On time and for you to complete! Read or seen any bias? This is where you detail it!
WEDNESDAY OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir Dec 25, 01:55
Christmas 2024
ALL the following from recruitment adverts Disgusting for any young white male comprising the vast majority of the potential construction…
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
posted this in a thread below before the new open thread started,but it’s worth a repost I think
not a mention of this so far on al beeb,but sky news app had this this morning
http://news.sky.com/story/1060436/gaza-marathon-axed-after-hamas-bans-women
Gaza Marathon Axed After Hamas Bans Women
UN agency UNRWA, which sponsors the annual Gaza marathon, calls off the race after a disagreement with the territory’s rulers.
This year’s Gaza Marathon has been cancelled after the territory’s governing Hamas movement banned women from taking part in the annual race.
UN aid agency UNWRA, which assists Palestinian refugees and also sponsors and organises the event, said “this disappointing decision follows discussions with the authorities in Gaza who have insisted that no women should participate”.
Taher Nunu, a spokesman for the Gaza government, said Hamas regretted the cancellation of the marathon, but that it had told the UN agency that local traditions must be respected.
“We emphasise that the government had informed UNRWA about its approval to organise this event … maintaining certain matters related to the customs and traditions of the Palestinian people,” he said.
LMAO
where all the faux outrage and righteous lefty ire
and where is al beeb on this?
at time of posting…….nowhere.
maybe the news wires-normally so reliable when it comes to reporting anything even slightly perceived to show anything Israeli in a negative light-aren’t working properly
or something like that………probably
Hmm sounds very like ‘apartheid’ which only Israel is accused of being by the BBC and ‘misogynistic’ which is what the BBC keeps getting caught doing !
i bet “panto” campbell and VD Drearybyshire
will have a special, post haste, first thing tomorrow morning? …… won t they?
love their feminist issues, love their sport
love their scrimination and all that, its perfect.
As I wrote on a previous post the Beeb had a section on Radio 4 about this story yesterday. The Beeb blamed ‘conservatives’ in Hamas. No mock outrage by the Beeb in the interview, just a sensitive, sympathetic tone because was all fault of the ‘conservatives’.
sounds like hamas tv
‘They would probably argue about… that they are blaming Hamas…’
If you say so, luv. Sounded like it to me. But good to chip in when so many colleagues stay mute on comments that may be in need of ‘re-interpretation’.
Rather like a reverse ferret after ‘Critics are saying..’?
Anyway, as the Flokkers have run their reds through the wash with Chris Bryant’s chaddis and are back en masse, how long before this topic find itself dragged into the pink as well.
‘…a PR failure for Hamas…’
No. I’m afraid the likes of supermarkets and mobile phone companies have PR failures. Terrorist organisations – not so much.
Good grief, is the Beeboid interviewer really so ignorant as to ask if there’s been some “shift” in Hamas that conservative forces are now moving to the fore? That’s one of the most appallingly ignorant things I’ve ever heard out of the mouth of a BBC presenter.
Either the woman is grossly ill-informed and misguided, or the BBC is deliberately trying to mislead the audience and sanitize what’s going on.
And please let’s note that this BBC employee who was going to take part in the marathon has openly expressed her disappointment that Hamas (and, by extension, the heroic Palestinians of Gaza) have lost an opportunity in what she describes as a PR battle with Israel.
This is someone – or two people – at the BBC openly taking sides. Yet defenders of the indefensible remain silent as always, or will chime in to tell me I’ve inferred something that isn’t there.
Oh, my bad, Ramdani isn’t an official BBC employee but merely a “commentator” for the BBC. That’s still no excuse for the BBC presenter to act as if Hamas has not been “conservative” until recently. Truly awful ignorance, if so.
Presumably moderate Hamas members push opponents off three storey buildings while conservative ones throw them down from ten storeys.
Ah, those, moderates !
‘not a mention of this so far on al beeb’
‘So far’ , but… allow me.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/search/?q=gaza%20marathon
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/middle_east/
But not as high profile as old Justin’s no-show was t’other day.
Editorial decisions, priorities ‘n all.
Stand by for the outraged feminists to take to the streets in protest!
To criticise Islam, with respect to women in this case, is to admit that Islamic society is inferior to western society. As all societies are equal in the religion of Multiculturalism, Islamic society can’t be held to the same high standards as the west is held by feminists, because to do so would be an admission that Islamic society is starting from an inferior position. It would mean their whole world view would come crashing down on them. That’s why western feminists do not criticise Islam. Muliticulturalism trumps women.
More of the soft racism of lowered expectations.
Plus Islam attacks the West so it is OK. The Left is pre-modern (i.e. feudal) indeed pre-civilization (back to nature) anything primitive excites its admiration – especially if it is violent and destructive.
Therefore a 7th century ideology is just right for them ? Barbarian practices must be superior to modern ways.? The feminist response is a bit of a litmus test test then in cases like that abandoned race.
Plenty of rough trade in Salford.
March 6, 2013:
“not a mention of this so far on al beeb”
Jeez, you’re dumb.
5 March 2013:
Gaza marathon: UN cancels race over Hamas ban on women
http://bbc.in/VIelBf
hiya spaz
drive by troll king
still to hear it on tv
so wrong answer,but thanks for playing anyway
back under the bridge like a nice numpty now
He’s either on piecework and so desperate he can’t see these silly drive-by’s (often with added ***** spice.. late) backfire, or being paid to make sure they do by highlighting the poverty of such avenues of critique.
But if the former, it may be worth noting the lack of broadcast profile along with any caveat.
Though that does mean the opportunity of a Flokker crying ‘but it was on Ceebeebies in 2007’ can get lost.
It’s still ‘topical’…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100205751/reality-check-for-left-wing-opponents-of-israel-hamas-bans-women-from-participating-in-the-gaza-marathon-because-its-un-islamic/
Classic 5L this morning. Segment on immigration with Rachel interviewing a Romanian about how wonderful it all is, and everyone works, and no one claims benefits, etc, etc.
Next up GM of Coca Cola UK to be given a hard time for pouring sugary drinks down our throats.
Immigration =GOOD. Coca Cola = BAD. BBC = BIASED
Despite his smug leftiness, I actually sometimes quite like Nicky. I have, however, no idea how Rachel got the gig. She knows nothing about anything and doesn’t even have the skill to pretend to be impartial.
Rachel Burden believes herself to be a lot cuter, far more hilarious, and a much better presenter than she actually is.
It’s a pathological condition known to the medical profession as Alexjonesitis.
And, treacles, what you appear on are ‘programmes’ not ‘shows’, and you are ‘presenters’ not ‘top talents’.
Burden to the Coke guy “But where is the NUTRITION in a can of coke?”
fark off silly cow, maybe i want to neck a can of coke just for the hell of it. Maybe we should just ban everything except for the bBC
Wheres the nutrition in a cigerette? – they will want to ban that next
Rachel Burden? If she’s so crap how did she get the job? Oh yes Daddy was a BBC ‘journalist’ …
Unique!
