This item by Mark Easton has got the attention of quite a few readers I can see. This is quite a neat dissection of it by a B-BBC reader…
“An article on the BBC website today by Mark Easton entitled ‘Why have the white British left London?’. Few of the glaringly obvious reasons are discussed; rather, it is all presented as something normal and natural. In fact, it’s largely down to those cheeky Cockney types having bettered themselves and retired to Southend and Clacton. Or as Easton summarises it: “It is a story of aspiration. It is a story of success.”
Occasionally, though, the truth seeps through and has to be managed. He states: “Some white British may have moved because their neighbourhood has been culturally transformed, the tea rooms and restaurants replaced by takeaway chicken shops and halal supermarkets serving the new arrivals.” Interesting use of the phrase ‘culturally transformed’ – or what other people might call ethnic cleansing. Ethnic cleansing does not just mean men turning up with guns to force people out of the homes; it also means cultural transformation of neighbourhoods, as well as economic transformation as governments bring in low paid workers from overseas to make the place not viable for the locals.
Also notice how he refers to halal supermarkets for the new arrivals. What can he mean? Are Hindus from India, Catholics from Poland, Buddhists from Sri Lanka etc all clamouring for halal supermarkets? What Easton is basically saying is that when it comes to replacing a population, one type of migrant is preferred to all others. Just setting your expectations, you see!”
Think it might have been more apt had he signed off Allahu Akhbar, me old china.
It appears the bBC have scored something of an own goal with this attempt of a whitewash of an article. The top rec reply reads:
26. ravenmorpheus2k
7 Hours ago
Why have the white British left London?
—
They have left because they’ve been pushed out by migrants.
A few weeks ago we heard of some Islamic “men” castigating a man for not being Muslim, asking if he was gay, and telling him to “get out, this is a Muslim area”.
Their exact words were played on the radio so there was no doubt over it.
Time for the govt. to do something about such migrants.
‘It appears the bBC have scored something of an own goal with this attempt of a pcwash’
Complemented by a panic closing just after lunch, thus ensuring a mere fraction of the UK licence-fee paying public get to offer their opinion.
So in trying to look like they are going into the tricky areas, they screw up, get burned and look even dumber than the box of rocks they already are known to be.
But I’m still pondering the vision of all those remaining in the ‘Smoke supping a Polish beer or three together, if not, by Mr. Easton’s headline definition: ‘White British’.
One for the ‘when in hole, best not to dig further’ files, they have now, having asked a question and been given one that got a top rating from the UK public…. modded it away.
Unique, Bandicoot… and not in a good way.
What house rule can that possibly have broken, assuming Pounce has given us the full post?
Of course, nobody can point this out as further comments are now verboten. What a coincidence.
Not.
Pretty much as I recall it.
And, as you say, the memory hole has kicked in…. by sheer coincidence.
Here’s the second highest, who seems aware of how the BBC operate:
1. Spindoctor
11 HOURS AGO
This is probably going to be Moderated off the Boards.
It is my opinion having lived in an area where a large influx of non white British arrived (Asian Pakistani and Bangladeshi) that the White people began to feel they were living in a foreign land and left. I know full well the statistics tell me that only 6% of Bradford is of Asian decent but in some areas you hardly see a white face.
That box labelled ‘Pandora’, Mark… how did cracking a peak work out?
‘I know full well the statistics tell me that only 6% of Bradford is of Asian decent but in some areas you hardly see a white face.’
Having once searched for (and found) an off-the-beaten-track curry house in Bradford, I can vouch for that 100%.
Roland,
I didn’t amend that post in anyway. It was a straight cut and paste.
Looks like trying a stealth edit after a closing may not work out quite the way they were hoping, if the cover up gets the coverage it deserves.
BBC asks questions… doesn’t like the answers. Censors all it can. Fails (again). Gets nailed.
Looking forward to the powers that be chez Aunty being called to account for that.
Thanks Pounce. I had thought that was probably the full post, but it’s good to have the confirmation.
If I were “ravenmorpheus2k” I’d be demanding to know which house rule I’d fallen foul of. Presumably the “anything that’s contrary to the Narrative” rule. Of course, even if the post were put back, by that time no-one is reading so objective achieved.
‘even if the post were put back, by that time no-one is reading so objective achieved.’
Such an appeal would simply be added to the ‘we’re sorry we took so long to reply as we’re swamped… but still just about right’ appeal labyrinth.
A month… minimum. And I don’t think they restore anything after a closing. Very Beware of the Leopard.
And just one of the things that make the BBC so unique.
you visit that sad one dimemsional compendium now …. and there are so so many
that have erm “broken house rules” 😀 … now … what could they say (chortle!)
“broken house rules” which if left to the
al bbc are probably “move outta londonistan kaffir”
“Why have the white British left London?’”
It’s called ethic cleansing.
I was ethically cleansed once. Now I have no morals at all.
(I do understand what you mean, I just couldn’t resist it.)
Did you meet many BBC journos while this sordid event took place?
It quite cheered me up to read all the comments pointing out the blindingly obvious. One day the BBC might wake up to the fact that they are living in their own world.
“Why have the white British left London?”
Perhaps they want their children to grow up in the country – one of the many evasive reasons given by middle class hypocrites.
Another way of looking at it is that they want to live in areas where torches and pitchforks are readily available.
V hey coldtitz,
V “groups settle prosper and move on” 😀
V don t know much about islam do you?
V
V
Maybe we should ask Billy Bragg?
So London, and areas like Brick Lane have been ethnically cleansed. Did the Huguenots cleanse Brick Lane of jolly cockneys when they arrived? In turn where they cleansed by the Jews from Easter Europe? And in turn were they cleansed by the Asians?
Not that long ago you could put up a sign for a room let that said no Blacks, No Irish. Imagine, David, being discriminated against just because you were Irish…So did those groups also ethnically cleanse London?
Of course not. London has had waves of immigration and emigration throughout its history. Groups settle, prosper and move on.
I pass a Halal takeaway most nights. I see customers of all colours in it, just as I see customers of all colours in the white owned mail barbers and the black owned female salon. Jewish kosher butchers and restaurants have also been a feature of London. I assume David has never visited Golders Green.
London is a cosmopoltan city and it’s vibrancy is the result.
No bias in the this. Just reality.
But Nazis prison guard, did the Huguenots police East London and attack people for being:
Non_Jewish
Gays
Not dressed correctly
it is female sex organs like you who bander the racist card whenever anybody questions the religious bigots who have taken over London and as we see in the third world enforce their god given right to bully on us all.
In a nutshell people like you are just as much a part of the problem as are the idiots who rape,murder,cut of the bits of little girls, oppress women in the name of allah.
