Been away most of the week and just getting back into swing so here is a Friday Open Thread that is on time! Over to you, gentle reader.
FRIDAY 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… - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:28
Weekend 21st December 2024
Indeed. I’ve seen few NK documentaries down the years. In a few of them, I’ve seen clips and interviews with…
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
The standard reply to fascists like Self should be, if mass immigration and multi-culturalism is so good, why do all the white middle-class propogandists of these policies refuse to live amongst the newcomers or send their children to schools where ethnic minorities are in the majority? Instead they live in their expensive, exclusive London enclaves, believing they can avoid the problems of mass immigration.
Like BBC favourite Billy Bragg moving to hideously white Dorset do you mean, from whence he can safely lecture the rest of us on ‘celebrating diversity’?
Will Self lives in an area of South London with a high proportion of Immigrants. So your; “standard reply” is utterly pathetic. Some surprise huh?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2148792/Author-Will-Self-family-flee-lives-roofs-1-million-houses-street-collapse.html
Ghetto?
The other side of the street is a 1960’s housing estate in the middle of Lambeth.
Perhaps, you know, when Will Self says he enjoys living in a multi-ethnic London he’s actually telling the truth.
Shock horror!
Have you ever considered that were Will Self to lose his next big book advance, undercut by a cheaper Pole or Pakistani who wrote similar ‘satirical, grotesque, and fantastical’ novels and was similarly ‘concerned with the politics of urbanity’ then Will Self’s attitude to mass immigration might be just a tad revised? God forbid the small yet liberal-minded audience for Will’s literature alter their outlook on life and turn to look for something more conservative in their reading matter. And even as a fantastical, satircal and grotesque exercise let’s not imagine some time in the not too far off future Mr Self’s vibrant new neighbours taking sudden and vehment objection to something he had considered Satirical, grotesque or fantastical in his latest work.
I think Will should put his money where his mouth is go and do a bit of gay marriage campaigning round the Tower Hamlets mosques.
But I think it is more complicated than that. As a life long east London resident, I spent 20 years living on an estate in Hackney. There were million pound houses (or whatever they were worth then) at the end of the road. Did this nearby affluence engender a feeling of ‘togetherness,’ did the rich and poor mix? No, they lived totally separate lives despite of their physical proximity. Saying that there’s a housing estate on the other side of the street is hardly evidence of a massive gesture of social solidarity from Will Self. Most of the conservation areas of Hackney, Islington etc. tend to border housing estates. The people who live in these enclaves tend to live very much apart from there poorer neighbours. That’s one of the saddest things about modern London, I find.
Dez knows this, he is just pretending he is ignorant.
Like all narcissists the only thing that matters to him is his feelings – in his case his hatred of people who draw attention to realities which contradict his feelings.
‘….he is just pretending he is ignorant.’
I think we need some proof.
‘Will Self lives in an area of South London with a high proportion of Immigrants.’
Is there any other kind?
I wonder if his kids go to the local comp? Or maybe they car share with local MP Diane Abbott’s little boy to a private school?
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/im-a-diehard-leftie-but-my-son-is-going-to-private-school-6898981.html
Oh.
Dez is correct about Will Self’s residential situation. The BBC once paid their darling to write about just that, and he turned in an essay about how only right-thinking white people like himself can save the blacks from being left behind. To his credit, he did admit that he needed to try harder to socialize with his neighbors of color, as those with darker skin were otherwise unable to elevate themselves in society.
Just suffered the extreme pain of listening to Evan Davies – the BBC’s favourite gay radio presenter – boring us to death with his second programme of ‘insights’ into selling biscuits in LIBERIA!!
They sent this prat 4,000 miles to West Africa to walk around the market asking the price of BISCUITS. He comes out with gems like: ” it ain’t half hot here” and fantastic insights like: “life is really tough here”. This little jaunt has probably cost £200,000 for Davies, the sound recorder , a producer and a couple of P.A.s to fly around Africa, for what???
