Another week and another open thread…let’s hear what you’ve found….
Open Thread Monday
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir Dec 19, 03:04
Midweek 18th December 2024
The liars caught out over and over: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZX3XFzmTww - BRISSLES Dec 19, 00:58
Midweek 18th December 2024
Perhaps they’re looking to give Chopper (Ive done this, Ive done that ..) Hopeless his own show – he infiltrates… - StewGreen Dec 19, 00:25
Midweek 18th December 2024
GBnews new lineup statement doesn’t mention Dolan https://www.gbnews.com/shows/gb-news-makes-2025-programming-announcement - StewGreen Dec 19, 00:24
Midweek 18th December 2024
Foreign funded Client Earth have been using lawfare trickery to usurp democracy on UK enviro policy, for years They are… - wwfc Dec 18, 23:08
Midweek 18th December 2024
I wonder why this is happening more and more now let me think !! His 61-year-old father collapsed and died… - wwfc Dec 18, 22:50
Midweek 18th December 2024
Well looks like this site will not be around much longer happy heart attack and you paid for it yourself… - atlas_shrugged Dec 18, 22:39
Midweek 18th December 2024
A Turkish crime boss said to be one of Britain’s biggest drug dealers has won his human rights battle against… - Fedup2 Dec 18, 22:20
Midweek 18th December 2024
Me . Every year – I used to get flu and it took me out for 2 or 3 weeks… - Eddy Booth Dec 18, 22:18
Midweek 18th December 2024
[img]https://i.postimg.cc/fL5j2Zh2/Screenshot-20241218-215548.png[/img] - Emmanuel Goldstein Dec 18, 22:13
Midweek 18th December 2024
This 10.5 £billion that the waspi wimmin want….that’s half a black hole.
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
Tonight’s Westminster Hour (Radio 4). Presenter Carolyn Quinn kept repeating this weeks’ favourite bBBC catchphrase ‘swivel-eyed loons’ but developed the meme: “Lord Feldman strenuously denies using the phrase, but even if he didn’t say it, it must be what a lot of people are thinking”.
Anti-Conservative bias. It’s in their DNA.
‘but even if he didn’t say it, it must be what a lot of people are thinking’
If that’s what was said, and it’s in their DNA, it explains a fair bit about the calibre of factual reporting around the BBC, if still does not excuse it.
‘And here is the BBC N… what a lot of people here are thinking’.
One is sure there is a unique ‘context’ justification being run past management for trialling here soon.
Likely by folk who have a selective regard for what is, or is not, put in folks’ mouths, as it were.
Quinn’s exact words were “… what about those comments then? He strenuously denies them, but isn’t the problem that, whether or not he did say them, the words have a ring of truth to them? Many activists will be convinced that David Cameron and the hierarchy in the party do regard them as swivel-eyed loons, this kind of revelation fitted the truth.”
In just two sentences, the bBBC liar managed to get her biased views across, using the word ‘truth’ (twice), and ‘revelation’ about an unsubstantiated (and denied) comment.
“A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”
Thank you.
Rather compounds the negative reputational impact of the efforts being thrown behind this by BBC staff.
‘Rings of truth’ and ‘fitted truths’ may suit the BBC concept of ‘truthiness’, but they are not ones I am inclined to trust as much more than sticking the knife in, as part of ‘events interpretation #101’.
Fine for a declared tribal member or PR representative… not so great in a a supposed impartial news medium.
Appalling bias, they even admit they are simply making the news up. The government should insist that the reporter is sacked, but they won’t, they are too feeble.
Its a repeat of pleb gate – the BBC ran with the story everyday for a week when they thought the Tory minister had insulted the police. When it later transpired that the police had probably made it up the BBC weren’t interested, insisting that what was actually said was of little interest to the public.
Not sure, but ‘What we think is of interest to the public; not what actually happened’ may be many things… popular even in some quarters, but as objective, professional news it remains a credibility stretch.
Lucky really we are only forced to pay £145.50pa to get served it, like it or not.
“He strenuously denies them, but isn’t the problem that, whether or not he did say them, the words have a ring of truth to them?”
We should remind BBC supporters of this sentiment next time they bristle at the suggestion that the BBC is breeding ground for perverts and sexual predators. Remember the HIGNFY episode with Ms. Balding – “Endemic rape and child molestation at the BBC?…quick, look at this Daily Mail article!”
“what about those comments then? He strenuously denies them, but isn’t the problem that, whether or not he did say them, the words have a ring of truth to them?”
A bit like when Andrew Neather strenuously denies saying Labours aim was to “Rub the rights nose in diversity”?
A new BBC meme perhaps?
The leader of the party of swivel-eyed loons has impaired judgement because of the demon drink?
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3582/video_bbc_presenter_slapped_down_over_question_of_farage_s_drinking_and_smoking_habits
BBC’s News Watch, a feed back programme to give the impression that they really cares about the local peasants complaints.
” Why do you never mention the religion of the Pakistan muslim sex gangs in Oxford, Derby, Oldham, Rochdale etc etc ?”
BBC Harridan Mary Hockaday, commissar of all news, ” We don’t give a rule book on language to our reporters !”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01sgrqf/Newswatch_17_05_2013/
Hmm, some how I doubt that, as the NUJ guidelines on reporting race tells us, don’t mention the gorilla in the room.
ethicaljournalisminitiative.org/en/contents/nuj-guidelines-on-race-reporting
Again I will go back to the complaint last year I made when the BBc failed to report on the muslims on trail in Liverpool. Despite the case being all over the internet and several groups demonstrating outside the court room. All we had was the sound of silence from the BBc. This was the response…note back in those days someone used to put a name on the reply to my complaints..Reference CAS-1288417-M8C02L
Thanks for contacting us about BBC News.
I understand you’re unhappy at the lack of coverage of a court case in Liverpool.
Choosing the stories to include in our bulletins; the order in which they appear and the length of time devoted to them is a subjective matter and one which we know not every viewer and listener will feel we get right every time.
Factors such as whether it’s news that has just come in and needs immediate coverage, how unusual the story is and how much national interest there is in the subject matter will all play a part in deciding the level of coverage and where it falls within a bulletin.
Essentially this is a judgement call rather than an exact science but BBC News does appreciate the feedback when viewers and listeners feel we may have overlooked or neglected a story.
I’d like to assure you that I’ve registered your complaint on our audience log. This is a daily report of audience feedback that’s made available to many BBC staff, including members of the BBC Executive Board, channel controllers and other senior managers.
The audience logs are seen as important documents that can help shape decisions about future programming and content.
Thanks again for taking the time to contact us.
Kind Regards
Kevin Freeburn
BBC Complaints
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints
So not much national interest in pedos back then?
This is the intitial responce . What would be ideal is if you appealed and said this is not a satisfactory responce. The BBC complaints procedure only begins to take you seriously if you don’t accept their first answer. You are entitiled to a fuller and more relevent answer to your specific complaint as you pay for their services .
I have pursued a couple of complaints further down the line I think I made a further two complaints related to this story.
‘Essentially this is a judgement call rather than an exact science’
Interesting where the calls get made as the science fails. Maybe, as with Ms. Quinn above, within the BBC it’s more based on ‘what people are thinking’; a hard measure to define indeed, especially with few parameters to work on.
It’s always interesting to see what the responses are to complaints will be.
As Lynette says, this is standard cookie-cutter, designed to initiate the attrition process to make you give up in frustration or needle you into crossing one of their internal ‘abuse’ lines so they can pull the plug. Like Flokkers here try and do but with the difference that they can only flounce and sulk vs. this can actually get you expedited.