Dear Colditz,
I’m not sure if you are the colditz who feels posters on this site are sad and lonely, as I think they use a small ‘c’. But if you are given the number of posts you make I’m sorry for not offering any succor by keeping the majority of your posts company.
The Huguenots and ‘no blacks, no Irish, no dogs …’ are straw men arguments, as they deal with the past. With respect to the latter if the British were so intolerant then no blacks or Irish would have settled here.
As you go past the Halal takeaway each evening, bear this in mind about the future.
My wife met an elderly couple from Newham a while ago, and as they watched our children play they opened up and confided that they should have left Newham a long-time ago. Things had changed. And not for the better. In particular their neighbours were no longer the same, the ones they’d welcomed and baby-sat for years ago where still there but since there sons had ‘got the religion’ there was no longer any contact, even eye-contact with them. Not only with the sons-who-have-the-religion but also their parents.
The elderly couple can’t move, and at the moment you claim to celebrate the vibrants and enrichers, but we both know when you feel it is ‘just is not quite the same’ you’ll move, and not too an even more vibrant and enriched environment.
Oh colditz, you slippery chap.!
I`m on the “Hodge the Dodge” channel (or thread if you`re being picky!
Any idea what I`m going to say?
Idiot. “Waves of immigration” is the right term for recent immigration – or maybe tsunamis of immigrattion, But there were precious few Huguenot immigrants, and not many Jewish immigrants eg from eastern Europe I remember the East End from the 1950s – it was NOT heavily Jewish. Whereas large parts now are HEAVILY Muslim – and increasing fast..
Tower Hamlets “vibrant” ? – it used to be, but it is now a worse slum than 20 or 30 years ago. And damn-all “diversity” – it has been ethnically cleansed.
Could your recollections be based on the fact that the Jewish population assimilated and were not as easy distinguished from the indigenous population?
I also recall the East End at that time. Jews were always the minority, and as soon as they made enough money they moved out and on.
Definitely the fact that they assimilated and contributed to the society easily made that possible.
In school the Jews COULD be easily distinguished from the general populace, as most worked hard to advance. Considering the poor area that it was, that was not the norm.
Hugenot immigration in 17th century amounted to some 50,000. Jewish immigration late 19th century to 1919 was around 200,000. Muslim population of UK in 2011 census was reported as 2.7 million, some 4.8% of the total population.
Di you see the difference in scale? Do you think colditz will?
Spot the difference?
“There is a vital distinction between the immigration just mentioned [Huguenots, Protestants, Catholics and Calvinists] and that of Hebrew people.
Clannishness, tradition, a sort of historical fear of separation from their co-religionists, their obligation to observe peculiar ritual ordinances, added to the promptings and difficulties which tend to keep men of the same tongue and habits together in a strange land. All these things act as an inducement, almost as a spell, which brings the Jewish immigrants into the already crammed and congested areas of the East End, where their brethren are aggregated and segregated. And the native folk cannot assimilate this element.
The Christian fares as the Canaanite fared. He is expropriated.
In some districts every vestige of comfort had been absolutely wiped out, the foreigners coming in like an army of locusts, eating up the English inhabitants or driving them out.”
Sir William Eden Evans-Gordon M.P.
The Royal Commission on Immigration
“The Alien Immigrant” 1903
Bernard Lewis pointed out that given the choice staying with strict orthodoxy or of availing themselves of the opportunities and conveniences of integrating into wider society in post-emancipation Europe, the majority of the Jews opted for the latter. He was not convinced that Muslims would do the same and there is a lot of evidence that they are consciously refusing to do so. There is also the slight difference between 200000 and a few million.
“Bernard Lewis pointed out…”
Those previous immigrants were fine but these new ones are different.
The exact same argument as Evans-Gordon.
Bernard Lewis is an expert on Islam and Muslim history, much respected in the Muslim world. He is also from a Jewish background: his considered opinion is somewhat more weighty than yours. I suspect you haven’t anything but the most superficial knowledge of the differences between Islam and Judaism which may have led him to this conclusion.
“…his considered opinion is somewhat more weighty than yours”.
Ah lovely, the good old; “argumentum ad verecundiam”.
Anything else to add, other than; “My Dad’s bigger than your Dad”?
yeah
you’re a lefty dickwad
I think it’s a fair bet that he knows a lot more about Islam than you.
If you go into any public library to find a book about 20th century Islamic history you will probably find a few books by him. His reputation as a specialist meant Lee Kwan Yew had him meet him in Singapore to discuss the problem of non-achievement among that state’s Muslims. That you have clearly never heard of him speaks volumes about your depth of knowledge of the subject.
Argumentum ad verecundiam, eh?
You mean like the BBC’s coverage of ‘climate change’?
The difference is Islam. Jews and Christians of various types have often, although not always, found ways of peaceful coexistence leading to integration over time. This cannot be said of Islam.
Your premise is: in the past immigrant communities in London have integrated over time so these Muslim communities will also integrate.
The correct premise is: in the past Muslim communities have shown high resistance to integration and will again in London.
A poor argument and hardly likely to convince those who posted on the BBC Mark Easton article.
Why is it liberals always try to argue by analogy ?
This is not 1903 and things are very different.
That is the reality . Face up to it or hold your peace.
I object to what has been done to my country by ill educated and thoughtless politicians. They had no right to do this.
I remember the London of my childhood. A magical and very safe city.
And you and your like try to tell me it is a better place.. it is “diverse’ and that other meaningless word “enriched”.
Just one thing is enough to put an end to the lies of the present.
Knife and gun crime and the endless deaths.
“Why is it liberals always try to argue by analogy?”
It’s not analogy it’s history. Is it not a good idea to try and learn from that?
“This is not 1903 and things are very different.”
And in 1903 people said the same thing about 1803. Would you rather the Jews had been kicked out?
“I remember the London of my childhood. A magical and very safe city.”
You think you are the same person you were as a child?
Funnily enough I remember the London of my childhood as well, and it was a dirty, grimy place full of half derelict buildings. Dipping a toe in the Thames was likely to result in chemical poisoning. Soho was dark, stank of disinfectant and was absolutely terrifying. Brixton, Notting Hill, Aldgate, were crumbling cesspits filled with cannibalistic Africans. Jews were devious shysters who could never be trusted.
All of this was common knowledge at the time.
Don’t remember? Perhaps you where too engrossed with your bouncy ball to notice?
Maybe it’s not the London of old you are nostalgic for but your childhood?
Jews were devious shysters who could never be trusted?
What a star you are. Exposing the BBC mindset for all to see. Perhaps the Jews also groomed young white girls for sex, hated gays, hated women, hated anyone who didn’t worship Allah.
Oh wait, wrong religion.
Jeez you’re dumb.
Great way to explain away a real rise in crime, dez. Are we pretending nothing has changed on that score?