They COULD have sent Davies to Brixton market, or better still to the African market in Ridley Road, Hackney – where you can buy cows feet, muzzles and udders – in a stinking mess of rotting food and the most unwholesome conditions. But that woiuld mean asking REAL questions, like what are 500,000 Africans doing living in central London. That question will never be asked. So off to Liberia with you! Gins sling anyone??
no not Tower Hamlets …… Copenhagen
“If you are a jew in Copenhagen, it is wise to not show that publicly. On the street there is a great risk of harassment, says Israel’s ambassador – “We advise Israelis who comes to visit the synagogue to not wear their skullcap before they are inside. They should not wear it on the street — not even in areas that are considered ‘safe’?,” says Ambassador Arthur Avnon, who also discourages wearing visible Stars of David and speaking Hebrew in public spaces – The Mosaic Religious Community advises its young members to think twice before deciding whether to wear a necklace with a Star of David on it.”
i wonder what the view of “open” homosexual couples is in that wonderful city you know … just for being there … not for staging a gay marriage protest or anything like that. EH!
YEAH! … damn those Cof E churches eh! … wanting to be all, politely and quietly conservative …
oops! while talking about churches, and those damn rampant “homophobic” vicars eh!
Denmark – “‘Youths’ Muslim-dominated area
“criminals have turned against the Holy Cross Church on Kapelvej in the heart of Nørrebro, a few hundred meters from Blågårds Plads – notified the verger that the church was in their territory and therefore has to pay protection money”
IS …
Will Self flying over there as we speak to condone this abhorrent behaviour as unacceptable? … as racist?
Panorama be rushing out a special next Monday
Did any one of that sad excuse for a audience on QT
even mention the Muslim penchant for violence, threat, murder against gay people? never mind changing the perfectly acceptable civil partnership to a marriage? … making this biased IN favour of gay people
“Next week, Question Time will be broadcast from the East London Mosque. Our guests will be Peter Tatchell, Ben Bradshaw, Sandy Toksvig, Chris Bryant, Matthew Paris, and a man driving a crane.”
i m just sick and tired … of the continuous nitpicking over a genuinely nothing issue for an even tinier number of people who may or may not, at some time in the future consider a possible erm … “marriage”.
WHERE ARE YOUR PRIORITIES? ladies and gentlemen., of the pink persuasion
you absolute cowards, gay bashing or even lynching is coming back to a community near you, SOON … you re the next box after jews to get ticked, doesn t matter to them whether you re “married” or not.
A small minded and petty, hissy fit attitude to genuine old brit members, of the clergy and their congregations is the least of your worries … believe me
if it’s such a “nothing issue”, why get so frustrated about it? And why do you think that people who are in favour of full marriage equality can’t also be interested in other political issues at the same time, whether matters of particular concern to gay people or not?
it garners undue and unwarranted time and dramatic over exposure, by media like the bbc.
infering that anyone who disagrees with it, holds a differing opinion is somehow a bigot
Holding a different opinion doesn’t make you a bigot.
Dismissing other people’s wishes for a change in the law as a “hissy fit”, on the other hand…
So next step after gay marriage is what, Scott – any ideas? I suspect the teaching of gay sex in schools but hey, what the hell, why should we have a ‘hissy fit’ about it?
Why are you imagining gay sex being taught in schools?
Do you think about it often?
I’m not looking forward to the practical…
Answer the question, Scotty boy, you know where I’m coming from on this one. Or if you’d like me to put it another way, would you back such a campaign?
And childish suggestions about gay sex fantasies don’t come as a surprise from someone whose website shows an unhealthy obsession with childrens TV and teenage menstruation.
A unhealthy obsession with teenage menstruation? What a bizarre world it must be inside your head.
‘if it’s such a “nothing issue”, why get so frustrated about it?’
If this is such a nothing blog why do you keep posting on it?
Or you could try answering the question and engaging with a topic. It does take a little more brainpower, though.
Irony alert.
RICKETS ON THE RISE
The Today programme had a classic piece of P.C. self censorship regarding the 25% rise in the incidence of rickets in the UK, caused by vitamin D deficiency.
The presenter asked ‘why’ it was on the increase – and the medical expert explained that it was due to low levels of sunlight in winter, and people ‘covering-up’ their skin. There was a strained few minutes where the presenter and the medic both tiptoed around the obvious and well reported truth – that dark skinned immigrants are not adapated to synthesise vitamin D in the weak sunshine of 56 degrees North. In addition, Muslim women rarely go outside, are forced to cover their bodies in heavy clothing – including face veils – and hence they are never exposed to the sun at all.
Of course that could NOT be mentioned – so the ‘answer’ is for £millions to be spent on providing everyone in the country with ‘free’ vitamin D from the doctor. The idea that we might educate immigrants to change their behaviour, or eat more oily fish was anathema. As was the idea that maybe transporting thousands of people from tropical Africa to freezing Glasgow – or Hackney is not such a good idea.