This one is pure subjective waffle, with a dash of semantics, so they can blow it off any way they fancy. It does not address the specifics, though proof of negatives is always the hardest one to pursue. It may not be worth it.
The annoying thing is that while it will be ‘logged’, it will also be ignored, and count on no measure of complaints. Hence it will never have happened. Job done.
Bear in mind a few things to take on board as you will. Citing codes and names tells them who you are or are quoting. Doesn’t add much to anyone else so maybe worth leaving out if sharing in public forums. They also deem this ‘bad faith’, which is another internally-concocted and assessed plug-puller.
I’ve been complaining for some years now. As I have said in a previous thread the BBC know exactly who I am. As I have the dubious delight of having to pay for this this service,(and yes they are still busy sending threat letters to our other address where there is still no tv), they have never implied that the replies are in confidence so I have no problem at all pasting the whole body of the communication. View it as a training aide for anyone complaining for the first time. I think someone said that this was the first action that they make. In fact the first reply in my experience is just not to bother to reply at all. One of my friends complained for the first time recently. After a couple of months I asked him i9f he’d received a reply. Guess what? I asked him again a while ago if he had bothered to pursue it which of course he hadn’t. If this is a wide spread practice and to be fair I can only base it on my limited knowledge, how many complaints would be dealt with in this manner.
You are of course quite right, and your friend typical.
See, the system works!
” I’d like to assure you that I’ve registered your complaint on our audience log. Thanks again for taking the time to contact us. Kind Regards
Kevin Freeburn”
In other words, ” There, there, pat on the head, now get lost !” Talk about patronising.
‘Mary Hockaday, commissar of all news, ” We don’t give a rule book on language to our reporters !”
I had not realised Viewsexcuse was still going after Ray Snoddy left. No change then.
Ms. Hockaday’s ‘assurances on concerns’ are interesting.
Is it true that accuracy is the only constraint?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/page/guidance-language-full/
Beyond this, it stretches credulity that there is also not a vast whispered corridor nudge-nudge unwritten code that any seeking career advance or promotion and pension (of the non-contract breaking void variety) will be aware of. What language is smiled upon. What is crushed.
Also, I have to say that giving the perp’s street addresses does seem unnecessary. Given the BBC gets upset about more being shared in public than is ‘good faith’, why was this legal but irresponsible raised topic not discussed beyond ‘everyone else does it’?
This exchange was textbook selective semantics on Ms. Hockaday’s account. I must say Ms. Ahmed was on the whole pretty good, if letting things get dropped too easily on occasion, perhaps for that risible ‘all we have time for’ reason that lets too many slippery customers like Ms. Hockaday wiggle off the hook as she tried here. Sadly for her, her responses were utterly typical, useless and bent. And stood out as such by a mile. Market rate talent indeed.
On the Newsnight question the answer was simply that the appointment of Ian Katz as a ‘hugely experienced editor’ solved all ills. Apparently.
He’s a print guy entering broadcast, with such as Operation Clarke County on his resume.
That may make Ms. Hockaday and the rest of the BBC comfortable in the belief they have again got it about right, but hardly reassures any less easily convinced by bland statements of personal or corporate self-delusion over actual facts.
All day the bBC has been promoting this view that the Tories are in disarray over:
1) Europe
2) Gay Marriage.
The thing is, if looked at in detail we find the people berating him for Europe are..EU friendly and the gay thing, well the bBC while saying that a load of Tories marched up to 10 Downing St in which to express their disappointment in allowing Gay people to marry kind of keep quiet on how 500 Islamic Mullahs have written an open letter to the Daily Telegraph in which to state their anger.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/10065280/Muslim-leaders-stand-against-gay-marriage.html
The BBC workers do seem to be enjoying the ‘Swivel eyed loons’ furore.
I suppose they would, given their political slant.
Not so funny when they realise UKIP will be the beneficiary.
As Cameron is one of their own it does seem odd that they give him a hard time.
Odd lot the beeboids.
‘Not so funny when they realise UKIP will be the beneficiary.’
Given the ad Mr. Farage is running today, you may be correct.
I get the feeling that in a begrudging way the beeboids want to promote UKIP so that they can take as many votes away from the Conservatives at the next election as possible.
BBC 3 tonight Monday 9 pm ” Branded a Witch.”
”This is not just medieval history, it’s happening now… and here in Britain. Kevani Kanda explores the dark and secretive world of faith-based child abuse which, in the last few years, has seen an upsurge in children being abused and even murdered by relatives in Britain.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01swd7g
Gosh ! Witchcraft in Britain, what thrilling ‘vibrancy’ !! Thought all that died out in the 16th century ? I’m going to take a wild guess, is it because the Labour government imported millions of African immigrants ?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2326352/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Peter-Mandelson-admits-Labour-brought-migrants-losing-working-class-votes.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
The BBC will only have a go at this because it is Christian, or as the programme blurb has it “ancient traditions have been hijacked in the name of Jesus” (whatever that is supposed to mean).
They are not exactly falling over themselves to other, more prevalent religious problems of our age.
erm, “faith” … based child abuse?
oh like :-
female genital mutilation, child marriage, “honour” violence, honour killing, encouraging paedophillia, deliberate brainwashing, preventing integration, encouraging incest as religious duty, etc etc
the small matter of recent court cases involving a erm certain “faith” based issue, in bradford, derby, oldham, rochdale, stafford, nottingham, hastings, oxford, brighton, etc.
you mean something like that? … boy are they on the wrong track 😀 … they would need a whole series just to cover it superficially.
what do you mean …
“its not the church of england though”?
“not just medieval history, it’s happening now”
too true … (please don t read if easily upset)
“Child marriage happens in the UK too, warn British MPs” … girlsnotbrides.com
Noggin
I noted that euphemism too, ‘faith based’ crime when describing witchcraft. Last year in London, Congolese immigrants tortured their 15 year old relative by hammer and chisels and then killed him.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082618/Kristy-Bamu-15-tortured-death-witch-claim-Christmas-Day-Newham.html
What part of cultural enrichment would that be classified as?
‘….in the last few years, has seen an upsurge…’
Goodness. Has this been a new British fashion I’ve missed?
Or was witchraft already present in certain overseas cultures? The BBC will always find that hard to say.
“Goodness. Has this been a new British fashion I’ve missed?”
Yes. Wicker men have been appearing all over the South Downs.
I left Yorkshire to get away from that sort of thing.
How the bBC rewrites the news coming out of Syria in which to edit Hezb-allah out of the picture.
Syrian army storms rebel town of Qusair
Reading the above report do you get the impression that the town of Qusair is important to the rebels in which to allow them to move to and from Lebanon.. Have a look on any map, the town sits at the end of the Beqaa Valley. You know that Beqaa Valley which is the home turf for Hezb-allah. Now the valley is faced with steep mountainous ridges on either side , the easiest route away from prying eyes into Syria is through Qusair. Yet the bBC don’t mention this fact, neither do they mention that they are using the town to prevent Hezb-allah from moving freely into Syria. I quote from Al Arabiya,
“A battalion of opposition fighters had earlier set a trap along the banks of the Assi river on the Syrian side of the Lebanese border. The battle saw the deaths of at least 10 Hezbollah fighters and wounded dozens more as they attempted to enter Syrian territory.”
Did anybody see that video of the airstrike, where the jet aircraft drops its load on the town. Now when the IDF used smoke shells (yes smoke shells) in GAza, the bBC was quick to promote this as a human rights crime by the use of phosphorus (Nobody killed) Yet when Syria uses a number of 500Ib bombs on a town then..nothing. Infact the bBC rewrite the story in which to edit the involvement of Hezb-allah. Watch the bBC video it substantiates everything I write.