I have complained about her bias before, got the usual bland reply…the “right on” bias is so ingrained they just cannot see the wood. Peter Sissons was absolutely right.
Some interesting thoughts on Paxo/Savilegate/BBC culture:
http://www.venerablebeads.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/electronic-lice.html
Excellent – thank you.
So presumably, Paxman’s been sitting quietly all these years and is only now speaking out? Where was he when the BBC was promoting Savile all those years? That million a year sure seems to have bought a lot of silence when it counted. Combine that with the arrogance he displays in how his precious TV sitting room journalism has been destroyed by the radio muggles, and he disgusts me even more.
Greenpeace = good
BP = bad
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/2865/greenpeace_caught_with_pants_down
Awwwwwkward.
I wonder if it will make HIGNFY’s weekly round up?
Another related excellent piece in The Commentator today is this one:
Green agenda in meltdown
One would think that with the dire climate change predictions that the BBC science greenies, among others, have relentlessly tried to convince us of, now found to be just ‘hot air’, that they would be delighted to relieve the public of these fears.
But that’s just not the BBC way.
It shows they are involved in this scam for their own purposes, which have nothing to do with reporting truth or accuracy, even when ‘the game is up’. Of course, this is just one of their easily recognised propaganda agendas.
It’s called CONSCIOUSLY LYING!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21655918
More eco-propaganda and brainwashing been helped along by the BBC. This article is just unbelievable. I had a very depressing experience taking the children to the Science Museum during half-term. The magnificent place I loved visiting as a child has become another exercise in brainwashing children; unforgiveable.
just on the news
8 “men” arrested for grooming young girls for sex
2-1 on they’re “asian”
could they be a muslim sex gang?
NO MORE BETS PLEASE!!!!!!!
But they could be CATHOLIC PRIESTS.
On the other hand, they couldn’t, because the BBC would have said so, wouldn’t it?
Or Radio 1 DJs.
Must be innocent, because one of the girls had lived in a children’s home and other slurs.
wasn’t me, I started just after Saville left.
Tickertape on BBC website talks about “A missing student”. Alarm bells start ringing, so check article. Yep, it’s about an “Asian” girl gone missing and the police have arrested some of those “men” again, along with some “women” this time. Hopefully the poor girl will be found safe and sound and is not the victim of tribal murder (which the BBC will euphemise as “honour killing”).
Whenever an ethnic teenager is killed he or she is always a “student”, usually a “promising student “. In the case of a black male, they will have often have aspirations to be “an architect” (to remind us of Stephen Lawrence), unless that’s clearly infeasible, in which case they are “an aspiring footballer”.
Of course, many of these unfortunate victims are indeed students. But the BBC are clearly using it as a deferential description. Review the high profile cases and you’ll see the pattern. Then contrast it with the reports of white victims of ethnic violence, where the victims are described in derogatory or indifferent language. That’s if they bother to get their names right or report them at all (try Googling Kriss Donald).
A few years ago a nasty little 13 year old attempted to rob a bus around here but ended up going under the wheels (oh dear , how sad , never mind) and needed hosing off the road by the fire brigade.
The little sh*t had been causing grief on his estate for years and hadn’t been seen in school since he was 7 or 8. However up pops the headmaster of the comp school he had barely (if ever) attended to say on the local TV news that he was a promising A star student. Why the establishment feel the need to lie like this is quite beyond me.
Sadly whenever I watch or read a media report about the death of a “yoof” I don’t believe a word of it.
I still waiting for a group of London gang members to correctly identify one of their opponents. They have knifed and gunned down hundreds without, seemingly, ever yet getting the correct person.
“8 ‘men’ arrested for grooming young girls for sex”
“2-1 on they’re ‘asian’ ”
“could they be a muslim sex gang?”
“NO MORE BETS PLEASE!!!!!!!”
Oh I don’t know, must be some reason why they don’t happen to mention their religion. What d’ya think?
Paedophile ring members from Cheshire and Wiltshire jailed
http://bbc.in/VIg1dV
Jack Kemp and Peter Petrauske jailed for ‘ritualistic’ sex abuse
http://bbc.in/XXqgaB
Four men jailed over global paedophile ring
http://bbc.in/VIgAEs
Bloody Muslims.
ok spaz
muslim paedo gangs specifically targetting non- muslim underage girls,and frozen brains like you think it isn’t relevant?
good job it wasn’t roman catholic priests than isn’t it?
what a twat you are
Don’t feed the very unpleasant troll…
Is that it,trawling the BBC news site back to 2011 and that’s the best you can find?
3 cases involving more than one white perpetrator is the nearest you can come to equivalency for the,so far, dozens of gangs involving scores of exclusively muslim men systematically abusing over a hundred all most exclusively white teenage girls?
All you have done is confirmed what I already expected.That no sacrifice,of other peoples children is to great to maintain the lie of your suedo-religion.No blood sacrifice to terrible to bring about your vision of reconstructed utopia.your hypocrisy is truly soul-sickening.
Watched Bluestone 42 which was rather good apart from the lazy stereotype of an American being fat, loud and arrogant. For some reason I suspect that they won’t portray Muslims as women abusing terrorists as only some stereotypes are acceptable on the BBC.
For balance.
The BBC of course has critics from all corners of the political spectrum.
That it somehow mixes all these colours of opinion up and still calls the sludge brown result clarity is a conceit they continue to repeat in hope of becoming truth, when it has become but another delusional bad joke, is for them to answer for (to whom still being unclear, as they are effectively unaccountable).
However, it is still worth digesting input on the BBC’s output from all who offer it, and divorce the origin from content.
http://www.medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=723:down-the-barrel-of-a-gun&catid=51:alerts-2013&Itemid=202
I invite reading in there some statements that may resonate.
It does not matter that the source is advocating certain views be pushed, or suppressed to suit their preferred notion of objectivity, but in amongst it all are plenty to show that whatever the BBC is, it is not professional or impartial as the notion of reporting has flown out the window in favour of ‘analysis’, ‘view’ or ‘opinion’ by those the BBC employ, or select to speak on various topics.
Or indeed let rise, again, to the top…
‘a bizarre email once sent to Media Lens by Helen Boaden, then BBC News director. She had attached six pages of quotes’
Post Pollard, and the can’t provide e-version redactions, and the bazillion pages of waffle, let us not forget this lady was, and maybe still is, head of complaints, with an email to nowhere if they get as far as her.
The BBC will see this article as proof it is ‘getting about right’.
I see it as yet another nail in the coffin of what they pretend to be.
They always do it but I can’t get used to the BBC totally ignoring the religion of our home grown terrorists.
They were at it again with last week’s Birmingham drongoes.