It is just amazing to listen to Sara Montague tying herself in knots to AVOID saying the word ‘immigrant’.
Listening to this PC millionairess empathising with the ‘poor’ every morning reminds me increasingly of Marie Antoinette and ‘let them eat cake’.: “Lack of sunlight – why can’t they all take a break in Bermuda – like me?”
Re: Rickets
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20710028
‘The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) says up to 25% of UK children are vitamin D deficient, leading to a rise in rickets cases.’
‘In the BBC’s Scrubbing Up column, the college’s Prof Mitch Blair called for concerted action to tackle the problem.’
‘Half of the UK’s white population, and up to 90% of the black and Asian people in the country are thought to be affected by vitamin D deficiency.’
Vitamin ‘D’ Wiki: ‘Vitamin D is a group of fat-soluble secosteroids responsible for intestinal absorption of calcium and phosphate. In humans, vitamin D is unique because it can be ingested as cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) or ergocalciferol (vitamin D2) and because the body can also synthesize it (from cholesterol) when sun exposure is adequate (hence its nickname, the “sunshine vitamin”).’
So have the BBC given up on the idea that Global Warming is going to help dark skinned people more at home in our northern climes?
Absolutely correct. Note similar avoidance of relevant science when discussing the increase of Type2 Diabetes.
Accepting the fact that much of the increased rate of Tpye2 is due to under-exercised overweight indigenous folk, the genetics that tell us Asians from the Indian sub continent are predisposed to this condition are ignored by the BBC. Hard work, frugal eating and hard lives keep the incidence down in the home countries, but once in the west it exerts itself. We have been paying for this years in the Midlands particularly Birmingham.
Any programme that discusses diabetes avoids genetics, I suppose it’s racist.
Not to mention congenital problems caused by first cousin marriages. According to Dalrymple, if the results are disastrous enough to produce a deformed or mentally handicapped child, the woman is always blamed, breezy Islamic divorce laws are brought into operation and another bride is shipped in from the subcontinent.
We’re all racists for mentioning that more than half of ‘British’ Muslims marry first-cousins, and their children have more than ten times the rate of genetic defects than babies in normal British families.
See, e.g. http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/episode-guide/series-68/episode-1
It’s known as FLK syndrome in the NHS/Social services…
“Before Bradford, 57 percent of British Pakistanis were married to their first cousins by the turn of the twenty-first century. If, like most of the experts, you were insouciant about that number and assumed the seductive charms of assimilation would soon work their magic, well, in 1970 the percentage was half that. Back then there were a lot fewer cousins to marry.”
Mark Steyn, After America
‘So have the BBC given up on the idea that Global Warming is going to help dark skinned people more at home in our northern climes?’
Luvvit.
And in the 17th Century about 400 people died from Rickets every year in London alone.
I suppose that must of been because of immigration as well…
Really, the level of ignorance on this blog endlessly surpasses any previous expectations.
Possibly one of the top ten dumbest places on the internet.
Hmmm, the old moral equivalence tactic (yawwwwwn). Hang on, this one works – yes, our civilised country is regressing to a more primitive time ……
Blimey, Dez, yet another own goal.
It really, really is phenomenal that someone can make a comparison to life in the 17th century as a positive argument and hit ‘Post Comment’ without questioning how incredibly stupid a point it is to make.
“Possibly one of the top ten dumbest places on the internet” 😀
well … don t let the door hit you on the way out
On the BBC 6pm News the only reason advanced for the return of rickets was that folks have been scared into covering up by the publicity for skin cancer – so we are left with the impression that the victims are people who have cut out their 2 weeks sun worship on the Costas
Perhaps a solution might be to offer them a one way, first class ticket with lots of spending money to go leave our bleak and miserable country and GO HOME!
I enjoyed the comedy slot on Toady this morning.
Sadiq Khan held himself and Ed Miliband up as two examples of the way immigration has benefited the UK.
I laughed out loud as I drove to work.
Sadiq kept his composure, as would any good comedian, but Jim Naughtie didn’t realise it was a joke and just agreed with him.