Hey I am not supporting either side here, but the fact remains the bBC is only informing the British public what its Middle Eastern Editor wants you to hear. (He is a friend of Assad)
The BBC seems undecided whether Hizbullah are fighters or militants when they are assisting Assad.
thanks Pounce – I can trust far more what you bring to our attention that the National Broadcaster.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22560237
How to cook Gaza style (don’t forget to arm the fuse!)
I thought the Gazans preferred KFC Chicken!
See Jerusalem Post “Smugglers use tunnels to sneak in KFC chicken from Egypt into Gaza”
BBC 5 Live are asking : ‘is it evil to avoid tax?’
I don’t know.
Is it virtuous and holy to spend tax payers’ money?
Bit of a tautology – The laws on tax are implemented by the Government and it is up to them to ensure that the tax that they require cannot be avoided. In contract law it is called the ‘contra proferentem’ principle.
I find it interesting that thanks to the efforts of the BBC and like minded media (i.e. most of the mainstream press), most people would now find the following idea repugnant:
“it is morally good to minimise the tax government receives by only paying that which is prescribed, and avoiding any unnecessary payments otherwise”
Whereas, if you understand the link between high taxes, big government, and socialism/marxism, you can see immediately why any free market capitalist (in the original orthodox economic sense, or alternatively austrian economics school sense) would support the idea that the greater good is served by starving big government of its lifeblood (taxation).
This, incidentally, is also the reason that groups such as the modern Tea Party (before it was corrupted by the more progressive republicans) support ‘sound money’ as a core principle for limiting government.
Briefly, government revenue comes from only two sources – taxation and monetary inflation. The first is revenue transfer from specific, easily identified groups, whilst the second is a revenue transfer that is usually hidden by official statistics such as CPI.
But now, it seems that the BBC and other left wing media have managed to move the Overton window with public discourse successfully shifted to allow travesties such as e.g. show trials for companies not ‘paying their way’ (such as Google) and media support for government crackdowns on tax avoidance (which has always been perfectly legal).
it all fits in with the liberal “progressive’ view so beloved of the average media droid.
Ideally all income should be at the disposal of the state. Rewards are then made by the state to all.Tax is not then necessary.
Of course the more “progressive” and state loving the worker the greater his reward.
As this is the model currently used by the BBC- tax the nation then reward ourselves- I am not surprised it would find favour. .
The only weapon we have against the over powerful state is to limit it’s capacity to tax our work . The current demonisation of large companies is but a prelude to the notion that all income belongs to the state.
Some call it communism and socialism. I call it tyrrany
Did anyone challenge the hypocrits (5live presenters) about their own tax and NI employment status.
Most popular phrases today remain “Swivel-eyed loons” and “Gay Marriage”. I am heartily sick of both.
In Case of Emergency!
I know a number of you remain extremely frustrated at the BBC’s failure to properly investigate and respond to pretty-well every complaint sent their way.
But help is at hand. Here’s a letter written by an equally frustrated rail passenger to the train company which refused to reimburse his rail fare.
I think it might be easily adaptable for BBC use!
http://i1.cdnds.net/13/18/618×686/odd-greater-anglia-letter.jpg
Absolute quality!
Love it.
Initially, I got quite encouraged by this BBC story…
Climate slowdown means extreme rates of warming ‘not as likely’
Scientists say the recent downturn in the rate of global warming will lead to lower temperature rises in the short-term. Since 1998, there has been an unexplained “standstill” in the heating of the Earth’s atmosphere. Writing in Nature Geoscience, the researchers say this will reduce predicted warming in the coming decades
Until,
But long-term, the expected temperature rises will not alter significantly.
Oh.
Not everyone agrees with this perspective. Prof Steven Sherwood, from the University of New South Wales, says the conclusion about the oceans needs to be taken with a grain of salt for now. “There is other research out there pointing out that this storage may be part of a natural cycle that will eventually reverse, either due to El Nino or the so-called Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, and therefore may not imply what the authors are suggesting,” he said.
The authors say there are ongoing uncertainties surrounding the role of aerosols in the atmosphere and around the issue of clouds. “We would expect a single decade to jump around a bit but the overall trend is independent of it, and people should be exactly as concerned as before about what climate change is doing,” said Dr Otto.
Is there any succour in these findings for climate sceptics who say the slowdown over the past 14 years means the global warming is not real? “None. No comfort whatsoever,” he said.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22567023
The BBC admits there is no significant rise in global temperatures over the past 15 or so years, but immediately reminds us that this is of no consequence since the projections (these are the models that have so so far got it all completely wrong) suggest it’ll be ‘business as usual for the CAGW mongers once temperatures get back on track – oh, and by the way, don’t go thinking that a flatlining global temperature for the past decade and half means the great climate catastrophe isn’t on the way – cos it still is, you know!’
BBC + Climate Change = *facepalm.jpg*
On matters of settled science, it must be nice to have a lot of money, control the edit, and set interesting precedents.
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/05/video-meet-climate-trolls
Seems that while the argument is uncertain and febrile, it’s the person who really matters, so it seems some have selected their heroes and villains beyond the power of persuasive debate. Then cut it to suit. Along with a set-up ‘debate’. Old boy (to be fair, kinda savvy – they could have chosen a ringer) vs. cute young sciencette (to be fair, not that savvy – they could have chosen a better champion), modded by young hip dude, posing leading questions & filtered afterwards by his mates in the suite. Actually quite interesting ‘This isn’t about [journalists]; it’s about you guys’. Uh-huh.
Now, who else does that (this is the bit to keep it ‘on-topic’ in case any hall monitors are leaping to their keyboards)?
Then there’s the notion of tracking down folk who post at home. Not creepy at all. Oh, who’s that at the door?
And Flokkers… as I get that, what if it happened back?
BBC-NUJ on South Africa.
Late in the day, after years of ANC corruption and discrimination, Beeboid Simpson finally gets around to asking:
“Do white people have a future in South Africa?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22554709
Thanks for the link. A very odd article indeed. That the question should be posed tells us something about South Africa that for many years has been kept quiet.
There seems to be good reason to worry that when Mandela dies the situation for the whites wil deteriorate.
But just imagine the howls from the liberals if the colours -white and black- were to be reversed in any other country.
The whites in SA like the Israelis are not really of any concern to a good liberal leftie. They do not fit the profile of victims of white civilisation. In their eyes mere collaterall damage in the cause of the liberal pusuit of the impossible world.
“The Gruesome Reality of Racist South Africa”
By Arnold Ahlert .
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/arnold-ahlert/the-gruesome-reality-of-racist-south-africa/
A Warning to America from South Africa.
http://www.manews.org/0105sawarning.html
“Do white people have a future in South Africa?”
No.
http://www.southafricaproject.info
They do not have one here. Tonight’s “pointless” (a repeat) had a question on the languages used in the census questionnaire – Hindi, Urdu, Portugese, Korean etc etc but not Afrikaans
“Those who fit in and succeed will certainly have a future. As for the rest, there are no guarantees whatsoever. ”
Chilling words from the mouthpiece of the liberal inquisition.
Their blue print for a future ‘mixed britannia’?
I read Simpson’s piece and was encouraged that he didn’t take the view that the whites deserved what they got, or really take sides at all. I honestly don’t understand what he meant by “fit in”. The “succeed” part I get, as he’d already pointed out that there was still a well-off, prosperous white contingent who didn’t appear to be in any danger. But what does “fit in” mean? He wasn’t talking about multiculturalsim before that, nor had he suggested that those poorest Afrikaner farmers were racists who needed to be educated or whatever. So I don’t get it.