‘It’s not analogy it’s history. Is it not a good idea to try and learn from that?’
The history is Islam is one of violence, conquest and bloodshed. Or is that the wrong sort of history to learn from?
Leaving aside the relative propensities of Hugenots, Jews and Muslims to integrate into the host population, once again you seem to be ignoring the scale of the modern Muslim immigrant population.
Hugenot immigration in 17th century amounted to some 50,000. Jewish immigration late 19th century to 1919 was around 200,000. Muslim population of UK in 2011 census was reported as 2.7 million, some 4.8% of the total population.
The 40,000 Hugenots as percentage of 7 million English population would be half of 1% (0.005%). The 200,000 Jews pre 1919 would oddly be almost the same percentage. The Muslim percentge is 4.8%.
Do you see the difference in scale?
I always ask the same question. Apart from the Hugenots (Protestant refugees by the way and culturally hardly that distinct) tell me when and from where we can identify the waves of immigrants who the historical revisionists say arrived in this country between the 11th century and the late 19th.
When you have answered that question we can deal with the exact numbers of Hugenot immigrants and the late 19th century rather small scale Jewish and other immigration and compare it with the period 1950 to 2013 with especial reference to the 1997 – 2013 years.
Until then don’t waste our time .
And if you want a one word reason for the whites leaving London and certain other cities. -Schools.
You obviously live a sheltered life and never really talk to people
‘Apart from the Hugenots (Protestant refugees by the way and culturally hardly that distinct) tell me when and from where we can identify the waves of immigrants who the historical revisionists say arrived in this country between the 11th century and the late 19th’
Here’s a few, Germans, Russian and Polish Jews, Indians, French (escaping one of their many revolutions), and blacks who fought for us in the American War of Independence.
If I remember rightly it was about 40,000 Huguenots and 200,000 Jews. The other numbers, assuming the Irish were more or less co-nationals, were comparatively negligible in the scheme of things. Oh, and their sacred texts didn’t tell them not to take non-believers as friends, not to imitate their ways and to convert or subjugate them, by force if necessary.
At the time of the Huguenots arriving the population of the UK would have been around 7 million, and 35 million when the Russian Jews arrived. Not massive numbers but for their times substantial.
And have you read the Bible?
I missed the bit in the New Testament about having two ethical systems: one for one’s fellow believers and one (brutal and discriminatory) for the despised unbeliever whose religions were deprecated by name. 400000 is 0.571% of 7m, as, coincidentally, is 200000 of 35 million.
The estimated 2.5 million immigrants since 1962 would constitute about 4% of the population: the difference, for a population of 62m, is a factor of 7.
sorry – for400000 in percentage breakdown, read 40000
As an afterthought, I doubt if there was much of a differential in birthrates between previous migrants and the indigenous population, as well .
Still noticeable numbers more so when concentrated in areas like the East End. The difference is not numbers but our response to them. A German arriving in London in the 1900s was expected to learn English and fit in, now that’d break some council policy.
And try the Old Testament.
The attitude of both Christians and Jews to the scriptures (that they are the work of man and, to some extent, appropriate to their time) entirely from the Muslim belief that the Koran is the verbatim, immutable word of the almighty, has existed for all time, and is to be applied for all time. The New Testament, of course, modifies and, Christians might say, mollifies the Old Testament message . The difference is numbers: a single concentration in East London differs from a large concentration in a half a dozen cities and smaller, but noticeable ones, elsewhere.
0.57% is substantail?
If you accept goverment figures muslim immigrants alone represent
3% of population most of that having arrived in last 20yrs.
You and comrade colditz can pump that ‘nation of immigrants lie’ all you want,who knows you may even construct a new truth for some. But,for now at least,you cannot reconstruct the first hand experience of millions of white working class men and women who have been forced out.
The 40,000 Hugenots as percentage of 7 million would be half of 1% (0.005%). The 200,000 Jews would oddly be almost the same percentage. The Muslim percentge is 4.8%, that’s proportionately around 960 times as many.
Hugenot immigration in 17th century amounted to some 50,000. Jewish immigration late 19th century to 1919 was around 200,000. Muslim population of UK in 2011 census was reported as 2.7 million, some 4.8% of the total population.
The 40,000 Hugenots as percentage of 7 million English population would be half of 1% (0.005%). The 200,000 Jews pre 1919 would oddly be almost the same percentage. The Muslim percentge is 4.8%.
Do you see the difference in scale?
Oh dear Ralph.,
You failed to read my post. I mentioned the late 19th c immigants from Eastern Europe. The other groups you mention are statistically insignificant.
I take it you agree that between say 1066 and 1830 immigration was negligible ( Hugenots always excepted).
It is an article of faith with a true liberal that this England is a nation of immigrants. But then denying reality is a prime liberal trait.
Sadly they will still be denying reality when London is no longer ethnically English in any meaningfull sense.
And if you don’t think that is a problem for the future then you are living in a bubble of unreality.
i can just imagine the howls of liberal outrage if any third or developing world capital city was taken over by us whites.
So London, and areas like Brick Lane have been ethnically cleansed. Did the Huguenots cleanse Brick Lane of jolly cockneys when they arrived? In turn where they cleansed by the Jews from Easter Europe? And in turn were they cleansed by the Asians?
No they certainly didnt, because the numbers simply werent great enough. Until recent years the indigenous always formed the majority and various newcomers lived alongside and often assimilated.
What we are seeing now is genocide, immigration on a scale where the indigenous are being submerged, out bred and pushed out – the only comparable invasion we have experienced as a nation was the Anglo Saxon driving of the Celtic population back to the West, and that was before Britain as a nation state was formed.
and that was before Britain as a nation state was formed.
Or even England
If I remember rightly, the Huguenots built Brick lane.
OK it was developed by some grandee called Bacon (Sclater) but they were among its earliest occupants.
Don’t forget the Normans.
And they are still in power today.
Just pass any primary school in London. The very definition of ethnic cleansing before your eyes.
Beeboid EASTON can’t honestly answer his question:
“Why have the white British left London?”
He misses the impact of mass immigration into London/Londonistan, musing:-
“Some white British may have moved because their neighbourhood has been culturally transformed, the tea rooms and restaurants replaced by takeaway chicken shops and halal supermarkets serving the new arrivals.”
Hiint for Easton.
One reason?:-
“A Future for Britain Free from Islamization:
An Interview with British Freedom Party Chairman, Paul Weston”
by Jerry Gordon ( 2012).
http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/108985/sec_id/108985
“Unparalleled levels of immigration threaten Britain’s cohesion as a nation.”
(‘Civitas’ pamphlet):-
[Opening extract] –
“Immigration into Britain is now running at a level that is without precedent in our history and which threatens our cohesion as a nation, according to a report from the independent social policy think-tank Civitas.