Sidi said ‘hands up, we got it wrong in immigration’ as though he was admitting he had stolen a sweetie from a friend. The implications of ‘getting it wrong’ are huge. The cost to the NHS, Education, Police, etc for 2 million more people is enormous and that means the UK’s population – not just the tax payer but anyone needing to go into hospital, have a child in education or are the victim of a crime. Even if there were 2 million more British white middle class there would be a cost to these services, bring in the poor of the world and these costs magnify.
It’s not two million, by 2035 it will be 14.5 million – a 25% increase on the 1997 population. I ranted about this in another post
sorry It’s all too much – I wanted to rant on Panorama (see post below) and didn’t want to be distracted too much be going off and searching for figures.
Here’s a thought:
Hydraulic fracking causes small tremors which may be difficult to measure on the Richter scale. Instead we should use the Tori scale.
Tori scale: I had never heard of that one, so looked it up. Wish I could understand it LOL.
Alternatively we could just ask Michael Mann to draw us a funny graph.
Yes, it would be based on his carefully researched data which shows there have been no tremors or earthquakes prior to fracking and therefore these are earthquakes on an unprecedented scale, and can only therefore be caused by fracking.
Which would please the BBC – they seem to like that kind of stuff.
I watched the Panorama special last night on homelessness. What a surprise there were no non-British born people chosen for this programme.
I do feel sorry for the people in the programme and homeless people anywhere – especially when it is -4 degrees outside. But in every case there appeared to be more to the story than the Panorama team was telling.
Were the cameras with several families for several days -just waiting for the eviction notice to arrive – because it managed to be there for 2 families.
The investment banker – was supposed to have just flown in from the States – on a ticket paid for by a charity. He was supposed to have been in the country for 2 days – so why was it said that he ‘went every night’ to a soup station. He could only have been there the night before.
The family with 6 children – where the only explanation of the fact that they didn’t go to school was given by one of the children – that Mum hadn’t registered him or something’. We were not told how much Dad earned as a late night bus driver but I remember Tom Uttley in the DT writing that he was surprised how well paid it was when his wife got a job doing that. And why did Dad have to go to the launderette by himself if Mum wasn’t working? And why couldn’t he get one or two of the children to help?
The family whose house was being repossessed had borrowed nearly £500,000 on a 100% loan ten years ago. Living in Redbridge where property prices have increased over that time they didn’t seem to have any equity in the house. Yes the husband had had a business that he said a turnover of £1 million, but we were not told his income.’
And the lady with cancer didn’t seem to have any equity in her house either. Her husband had left 3 years previously – we were not told how she had managed to pay the mortgage during that time. If she had moved sooner into a flat maybe she would not have been in difficulties. I think they showed her daughter taking her mum for chemo in a Range Rover – hello BBC.
This was a programme about people who had financial difficulties and who a change of circumstances which they had not been able to manage. But of course the BBC made it into a programme about the nasty banks and nasty Tory government. Hardly fair but when is the BBC fair?
I live in the South West. Here, to qualify for social housing, you have to be an alcoholic, drug addict, drug dealer or mentally disturbed to qualify for social housing. All the rest must rent privately.
18 000, mostly working families, are on waiting lists. This thanks to Liebore. A local Church Charity sold a land holding at below market rate to provide new homes for local families. Yep, all the property developers were there building crap homes for second home buyers and pensioners from other areas of the country at exorbitant prices that none of the local people could afford. Many of the local factories have closed due to the recession and many young local families are forced to move into metro areas to find work.
‘But in every case there appeared to be more to the story than the Panorama team was telling…’
You highlight an interesting aspect of BBC current affairs presentation. Increasingly the BBC picks up the story of a supposed victim and plays advocate for the defence – or from the Government’s point of view – the prosecution.
More and more often the story the BBC documentary maker wants to put over is emphasised over a desire to put two sides of an issue.
Also I detect something of a feedback effect in the supposed victims. Being by now well versed in the sort of victim culture portrayed in the liberal media joe public is savvy enough to know their lines and their moves. Therefore a middleclass person easily slips into the role of single mother or food bank frequenter. Afterall this is what minority culture is all about. Competing special interest groups all raising their voices in a desperate cry for more – for their group.
I posted this in another thread:
“…Awful programme. There was an agenda there, in your face, and I wonder what the truth was behind the “evictions” of some of these people? The large family of thickos with six kids looked to me like the archetypal “problem” family with a history of being a pain in the arse – you don’t get evicted for cracking a window. Funny we never saw the respective council’s side of the story…”
The bBBC didn’t tell us, of course, but I guessed that an underlying cause was that some of those defaulting on their mortgages had been paying interest-only and thus had no equity in the bank’s house.