According to the BBC’s Radio Times it seems that only a “homophobe” wouldn’t find the stagey antics of our Gay knights the funniest of programmes
Which camp are you in — lover or loather? If the latter, you’ve probably already given up on Vicious, a show that’s divided viewers and critics. But if you accept and revel in the fact that Stuart and Freddie are two gay men unabashed in their extravagant mannerisms and insults, which only the unimaginative would condemn as stereotypical, then enjoy because this series gets funnier, naughtier and, importantly, kinder to its characters.
I’m sure that only homophobia could account for the programme losing almost 50% of its audience from the first to the third episode (5.78m to 2.66m) and its nothing to do with its unimaginative plot
The show is just a gay version of Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse’s Old Gits !
I really enjoy this show, the combination of Francis de la Tour, Derek Jacobi and Ian McKellen are a joy to behold and I think the series is improving with each episode 🙂
it actually is great to see them.
but the material their working with is dire.
True but still better in my eyes then ‘Miranda’ god it is awful and you get threatened for not paying to watch that garbage ! !!!!!
Mr Miranda Hart, a transvestite comedian who thinks that pulling faces and falling over is funny. I thought slapstick died out with the Keystone Cops.
yes similar only …. without the humour
😀
“this series gets funnier,”??
where? … in the … “right on” … voting for gay marriage lobby.
a hint for getting the ratings up, a gay muslim lodger, comes to stay …
Halal Al .. whose struggling to come “out” as he s a teacher at the local madrassa, lots of embarrassment and laughs ensue, as the pair have to enlighten the school head and mosque
go-ers, to the joys of modern same sex relationships.
…but fortunately the new imam is a transsexual….
As a gay man myself I can’t bear to watch ‘Vicious’ (it was originally going to be entitled ‘Vicious Old Queens’). It’s actually quite painful viewing. I don’t know – and I never have known – any gay men as completely ‘pantomime-camp’ as those two old hams. The series lacks the wit and the charm of something like ‘Will and Grace’ which was beautifully written and brilliantly acted.
‘Vicious’ is a hideous throw-back to 70’s sit-coms – unfunny, unrepresentative of anyone but cartoon characters, over-acted and out-of-date. I seriously hope the target audience (presumably queer audiences) disown the whole thing as a bit of an embarrassment all round.
“I don’t know – and I never have known – any gay men as completely ‘pantomime-camp’ as those two old hams.”
You’ve not come across our Scott then?
Sorry but couldn’t resist it.
WAH WAH WAH AD HOMINEM ETC ETC
(C) hippiepooter and his stones thrown from a house of glass
“The series lacks the wit and the charm of something like ‘Will and Grace’ which was beautifully written and brilliantly acted.”
Bizarrely, the chief writer on Vicious was also responsible for Will and Grace. From what I hear from friends who were at the recordings, it worked better in the studio. The overplaying that comes across on camera would, I imagine, not be quite as ridiculous when you’re quite a way back with a bank of cameras between…
My straight husband cannot stand Vicious either and asks why on earth two (or three if you count Frances De La Tour) respected actors ever agreed to be in it. Still it is on ITV so we cannot blame the BBC for this one.
It`s always good when the BBC give us a ready stuffed turkey of a show like Citizen Khan or Vicious( I know it`s ITV, but the points the same).
Gets panned episode One…and we know there`ll be weeks yet for the announcer to tell us what a treat is in store before every miserable episode.
Week by week you can hear the loss of the will to lie…even to live…getting that bit greater.
I like that…I`m sad in that way!
Must listen in to how they herald the arrival of this weeks dead dog smelling of lavender water, with a rather jaunty cravat, worn a la mode!
But if you accept and revel in the fact that Stuart and Freddie are two gay men unabashed in their extravagant mannerisms and insults, which only the unimaginative would condemn as stereotypical
—————————————————————————
Dear A Droid Times,
I am condemning it as stereotypical.
I must be unimaginative.
(or perhaps you are full of sh*t).
I’m also condemning it as completely and utterly unfunny, like all the rest of your *comedy* output.
And trust me, I know comedy.
Worth pointing out, perhaps, that (a) Vicious is not a BBC sitcom (as others have noted – let’s ignore ChrisH’s “I know it`s ITV, but the points the same”, which I’m sure he thinks makes sense to him); and (b) the Radio Times hasn’t been a BBC property since it was sold in August 2011.
So, two reasons why it’s outside Biased BBC’s remit. But hey. Biased BBC never lets facts get in the way, does it?
If only you would ignore me Scott!
But you continue to drop by with your observations that are never less than aimless contrarian Beeb puffery.
Don`t know what you see in us!
the so-called BBC’s so-called Environment correspondent, the environmental extremist broadcaster Matt McGrath, finally admits global warming is a total load of bollox, although the above mentioned moonbat is in serious damage limitation mode for the envirmonemtal movement
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22567023
the so-called BBC should now appologise to the whole world for its misleading reporting over the past 15 years and admit its been broadcasting moonbat propaganda
He’s admitted no such thing. Most of the article strove to reassure everyone that it was still serious, and the reduction of warming would be insignificant. I assume that’s what you meant by “damage limitation mode”. The one voice critical of this new study was from the Warmist perspective. McGrath then closes with this:
Is there any succour in these findings for climate sceptics who say the slowdown over the past 14 years means the global warming is not real?
“None. No comfort whatsoever,” he said.
Revealing isn’t it? You would think that everyone would be ‘comforted’ if global warming was proved to be not occurring. The perverse truth is that the green lobby actually wants the earth to be heading for disaster , and evidence to the contrary is regarded by them as bad news.
Hmm funny how they are more ‘end of days’ and ‘rapture ‘ obsessed then, the right wing fundamentalist Christians they claim to hate soooo much !
Got to be a scale hasn`t there?
Do the JWs, the Jonestown lot or the BBC Greenies have most Chicken-Licking tendencies?
Is there a Jones/Frazer Index available-or do we make our own?
Watchtower or Harrabins Stardate Log…fresh from his bottom!
The watermelons of the Left (green on the outside, red on the inside) are depending on AGW as the only way they can now exert total control world-wide, the rest of their experiments in totalitarianism having gone completely tits up.
Just read up on the ‘mitigating actions’ they have drawn up to fight global warming and it tells you all you need to know. Then read the UN’s Agenda 21 to see how this translates into a world eco-Marxist totalitarian state. When more people wake up to what is behind the AGW movement, and why the likes of McGrath are so keen to perpetuate the myth (and it is a myth – all their projections have been wrong, wrong, wrong), and realise how much they have been conned and fleeced in its name, the BBCand its warmist camp followers will have hell to pay.
Yet another CAGW/Climate Change article with no opportunity to comment. Unless I’ve missed one, it has been months since readers have had a chance to discuss the BBC’s output. Can’t think why.
For INBBC to report, or to censor?:-
“UK POLICE PROBE AT LEAST 54 MORE MUSLIM CHILD SEX SLAVERY GANGS”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/05/uk-police-probe-at-least-54-more-muslim-child-sex-slavery-gangs-.html
That Orwell Prize-winning journalist mentioned this to Evan Davis on Today last week, so technically not censorship, but all Davis was concerned with was making sure everyone understood that the “vast majority” of sexual abuse crimes were done by solo white men. At some point, somebody is going to have to do the numbers for real, and then we’ll see about that BBC Narrative.
Hi David, have you got Davis’ actual words? If he really said that i think he needs investigaing too.
the BBC report ? … hello?