“In ‘A Nation of Immigrants?’ David Conway takes issue with those who minimise the threat posed by mass immigration by claiming that this is nothing new; that we are a ‘mongrel nation’; and that, in the words of the Commission on Racial Equality, ‘everyone who lives in Britain today is either an immigrant or the descendant of an immigrant’ (pp.2-3). He argues, to the contrary, that from the time England can be considered to have become a nation, immigration has never risen above very low levels and had no serious demographic impact until the last part of the twentieth century. Since 1997, however, Tony Blair’s Labour government has effectively abandoned even the goal of limiting immigration. As a result, by encouraging unending mass immigration as a permanent feature of the political landscape, there may result a disintegration of the bonds that hold together the group of people that constitutes a nation:
‘The country may possibly have already reached a tipping point beyond which it can no longer be said to contain a single nation. Should that point have been reached, then ironically, in the course of Britain having become a nation of immigrants, it would have ceased to be a nation. Once such a point is reached, political disintegration may be predicted to be not long in following’. (p.95)”
http://www.civitas.org.uk/press/prcs58.php
The complete pamphlet,
‘A Nation of Immigrants? A brief demographic history of Britain’
by David Conway,
– is made freely available as an e-book (pdf) by the excellent ‘CIVITAS’ here:-
Click to access ANationOfImmigrants2007.pdf
Commission on Racial Equality, ‘everyone who lives in Britain today is either an immigrant or the descendant of an immigrant’ (pp.2-3).
This is a load of coblers put out by the Liberal elite to justify their enrichment.
Oxford genetic research (Bryan Sykes – Blood of the Isles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Sykes) indicates that quote;The genetic makeup of Britain and Ireland is overwhelmingly what it has been since the Neolithic period and to a very considerable extent since the Mesolithic period, especially in the female line, i.e. those people, who in time would become identified as British Celts (culturally speaking), but who (genetically speaking) should more properly be called Cro-Magnon[citation needed].
Now since these were the first people to settle these lands after the last ice-age it would be difficult to describe them as immigrants. 90% of the indigenous population descend from the original settlers. A skeleton found in the Cheddar caves was dated as being 9000 years old and tests of local people found several descendants of this person.
Four of my friends have lived in London for over 15 years.
All have now left for pastures new, all have said the intimidation they had begun to experience in the last 5 years (from certain religious parts of the community….and no its not the militant Buddhist) had reached a point where they were afraid to leave their houses.
Two still commute in to work, the other 2 have got as far away as possible and moved jobs as well.
Two are White, one is Black and one is Asian (not the BBC definition)…… Not just white flight it seems…
Do any of the white folks at the BBC live in areas where they are in a minority? If they did then the answer would be obvious to them as to why people move. Why would anyone who could move stay where they weren’t wanted for longer than they had to? The BBC should consider the plight of those who for one reason or another can’t move out and have to put up with living in and amongst an alien culture that despises them.
Does Mark Easton and the BBC really believe the rubbish they send out or are they just trying to keep us all calm until its too late for anyone to do anything about it?
Like all bourgeois liberal hypocrites and their quisling lap dogs (i.e. Billy, whiteflight,Brag),they live in the safety of their income gated communities.
I think it’s beyond that. I’m not entirely sure that members of the bien pensant classes are entirely sane people, with both feet on the ground. The French phrase, ‘the autism of the elites’ is beginning to seem more and more appropriate.
Many of them probably do live in areas where they are the ethnic minority, but the differences are these:
1. There is no other dominant ethnic majority, there are many different ethnicities.
2. The area is affluent and most of the immigrants who choose to live in these ethnically mixed areas are the better educated who are keen to assimilate, at least to a fairly substantial degree.
3. They can afford to move away or select a private school when their kids reach secondary age. Until then they simply use their sharp elbows to get their kids into the best local primary school where once again there is no one single dominant foreign ethnic group.
Do you ever get the feeling that you’re living through the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire ?
If you want to know why Britain has collapsed over the last 60 years from the British Empire to a vassal state of islam, African immigrants and Cultural Marxism. Take a look at Deuteronomy 28.
https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/deut/28?lang=eng
Britain will cease to be a white country by 2066, break out the champagne ! Sharia law here we come.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1330734/White-Britons-outnumbered-2066-immigration-continues.html
‘Vibrant’ Tower Hamlets:
“Tower Hamlets children poorest in UK with 42 percent below breadline.”
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tower-hamlets-children-poorest-in-uk-with-42-percent-below-breadline-8502616.html
Are the whites of British society to blame for this?
Should these immigrants (and millions of others) be provided with more money and resources?
Is the policy solution to get even more mass immigration into Britain from Banglasdesh, Pakistan, etc to in an attempt to increase ‘diversity’ and ‘cultural vibrancy’?
If you are a white, non-Muslim person, do you think you should do your civic/religious duty by moving into e.g. Tower Hamlets?
“Why have all the white British left London?
Can I -just this once-play angels advocate?
Was ANYBODY in that fair muliculti dream of harmonies, diverse lifestyles, sex drugs and Jagger wags(BBCtypes basically here)…was ANYBODY..Muslim, kaffir, gay, green, Caledonian or northern?…able to get out from London last night…if that entailed using our biggest funkiest terminus and tube line nexus that is Kings Cross?
Wasn`t it bad enough for poor Arsenal fans heading back to Grantham last night, without having to sleep on the platforms, with a surcharge for a carriage seat facing towards the north?
Luvaduck!
Still-I was lucky enough to be able to watch my telly last night (not that I did…it`s shite!)…but I DO know what was on BBC2 at 9 p.m last night..same time as beggars were turfing matrons from Edinburgh out of their skips(unless prebooked of course!).
Maybe the broadband reception was OK near the tunnels, I don`t know…so could be seen on handhelds, laptops etc…if so they could watch that piece of puff about the joys of the new Kings Cross-quality, passion and excellence…no silvers here mate…only platinums!
Was that Ricky Gervais tribute act of a manager on again…or that Scouse young lady with a voice that could cut glass?
Oh do tell…any jokes about all this on the BBC?…
No doubt the trouble started after 10p.m when the show was over Dez eh?…so no irony, no jokes . Zees iz not FUNNY!
The Railway…BBC2…let`s hope some northerners are now able to catch up with it on iPlayer…which is what it will increasingly be getting used for eh?
Well, THIS white British person left London, and the Former UK, because he didn’t feel British any more, saw very few British around, was fed up with tinted faces and strange languages everywhere, and moved to France, where admittedly the language is strange, but the way of life is far, far more pleasant.
For the benefit of Mr. Easton’s research…
Old goat… Can’t blame you. Envy you in fact.