This is the next financial time-bomb awaiting this country, when the millions speculating in the housing market using interest-only loans realise they have no way of paying back the capital. But the banks will get the blame.
Another planet? Cameron giving speech about banking and Europe, first question given to bBC, their question, ‘what about Clegg’s statement on drugs. FFS.
Well, that’s the BBC for you: they’re the people who think crack should be legal but watching TV without a license shouldn’t be.
What a great idea!
A crack license!
I don’t know if it qualifies as an open goal, and for some a banning may already have rigged the match a bit, but the field is open…
Nick Robinson @bbcnickrobinson
What will be big political themes/questions of the year ahead? Just mulling for a radio/online piece. Your thoughts gratefully received
And just when Newsnight’s reputation for educating and informing professionally and with integrity was at an all-time high…
http://order-order.com/2012/12/14/newsnight-parent-governor-actually-labour-activist/
Newsnight Parent Governor Actually Labour Activist
Remember that ‘educational consultant’ who turned out to be from an anti-academy school?
Some here might….
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/9674889.stm
Noting…
”independent educational consultant Roger Titcombe’?:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7381927.stm
‘…campaigner Roger Titcombe, a retired head teacher who used to run one of the schools the academy could replace.’ Of the the group ‘Our Schools Are Not For Sale (OSANFS)’?.
Noting also the irony of Ms. McKean’s career path too.
Another Transparency fail at Snoozenight:
http://order-order.com/2012/12/14/newsnight-parent-governor-actually-labour-activist/
That’s aside from the more general bias of a debate on education featuring three suppliers and one customer, who turns out to be a part-time member in good standing of Educrats R Us anyway.
Heh. I got gazumped!
Repetition for effect:)
I learned that from the BBC.
Rule #1 on full display here: If the BBC doesn’t label them, you know where they’re coming from.
Away from the prison, Robert explains how Monica got pregnant. “She was raped in prison. She had the baby by one of the guards.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20586070
The article assumes that the woman in question had in fact been raped, even though her alleged attacker has not been convicted of rape.
The BBC also seem to think that the alleged attacker should have been tried. Why do they think that a jury would find a prison officer guilty of rape beyond reasonable doubt based on the word of a criminal serving 20 years? A half decent lawyer would tear that case to shreds!
I’m also not quite sure why the BBC threw the following in, except to imply that the USA imprisons too many people:
‘ The United States is the most incarcerated nation on earth – more than two million inmates are behind bars in federal and state prisons, and local jails.’
Jeff
If they do incarcerate too many people, then why not execute a few?
Most of the “progressive” policies promoted by those smart young men and women at the Beeb can actually sound quite good if you forget about the almost certain moonscape type desolation which will result.
But here’s one that even sounds bonkers from the get go’
See “Barking at the Sun” at:
http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/
Even the quiz programme Mastermind is not immune to the bBBC’s leftie bias. A question asked just now: “Which controversial Conservative MP joined the Ulster Unionists in 1974?”
General Knowledge also included the obligatory weekly question about Islam. I’m sure it’s not just me who notices this.
I gave up watching Mastermind many years ago when a coloured contestant was asked questions that a 10 year old could answer in the general knowledge section.
So Powell wasn’t controversial? It’s not a perjorative term.
Surely you don’t find the “rivers of blood” speech controversial? Considering the riots, sharia violence, knifings, tube bombing, grooming, no-go areas for whites, etc Powell was clearly right. It would be controversial to insist otherwise.
Here’s my prediction:
In the next 40 years something bad will happen.
Looking forward to you telling me in 2053 how clearly right I was.
The controversy in Powell’s speech clearly was about integration or lack of it, whereas your Nostradamus-lite prediction could include an asteroid strike, or even a Klingon invasion.
Jim – Out of interest, do you ever agree with any of the comments in this forum? And when you do, do you say ‘I think you’ve got the BBC bang to rights there’? Or do you just post messages when you think you can pick holes in people’s arguments? 🙂
Jeff
I agree with some things said here and say so when I do. With David P on Evan Davis for instance.
Jim, you did not agree with me entirely on Davis. We agreed that he was rude and did a poor job, and that if any apology was to be made it should not be to Osborne but to the audience for failing them.
However, you also claimed that he was biased in favor of UKIP, and had no complaint about it. I strongly disagreed with that.
