But that is a “balanced” view. Don’t expect balance from the BBC.
INBBC’s MICHAEL WOOD: a classic case of ‘pathological tenderness’?
Wood’s phoney TV ‘Story of India’series, (INBBC 4 tonight.)
In the previous episode, Wood extols e.g. the Islamic Mughal Empire (e.g. last week’s Episode 5), while censoring out the considerable violence of jihad conquest.
However, in contrast in tonight’s Episode 6, Wood gets stuck into India’s “struggle for independence from British rule” (Radio Times).
So for Woods, the Islamic Mughal Empire was pretty wonderful for India, but the British Empire wasn’t.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007xwdc
An alternative view of Gandhi (by historian Andrew Roberts) to that of Wood:
“GANDHI WITHOUT THE BLINDERS: ANDREW ROBERTS”
http://www.ruthfullyyours.com/2011/03/28/gandhi-without-the-blinders-andrew-roberts/
That term, ‘PATHOLOGICAL TENDERNESS’ seems to fit Wood like a glove:-
“Pathological Tenderness — the affinity for one’s enemies over one’s own people.”
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/korol/121027
Michael should have stayed with the Trojan War and Alexander the Great.
Those were worth watching…even bought the DVDs.
The India stuff is very problematical…but hey, look who commissioned it!
At least Indians will be relieved to know that the BBC sponsored historian has confirmed that India exists. That’s more than the BBC did for us poor English. We only exist ‘in our diversity’.
Nice double whammy on the 6:15 News tonight. First up, a piece celebrating the so-called ‘anti-stalking’ legislation.But wait…. where was Universal Shami and the rest to point out that legislation which requires no independent evidence of wrongdoing and where the key issue is whether or not the alleged victim ‘feels’ threatened may not be a great leap forward for civil liberty?
Even if the usual suspects were in hiding – very likely – surely there must be some lawyers out there ready to give the other side of the story?
Just to ram home the humbuggery though, North West Tonight straight afterwards ran an piece on the investigation into grooming in Rochdale… illustrated with pictures of ladies of the night touting for business.
See? Did you get the subtle hint? The victims in Rochdale were all slags, init?
Or, to put it another way, women never lie about stalking but teenage victims of gang rape were obviously asking for it, probably going round all uncovered and such.
A more perfect example of the left’s humbuggery would be hard to imagine.
” obviously asking for it”
I’ve said it before:
If only those victims had dressed appropriately ( Burqa’d from head to toe in black tent) they wouldn’t have tempted those poor poor wretched Asian men into being complete &%*ts then would they.
BBC promotes Denmark as the country that Britain should follow in press regulation:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20466987
All so predictable. Norway, Sweden and Denmark are always the social democratic models that the Guardian/BBC think Britain should try and emulate in every respect.
…well we’re certainly following their Muslim raping indigenous locals stats….and the covering it up.
Let’s also follow Denmark re: windy power, eh, BBC ?
just listened to ISIHAC and even this show has a go at the tories,eric pickles,michael gove,etc.
The show was a must hear but i might stop if its going the same way as other BBC so called comedy shows.
A shame.
Agreed, it was as if the comments had to be shoe-horned/forced in. If this is the way ahead I shall also stop listening. Shame, it was such a good show and Jack Dee is making a decent fist of being chairman.
As the BBC are so keen to present Islam as an acceptable religion, I do hope they show this clip from the Shi ite version of I am a celebrity.
Coming to a town near you real soon!
Oh that vibrant diverse enrichment.
As with all these abhorrent practices, they are already here:
http://lifethelove.wordpress.com/2008/09/25/british-muslim-avoids-jail-for-child-cruelty-in-ashura/
Complete with Dhimmified verbal diarrhoea from the judge.
http://thebodyoftruth.wordpress.com/2012/11/02/british-muslim-brutally-murders-a-7-year-old-child-because-he-could-not-recite-the-koran/
yep, you are correct, it’s here!
Cardiff Trial, oh the enrichment!
Dhimmi? Oh dear, in my naivety, I once had to ask Dez what’s a dhimmi?
Still waiting for an answer.
No apologies offered to anyone for restating that one.
Bloody shite :-O
Blimey, can’t recall the BBC headlining this one!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2238172/British-secondary-school-teacher-unmasked-convicted-murderer.html
If they link to it Dez will provide us with the links from his dedicated team.
“Rotherham, Hislop, Common Purpose”
By James Delingpole.
(inc video clip).