Britain is an increasingly unrecognisable, so if you’re going to live in a foreign country, it might as well be one of your choice. France seems as good a choice as many. At least they havebthe room to avoid much of the 3rd world ghettoes our cities are becoming.
You do realize how racist that sounds?
You’re right – the colour of people’s faces is, rightly, an irrelevance. Personally, I maintain that there isn’t a single problem of integration of minorities that isn’t soluble given time – except for one: a hostile supremacist, ideology with a built in mechanism to prevent reform.
Fine, but if the minority is large, or not even a minority at all in the region in question, who “integrates” with whom?
And why should the indigenous population calmly accept this?
Fair point. Too bad Easton is avoiding it.
He’s being honest about the way he feels. I feel the same way about my home town of Bradford. I grew up in a true community which has been destroyed by immigration from Pakistan.
If you don’t like the way that “sounds”, tough!
And if you don’t like other people having an opinion on what you say, tough!
DP’s attitude is part of the problem – expecting white people to scrutinise every word and walk on eggs when other races don’t bother.
Old Goat, possibly retired, wants to live amongst people he recognises as being like himself. People generally do. I can’t criticise him for that.
A bit late to this post , but being white , English & an Essexman born & bred , I agree with all the other posts , my 1 & only defence of the BBC is BBC Essex (radio) is not like the rest of the BBC , being in the heart of Essexman Country , no Labour MPs , unless , you include Hodge , really a London borough , where she has her seat , the only other non Tory MP .is Bob Russell in Colchester ! My county is 95% Tory ,in councils & councillors ! BBC Essex managers , realise this & we don`
A bit late to this post , but being white , English & an Essexman born & bred , I agree with all the other posts , my 1 & only defence of the BBC is BBC Essex (radio) is not like the rest of the BBC , being in the heart of Essexman Country , no Labour MPs , unless , you include Hodge , really a London borough , where she has her seat , the only other non Tory MP .is Bob Russell in Colchester ! My county is 95% Tory ,in councils & councillors ! BBC Essex managers , realise this & we don`t get the anti tory bias , that the HQ BBC ,speels out constantly !
What happens in America, we in Europe gets in 10 years time. White Flight, cites going black, California going Hispanic. All due to the 1965 Emanuel Cellar immigration Act which changed the demographics of the U.S.
The eloquent Jared Taylor discusses these changes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpJmb3fOqsI
That article is a masterpiece of obfuscation, evasion and revisionism. It should be taught in classes on textual analysis.
Oh, and – of course – “Elephant in the room? What elephant?”
Never mind the elephant, what room might be a better metaphor
Why is it that blacks and muslims are called ‘vibrant’ ? Why is a white neighbourhood never called ‘vibrant’ ?
David Cameron called India ‘vibrant’ and ‘diverse’. Would he call Iceland ‘vibrant ” ? ‘Vibrant’ seems to be the word of the decade.
Vibrant only applies to those neighbourhoods in which the great majority of the residents came from countries where open sewers and fgm are still the order of the day.
Yes, for BBC-NUJ’s propaganda lexicon –
Words which are IN: ‘vibrant’, ‘diverse’, ‘militant’.
Words which are OUT: ‘traditional, ‘national’, ‘conservative’.
Hate the word. For some reason it always makes me think of a mechanised dildo.
Perhaps someone once said “Violent”, in relation to these areas, and was misheard, hence, “Vibrant” stuck.
This country of ours , when it was old England, that made such waves in the world cannot possibly be vibrant or have ever been vibrant.
The liberal elite has spoken. What fools they are.
Vibrant, that exemplifies bourgeois liberal attitude towards the once working class areas of London.
They see them as some sought of multicultural theme-park, that they can visit for their amusement and gratification.Until it gets dark and then they can retreat to the safety of their bien-pensant enclaves.
Whites living in Africa = Colonisation
Blacks living in Britain = Enrichment.
Whites living in Africa=crime
Blacks living in Britain=punishment
Read Mark Easton’s article and then read the ‘Highest Rated’ comments on ‘Have your say.’ He’s been owned big time on this one. Also, there’s no ‘Editor’s Picks’ to go with this story which is unusual but not surprising given the public reaction.
‘He’s been owned big time on this one.’
Seems to be a trend. But credit him for (initial) bravery in even going there.
He was of course the Editor tasked with or who volunteered to stick his head over the parapet when the Savile was hitting the fan.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20031176
It was probably wise that comments to this one were disabled at the off, as this was his equally unique ‘analysis’ on that one:
‘And so the fact Panorama is able to investigate editorial decisions within the Corporation is seen as evidence of a vital freedom.’
Not once you read the Pollard Report, no.
INBBC, Easton, Bangladesh 1971, and Tower Hamlets today.
“What Happened In Bangladesh”
http://hurryupharry.org/2013/02/20/what-happened-in-bangladesh/
While PM Cameron expresses remorse for Amritsar, 1919, no doubt Bangladesh PM will express her remorse for the far greater crimes of Islamic jihadists in Bangladesh in 1971.
I have seen a comment online that the third largest donor to the Tory Party is Lycamobile, an Indian-run company that sells long distance phone cards.
Now you know why Cameron is wearing out his kneepads crawling in India.
Look on right side chaps;
There are few subjects that unite the British people more than their opposition to mass immigration, thus there are few subjects that will unite the public in their opposition to the BBCthan the organisations continued and blatant pro-immigration propaganda.
Expect to see visitor numbers to this site shoot up as the public looks for places to vent their anger at the BBC.
Not quite a Savile/Homage/Pulled/Newsnight special, but having read the Pollard Report, the thought of who is penning what emails, who is shredding others, and who is currently denying giving who the BBC ‘corridor-nod’ to this latest BBC cluster-fudge (pulled at lunch… killing the top rated comment that answered their question… maybe Madge Hodge’s legals told them to, too?) is too delicious.
The BBC’s credibility as a place of sensible discussion on serious subjects is now dead and buried.
Spot on Bodo, this was the first I’d ever heard of this site. Seems to be quite accurate if the name “Biased BBC” is anything to go by…
Welcome aboard.
As long as you’re not muslim, black, asian, female or homosexual. We don’t like your sort.
Speak for yourself.
You can tell a posters race and sexuality from a pseudonym or an avatar?
that sounds like the qualifications for a bbc job right there
No Dez, just the BBC and its worldview which, as a veteran visitor of this site, you have had plenty of opportunity to understand and see where the majority of the people are coming from.
So, still mulling over your response to 28gate? It’s either one hell of an epistle or you don’t really have much of a defence. But then, debating issues in a less than immature, student-socialist ‘yah boo fascist bigots’ fashion seems to be well beyond your grasp.
Don’t misrpresent the truth. If you read the postings on this board you’d know that there are black, female and homosexual posters on this board. As to Muslims, I’d welcome some discourse here, I engage with plenty on Twitter.