My apologies, Jim, I’ve obviously mixed the poor interview with Osborne and the equally poor one with Farage. We agreed on one but not the other.
Jim inevitably defends the BBC – you know, the treasured and trusted state broadcaster which lied through its teeth about its secret meeting with ‘climate change’ activists.
“June 2012 marks the centenary of the birth of John Enoch Powell, one of Britain’s most colourful and controversial politicians. ” – not the BBC but the The J. Enoch Powell Literary Trust.
http://enochpowell.info/index.html
Quite. Controversial is not a biased term in relation to Powell.
Tony Blair could be described as controversial. Some call him a war-monger, some a saint, some call him a liar, some call him a murderer, some call him a hero.
Do you think if Mastermind ever asked a question about Blair they would preface it with “controversial”?
e.g. “Which controversial politician punished the UK population by getting rid of the EU rebate and scrapping all sensible immigration laws?”
Powell was controversial, but what leading politician isn’t? So that begs the question: Why refer to him as ‘controversial’? It’s redundantly redundant, unless the implication is ‘This guy’s a bit dubious’…
“On 20 April 1968 he addressed a meeting of the West Midlands Conservative Political Centre, of which he was president – his speech was circulated in advance by the West Midlands CPC and not the party Central Office – and delivered an attack on unchecked immigration from the Commonwealth to the United Kingdom. He used a classical allusion to Virgil, declaring, ‘Like the Roman, I seem to see “the river Tiber foaming with much blood”.’ Though the script, typed by his wife, had the quotation in Latin, he delivered it in English and it was soon dubbed the ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech. It was immediately denounced in the media and by party leaders: Heath sacked him from the shadow Cabinet. However, there were marches by workers in support of his stance, and opinion polls showed majority support for his views. It was a speech that both made him and destroyed him. Overnight, he became a national figure and a political pariah. He never held office again but spent the rest of his life as one of the nation’s most controversial politicians.” – From Enoch at 100 by Lord Norton, English author, academic and Conservative peer.
You clearly disagree with Powell’s views. So do I. But unlike the BBC, neither of us are legally obliged not to express our own political views…
Jeff
BBC high-cost greenie propaganda against the development of shale gas now extends from its ‘science/environment’ pages, to its ‘business pages’ and now to its ‘entertainment’ pages.
The propaganda hand of Hampstead Beeboid Harrabin is everywhere.
This must be a Harrabin piece because the fifth word is his favourite, ‘controvesial’.
Of course, Harrabin does not describe the film here as ‘controversial’ because it opposes shale gas development!
Ludicrous daily bias from Hampstead Harrabin and co.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-20724777
“AL GORE TO HOLLYWOOD: MAKE MORE GREEN-THEMED MOVIES”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/12/13/al-gore-hollywood-more-green
So for Beeboids, such as Hampstead Harrabin, there is not
shale gas, but only ‘controversial shale gas’, which he opposes.
“On the stupid Lefty Luddites, green ideologues and Guardianista pillocks opposing our glorious shale gas revolution…”
By James Delingpole.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100194309/?
BBC-NUJ claims to be enthusiastic in reporting ‘EVOLUTION’, except when:-
“Debate on Islam and evolution has to be called off after ‘torrent of opposition from Muslim students'”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/12/debate-on-islam-and-evolution-has-to-be-called-off-after-torrent-of-opposition-from-muslim-students.html
‘A majority of Americans still believes that gun ownership is guaranteed by the Constitution.’ – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20738025
Er, perhaps that’s because it is!
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Jeff
‘A majority of Americans still believes that gun ownership is guaranteed by the Constitution.’ – In what way is stating this fact evidence of bias?
The Wiki, when read in full, outlines in some detail the debate around how the Second Amendment can be interpreted. These cases clearly show that not all Americans do believe that that gun ownership is guaranteed by the Constitution.
It gives the impression that those Americans may wrong in their interpretation of the Constitution, when even the Supreme Court has said that the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to own a gun (meaning that, to all effects and purposes, the Constitution does guarantee that right – even if you believe that the Supreme Court erred in its judgement).
Hardly when the sentence preceding your quote is : “But support for stricter legislation has fallen dramatically in recent years, along with a gradual decline in the overall level of gun crime.”
The impression it gives is that Obama and others arguing for tougher gun controls are in the minority.