There’s a take on this psychosis in: “BBC Dumb Delicacy” at:
http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/
The BBC is now little more than a collection of beliefs, views, analysis and opinions dressed up as facts.
For them to justify and live with, professionally.
The internet is the very same, but two lies don’t make for truth.
However information is power, and in a febrile, crowded environment I always appreciate the opportunity to be served, by choice, the odd diamond:
http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2012-13/bbcauditarrangementsandpublicationofinvoices.html
Receive email updates for this Bill
Knowledge is power, especially when some powers seem less keen to account for when and where theirs is applied, or not…
http://www.aluncairns.co.uk/2012/11/calls-to-put-bbc-expenditure-under-closer-scrutiny/
‘Mr Cairns had written to then Director General of the BBC, Mark Thompson, earlier this year to ask that they publish all invoices over £500 for transparency in its spend, given the publicly funded nature of the organisation. This request was turned down twice.
Further research by the Vale of Glamorgan MP has discovered that the National Audit Office have to request permission from the BBC Trust before they can investigate specific areas – an arrangement that is not similar to any other publicly funded organisation.
If fact, yet more uniques that are hard to credit regarding the single greatest force for policy influence in the country.
On the death of Chavez.
BBC-NUJ leftist propaganda on Radio 4 (after 8 am this morning) described him as a ‘firebrand socialist’.
BBC-NUJ + Chavez + Castro + Hamas.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8823931/chavezs-useful-idiots/
It will be interesting to see from whence our world-travelling Newsnight Econom… Anger and Protests Editor and his muse next file a ‘report’.
Summed up very well in The Daily Mash:
Guardian readers pay tribute to man who would have banned the Guardian
“Emma Bradford, a level six Guardian reader from Stevenage, added: “He introduced free healthcare and free education and if you have those two things then why on earth would you need a free press?”
The free healthcare was modelled on Cuba’s (for ordinary Cubans, not the elite), and the education was mostly political indoctrination.
Funny how those magic words “healthcare” and “education” are always parroted by useful idiots to excuse socialist tyrants’ excesses.
Are you serious? Emma actually wrote that shite? Holy moses. No wonder the inbbc is o keen to hang Murdoch and gag all else, leaving them as the only source.
“Are you serious?”
No it’s not serious you dumb f**k. It’s “The Daily Mash”.
oooohhhh what’s wrong spaz?
is it your time of the month?
His jackboots are pinching his toes at the moment.
I should have pointed out that “Emma Bradford” was almost certainly a spoof .
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100205593/mid-staffs-scandal-it-suits-all-of-the-parties-to-do-almost-nothing-about-it/
Top comments interesting, ‘speaking for the nation’-wise
Hayekian2 makes interesting observation
Very interesting indeed. Attempted direct link to comment:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100205593/mid-staffs-scandal-it-suits-all-of-the-parties-to-do-almost-nothing-about-it/#comment-820939016
Key bit in case link doesn’t work:
To be fair to my colleagues, they all take patient care and safety extremely serious and ours is one of the safest hospitals in the country but there is a closing of ranks, an unwillingness to criticise parts of the NHS even when they are manifestly failing.
I think we all know which three letters to substitute there.
Oh look…. scientists have just discovered that we had an Ice Age
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/21660528
‘Scientists studying an exceptionally well-preserved woolly rhinoceros have revealed details of what Britain’s environment was like 42,000 years ago.’
Was it chilly?
‘The research team used these climate-sensitive insects to calculate that summer temperatures in Britain would have averaged just 10C, and dropped to -22C in winter.’
Yeah , thought so.
http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/10269933.Child_rape_suspects_arrested_in_operation_which_targeted_Redbridge_addresses/
‘Sapphire Command police officers arrest men at addresses in Redbridge, Newham, Havering and Hertfordshire on suspicion of raping girl under 16’
Re: earlier comment on this thread – All bets are off on the religion of these guys but you might get odds on how many of the eight have a full beard?
Could get a sweepstake going here… I bet 3 of them have a name with the first three letters H, M & O in no particular order.
That’ll be the role model influence of the Simpsons patriarch back in the day then?
KFC could learn a thing or two about franchising from this lot.
No mention on al-Beeb at the time of commenting.
I am going for 3 with a beard, and 5 with the name “Mohammad” or a variation.
My bet is just the one full beard, two heavy stubble and one funny little hat. Look forward to the Court artist’s sketches for the big reveal several months from now.
Regarding Hugo Chavez, I’m dreading the day when ‘The Risen Christ’ Nelson Mandela kicks the bucket, the BBC will go into mourning, solemn music played on all stations etc etc. Mandela singing a song about killing whites. How nice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC8qQE4Y2Js
Perhaps they’ll repeat the 1998 “Walden on Heroes” about Mandela.
No chance – disappeared into oblivion.
Oh I do wish they would, but its quality and gravitas would show up just what an intellectual sink hole BBC journalistic analysis has become.
I managed to get the book of the scripts off Amazon a few years ago, maybe I should approach the BBC to commission a rereading if they’ve ‘lost’ the original tapes.
Tried various sources for the video, without success.
”Mrs Ann Clwyd, Labour MP for Cynon Valley, led the onslaught on Walden.
She said: “Nelson Mandela is one of my heroes. He is such a gracious man and symbolises so much of what I admire. I am staggered that someone should make that kind of attack on him. Brian Walden has lost his marbles.”
Mr Barry Sheerman, Labour MP for Huddersfield, said: “This is a disgraceful and demeaning attack on one of the great figures of politics of the 20th century. ”
Oh, Get a grip !
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Outrage+at+attack+on+`arrogant’+Mandela.-a060789628
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Outrage+at+attack+on+`arrogant’+Mandela.-a060789628
My favorite BBC-Mandela moment (so far) was a number of years ago, the first time I saw “Ground Force”. I was on a trip to London and environs, staying with friends, and one afternoon hanging out, lazily watching TV, the show started. Ooh, let’s watch this,, my friend said. The martial music started up, somebody in a helicopter, I think it was, in the opening sequence, and I had no idea what it was going to be. It’s really lovely, I was then told, they make gardens for deserving people. Um, okay, whatever.
So it turns out this was their first “celebrity” garden for the show, and the guest star was none other than Nelson Mandela. They snuck into his home while he was away on some conference or something, made a nice garden for him. He comes back home for the reveal, and they’re all standing around giddy and nervous, as one would expect. Mandela is led in with his eyes closed, as they do, opens them, and….silence. After a long pause, he said something like, “I had a garden when I was in prison.”
I couldn’t stop laughing for about five minutes. Mandela was very gracious about it, eventually said something about how it was a fond memory, keeping the garden kept him busy, etc., for all those years, but oh, man, the awkwardness and stunned faces for a minute there.