Enoch was right.
There’s got to be some Godwin’s Law equivalent here, surely?
Ray Honeyford truly “a prophet in his own land”
Agree.
He was treated atrociously.
I believe folk here are misunderstanding Mark Easton’s motives.
He has written this article, not because he thinks it’s a true statement, but simply because he CAN!
He is shoving two fingers up to the majority in the UK and shouting ” see what I can do, what are you going to do about it? So fuck the lot of you knuckle scrappers” ( sorry I borrowed that badly spelled phrase from cold tits)
Things will have to change a hell of a lot here before twats like Easton can be held to account.
I am being forced to move house after a Pakistani Moslem bought the house next door. He began building work without planning permission and four neighbours complained to the council two either side and two opposite.
Then it started, I answered the door to two young druggies and was immediately attacked, luckily I wan’t too badly hurt, but having seen this he sent down a meditteranean looking guy who looked like he’d stepped out of the gym. This time the door wasn’t opened and when challenged he wouldn’t answer what he wanted, nor who he was. That’s how they treat women!
The house on the other side a pensioner lives, he was going to be killed, needless to say the Police were invloved before it happened fortunately, but it didn’t stop him having both houses opposite burgaled and their cars vandalised.
He made no secret it was him with threatening phone calls, but clever enough not to give enough evidence for the Police to act.
He had complete details from the council of who had complained their addresses, who & when they had phoned, how long the call lasted and what was said.
The council just laughed and said Oh we broke the data protection act – and that was it! The Data Comissioner said -well because it’s a public body we might just give them some advice !
An injunction was gained to prevent further work, but the council went to their lawyers to find a way around the injuction and said well we weren’t working on the site, we were just observing, begging the question why someone would go to such lengths?
Eventually he failed to get the planning permission he wanted and one bright afternoon three young druggies turned up at the house, and being suspicious I phoned the Police and the neighbour – (by this time both of us have CCTV systems installed). Within a couple of minutes the scroates have gained access and set the house on fire, but just as they are leaving the Police turn up & arrest them. They find on them drugs lighters, and the keys to the house which they claim to have found inside, along with a can of petrol – the only items in the house. – Draw your own conclusions!
No one is interested though, all the public sector is scared to death, an accusation of ‘racism’ can end someones career, there is no help for white people, although the public sector will bend over forwards as well as backwards for ethnics.
This is why people are moving, because ethnics do not & cannot behave in a manner that indigenous British regard as civilised. There’s no chance any mainstream media will carry my story, it’s far too loaded, and they certainly don’t want people knowing the truth!
@thoughtful,
I’m sorry but I find your story to fanciful to believe, however kudos for getting in so many catchphrases.
@Joseph
I’m sorry but I find your comment too supercilious, obnoxious and lacking in substance to believe – however, congrats on epitomising so well a patronising jackass.
@wallygreeninker,
Hilarious that you find my observation that I don’t believe the other poster is lacking in substance, you don’t like my opinion fair enough but your response is comedy gold.
You might also want to check the definition of supercilious as I made no claim in my post to be superior to the initial poster.
As for the rest of your response , I think it would unfair on the donkey your comparing me if I can manage to be supercilious, obnoxious, lacking in substance (my personal fav) and still coming out as the perfect example of a jackass!.
You basically said that in your opinion, the post was a lie and implied that this was, in part shown by the presence of ‘catchphrases’ (pretty insubstantial grounds) and couched your comment in vaguely sneering terms (people who sneer are usually taken to be assuming an attitude of superiority): your follow up comment gives me the impression that you’re right: characterising you as a donkey would be grossly unfair to the creature. I should have used the American term: asshole.
@wallygreeninker,
So your reason for calling me a supercilious, obnoxious and lacking in substance jackass was because you felt I had posted a possibly sneering post.
Now you have decided that as I queried your post I have been elevated from a jackass to asshole!.
Clearly if you have issues with what others have posted it is normally the best approach to debate in a grown up manner why you disagree with them, instead I have been exposed to your rather pathetic school-yard approach to debating which makes you look like the person who most closely fits the definition for jackass or indeed asshole.
Thoughtful posts here quite frequently and is known to be a sensible person: the post below will convince any rational person that the story was truthful. What is it with you ankle biting trolls that you never know when to shut up? Now sod off.
“Thoughtful posts here quite frequently and is known to be a sensible person”
This is a joke right?
I was walking down the street minding my own business when this Muslim guy I’ve never met before punched me in the face. I said what did you do that for? And he said we don’t want you dirty christians in our neighbourhood. So I battered him.
This is a true story. Pounce told me.
As someone of a Pakistani background who ran away from a rather brutal Muslim milieu and became a Christian, Pounce’s experience of Islam is pretty unique in many ways – why don’t you take it up with him: he could fill you in on a few details but I doubt if he would have much patience with your snarkiness. Your propensity for calling people liars sounds like a case of projection, or denial, to me.
Anonymous libel is so easy, isn’t it, dez?
That’s very Sad Joseph. I still have the CCTV footage, and spent ages in court with the other neighbour, and had to give evidence twice in a case of arson with reckless endangerment.
We had special Police emergency panic alarms which apparantly use cellphone technology to avoid lines being cut.
It’s a shock for me because all this is true, whether you find it too much or not, some of the crimes were reported in local news but unfortunately they give address identifiers.
If you find this ‘too fanciful to believe’ then I suggest you’re living in the same rose tinted fantasy world so many liberals like to live in, where even reality is seen as ‘racist’.
Sorry to hear about your problems here Thoughtful – you’re really on the front line of it. There are plenty of journalists who I’m sure would be happy to pick up and go with your story, especially as you have proof.
Have you tried to get it published anywhere.
P.S. Take no notice of idiots like Joseph, he’s just a troll trying to stir things up. As you could see, he has no foundation for his view, other than to express it.
@Teddybear,
You accuse me of being a “troll and trying to stir things up” & “has no foundation for his view”.
Well following your logic you too are a troll who has no foundation in your views?
Pathetic reasoning!
Don’t feed this troll.
Well I don’t suppose we can be hundred percent sure of what anyone says on the site. Couple of things though;
Asian insiders in local councils and the NHShave been reported as leaking confidential information. A classic example is Asian GPs reporting personal details of young girls medical care to their parents.
You might want to google “Windsor mosque riots” for a tale of how some in a local Muslim population used threats and violence to intimidate local opposition, how planning rules were ignored, and how council and police sided with the violent mob.
Instead of digging up some statistics which fit his theory that economic success means leaving an expensive area and moving to where the cost of living is lower, Easton could very simply ask the BBC to do one of those polls they’re so fond of. Come on, BBC, you love your polls, and your claim to have a finger on the pulse of public opinion.
Just ask the public like you do on all those other important topics.