– in the distance an owl hoots, as a cold wind blows down an empty corridor
Here you are at 2:19:19: 3 days left to listen
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01sdnkd
Listen to the ‘controversial’ Evan Davis (who ‘some people say’ has a clear left wing liberal bias!) turn cartwheels across the floor, trying to avoid, evade and deflect.
He probably went a whiter shade of pale, his guest being completely off message. Mr Norfolk, no doubt, will not be back anytime soon.
Perfect example of “walking on eggs”.
It was claimed that Ann Cryer sounded the first alarm bell but Nick Griffin beat her to it by two years. It was implied that this amounted to “spreading far right poison”. How much damage had been inflicted on young girls in the meantime?
I understand that the “poison” was not a Goebbels-style rant, delivered on a street corner, but a dossier of victims which was handed to the police.
Nick Griffin is not Ray Honeyford, but in both cases the authorities preferred to shoot the messenger. Mustn’t spread the wrong type of “poison”, must we?
“we did one story and moved on”
… but the police dossier?
“not wanting to give a platform to the far right” ??!?*!? …
… were those facts correct or not?
“the far right spread their poison”
… was it the truth though?
Here’s my comment on it from last week, with key quotes. And my thanks to #88, for providing the link to the audio below.
Thank you David and thanks to #88.
Crazy. Must say not just Davis but Norfolk too. As you say, “At some point, somebody is going to have to do the numbers for real”…
White flight is true, not just from London. In 2001 census just under 91% were “White”, in 2011 this was 86%.
2001: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_the_United_Kingdom
2011: harder to find as ‘Asian’ has been lumped together (all media did this too)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Asian#Demographics
2% Pakistani so we can assume 1% Pakistani male…and 43% White male. This needs to be taken into account in the numbers and I doubt whether the “by far FAR FARRR!! and away majority of such crimes are by white solo males”.
I’m just a bit puzzled.
How can::
“everyone understood that the “vast majority” of sexual abuse crimes were done by solo white men”
when for so many years so many sex crimes were being covered up by the MSM*, police and the Social Services (aptly, the SS)?
If these crimes were being covered up they didn’t appear in the crime figures, so that would have skewed the figures. Is Evan Davis too thick to realise this? If so, he is incompetent and therefore vastly overpaid.
Please bear in mind that even now it is only a very few of the hard-core ringleaders that are finally being arrested and investigated.
All (the hundreds, thousands, maybe more?) of their customers who shared their attitude, joined in their crimes and kept their secrets are being ignored. I wonder why? The BBC wonders for how long it can stick its fingers in its ears and go ‘la-la-la-la we’re not listening’, or as Evan Davis maintains the lie ‘everyone understood…’.
*I’m pretty sure the complicit MSM includes the ever-so-clever Evan Davis
Also, when the term ‘vast majority’ is used, it refers to absolute numbers rather than percentage of offenders from the given ethnic group. My suspicion is that if the statistics were available, we would find that on a percentage basis, white men (along with chinese men, and hindu/sikh/buddhist asian men) have lower rates of offending in this type of crime than muslim asian men.
I doubt such statistics will ever be compiled however, never mind released, as they would fuel the most heinous of thought crimes in our PC culture today – the idea that many muslims don’t integrate, don’t want to integate, and even worse, seek to destroy native culture in the UK.
It must be bad for poor Twinkie Davis when he has to drown out the sound of mad mullahs at prayer with the mention of dear James Savile of Wood Lane.
For the BBC to continue this harikiri strategy every time Islam gets a mention surely entitles Evan to 72 dried raisins when he gets to meet Ali(Bongo)-those poor virgins will have to wait for Prescott or Norris eh?
When the BBC throw up Savile as tracer fire, you just KNOW that they`re even more scared of Muslims than their own newsrooms and medical facilities that hold the likes of Hall and dear Sir Jimmy!
Good fun though watching them twist on their own Meccano cranes…anybody told them it might get worse if they don`t decide to tell us the truth about Islam once in a while?
daily mirror … police probe 54 more muslim child sex gangs
54 more gangs? … before it disappears from iplayer …
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01sd0zh/Jeremy_Vine_15_05_2013/
(12mins 20)
leave “asians” out of it, this is a muslim issue, Dr Taj Hargay
it is the PC NSPCC idiot who shows perfectly the reason why nothing was done to stop the child gang rapes, for so long, the poisonous enviroment of deliberate, wilful neglect.
He even here, on this very show, he is still in denial,
oh … and i thought the NSPCC would be in the know about all these NEW cases, obviously working with the police an all that?
hmmm … i would hazard a guess that the information he was droning on about, here, was even MORE incorrect …
at least 54? …
right heres the link
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/police-probe-least-54-more-1896991#ixzz2TmWbPv7n
The Mirror, May 19, 2013
“Officers are preparing to bust the biggest paedophile network EVER SEEN in the country, with police set to swoop within days”
now? … what was that NSPCC idiot saying?
John Browns body is amouldering alright-but he`s well paid to spew this crap.
If that clown is paid to PROTECT children-and he twists and cavils like this-then no wonder these girls are so debauched, and left high and dry to hang.
Disgusting…but John Brown is the white face of the NSPCC, daring to tell a Muslim Imam what the problem is.
This interview showed so vividly the plain speaking statements of the Oxford Imam, ones that should be the meme of our leaders, and those whose duty it is to combat it, but instead we get the inane obfuscation of Brown, head of he NSPCC sexual abuse programme, that demonstrates clearly why we will have many more instances of this kind.
Anyway I saved a copy of the interview here for future reference.
I also saved a relevent copy of the recent Any Questions where they put a similar theme to the panel, and all of whom sounded like Brown. It’s what we’ve come to expect from our BBC on the subject.
I noticed they avoided putting this question to their Question Time panel last week. Could it be that since they had the shadow immigration minister on it, the kind of inferences that would be likely about how Labour was in their way responsible was something they preferred to avoid?
That’s my guess.
Full credit to Jeremy Vine for putting this fabulous Imam on air.
Yes, Vine was pretty animated for once.
“Imagine” if this caught on.
You may say I`m a dreamer….
BBC News
Young children should hear about the dangers of pornography as soon as they have access to the internet, leading head teachers say. http://bbc.in/18bHIPs
May be worth tipping ’em off about odd offers from some BBC staff on the premises too.
They have touched on a rich seam looking at the comments. I wonder if it will make it past 5pm?
Given the poor accountability of head teachers for some of their staffs habit of bedding students! I feel they are not the best lot to lecture us or the state !
I suppose that teaching everybody to read, write and -maybe-a few sums too is asking too much still though.
Still-as long as there`s a betting shop, kebab shops, sexual health clinics and access to the last library computer; then that counts as “an education”….after eleven years.
Splendid!
You obviously subscribe to the old-fashioned notion that schools are for education, whereas – ever since the lefties took over running the syllabus and exams in the 1980s – the purpose of British state schools has been social engineering and pc-indoctrination.
Internet porn gives young people an unrealistic idea of how quickly a plumber will come to your house.
Classic!
I wonder if they will now include info on the Sin of Onan in the curriculum as well. Well the little dears don’t want to end up blind and with furry palms do they …
‘I wonder if it will make it past 5pm?’
1. ThreeEdgedSword
20TH MAY 2013 – 8:24
613. H52
20TH MAY 2013 – 15:04
Some questions can be rhetorical.
How many parents still at work feel about not getting a chance to engage will remain a mystery.
I think I’ll be visiting this site a bit less.
It’s been an eye-opener.