Incredibly David that is one of my favourite TV moments and actually something about Mandela that I like: he turned to the friend (family? that had brought him there for some other reason ,to be a surprise) and said “You lied to me”. Live TV and the thing that he is upset about is that he was led to. A similar moment occurred with Mohammed Ali when taken onto “This is Your Life”.
Shelia Fogarty scolded Richard Bacon in his pronunciation of Hugo Chavez.
”It’s Ugo not Hugo.”
Well, I wonder why she doesn’t say ‘Paree’ instead of Paris or ‘Roma’ instead of Rome then ?
and hugo mate it’s ‘yoo’ not ‘choo’.
Now kids, enough talking about the telly and what John Barrymore has been up to lately. Richard Bacon ensures the youngsters get some socialism with their showbiz – so it’s over to yet another report on Ooogo Chavez.
Is it even possible to live a celibate life?
By Tom de Castella BBC News Magazine
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21654663
I don’t know. Why don’t you go ahead and pontificate about it BBC?
‘pontificate’ see what I did there? You just know which religion the BBC are having a go at – check the photo at the head of the report – Craggy Island or what?
Next up. Young Muslim men waiting for their arranged passport marriage to come through…. is it posible to live a less rapey life……
On the link page we have “another sex scandal involving a senior member of the Catholic Church”, but not “another child sex scandal involving moslems” re today’s exposure of another grooming gang in the papers.
Then there’s this about Gandhi – “To test his discipline, he habitually slept with – but refrained from sex with – naked young women, something he called ‘a worthwhile experiment'”
Amazing self-control! Pity they missed this – ” in his mid-seventies, he brought his grandniece Manubehn to sleep naked in his bed”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi#Celibacy
“To test his discipline, he habitually slept with – but refrained from sex with – naked young women, something he called ‘a worthwhile experiment’”
Didn’t Michael Jackson use a similar test?
I see the ludicrous Mark Mardell has finally gotten around to stealth-correcting his ironic Star Trek faux pas in his defense of the President’s Star Trek faux pas. The “Dr.” Spock has been replaced by Mr.”, with no acknowledgment of the error.
Now if only he would correct the serious errors and falsehoods in his other blogposts and reports. For example, his continued denial that the President offered the ‘Sequester’ scheme, or that the Republicans have conceded nothing in the budget negotiations.
There was a short piece on the BBC TV news the other day about the French having carried out tests on what remains of King Richard 1’s (‘The Lionheart’ of England) heart in a box in a cathedral in France.
Not much was discovered but the reporter gave us a short description of Richard. ‘He was cruel, he didn’t spend much time in England, he couldn’t speak any English, he failed in his attempt to capture Jerusalem and he killed 2700 muslims in cold blood’. They just had to get a something the bit in about muslims, they were all so innocent of course. The usual hatchet job (no pun intended) as usual from the BBC. No context, no balance.
perfumed to give added sanctity, was that on the bbc?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21639734
here is the bbc report, prangwiz have to agree with you
😀
I’m afraid no English or later British monarch is ever likely to a get a good write up from our BBC these days. Richard I, leader of the 3rd Crusade – frankly he got off lightly.
Personally I would have been tempted to highlight a fact that the BBC ignored – he was held to ransom by the Germans.
“Germany” did not exist as a unified nation until 1872. At the time of the Crusades, most of Western Europe, including the territory of modern Germany, was a loose confederation of states and principalities called the “Holy Roman Empire” – founded by Charlemagne four centuries earlier as a revived “Roman Empire” but run on Christian principles.
And they didn’t know the man was gay? I wonder whether that would have given a different complexion?
probably excuse him … but he was against
muslims you see … and well “you know how bitchy those queers get” … especially about inherrent homophobia,
and sadly he had a sword in his hand at the time, i bet they were just going to tell him he should be thrown off a mountain too.
.
Had they realised that Coeur de Lion was gay (in all likelihood) perhaps the narrative would be as follows…preferred the French vie en rose, sang and danced with troubadors, was heart-broken when 2700 Muslims impaled themselves on his army’s lances misunderstanding his dream of an open access multi-cultural Jerusalem (as subsequently agreed with Saladin) and met his end at the Chateau Gaillard (saucy Castle…I kid you not!)
sarc well and truly off.
The Guardian not left wing enough for you? Try the bBC !!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/04/yemen-stop-child-executions-human-rights
Yemen currently has 200 children held on ‘death row’ 40 to a cell some have already been executed and it is one of the few countries in the world to execute juveniles. Reports of this are all over the web and the media, except for one which is notable by its silence – unsurprising when there’s a strict Moslem country involved.
And they are still crucifying people in Saudi. What a way to spend easter.
Having Been A Soldier by Lt-Col Colin Mitchell.
Aye me, Mad Mitch knew how to deal with Johnny Yemeni when he misbehaved.
🙂
Yes but they do cover this story, which is certainly on a par with a nation executing children.
In fact, in the eyes of the BBC – it’s far worse.
🙄
UN rebukes Israel over child arrests
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-21684182
shazaad rehman – bilal hussain
the Judge said these … “men” ….
“engaged in a course of conduct which has become increasingly and depressingly familiar in this country”.
increasingly depressingly familiar … why? is there a link?
anything that bands these dozens of child gang rapes together? …. what could it be?
Uh oh. Giant elephant in the room avoided. Thank goodness for that.
We have much to learn from the elephants. Nicky Campbell said so. They have a matriarchial society, don’t you know.
Not in the islamic herds, they don’t.
A load of HORROCKS.
“£240,000-a-year BBC executive claimed 6p for phone call.
A senior BBC executive earning more than £240,000 a year claimed back 6p for a phone call.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9913220/240000-a-year-BBC-executive-claimed-6p-for-phone-call.html
Less tax? Inc. P&P? And handling. Plus admin charges?
Interesting to note that of the current three comments, two appear to be rather ‘defensive’.
Looks like the investment in top tier hires is being matched by the PR department too.
Roll on ED & Ed getting in and locking down that gravy train again for the next 10 years, eh?
Guessing these came from the same release quoted here?:
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/by-time-i-get-to.html?
puzzled by those for Caroline Thomson, who left the BBC “at the end of September”, having failed to convince Lord Patten and others that she’d be a better DG than George Entwistle. She received a reasonable sum in lieu of notice – but was she still on BBC business when she flew to Phoenix from Heathrow on the 13th October, at a return cost of £4,190.89?
Guessing these questions will be covered by some exclusion or other? Speaking of which…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/riposte.html?
‘The BBC – which has put its FOI publication promises into abeyance for over a year’
Seems that. just as CECUTT can argue black is the new white, the BBC can see opaque as the new transparent.
As with so much, they seem able to argue that the cost of defending the mess they keep getting in means that they don’t actually need to bother… ‘to save the licence fee payer money’. Uh-huh.
Unique indeed.
BBC-NUJ: uninterested in reporting on the political left ‘s hostility to UKIP.