Another thought: if hundreds of thousands of people have left, why is there a housing shortage?
because millions of immigrants have moved in ?
Perhaps the so-called bedroom tax is their way of saying: ‘come on everybody – squeeze up and make room for more.’
As BBC types know only too well, celebrating diversity is best done from a safe distance.
It’s wonderful that children attend schools where so many languages are spoken.
Other peoples children that is.
Other people is what the BBC/liberals think we English are.
How they must hate themselves and their country.
Yep, And don’t forget that the BBC pays for 500 of its most senior staff to have private medical insurance. They’ll all be nicely insulated from any pressures of overcrowding on the NHS.
Self-Loathing middle class liberals are our best useful idiots.
Where do they find the motivation for their self-imposed dhimitude? Why do do many idiots think that way?
Hilarious stuff from you chaps!
BBC puts up an article you don’t agree with, has an HYS which allows all viewpoints, including loads of anti-immigration/multiculturalism pro Mail/Express claptrap – over 2,000 comments and you still complain!
They really can’t win can they?
Or rather they can. The BBC isn’t going away. Most people in this country don’t begrudge paying for it – if they really did, there would be a major campaign of mass civil disobedience a la poll tax, but there isn’t.
It’s worth the licence fee for the quality of the output across loads of different platforms which make much commercial output look quite frankly poor. And we don’t have to sit through 7 minutes of inane commercial messages per 12 minutes of content.
No, the BBC will still be here generations after this blog is a faded memory. Regardless of how frequently you tap on your keyboards in impudent rage.
But I suspect you already know that.
If the Propaganda tax had as much bad publicity as the Poll Tax had, especially if the truth about how the propaganda money is being used….. But of course it was the BBC who led on the protests against the Poll Tax and encouraged the riots. So they know they are safe here as they control the media output in this country.
“But of course it was the BBC who led on the protests against the Poll Tax and encouraged the riots. ”
Any evidence for that Demon?
No?
Wow, you really are that insane. Do you blame the BBC for burning your toast in the morning or just for your incontinence?
Dezional Sozialist. Evidence – yes. Can I be arsed providing it for you? No! F— off you nazi slimeball.
betcha steve collins doesn’t work for the bbc :):);)
The attitude reflects what I said about the Easton article. They do it because they can. Simple as. They have their position of superior knowledge over the average joe on the street and will continue to shove the proverbial 2 fingers up to anyone who disagrees. There is in Collin’s post a quite clear message that says we can do nothing whatsoever about it.
However the fact that those bbc trolls post here says something else to me. Somone, somewhere at the inbbc is taking the trouble to read this totally time wasting blog and define an action plan and strategy to try to silence it. I wonder why !
“little right-wing message board”
So people who attack the BBC are right-wing, and therefore wrong. You could not be clearer.
Just a description, not a value judgement.
But you run with it, if it makes you feel better.
If you think you are not making a value judgement no wonder you like the BBC.
Thank you for confirming all that for me!
I have this small stumbling block in my mind. If I go out and buy a TV I have to fund a broadcaster by law- that is the BBC.
There is no logic to this in a digital age. it is simply a hangover from days gone by.
Time to bring broadcasting into the 21st century. The technology is there
If ‘this is just another little right-wing message board among thousands.’ Why do you waste your time here?
I’d be delighted to take you up on that bet Itwf1964, because I most certainly don’t – never have, never will.
I work in the private sector for a trade association. I’ve even been know to vote Conservative.
I’m simply a punter who enjoys BBC output, reckons it’s an excellent broadcaster and doesn’t mind at all if it’s ‘state-funded’ out of the licence fee. I look around the world at the alternatives and realise that we get the best deal.
Funny how you assume that because I like the BBC, I’m somehow a BBC employee. You just don’t seem to get it do you? You’re so insulated in your comfy little silo here in BBC Bashing Land that you can’t really grasp the fact that the BBC is actually very popular in the real world, which is why there is no national desire to abolish or majorly reform it, despite Savile and the constant sniping from the tabloid press and the right-wing blogosphere.
No matter. You carry on – you’re clearly enjoying yourselves.
‘the BBC is actually very popular in the real world’
Just thought that worth a post all on its own.
No, it is his choice of the word “impudent” that is the gem.
Perhaps he meant “impotent”.
‘Perhaps he meant “impotent”?’
(I added the ? in case the new point-of-order Nazi got snarky).
Dashed good point Albaman.
Well worth being highlighted again.
One Leader, One Party, One Nation!
Thanks. I aim to please. Still waiting for that mass campaign of civil disobedience to start.
By the way, many thanks for your kind welcome Guest Who, I may well pop by more often.
I guess ‘impotent’ and ‘impudent’ work pretty well from my point of view. I’m also particularly impressed that ‘we sympathise with you problems’.
As for ‘chaps’, I may be wrong, but these kind of places do tend to be populated by a certain type of 30-50 year old male, but for all the laydeeeez in the house, may I qualify my original comment by appending ‘chapesses’!
Anyhow, it’s all my own work, rather than any cribbing or plagiarism. But having been down here for so long railing against the Beeb, you probably think that everyone shares your opinions by now and that naysayers are Corporation plants. An interesting bit of self-brainwashing and delusional paranoia.
I must admit I have no idea what you’re on about, nor do I have the time or inclination to explore, when you mention prison camps and Germans. I’ll leave that for now. However, I would agree that a 1,000 year BBC is unlikely and probably undesirable, I really don’t think I mentioned that. However, all these allusions to Teutonic goings on from 70 years ago appear to open a slightly disturbing window into your mind, one which I’m not very keen to know more about.
Until the next time. Pip pip!
I may well pop by more often.
Don’t be a stranger.
Though if presuming to make judgements, admitting to dipping in and not having a clue does rather make subsequent commentary of less value.
I may be wrong
Best leave it there.
Actually, bar a few, who on a blog can really tell true gender?
The presumption is you are a man, or Colditz, but you could be Irma Bunt and Rosa Kleb for all anyone knows.
‘..but these kind of places do tend to be populated by a certain type..
Careful, talk like that and Compliance will be down on you… oh, can I say that?
An interesting bit of self-brainwashing and delusional paranoia.
There you go cribbing again, this time actually from the Pollard Report.
‘I must admit I have no idea what you’re on about, ‘
Confession is good for the soul. Makes commenting on something seem daft, though.
‘nor do I have the time or inclination to explore’
{Klaxon!} You can’t say that and then comment… it’s a rule, albeit from those you don’t have time to find out about.
‘..all these allusions to Teutonic goings on from 70 years ago appear to open a slightly disturbing window..’
The irony of that may escape you, having not read beyond what you fancied, which is another irony on top. Double irony! Like BBC standards.
‘Until the next time. Pip pip!’