I now intend to try to avoid the BBC as much as I can, so I’ll probably have a lot less to say and can do without the BBC windup.
Does this site have any links or threads for methods of getting access to other non-BBC programmes, or truly independent or not so constrictively PoliticallyCorrect news, without becoming liable for the TV Licence?
Here you go, Theo.
Nice one DP 😉
Here’s a website where you can get loads of information and empowerment on not paying the licence fee, and other options available.
Princes William and Harry open Help for Heroes centre
Thankfully, no mention of how the bBBC tried to destroy the Help for Heroes organisation by broadcasting the lies from their favourite ‘journalists’ at the BIJ, costing the charity an estimated £4,000,000 in donations.
flying a triumphant over sized nazi flag,
WHAT! … quick, get on the al bbc hotline,
expose this “neo nazi-far right” disgrace … call in the UAF
… front page news … in depth report … vilify them immediately.
but they really want peace alert.
Flying oversized Nazi flag next to mosque near Jerusalem
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/168146#.UZo4S-uAGkg
“A resident, Uri Arnon, told the Tazpit News Agency: I felt we were going back 75 years, losing our hold on the land. The Arabs no longer feel the need to hide their murderous tendencies, announcing out loud that they wish to annihilate us.”
AUSTRALIA:
– undemocratically, BBC-NUJ decided, some time ago, to report on Australia online hardly at all (is that country too white? has too many British connection?); anyway, there is nothing on this:-
“Australia: Muslim rioter refuses to stand for judge, tells police officer ‘You’re not a lady, you’re f…ing filth'”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/05/australia-muslim-rioter-refuses-to-stand-for-judge-tells-police-officer-youre-not-a-lady-youre-fing-.html
After a couple of false starts, I’m not going to comment on this at all.
Don’t like prison food.
Och, where’s there an FoI lawyer when you need a quick redaction…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/crabbit.html?
‘Just over 10% believed BBC Scotland delivers value for money for licence fee payers.’
That’s staff?
Guessing this is a survey they won’t be trumpeting around.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/its-not-just-us-then/
Some interesting comments across a spread of subjects too.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC) and ABU QATADA.
INBBC: ‘the only thing we’re going to tell you about Abu Qatada is that he’s a ”cleric” (and he’s not fat)’:-
“Abu Qatada: Cleric refused bail”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22593258
Oh, and don’t make him look fat. Got it?:-
“BBC directive: Don’t make Osama’s right-hand man in Europe look fat”
(2012.)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/br0nc0s/managed-mt/mt-srch.cgi?search=abu+qatada&IncludeBlogs=1&limit=20
“Hate preacher Abu Qatada complains his five-bedroom taxpayer funded home is not big enough due to lack of storage space”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2327480/Hate-preacher-Abu-Qatada-complains-bedroom-taxpayer-funded-home-big-lack-storage-space.html
As if we hadn’t had enough with gay marriage (a misnomer) and swivel-eyes (the Roons, in my view), we now have the spectre of bloody Hillsborough dominating the news. For goodness sakes – there were faults on BOTH sides, and both sides should take some blame. Many fans WERE drunk (admitted on air and film by the father of one of them), and they were clamouring, pushing and shoving to get into the ground, and putting the police in fear of loss of life if they kept them outside. The shortcoming of the police have been well aired, so I’ll not repeat them, but they were put in an impossible position. The bottom line is that the so-called Hillsborough committee want not only total surrender of the police, but prosecutions (i.e. vengeance), and not least – MONEY. And they’ll not stop until they get it all.
Those of us living in northwest England know to our cost (literally) that Hillsborough is seldom out of the top-six ‘news’ stories on the bBBC local website. They have totally swallowed the line from the Scousers’ revenge campaign that there were only 96 Liverpool fans in Leppings Lane, minding their own business until Mrs Thatcher ordered the South Yorkshire Police to crush them against the fence, whilst – according to Liverpool pub gossip – the entire population of Merseyside were in the rest of the stadium, all having bought tickets beforehand, and arrived on time and sober.
Funny how Muslim paedo gangs seems to be described as “way too simplistic, not nuanced enough or populist grandstanding”…but Hillsborough now turns out to be a Sunday School outing one day early, with those who stormed the Leppings Lane end drunk and intent on a free ticket at 3.05 were angels.
No over-simplification can be made simple enough, now that the Sun has been banished from Liverpool…let the BBC spell it out in words of a few syllables for our Scouse community.
Thatcher caused it…and the BBC have absolutely NO remaining evidence of what THEY were saying about the Liverpool fans at that time.
No sirree…file under Savile eh?
Bloody Murdoch you see…and Burnham was flying helicopter missions of mercy and Billy Bragg sang “Feed the World” at the same time
See-I was there!
I recently received a response from a Muslim who said ‘do you think these gangs don’t abuse Muslim kids? Well I can tell you that they do, and their families don’t even report it to the Police because of the shame & dishonour in their community.
I was aware that the Pakistani ‘community’ do not trust the Police because of their experiences back home but this allegation is something new and it is even more worrying that we could be seeing just the tip of the iceberg.
Polygamy is next – this from the guy who started the whole thing in the netherlands
“Polygamy, welfare benefits and an insidious silence” (2011).
[Opening excerpt]:-
“In this disturbing and brave exposé, a Pakistan-born baroness reveals how some of her countrymen have as many children as possible by several wives so as to milk our welfare system…”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2037998/UK-immigration-Polygamy-welfare-benefits-insidious-silence.html
‘do you think these gangs don’t abuse Muslim kids? Well I can tell you that they do, and their families don’t even report it to the Police because of the shame & dishonor in their community.”
Taqiyya.
Simple as that Thoughtful,
this is an attempt to deflect that this is actually, sexual jihad on the infidels…do not be fooled.
Very sad, thoughtful. If I may ask, a response from what? Mohammedan children are as much victims of the authorities and the BBC turning a blind eye as the girls in these trial cases. They should be encouraged to speak out, and given support.
Walid Shoebat said on the Michael Savage show
” Child abuse is rampant in the muslim community, they just don’t speak about it.”
shoebat.com
chrisH,
“Funny how Muslim paedo gangs…”
Congratulations for managing to link “Muslims” with the Hillsborough disaster. You must be proud.
“…those who stormed the Leppings Lane end drunk and intent on a free ticket at 3.05 were angels.”
The 96 deaths weren’t caused by drunken fans, not even partially (as suggested by MartinW). That was a lie purposefully spread by the police in order to cover up their own mistakes.
The police lied about what happened and fed those lies to the press. This has been proven to be the case. Your continued peddling of this lie just shows what ignorant buffoons you, MarinW & Strebe-Grebling really are.
But admittedly you are in good company here; seeing as David Vance described the campaign to uncover the truth, by relatives of the 96 dead, as; “relentless MOPERY emanating from Liverpool”
http://wp.me/p2ZrbV-TH
Dez, you’ve swallowed the propaganda. South Yorkshire Police officers, who weren’t on duty at Hillsborough, and officers from a neighbouring force, actually obtained hundreds of statements from members of the public, people living around the ground and pub landlords that confirmed the fact that too many Liverpool fans were drunk when they arrived at the ground. Some pub landlords confirmed that their pubs had been drunk dry by Scousers and people living around the ground related incidents of drunken Liverpool fans using their front gardens as public toilets and made threats of violence against those people complaining to them. These statements – and photographic evidence- were made available to the Hillsborough Enquiry chaired by Lord Taylor. The evidence of drunkenness was suppressed by Taylor himself who ordered that such evidence was not to be used.