A catch-up is available here for BBC -NUJ in ‘Daily Mail’:-
“Former NHS worker barred from protest over Health Service cuts… because she backs UKIP.
By Nazia Paveen.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2288797/Former-NHS-worker-barred-protest-Health-Service-cuts–backs-UKIP.html
Here’s an excellent question:
David Gregory-Kumar @DavidACGregory
I’ve just been through the latest BBC safeguarding trust course. Am now probably over thinking if I can send a tweet or not.
Interesting that the course did not appear to cover that.
Maybe Stuart Hughes can offer his expertise?
If DG is over-thinking, he’s probably doing twice as much thinking as most of the rest of his colleagues do about it. Combined. It’s a shame we can’t have a reasonable discussion with him about it.
Ah now let me search the bbc website for
Leveson – 1831 articles
Mid-Staffordshire – 321 articles
Labour’s NHS Death Camps – 0 articles.
Nothing further (and if cherry vultures tell me I’m searching the wrong way or something – you know, I couldn’t give a stuff)
Can’t wait to see how the BBC handle this one….
Winner of £100k-a-year job from BBC series now suing Lord Sugar
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2127068/Apprentice-More-like-Lord-Sugars-skivvy-How-BBC-nearly-wrecked-Stella-Englishs-life.html
Not forgetting…..
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4230204/Ed-Miliband-publishes-Labours-major-donor-list.html
The list included several union bosses, Labour peer Lord Sugar and mayoral candidate Ken Livingstone.
http://order-order.com/2013/03/04/sugar-to-miliband-youre-hired/
‘the Apprentice host… forking out £51,000 towards the staffing costs of Ed’s office for the coming year’
I’m sure the hilarious satirists at HIGNFY and at The News Quiz will have a filed day.
So her job as a forkLift driver in one of Alan Sugar’s warehouses didn’t work out then ?
oh god Billy Bragg is on The One Show, jesus
Flicks on TV – BBC One is on – It’s the One Show…Billy Bragg is on the sofa…
Switches off.
Now on Radio 4@
Lent Talks -Benjamin Cohen
“Jewish journalist Benjamin Cohen reflects on his fear of being abandoned for being gay.”
Inevitable.
Never in the field of human endeavour has so much air time been devoted to so few.
The entire series of so called “Lent Talks” look to be a liberal’s dream. A typical liberal attempt to appropriate the last days of Christ for that self absorbtion and self flagellation which is so typical of the lberal left approach to life.
Little to do with what Easter means but much to do with the liberal’s obsessions.
Alan Sugar bares a striking resemblance to Nookie Bear.
twicsy.com/i/4dQCsb
The BBC seems dedicated to perpetuating the lie that the “Sequester” cuts (a dishonest way to describe a reduction in the amount spending will rise) is the Republicans’ fault exclusively. Not only that, but now the BBC is saying that the “cuts” have been written into this year’s budget, “despite warnings from Mr Obama, his cabinet secretaries and many economists that they could hinder the fragile US economic recovery and cost jobs.”
Oh, sure, He’s been big on the fire and brimstone lately, but He’s the one who offered the Sequester, and He’s the one who got a big tax increase from the Republicans already, while giving nothing in return. For those who still trust the BBC on US issues and don’t accept that the BBC is lying to you about this, here’s the White House spokesman admitting it, and here’s the White House apparatchik who told Bob Woodward he’d “regret” claiming that the President offered it admitting that, in fact, it was His idea after all. Yet the BBC is trying to tell you that this isn’t His fault, and that He tried to warn us against harming ourselves. Trapped in a world He never made, if only the masses would accept His Word into their hearts…..
Don’t trust the BBC on US issues.
Your last three words are unnecessary. You should have just said “Don’t Trust the BBC”.
The main item on bBBC ‘news’ is the shock discovery that companies that lend money expect to be paid back. Loan companies are now being blamed for lending money to people on benefits who didn’t realise that there is no such thing as free money, and of course the bBBC managed to find a dim chav who took out a loan to pay off a loan to pay off a loan …
The BBC’s loans from the EU are interest-free. So are the grants, come to that –
http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2007-08/791
And out of the other side of their mouths, the BBC will be complaining that one reason the economy is stagnant and businesses aren’t hiring is that banks aren’t lending enough and are hoarding cash.
People who wake up one morning with an overwhelming need for a 64″ plasma TV?
(The 51″ one being relegated to the kids’ bedroom.)
Oh Lordy-7.45 on Toady!
Humph says that the only news in town yesterday was Neuburger warning the Tories off the ECHR…leave it, Darren!
Well yes-at the BBC the news was of little else.
Yet here on Planet Real, most of us were getting on just fine, not too bothered about Qatadas right to another wifelet.
But it was news at the BBC-so Humph said it was our news too…tosser!
But I digress-Neuberger had a sister in law called Julia!
I`ve heard of her-typical leftie luvvie.
So in my innocence, I thought Humph would venture onto liberal elites, same old names and faces at the top of their trees etc…the sheer predictability of the same few names?
But no-Humph only cared about different spellings of top peoples names, and just why they are pronounced differently.
Well-we spoke of nothing else all day John!
So-if you hear Dimbleby getting the “Dimbleday” treatment, or Atteborough getting the “Attenbore”…well, you`re in the vanguard of the best of BBC news and its thinking.
Nepotism?…nah, they`re worth it…always are as well!
In case anyone’s interested, Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-KY) filibuster in the Senate of the vote to approve John Brennan as CIA director has been going on for about five hours now. Nowhere near the record longest attempt yet, but he’s taking a stand against the President’s official position that He can use drones to kill US citizens on US soil without due process of law. Live video on C-SPAN here.
Expect the BBC to start telling you the policy is perfectly fine, and any objection is just intransigence from enemies who just want to block whatever the President wants. If they dare address the issue at all, that is.
No, David, more likely the BBC will tell the listeners and viewers that Rand Paul is either (a) a dangerous radical right-wing nut or (b) a complete nonentity. That way they avoid discussing the issue.
I think they’ll probably avoid mentioning it altogether, because then Mardell won’t have to bother writing a blogpost defending the killing in cold blood of US citizens on US soil without due process of law. Otherwise, if they do report the filibuster, they’ll have to lie about what Paul said. Mardell can’t even defend a Star Trek faux pas properly these days, so this is probably a bit much. I can only imagine the discussion between him and Simon Wilson about how to justify their continued avoidance of this issue. Maybe they’re simply waiting for Sarah Palin to weigh in.
For BBC-NUJ: the legacy of CHAVEZ.
Using the same phrase as BBC Radio 4 news used about him this morning: ‘socialist firebrand’, this article is critical of Chavez’s impact on the Venezuelan economy:-
“Hugo Chavez’s Sad, Oil-Soaked Economic Legacy”
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/03/hugo-chavezs-sad-oil-soaked-economic-legacy/273758/?