Hurry back. Your contribution is valued.
ps:
‘I’ve even been known to vote Conservative.’
Claim like that, and you could be a source on Newsnight before they can say BIJ job.
Now, crucially, do you agree with TheGerman, Nicked Emus, Dr Foster or Colditz too?
That would make a full brace.
‘You just don’t seem to get it do you? You’re so insulated in your comfy little silo’
Pollard Report
87. I found it interesting that many of the people involved in this story seem to
have spent all or nearly all of their working lives at the BBC. There is no easy
or quick solution to this – if indeed a ‘solution’ is required at all – but to my
mind it does raise a question about the insularity of some people within the
BBC and whether all parts of it are sufficiently open to outside industry
practices and attitudes.
You’d see how ironic that is.. if you got out more.
A brace is two. You think it’s 5. Still using your toes to count?
Good to see you are keen on chipping in on the crucial areas of debate still.
Guessing you learned this on one of those funded bonding sessions on the moors, courtesy of the licence fee payer?
beats you opening your mouth to change feet, cold titz
I’m simply a punter who enjoys BBC output, reckons it’s an excellent broadcaster and doesn’t mind at all if it’s ‘state-funded’ out of the licence fee. I look around the world at the alternatives and realise that we get the best deal.
That is no reason why thos ewho dont share your admiration for the BBC should be forced to pay for it.
If it were by subscription, then if as good as you rate it, it would be well supported, and may even deliver a better and more efficient service if its income couldn’t be taken for granted – fan of the BBC as you are, you surely agree that many of its presenters are grossly overpaid?
You could well end up with a better service at a cheaper price.
if the bbc is “so popular” then let it be put to the test
make it subscription only,and watch all those delirious fans who then don’t face court for refusing to pay the telly tax leave like rats leave a sinking ship
‘Remedial Flokking #101 is really proving popular!
So a big welcome to our rainbow forum must be extended to Stephen.
Good to see Dez and yet another of our Master Rac… class students really making him feel so welcome already.
Good to see you have your manners still, TheGerman. That please was a nice touch. Try not to lose them. So many students do, and that makes bleating about others being beastly, well, hard to credit. And that would never do, would it?
Just a few things to bear in mind, Stephen.
‘Chaps’ has sexist connotations, and ‘we’ don’t really like that. And where I say ‘we’, ‘we’ really should avoid the ‘you’ too, as by posting here ‘we’ become ‘them’, and it all rather makes the ‘them’ and ‘us’ thing fall apart really.
But excellent work Stephen on the misdirection.
Point out the BBC asked a question, but then fail to grasp it reaped what it sowed, pulled the top answer and the possibility of most licence fee payers getting a chance to chip in.
It has been mentioned already, but you probably got away with it. Down, TheGerman, you know I was not channeling the banned Fawlty episode!
But Stephen, much as Colditz and TheGerman may not beat you up at break for saying so, although we all simply ‘know’ it is not going away, the notion of a thousand year BBC is maybe a bit overt to some. Especially those we, and the BBC, speak for, without truly appreciating that we do.
Oh, and as I’ve told Dez earlier, your credibility in class will be boosted just heaps if you can resist cribbing the last paragraph from ‘Aunty’s Best Trolling Tips’ with PR puff verbatim. That’s just lazy.
Finally Stephen, if we are going to mock those we don’t like, and we do encourage this still even when it backfires all the time, it’s best not to use good words when we mean bad.
Hence ‘impotent’ is probably better attempted than ‘impudent’. Maybe you don’t use it because…. well.. we sympathise with you problems.
But I suspect you already know that.’
Just read your reply. Two points.
This is 2013 not 1903 and believe it or not the world is different. The past is sometimes a guide but never a template.
Care to comment on the knife crime,gun crime ,the gangs etc.
You know nothing about my childhood .Nothing at all and so do not presume. I would never presume to know about yours. I feel the Easton article has bought out the liberal defence squad.-the LDS.
Rattled are we?
This is in reply to Dez. Why it appears here is rather odd.
Dave – they are well rattled. Otherwise why do they bother coming on here.
The BBC must feel so honoured having them as advocates (snigger).
Somebody is missing the point of HYS. But congratulations on the boilerplate anyway.
‘It’s worth the licence fee for the quality of the output across loads of different platforms…. ‘
Absolutely. And all so well co-ordinated to get make sure they get the global warming message across. Or maybe you’re not aware of 28gate?
‘…..which make much commercial output look quite frankly poor’.
Now that IS comedy gold.
‘As long as you’re not muslim, black, asian, female or homosexual. We don’t like your sort. ‘
Can I add; the poor, Catholics, people with AIDs and anyone to the left of Ghengis Khan too please?
There is certainly less sympathy for ex-provisionals on this site than they get from the BBC but support for the last Pope, and indeed all Christians, especially those enduring persecution at the hands of a religion much favoured by the Beeb, is considerable. As for HIV, the present situation seems to suggest that that a certain percentage incidence of it is an ever present concomitant of the gay lifestyle that the Beeb is very keen to normalise and indeed celebrate: since it has been known how to avoid it for years, sufferers can’t exactly hold themselves up as martyrs. The contention of this blog is that the BBC has a leftward bias which is certain too annoy those on the right but many of us are fairly centrist and just find that an organisation with immense influence which we are all obliged to finance and which is supposed to report objectively, is being immoral in displaying such partiality.
“Immigration is just a subtle way of ‘offshoring’ jobs:
so why isn’t the Left against it?”
By Ed West
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100203690/immigration-is-just-a-subtle-way-of-offshoring-jobs-so-why-isnt-the-left-against-it/
‘Why have the white British left London?’ As if to prove a point tonight on BBC news 24 from 5.30 – 6.30 – Newsreader, Clive Myrie, with a black business reporter, followed by a black weather man and then the change over at 6 to George Alagahia…seems the white ones are leaving the BBC as well. They don’t even bother with ‘balance’ any more.
The white people who have left London are racist.
A supremely silly statement..One may as well say the remaining whites are racist for staying in London and not giving it over to ethnic minorities.
Is that supposed to silence and intimidate?
Sorry, doesn’t work any more.
‘The BBC isn’t going away. Most people in this country don’t begrudge paying for it – if they really did, there would be a major campaign of mass civil disobedience a la poll tax, but there isn’t.’
Isn’t that a bit like writing the following?
‘The current level of fuel duty isn’t going away. Most people in this country don’t begrudge paying for it – if they really did, there would be a major campaign of mass civil disobedience a la poll tax, but there isn’t.’
or
Britain’s involvement in foreign military conflicts isn’t going away. Most people in this country don’t begrudge paying for it – if they really did, there would be a major campaign of mass civil disobedience a la poll tax, but there isn’t.
I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point…
Jeff