So, Dez, it wasn’t because there was no evidence of drunkenness. On the contrary, there was abundant evidence. It’s just that Taylor wouldn’t allow it to be entered in evidence.
Andy S,
I posted a reply to you, but it was deleted by the site admin for no apparent reason.
Just so you know…
Well, there you go Andy S: the evidence of supposed drunkenness was available to Lord Taylor and he tossed it as legally worthless. That’s what judges are meant to do.
This is why Hillsborough matters. South Yorkshire Police – the agency under investigation – claim they should be cleared because they themselves had collected testimony from licensees whose livelihood depended on keeping the police onside, and they had told them that some people who looked like the people who were killed had drunk quite a lot of beer.
If this insanity was allowed to stand, no one would ever be safe again. Imagine Mid Staffs NHS trust interviewing the guy who lives next to the golf club one of the victims belonged to and asking him if the members often drank to excess and smoked.
If the evidence was as worthless as you say, why did Taylor recommend legislation to make it a criminal offence to enter a football ground whilst drunk? The Thatcher government did indeed make it an offence, as Taylor suggested. South Yorks. Police did not allege drunkenness was the sole cause of the tragedy. What they tried to prove was that drunkenness affected the behaviour of the fans outside the ground so much that they couldn’t be reasoned with when they created the crush at the main gates in Leppings Lane. Don’t forget the crush was so great that at one point a police horse and rider were lifted off the ground by the fans. What would you have done? Leave the main gates closed and cause crush deaths at that location, or open them (they were buckling anyway) to ease the crush? The police were damned if they opened the gates and damned if they didn’t. I know I wouldn’t have liked to have made that decision.
Taylor made it clear right at the start of the enquiry that he wouldn’t allow ANY evidence that drink had affected the behaviour of the fans. He didn’t even bother to review the evidence. It was a precondition that seemed to have come from someone higher than Taylor.
I think the accusation that the police blamed those who died of being drunk was made by someone twisting what was originally said – as is usual when someone with an axe to grind tries to use it for their own agenda. Anyone with any sense could see that those who died were in the ground early and in plenty of time. Can you tell me why thousands of Liverpool fans turned up at the ground AFTER the game had started?
The fans didn’t directly create the crush outside the ground – the lack of police control (as testified by police officers) was responsible for that. The previous year there had been a filtering system deployed by the police, but in 1989 there wasn’t.
What the police should have done was shut off the tunnel to the central pens, which had been uncomfortably full since around 2.30pm. They didn’t, and nor were there any signs directing the fans away from the tunnel to the side pens (that is the fault of Sheffield Wednesday FC). When the gate was opened, a flood of people went through, and in the throng it was only natural to go straight for the tunnel to the central pens, particularly when the game was about to kick off.
Fans had been delayed by traffic problems, hence why so many didn’t arrive at the ground until just before 3.00pm. The kick-off should have been delayed in order to let them get in.
There probably were drunken fans. But the disaster would have been the same even if every fan had been sober. Drunkenness was a negligible factor in this tragedy.
Chris,you’ve missed my point completely. I was referring to the crush OUTSIDE the ground at the gates in Leppings Lane. There was a crush endangering life BEFORE the gates were opened that allowed the fans to channel themselves down the tunnel. I agree that there was no control at the tunnel itself, and once the disaster played out, most of the senior officers at the ground “froze”. In fact it was a Chief Inspector who decided to take command over the heads of the more senior officers, who tried to effect a rescue operation. I’ve no brief whatsoever for those top ranking police officers who proved themselves incompetent when the s**t hit the fan that day.
I’ve seen CCTV video, which was shown at the inquest, of Liverpool fans pouring through the tunnel and into the stand who were actually using their fists to beat back those trying to escape the crush at the front.
To be fair, it wasn’t just the Police and SWFC at fault that day. The fans must take their share of the blame as well, although it seems they have become a sacred horse above criticism. The only blameless people on the day were those poor souls at the front who died.
Sorry, that should read “sacred cow”.
Are you Dez..or Des?
When you settle on what your name actually is…and possibly settle on one version of the spelling(ask nanny!)..then I`ll possibly be half the buffoon that you turn out to be ,whenever you blow by.
1. You`re a bit thick on point I-no I do not equate Muslims with Hillborough, but I despise your efforts(like those of the BBC) to imply that one current saga is clear-cut(the police, McKenzie were to blame).
As opposed to the nuanced and multi- faceted dancing around the fact, that Muslim gangs are doing much of their evil because the Koran allows for this…and your likes would rather white girls be raped and tortured than admit that Muslim blokes need to be taken on in regard of their views on white women who are too young to fight back.
2. Certainly did not seem a lie to me in April 1989…the pictures and stories from fans would suggest something other than that the police lied about late drunken fans crushing fellow supporters because they wanted to see the match for nothing once it had started.
That does NOT exonerate the lies and cover ups that did follow in key places-but your efforts to absolve the fans who stormed the ground late of their responsibility(as I saw it at the time, and the media were stating and showing continually for months afterwards) is heroic…you should be proud.
Hope that clears it up-let us know if its “s” or “z”, so we can get some unity on this.
Nobody ever seems to mention that the Nottingham Forest fans were generally well behaved, sober and arrived at the ground with tickets and in plenty of time. They also don’t mention that Liverpool fans used the same ploy of rushing the gates after the start of the match at Chelsea a shortly after the tragedy. Luckily on that occasion the Scousers weren’t successful in injuring or killing anyone.
And nobody ever seems to mention why it became necessary to cage them in in the first place.
Perhaps that clown, Dez, would like to offer an explanation.
Trouble is that any objective criticism of Liverpool fans is seen (by the people of Liverpool) as an attack on the 96 who died.
I’d like to see the odd minute of silence at Anfield for the 39 Juventus fans who were killed at Heysel Stadium – yes killed – by rampaging Liverpool fans.
Was that Thatcher again?
Tomorrow (May 21) there will be a bunch of protests staged outside local IRS offices across the country by Tea Party types and various small-government groups. I don’t know how many there will be, or how many people will show up, or how many racist posters they’ll have. Let’s hope that, whatever happens, the BBC reports on it more honestly and impartially than they did with the original Tea Party protests.
Wait, scratch that. Let’s hope the BBC bothers to report it at all, which they didn’t do for the first two months of the Tea Party movement.
Doesn’t anyone else despise the vile,sneering heap of ill organised adipose tissue who would inform us on all things American?His lisping,thick predecessor was no less pernicious-and we pay them!
Enter “Mardell” in the search box in the sidebar, and you’ll find out.
When referring to BBC employees you need to be more specific.
SWEDEN.
INBBC: ‘Move along; nothing to report here.’
‘Atlas Shrugs’:-
“MUSLIM ‘YOUTHS’ BURN 100 CARS IN NORTH STOCKHOLM RIOTS”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/05/muslim-youths-burn-100-cars-in-north-stockholm-riots.html
Ironic since Sweden was at the fore front of the destruction of South Africa, constantly campaigning against it and bankrolling the ANC, now they’re getting a taste of ‘diversity.’
I liked one of the comments underneath the article.
”Swedish ‘humanitarian’ concern for Islamic religious bigots and racists discomfited by the consequences of their own ideology has achieved for Islam what 14 centuries of Arab, Moorish, and Turkish millitary conquest could not.”
The US Department of State has published the International Religion Freedom report for 2012.
It shows the bigotries perpetrated by the various countries round the world – by whom, and against whom.
For most of us here who don’t rely on the likes of the BBC for following world events we are aware for the most part of these goings on. This is also how we know better to judge the BBC output or omissions in regard to these incidents and the mindset behind them.