Predictably, BBC-NUJ wheeled out its leftist political chum, Livingstone, to praise the anti-West, Chavez.
“How typical of the Left to idolise a despot who gloried in attacking America and Britain”
By MICHAEL BURLEIGH.
[Excerpt]:-
“He may not have been a genocidal maniac in the style of Kim Jong-Il or Stalin, but Chavez was one of a grotesque line of authoritarian strongmen who have been the curse of Latin America over the decades.
“And yet, because of his defiant stance on the U.S. and his attacks on British ‘imperialism’, he was lionised in this country by the Left and its media mouthpieces, The Guardian and the BBC. (Perhaps that’s not so unexpected — we have to remember that a BBC reporter wept during the funeral of arch Palestinian terrorist Yasser Arafat.)”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2289326/How-typical-Left-idolise-despot-gloried-attacking-America-Britain.html
Can you imagine if the BBC did their version of TOWIE?
Wonder if this one will see light of day tomorrow…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-21692259
Nasty Tory cutz. Oh, wait, it’s a positive report, so never mind.
Just listened to Radio 4 Today. Why do their presenters always giggle when presenting a report that embarrasses their beloved Labour party, the EU or Obama? This morning they were reporting on a speech that Evete Cooper will make on Labours past/ present immigration policy.
What an absolute BBC / Labour love in this morning. Clearly the UKIP result the other week has told Labour that there’s a massive immigration bandwagon to be climbed upon so now Labour are flooding the BBC airways this week with their apologies for immigration mistsakes and that the Toreez should be doing everything to reduce immigration!
Then Labour’s Chris Bryant gets a really soft time from the Breakfast sofa boid complete with jokey and friendly banter at the start about some dancing event yesterday. It was as if they were the closest of friends.
How the BBC quickly change their stance over immigration when instructed to do so by Labour – years ago they would rarely tackle the subject and would usually try to dismiss any concern over immigration with claims of “racist”, “bigoty” or just the “BNP talking”, but now, it’s a major issue.
The immigration concern ‘love-in’ started yesterday when they plugged Labour’s newest party political broadcast on the Politics Show. They are so transparent when it comes to pushing the Labour party’s agenda.
Great commentators on Sky news’ paper review this morning. American lady weighing in on Pres. Obama’s ability to have her killed simply for not sharing her views, neatly segueing into a cheery bloke who highlights a DM piece on the post-departure travel arrangements of Caroline Thompson (mentioned here) and DG Marky-Mark being so busy he didn’t have time to hear about Savile, but made it to just about every glittering arts or sports event going.
Arrrrrrrrrgggghhhh
Conspiracy theories now “could the Americans have given oogo shavezzzz cancer”? I don’t recall them giving any air time to theories that Al Quaeda did anything all at when speculation suggested that they had.
It’s business as usual on Breakfast. Processed food = death. Vince Cable suggests borrowing more, Yvette Cooper is to say sorry for immigration. The last one is the funniest of the lot. My old MP was quoted in a local paper saying there should be a wider debate about immigration this was 2006/7 (I still have the letters somewhere) but refused point blank to discuss it with me.
have to say that i wouldn’t touch processed food myself
but Yvette cooper?
comedy gold
Yvette was allowed by Evan to say whatever she wanted with scarcely an interruption. Evan’s tone – like a chat with a friend. As soon as Mark Harper, the Immigration Minister(Conservative) started to speak he couldn’t get a word in edgeways for Evan’s interruptions in an argumentative, bolshy tone of voice.
Evan needs to be gently advised that Harper is on-message, being in favour of more immigration.
But Mrs Bollox didn’t say ‘sorry’ despite the BBC just saying on TWatO that she did. She merely acknowledged that mistakes had been made.
Still, the right message was conveyed to the sheeple by the independent, unbiased state broadcaster!
On the BBC R4 Today Programme at 06:53 this morning (07/03), Evan Davis started a piece on the impending flood of Romanians due to arrive here at the start of next year. He started with a vaguely sarcastic tone to his voice which disappeared by the end. All his interviewees seemed to be counter the BBC meme:
ED (BBC) “Well, it didn’t come up in that report but there has been a lot of worrying, in the last week, over the prospect of Romanians and Bulgarians coming into Britain in large numbers. Millions sometimes it’s claimed. Ah-and claiming benefits here, when the border opens completely to them, at the end of the year. Well it turns out we are not the only country where there is this concern the Germans are worried too. Here is what their Home Affairs minister Hans-Peter Friedrich told our Berlin correspondent Steve Evans.”
H-PF “The right of free movement gives, for all people in Europe the opportunity to come to another country for work, for education, but it is not allowed to come only to Germany or to Great Britain to get social security. That’s the reason why we want to send people back. Eh-and, this is what we have to -um- regulate in our -er- European law.”
SE (BBC) “But, this is the European Europe and there is free movement of labour, of people.”
H-PF “I mean, there is no problem when people are coming to Germany for work. That’s what we want it’s what we want to have in Europe. But we don’t want to have people coming for only getting social security”
ED (BBC) “……..But let’s talk now to Raz Vasilue[?] who runs a recruitment firm for Romanians to come and work in hospitality in this country.”
……..
ED (BBC) “Just tell us how many – how much attention goes into thinking about benefits of Romanians before they come here. Is it something that is talked about in Romania? Are people aware of the social security systems in Britain or Germany?”
RV? “Yes it-it’s been it’s been talks in-on the news, newspapers. But, they’re not, we are not putting so much , and we shouldn’t put so much attention into saying that Romanians will go to Germany or UK just to claim social benefits. Of course they might be some people who were inclined to do that. Because the UK – it’s – maybe easier access to gain those benefits. But that’s not Romanians fault. It’s the people who have done those laws that permitted the Romanians to get access…..”
The BBC reminds me more and more of the stereotype boorish Brit who, when dealing with others (often guests or as a guest) deals with not getting the answers they want in conversation by simply saying the same thing again, over and over, only louder.
There’s a good conclusion to summarise this in the latest BBC Watch:
“BBC journalists do not seem to be particularly interested in understanding the people who make up the nation about which they report.”
Or, frankly, those of the nation they purport to speak for, either.
Fine for a propaganda megaphone. Not so great for a supposedly impartial, professional, representative educator and informer.
” the stereotype boorish Brit who, when dealing with others (often guests or as a guest) deals with not getting the answers they want in conversation by simply saying the same thing again, over and over, only louder.”
Oh, the irony.
scotty drive-by hits out with her handbag yet again
I see ltwf1964 is contributing nothing more than personal insults again. It’s hard to claim the moral high ground when you’re yelling obscenities from the gutter.
scott
you wouldd know all about the gutter
you’re a driveby trolling twat like your mates dhimmi dez and cold titz
you get no special priveliges and rights here you’ll be sorry to hear
if you persist in coming to talk crap and be offended,you’ll just have to get used to it
I’ve lurked on this site for some time now – never written, and the reason is for comments like these.