[Excerpt]:-
“Perhaps the least surprising aspect of the Rotherham childcare story is that Car Crash Commissar and Child Catcher in Chief Joyce Thacker was a member of Common Purpose.
“The secretive Fabian organisation has been getting quite a bit of media attention, lately, thanks to a bravura investigation conducted by the Daily Mail.”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100191270/?
UKIP.
Through gritted teeth, ‘The Independent’, which is about as pro-E.U as are BBC and ‘The Guardian’, has this:-
“Editorial: Ukip’s rise in popularity”
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/editorials/editorial-ukips-rise-in-popularity-8348924.html
By the way, isn’t ‘The Independent’ wrong here in saying this:-
“The decision of Rotherham social services to remove children from a foster family, apparently because they deemed the parents’ membership of the Eurosceptic party incompatible with fostering children from elsewhere in Europe…”
Rather, the Labour Council political commissars of Rotherham, who don’t do excuses, used the disqualification of foster parents political pretext of ‘non-advocacy of multiculturalism’ as sufficient.
That is the real scandal isnt it?
If you fail to believe in and actively promote the required multiculti theology as peddled by the priests of this perverted cult you are no longer considered valid or normal. This is how political persecution begins, these people are truly evil in intent and action. Its not about what party you support at all really is it? The narrative is being created that if you fail to actively support their ideology you are not a fit or valid person in the eyes of the state machine.
Does anybody else on this site remember the ramblings of Atlas Shrugged? At the time I thought there might be a nugget of truth in them – seems there was rather more than I thought.
I do!
“‘We want our foster children back.’
The couple at the centre of the Ukip fostering row spoke yesterday of their desire to have the three children returned to them.”
(inc video).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/9702212/We-want-our-foster-children-back.html
“Did you get the subtle hint? The victims in Rochdale were all slags, init?
Or, to put it another way, women never lie about stalking but teenage victims of gang rape were obviously asking for it, probably going round all uncovered and such“.
The BBC have persistently played up the ‘deprived backgrounds’ and the “vulnerability” of the abused girls, thuis smearing the girls as “underclass gwhom the BBC have for years been mockign as stupid, drunken , fat, slags and “chavs”.
By demonising the girls they hope to reassure ‘tidy’ workign clas and middle class parents that their daughters have nothing to fear from Asian young men who may chat them up!
Just contrast this with the far far more sympathetic treament of black families whose sons have been victims of gun crime, even though these boys are every bit as much part of the neglected, underclass as the northern town female victims. The BBC never fails to mention the hopes of the dead boys to become footballers, Olympians, doctors or (strangely popular, graphic designers) nor , when a rare victim is found from a semi-respectable family, does the BBC not fail to big that fact up (Saint Doreen Lawrence being the prime example). Has any effort been made by them to find at least one comparable family among the Northern victims? No.
Stephen Lawrence, the Risen Christ.
According to the BBC
Certainly a young innocent taken from family and this world before his time, to be acknowledged and mourned as such, as one would, or should, any other such… if you get to hear about it.
But true, the level of obsession by certain institutionally ‘ist types for reasons beyond sympathy for the victim was noticeable in comparison to others that did not enjoy their ‘concern’.
It is getting hard to rationalise the selectivity some show in the stories and causes of victims of crime, and especially how equally investigations into perpetrators seem to also get accorded variable treatment and coverage.
From commission to omission to plain edit suite narrative shaping, it would appear the BBC is institutionally racist and needs to be held to account on this.
One has to presume that, also, falls under ‘unique’.
Did an Uncle Bup and got up early to listen to “Today”, before the rest of us got in to get annoyed.
Turned off about 40 mins in…could not bear it.
1. Catalonians vote for Independence-come on Celtic up there…Alex Salmond surely is with you all.
2. Floods-bloody Tories won`t let insurance cover the coming problems caused by global condensation…see-markets don`t work…come to BBC Insurance Services and get a quote.
3. UKIP might be racist, maybe not-but they`ll drag the Tories down and into a scrap, so let`s see how many disgruntled Tories we can get to tell us of their hopes of an “electoral pact”.
There you are-three traditional red flags hoisted early by Sarah and Jim…you have been warned.
Oh, aren`t the Stones rebellious after all these years…and why Will Hutton and Owen Jones want Leveson max…
See-saved you three hours!
As for Margaret Moran/Ernest Saunders…Dennis MacShane and the EuroStar Shuttle gravy trains…Harman and Savile links via P.I.E( nothing directly, but let`s tease that one out a little eh?)?…well, nothing to see here folks about such like…”s`not for t`likes of us” .