“It gives the impression that those Americans may [be] wrong in their interpretation of the Constitution”
[boggle] No it doesn’t. You are drifting off into fantasy land again.
‘The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.’
How can the above conceivably be interpreted as not meaning that US citizens have the right to carry a gun without drifting into the fantasy land to which you refer?
Jeff
No, using the word “believe” separates it from facts on the ground. It’s like saying the majority of Americans believe in angels and Creationism. The word itself has specific connotations, and was chosen deliberately for that reason. It becomes opinion rather than fact.
The BBC and belief… sets them apart from the real world.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/dec/18/newsnight-inquiry-bbc-helen-boaden?INTCMP=SRCH
‘BBC sources say a BBC email to BBC staff implies BBC director expects to avoid BBC censure from ex-BBC staff, BBC-commissioned BBC internal report’
In other ‘news’, the Pope went to Mass and a bear headed Woodards (without Bernstein)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2240121/Jimmy-Savile-report-BBC-refuses-release-evidence.html
BBC’s War on Britain’s Roads: even more fake than we feared – http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/dec/13/war-britains-roads-fake
Criticism from an unlikely source!
Jeff
Very disturbing manipulation. Hope Boris takes thisi up with the BBC and demands an explaination and an apology.
I wonder if Stuart Hughes was involved?
‘I wonder if Stuart Hughes was involved?’
Or his ‘wrong kind of complaint on the line’ manager, who opted for a ‘private word’ vs. actually dealing with a formal complaint in public?
I know nothing from the 8.15 item from Justin Webb on Today this morning.
I do know that kids died in a terrible massacre at a primary school in Connecticut…but not how many and (not yet) why.
Fair enough…too early to speculate, so until it is “seemly to do so”…let the BBC give you
a) The blinder played by Obama-he emoted just right, and the BBC were impressed.
b) Gun control-Justin did ask his American guest whether it was right to bring this up again..and so early on , as the tragedy unfolds.
But of course-there is NEVER a “bad and tasteless” to bring up gun control…oh, except for when Operation Fast and Furious going wrong might prevent President Emoter Obama from getting re-elected….
Our BBC…predictable as ever.
“But of course-there is NEVER a “bad and tasteless” to bring up gun control…”
Wow. The bodies are hardly cold and already you are trying to score political points.
Try and get a sense of proportion for God’s sake.
Dez – I take if you’re aware of the irony of your comment, ie scoring a point by advising others not to score points?
Unlike O’Blimey who has the audacity to fake concern in his recent response to the trajedy. Too harsh? No, count the seconds in his first ’emotional’ pause. 10 seconds on the dot. You can almost see his lips moving as he’s counting.
BBC sees this speach as being just dreamy of course.
And the bodies were not even cold ….
Exactly pah its all just so obviously insincere and fake its beyond me how any one falls for it. Oh course Barry is just a poor copy of our very own Tony Blair who in turn was trying to be a UK version of Bill Clinton the first politician to work out that media loves this stuff.
Surely this is more responding to those trying to score political points?
Precisely. Instead of simply giving us the news the BBC’s prime function is now to voice shouts for something must be done!
A foreign country descends into civil war. The issues and competing groups are complex and outcomes unpredictable. The chances of meddling and thereby worsening the situation are obvious to even the most distant of observers. The BBC: Something must be done.
A natural disaster occurs. Even to those not au fait with every ramification of the scientific modelling the gut feeling is that this was indeed a natural event. The BBC: Something must be done.
A tragic event in another foreign country. Few details required before : The BBC: Something must be done.
Agenda or inevitable media self-importance? Whichever you believe I reckon Something must be done: About the BBC.
What on earth have you guys done to this website? Scrolling down this one thread has taken an hour and has been like trying to run a marathon with feet tied together.
Damn pity since there are fine comments here. I suppose there’s a bright side: I couldn’t help but notice them since I was obliged to spend a minute on each one while the scroller went on go-slow strike.
Now the text is failing to appear as I type, so I better get out of here.
More to the point: can these bugs be fixed?
I thought it was just my PC being slow with big threads.
I had this problem too, but solved it by using Google Chrome. I can’t believe the difference – it’s now very fast.
we too have switched to Google Chrome – took a bit of getting used to but worth it for the speed. I switched because Internet Explorer kept bringing up a security box that needed a double click every time I searched.
Oo, the site is back (one hopes – no preview I see, so still ‘different’)… for me at least, as mysteriously as it vanished.