The level of abuse on this site is quite unpleasant. People who do not follow “the party line” are often insulted. The poster Colditz is abused routinely. Dec and Scott seem to be treated as figures of fun.
This is very off-putting for people who might want to help. Who wants to be abused?
The BBC is a monster, and it must be tamed, but I think a lot of people are put off because of nasty atmosphere on this website.
There is also a website that seems to speak a lot about Muslims, even if it has nothing to do with the BBC, and also seems pretty anti-gay.
I will not be posting here again, I would not like how they are abused, but I will continue to read.
I don’t work for the BBC. I don’t vote Labour. I am not gay. I don’t read The Guardian. I have never posted on this site under another name. This is my real name.
Also very good, James.
Textbook stuff.
Ant may be a bit confused, mind.
???
Dez (not Dec) is a figure of fun, as is colditz. Neither of them dare address the big issues. But I agree with your concerns in general. If you believe there’s a point to a blog detailing the bias of the BBC, you might want to consider posting more comments in future about various issues you think are important. Leading by example often works better than scolding. Help us to improve.
???
‘Dec and Scott seem to be treated as figures of fun.’
Well-known Geordie scamps?
Also, having posted this..
‘I will not be posting here again..
…posting again and again thereafter seems a bit… odd. If oddly familiar, as was the rest of your introductory declamation.
Which errs on proving something else.
David,
Improving is good.
But can get distracted from if being played.
‘FionnGM says:
October 3, 2012 at 6:27 am
Wow. Long time reader first time caller. Non Muslim, non BBC staff, non woman. You do yourselves no favours by spitting cliched rhetoric of the above groupings. Sad, bitter twisted lefties the rest of us. I went for a walk tody, fed ducks with left over bread. I will now turn in despite my insomnia. Gratified that I have at leased opined. My 10 year old knows tears from cheers.
It is not impossible.
pity you missed the bit then with cold titz accusing me of advocating beheading forbeeboids
no sniffy indignation with that one????
nah…..course not
maybe you should try guido’s site where the debate is a lot more restrained and defined,and trolls are treated with utmost respect 🙂
A lot of the stuff about Muslims is because the BBC systematically fails to report anything detrimental about them e.g. one of the greatest worldwide persecutions of Christians in the history of the church, which the Beeb barely bothers to notice. This site is (for reasons best known to themselves – they never quite get around to explaining what the hell they are doing here) under constant pressure from gay trolls
I can’t say I have seen any evidence of gay trolls on this site in the time I have been reading it.
I agree, I find the homophobia on this site distasteful. Frankly, Scott gets an undeserved hard time even though he does only appear to wave his single issue special needs flag and his sneering asides are monumentally irritating. But we obviously need Scott here especially as this site is one of a very few ‘broad church’ sites that encourage free speech – inevitably there will be a wide distribution of opinion. We also need to tolerate robust opinion. This site has posters that highlight Islamic homophobia and intolerance whilst simultaneously this site does have a fair livening of homophobia. The point is that there is freedom to post and unless the posts are pointless abuse, they should be treated with a modicum of respect
All I am saying is what this site appears like to an outsider. People on this site seem very happy with it as it is and that is great. But in my opinion I think it is unlikely you will get many new people because it is not a very friendly place.
James while I agree that there is some unessary abuse on here,compared with most other ‘topical news’ sites I find this quite gentille.no worse than the average branch meeting.
If you have an issue with anything said you should engage thats how democracy works
Mr James Stables I’ve lurked on this site.
That sounds a bit seedy.
This does rather prove my point.
I will carry on reading the site now, but won’t be trouble you anymore. I thought maybe you would like to know how an outsider views your site. If not, then I am sorry to have bothered you.
James, please contribute and ignore the nonsense: it is usually harmless. The anonymity of the net does mean people – usually thoroughly decent people whom you would enjoy arguing with in the pub – overstep the mark sometimes. If new posters don’t add to the site it will become even more dominated by the BBC pandering to Mohammadism theme.
Ok so let me see if i have got this right you don’t engage you don’t debate you do nothing untill the only time anyone hears a peep off you it’s your leaving rant ? so if you cannot be bothered why should anyone bother with you ?
I second “its all too much”, James. The discussion is more important than the people who simply have a talent to abuse. Every voice needs to heard. You can edit the crap out as you see fit. I do.
Mr stables, I’m sure we ALL look forward to seeing some contributions from yourself, whatever the viewpoint!
Scott, whilst one appreciates playing the man is probably the only skill-set you feel confident in attempting, trying to make Dez look like a reasoned debater is indeed brave but strategically flawed.
Guest Who, given your record of interjecting on threads with no other purpose other than to chastise either Dez or myself, your repeated jibes about “playing the man” ring exceedingly hollow.
If you want your words to have any effect, try not being such a blatant hypocrite.
‘record of interjecting on threads with no other purpose other than to chastise’
Scott, given I posted a reply to 45543, your off-topic, drive-by knee-jerk ‘interjection’ to have a hissy-fit is of course noted, and in no way stalky or hypocritical… because… you say so?
The precedent of you getting to chip in on others but get a pass on any blowback (down, Evan) may resonate in the BBC canteen, but not the real world.
Especially now Jim Dandy is not around as deluded, self-appointed hall monitor.
Equally playing the too frequent high horse card when lashing out from the safety of your special victim status.
I post, or comment on a variety of topical issues.
You don’t post anything original (guessing taking the BBC to task is not in your mindset, or brief), mostly snipe and about 90% of the time on a singular issue of near zero interest to me.
However, when your latest flailing seems in need of a comment, I do believe I’m entitled on a free… blog forum. Much as that appears to irk you.
Speaking of effect, I am content with the one you have with every shovel full you excavate in the very hollow place you inhabit, which may explain the echo you keep hearing.
It appears to me scottdezcolditz come on here to disrupt and divide, to provoke slanging matches and insults which a) they use on other sites to prove what bigots we all are and b) they hope will put other, genuine people off using the site, leaving just a hard core of contributors who will eventually get fed up and give up.
If you don’t want them to win, avoid the slanging matches – they never contribute to the debate and, I strongly suspect, all work for the BBC so you’re wasting your time, energy and blood pressure arguing with them anyway.
They’re mostly here to fight with ideological opponents. Any defense of the BBC is generally coincidental.
“…a singular issue of near zero interest to me.”
If it’s of no interest to you, you could always choose not to get involved, rather than pretend that the people you disagree with are doing something heinous and deserve your trademark paragraphs of dense, illogical, sneering hypocrisy.
If it’s of no interest to you, you could always choose not to get involved, rather than pretend that the people you disagree with are doing something heinous and deserve your trademark paragraphs of dense, illogical, sneering hypocrisy.
I really recognise the likes of you in that statement Scott, on nearly every post you and your ‘buddies’ make.