Brave Sir Robin….that`s our BBC before the boy gets sent out to Costa!
Savile and Newsnightgate seems to be all forgotten, let’s talk about ” waaycism ” in football ( groan ) the BBC’s favourite subject.
I expect the bBC do not like the UKIP affair, because it has the potential to raise the profile of ‘Common Purpose’ to the public’s attention.
The linkage being, Rotherham – girl rape and UKIP with social services; Leverson with advisor’s being founders of ‘Common Purpose’. If this little incendiary bomb takes off, even the bBC whitwash hose may be too small to put it out.
Guest Who
The photograph that the media always uses of Stephen Lawrence is cropped, the full complete photo shows him doing a Black Power clenched fist hand gesture.
This puts Mr Lawrence into an entirely different light. I wonder why the BBC never used it, Hmm.
majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/betrayal_lawrence_and_the_english_working_class
majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/betrayal_lawrence_and_the_english_working_class
just before the cherry vultures jump in
there are some very nasty pieces of work posting on that site
especially don’t like jews it would seem
that’s where I got off the bus,I’m afraid
250 Flood Warnings! Gosh that’s a big number…..I wonder what the heck it means? Must have something to do with all this global climate we hear so much about. I did hear some local tell an intrepid BBC reporter that they had never known their street flooded before – well, not since the 1960s. Never mind, we’ve plenty of space to build affordable housing elsewhere in the countryside. I know because the BBC tells me so. When we think we are overcrowded the BBC leaps in to tell us differently. Now we are worried about the insurance. We all like that kind of big windfall. So come on Government, flood us with money! Afterall, it just falls from the skies.
‘I wonder what the heck it means?’
If you live in my ‘hood.. F-all.
It is no more than an expensive backside covering exercise that now, by misuse in its primary role, has not only no function, but a negative one.
Last night we got an email and in complement urgent text telling us to head for the hills and take our goods and chattels with us.
Thing is, we get the same thing, and have done for a few years, about 3 times each year.
First and second time we did as told… and looked stupid.
Now we ignore them.
As I write, the football pitch next to the Wye 1/2 a mile away is again under some water.
In several years of asking I have been able to get zero sensible advice on levels or projections or precautions from the EA or council.
Local pols like standing in their wellies holding sandbags, and lazy media like pictures of grannies dangling from a Royal winch.
I prefer to prevent problems than whinge about them and how I can’t get insured.
This house has never been flooded in 600 years.
My concern is upstream defences sending volumes down river, blocked rains caused by council pensions taking priority over services, and the new 500 ‘affordable’ houses being concreted over several hundred acres of high ground farmland to accommodate residents at home all day flushing loos & washing their G-Reg untaxed souped up Saxos before heading to the benefits office.
I know what’s unprecedented. Shame the national disgrace doesn’t, or doesn’t want any others to.
“This house has never been flooded in 600 years.”
Careful. You’ve given a hostage to fortune. If it’s flooded that proves manmade global warming. Surely you know the upstream defences would have nothing to do with it? I thought you were aware of the rules of the game.
Last night the BBC reported that ‘over 800 homes have been flooded’ (10pm News). I set to wondering how do they reach that figure. Is it when people find that their carpets have got wet they think ‘I must ring the BBC and tell them I am flooded’ and then the BBC adds the numbers up?
And why isn’t Hull flooded like it was three or four years ago in spite of it being wetter? Could the flooding have been to do with the advice from the Environment Agency not to clear ditches to enable wildlife to thrive no longer been applied? Now the water can now flow away into the Humber and the risk of flooding is removed.
Global warming, it’s the tory cutz !
The Rotherham anti-UKIP case. You might expect it would be hard to find anyone who supported the council on this case? Far from it – Nicky Campbell’s backroom Beeboids can dig up a whole bunch of PC-minded listeners to mull this one over. So it becomes mad tower of Babel time until the righteous mob wander off message when Nicky quickly hands back to the professional PC’ers. Come on, cut the poor social workers some slack, I’m sure they had no agenda on this this….it’s just the cuts.
Any clues as to why, having had to pay the tv tax, all of the bBC radio channels appear to finish around 17.00 on Freeview? I would prefer the choice to listen to some of the older comedies on R4 extra on an evening. Typing of older comedies, why is G.O.L.D. a subscription service when it appears to mainly consists of bBC shows, i.e. already paid for by the tv tax? Maybe I should just get out more……
They don’t disappear at 5 o’clock for me, feargal – they’re on a permanent loop all day and all night. You’re getting them from Ch. 700 upwards, I take it ?