I had presumed it was my old Mac.
I’m now down to Opera and Safari as neither Firefox or Chrome are supported any more on my OS version.
Spoke too soon.
Just checked the actually site URL and (for me at least), it is still in the ether.
Only this one thread ticking over, like Battlestar Galactica.
In the last few weeks Labour have been running a campaign against pay-day loans.
Eastenders is filmed 12 weeks in advance. How convenient that an episode this week touched (briefly) on pay-day loans.
How is this convenience achieved do you think? Do the writers pop down Labour HQ for some hints of what will be current in 12 weeks time or does a gauliter drop in with ‘script suggestions’?
Oh, and on the same episode there was 2 second cut to a character with a ‘say no to cuts’ poster in the background in full view.
Another coincidence no doubt?
i had the misfortune to hear a little of “any answers” as i drove back.
it appears that immigrant ghettos are (surprise surprise)
… all our fault? … WE have to recognise? WE are the problem? …. says our caller, who incidently didn t even listen to “any questions” 😀 … but mysteriously al bbc have lots of spare time to give him a platform …
hmmm … i wonder why?
20 mins
http://www.bbc.co.uk/i/b01p9f5m/
scottjimdez very active across the site today not to mention perky (and a little pinky).
Christmas bonus time at the Beeb, boys, or just looking forward to spending your triple-paid overtime dosh dahn the old multicultural boozer tonight?
Still keeping quiet on the old ‘climate change’ embarrassment, though, I see – good discipline, stick to the script you’ve been given and you can look forward to next year’s bonus.
Jeremy Bowen says Al Beeb not biased
http://daphneanson.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/the-bbc-not-biased-against-israel.html
Bowen also said that the Muslim Brotherhood is “moderate, conservative and non-violent”, and has a personal grudge against Israel. No reason to trust him on anything in the region
The era of what the BBC or its staff ‘saying’ having any bearing on anything other than as a vocal outburst of what rattles around their echo bubble chamber is coming to an end.
As to trust, the BBC will need a rebranding there soon, along with the police force of the UK.
On SKY I heard that due to the ‘investigations’ on the Mitchellgate affair they may need ‘to work to restore public trust’… again.
Like the BBC, fool us once, guys… fool us once…
If things do fall apart for the police version, especially the Police Union given 24/7 unchecked gobbing access to the airwaves by the BBC, I wonder if that apology-demanding Flokker will be out on his perch or decide to stay in the bunker a wee while longer?
For Beeboid/Hampstead Harrabin propagandists:
Shale gas = controversial; wind farms = not controversial.
First sentence of BBC report, which it were about shale gas would include the compulsory Harrabin epithet, ‘controversial’.
“The developer behind a” [ controversial] “planned offshore wind farm on the south coast of England says it will look to see how it can ‘mitigate’ the concerns of campaigners.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20726813
“BBC spent £40,000 per week on US flights over seven months”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9744590/BBC-spent-40000-per-week-on-US-flights-over-seven-months.html
Any excuse to get to the land of the free.
Quite what those already doing there are for, I am not sure.
Or what those who arrive in reverse lend lease add.
Except to frequent flier miles.
(ps: Preview & cookie recognition back – the reboot seems to be restoring the system)
“The shale gas revolution: green taxes will mean sky-high prices for dirt-cheap energy”
By Christopher Booker, ‘Sunday Telegraph’:-
[Opening excerpt]:-
“A telling moment on Thursday’s ‘Today’ programme neatly exposed the schizophrenic mess the Government is getting into over one of the most far-reaching issues of our time. The excitement of the day was the laborious statement whereby Ed Davey, our Energy Secretary, announced that he has been dragged very reluctantly into giving the go-ahead to ‘fracking’ for shale gas.
“It is hilarious how the shale gas revolution has pulled the rug from beneath all that green ideology which has been driving government policy to the point where we seem doomed to watch our energy bills soar through the roof – that is, if we can see at all after our lights have gone out.
“The green obsessives who have hijacked our energy policy hate the very idea of shale gas.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9746864/The-shale-gas-revolution-green-taxes-will-mean-sky-high-prices-for-dirt-cheap-energy.html
bBBC ‘news’ in Northwest England has spent most of their time today advertising the CD to give money to whingeing Scousers in their campaign for
justicerevenge over Hillsborough.Another good use of our TV tax.