Couldn’t have put it better myself.
‘If it’s of no interest to you, you could always choose not to get involved..
On accusations hypocrisy and irony, you and I exchange these like twins giving each other £10 book tokens on their birthday.
So let’s stick to fact.
I said ‘near zero’, which you changed to ‘no’.
Chalk that up to whatever quaint BBC phrase for changing meanings to suit you prefer that they and you are allowed and no one else is.
I do tend to avoid involvement with your specialist subject as the homo-obsession exchanges you and those you attract serve mainly to fill up space with little other than impotent noise.
I replied to 45543, whose post was on EU immigration politics.
You opted to weigh in, as Dr. Foster might say, to pick a fight with me about… me.
So when it comes to getting knickers in a twist, in addition to getting your logic circuits unravelled, I might also suggest that writing such a thing on a blog that upsets you so much you are drawn to it like a moth to a flame is downright perverse.
I watched part of the documentary last night entitled ‘America’s Poor Kids’. Yes they appeared to be lovely children living in squalid conditions because their parents were in debt. They were obviously chosen for the sympathy appeal and vulnerability. Throughout the part of the programme I watched I felt there was an implied ‘ but of course things are better in the UK where there is Housing Benefit, Job Seekers Allowance, Attendance Allowance and any other money that the last government borrowed to give to people; and that the present government is struggling to reduce the bill.
I haven’t dared watch this yet, mostly because I have difficulty not throwing a heavy object at a tv screen telling me that children are worse off than during the Depression, or worse off than children living in the poverty-stricken tenements during the early years of the 20th Century. And especially because I know which President’s policies will not be blamed. Is there something there worth my time?
Nope. You know how it is when the BBC descends on the USA. The script is written before the research and the pictures merely illustrate the script. Don’t waste your time, David.
Dave, haven’t you noticed that because there is no social security in the USA, the capitalists have to target the poor (meaning the black/hispanic/injuns) with drone strikes to stop them staging an islamic revolution? I know it’s true because Pravda told me.
The BBC celebrate the blockade of Greenham Common and feminism: http://www.facebook.com/#!/media/set/?set=a.10152387884227588.1073741834.59145437587&type=1
Listening to BBC radio this morning…
Starts with major U-turn on immigration by labour….
Then serious discussion about it not being a u-turn but a change in emphasis…
Labour and BBC then agree Labour now has a progressive and forward thinking message about immigration…
And Finally immigration is a wonderful thing if handled in a compassionate and caring way, with the correct limits (no specifics), and would have been handled in a wonderful way if Labour were still in power… The coalition is generally heading in the right direction with this but Labour would have got it just about right….
Not a single mention of UKIP… the main reason all parties and even the BBC have suddenly thought it might not be a good idea to have unrestricted immigration
The “interviews” on Today failed to clarify what is happening here. There are (and were) 2 distinct immigrations from 1997 onwards: the one from the sub-continent and the one from the EU. God forbid that the treatment and analysis of those should be dealt with clearly and separately by the BBC (or the politicians of all parties).
Frankly – and this is never made absolutely clear – there is nothing we can now do (absent leaving the EU) about the movement of people within the EU. Cod-“apologies” from Mrs Balls are meaningless in the context of what’s already happened and will have no effect (and she and Evan and the coalition know it) in the foreseeable future.
As to the other immigration, nothing will affect that until the primary purpose rule is reinstated: even then the social problems engendered by the open door policy since 1997 will not go away, in fact they’ll get worse. The invidious effect of that immigration on almost every aspect of our civil life (health services, housing, education provision, crime, electoral and other corruption) is more or less ignored. Rather, any remarks or treatment on the effect of subcontinental immigration on the BBC listening/viewing services tend to be couched either in terms of the “benefits” of immigration to the indigenous population or how badly immigrants are treated by whitey.
Accordingly, the BBC is happy to host non-discussions about “immigration” with and between policians who talk a lot and “apologise” a lot but, in reality, do little. There is of course the quarterly ritual crucifixion of Sir Andrew Green from Migration Watch on Today (for “impartiality” you understand) but such episodes are rare and only highlight the bien pensant drumbeat evident in the day-to-day programming. Sure we all want productive immigrants and spendthrift tourists but inchoate disagreement about what the net immigration statistics mean just serves to allow the politicians to obfuscate both the history and the likely future of immigration.
“BBC spends £8.3million on computer program to monitor foreign news which has NEVER worked”
By Tara Brady.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2289519/BBC-spends-8-3million-program-monitor-foreign-news-NEVER-worked.html
‘to monitor foreign news which has NEVER worked’
Must confess to having had a Lynne Truss moment initially, and mused that the BBC’s ‘British’ news has not exactly been working too well for a while either.
“BBC executive’s £4,000 flight on expenses AFTER leaving the job: Corporation’s taxi claims also rocket by 19% despite drive to slash spending ”
By Keith Gladdis.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2289156/BBC-executives-4-000-flight-expenses-AFTER-leaving-job-Corporations-taxi-claims-rocket-19-despite-drive-slash-spending.html
Was listening to the World Service or Radio 4 the other day, they were discussing Cameron’s £35 million grant to combat female genital mutilation. However they discussed them problem as purely a black African one, and that it was purley cultural.
However they never mentioned that this practice is prevalent in Egypt, the Middle East, Iraq and Pakistan.
One reason why there is this practice is prevalent in these areas is never mentioned. Around 730 AD St John of Damascus wrote the first account of the practices of Islam. He wrote that the prophet commanded both men and women muslims be circumcised. The Beeb somehow failed to mention that.
So, even BBC-NUJ drops BOYLE now.
“Frankie Boyle booed by Comic Relief crowd as he makes ‘jokes’ about the Queen and Duchess of Cambridge so revolting that his entire sketch is axed from BBC3 broadcast”
By Sarah Bull.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2289454/Frankie-Boyle-booed-foul-mouthed-Comic-Relief-rant–AXED-broadcast.html
Shame. I actually thought he was once one of the sharper wits on Mock the Week, but a lot here is just unfunny.
And his twitter feed is simply dire.
However, the DM can get a bit po-faced.
But for real comedy, the BBC has filled the void again..
”It was an extremely tight edit of a 3-and-a-half hour show down to 90 minutes and not every act or performance made the final broadcast.’
One presumes this will be how they handle future transcripts as the BBC and ‘redaction’ are now synonymous, and not in a most trusted, national treasure way, with BBC SOP to rewrite its own dictionary:
‘It was an extremely tight edit of a 200pp report down to 199 pages of blacked out text, as no word spoken or written by anyone could get past Helen’s final legal line. But we are committed to transparency’.
It has to be said that Comic Relief brings out the very worst in comedians, and I have avoided showing any interest in Red Nose Day because of the way in which many of its supporters ‘enforce’ people to take part in it as it it were the only worthwhile charity on the planet.