The BBC has an article related to this report
Bigotry against Jews and Muslims on the rise, says US
My suggestion is for anybody to read the main page of the report first, then read the BBC article.
Consider what the report shows about the countries indicated, and the mindset behind the actions described, and the import of this to the values that we uphold as human beings and in our society.
Then ask yourself does the BBC article, supposedly a world class media organisation, funded by our society to inform and educate, really present anything close to what this report shows?
If you were a journalist writing an article on this report, is the BBC offering a representative evaluation of what’s contained therein?
I know it’s a while back but it still gets me that the BBC was able to get away with misrepresentation of what the PM of Britain said in a speech in Las Angeles in 2006. The political commentator on the 10 o clock News said “this is what the PM meant to say”. He then proceeded to distort what he said about the Palestinian/ Israeli conflict which was in any case not a major feature of his speech.
It is equally madening as to how my complaint was treated.
On complaining, the letter was sent to the News department even though I addressed it to Head of Complaints. I sent a complaint to the Prime Ministers office who forwarded on to the Director General of the BBC who simply forwarded on to Head of Complaints. to deal with which he should have done months before… He eventually answered my complaint . Sadly the reply was such gobbledygook and at that time two other complaint appeals had just been rejected , so I didnot appeal in this case.
Anyone interested in some past appeals and answers should read my blogs at http://www.netanyalynette@blogspot.il
‘“this is what the PM meant to say”
If in those terms, and I have no reason to doubt they were, then the concept of ‘reporting’ has gone through the BBC filter and ringer so perfectly complemented by their new ‘no room for accuracy’ headlines.
There is what is.
And then there’s ‘analysis’, ‘commentary’, ‘views’, ‘guest expertise’ and all else that seems to have been cosily described variously as ‘interpreting events’ to… more ominously, ‘enhancing the narrative’.
To do it at all is bad enough. To so casually broadcast it is done a real concern.
As to the complaints merry-go-round, one feels for you, but the politico-media-legislative-enforcement establishment at this level is pretty much stitched up.
One public sector speciality, especially in the area of transparency, is to create two separate entities and ensure that roles are vague enough that each can point at the other and any shortfall can be blamed on the void inbetween that is there precisely for such a purpose.
There are about 30 stories listed and linked on the BBC webpage for US and Canada News.
But not a single mention of any of the current Obama scandals – 4 scandals now if we count the snooping on Fox journalists
Not enough room to report that stuff when there are deadly natural disasters, light entertainment stories, and general interest news items to cover. It’s starting to seem like the BBC has given up being a serious news outlet for US issues and is more interested in appealing to a wider, lower-middle brow audience. Can’t imagine why they’d do that. 😉 Like a Left-wing USA Today, only with lots of “bespoke” video magazine pieces.
George R (via atlasshrugs);
“UK POLICE PROBE AT LEAST 54 MORE MUSLIM CHILD SEX SLAVERY GANGS”
Noggin;
“daily mirror … police probe 54 more muslim child sex gangs”
Actual headline in the Daily Mirror (not via atlasshrugs):
“POLICE PROBE AT LEAST 54 MORE CHILD SEX SLAVERY GANGS”
Not one person on B-BBC capable of spotting the difference…
Having difficulty distinguishing between summary/paraphrase and direct quotes again, are we, Dez?
they ARE muslim paedo gangs pespezdez …
i ve provided the link for you to read the article too … for clarity.
i know it might be hard for you, but …
-Until INBBC’s Dhimmi Casciani tells us about such ‘men’.
It’s getting silly already. ABC reporters followed by an armed police offer just for trying to do their job and talk to IRS employees:
Cincinnati Ground Zero of Exploding IRS Scandal, But Answers Hard to Find
As we traveled the public hallways of the building – watched over by security cameras – an armed uniformed police officer with the Federal Protective Service followed us. We were looking for a particular office—of someone who would not want to be seen talking to reporters–but chose to bypass it because of our official babysitter.
Asked why we were being escorted in a public building, the officer identified himself as Insp. Mike Finkelstein and said he was only trying to make sure that the newsmen were not a “nuisance.” He brushed aside further questions. The cop said a supervisor would call to explain.
How’s that hopey-changey stuff workin’ out for ya now, BBC? Can’t blame Republicans or racism for this one.
The gay obsessed BBC are having another mass-debate over same sex marriages……YUK
I have just been seeing the USA coverage (by helicopter) of the Tornado that has caused so much devastation and death in the State of Oklahoma. Careful analysis of this footage will show it was two storm cells coming together to create the large single storm cell. This does and will happen, but how long will it be before we hear on the BBC that this largest storm *ever* will be down to Climate Change? I’ll be listening with interest!
An incredible, awful event, to be sure.
Watching Sky, now the news value has passed they are into ‘how do you feel?’ territory and the TV is going off as the 24/7 padding starts.
On relative sizes/powers, there appears to be a 1-5 rating, based on ‘damage’. Not sure how that is calculated… Loss of life? $ value to restore? In which case a small tornado in a built up area is surely going to be ‘worse’ than a monster in the desert? This one is pegged at a 4, but there have been 5’s historically.
There seems quite an industry around these values, and as more people spread into the path of nature’s power one can only presume the ratings will indeed increase, sadly.
In making relative claims one can only hope objective science is the guiding measure.
On the basis of this, one can only presume the human stories will prevail over the objective science:
https://mobile.twitter.com/BBC_HaveYourSay/tweets
Interesting how this feed is used. I can’t see much value in using it as a source of news, as it seems pretty much devoted to pleas for content from what appear to be deemed promising witnesses.
The claim of “one of the most powerful ever” doesn’t even pass the Schofield Test, i.e. spending no more than 30 seconds researching a particular subject on Google.
So, tornadoes have only been officially classified since 1971, thus the historical record is very short. Tornadoes between 1950 – 1971 have been retrospectively assessed, lengthening the historical record somewhat.
This record shows that, since 1950, 59 tornadoes have been officially classified as F/EF5. FIFTY NINE.
Having said that, the death toll is indeed very high, which would certainly make it one of the “deadliest” tornadoes recorded, but I suspect this is more a function of where it touched down rather than its force.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_F5_and_EF5_tornadoes
Tut, tut. Comes now you must realise that in BBC-land the Seventies were a different time and nothing that happened then can be used to draw inferences from what is currently going on.
Haven’t you being listening? :p
“deadliest” tornadoes
This is an interesting point.
As a successful species we proliferate and spread out, which although it means the species is more likely to encounter disasters of various levels, counter-intuitively the species is safer because a smaller percentage is killed by the disaster.
Essentially, more of us are living where a disaster is not happening, or where harmful consequences are minimised.
Not that you can always tell that from the MSM need for headlines, but that partially explains why there are so many more humans despite all the disasters on the (manipulative) news, which trawls the world for a drama-fix, preferably one that can be tailored as a hot-button for an agenda.
I wonder if the BBC will report the consequences of our succesful technolgically-dependent civilisation as a twist against technology and pro some idealised version of climate (ignoring that it has very often been deadly for us, and consequently why we needed technology for protection)?
(I’ll state here I’m becoming as aggravated by the manipulations of CH4 News and am wondering if it will be worth complaining to CH4 and to their advertisers.)
Sky mentioned a couple of previous tornadoes that were deadlier and more destructive. The worst one, according to them , was in the mid-1920s. One in the early 2000s was worse than the latest. So,if they are correct ( they showed footage of the two mentioned above) the one in Moore City isn’t the worst one,as devastating as it was.
Tornado “damage” is physical damage; it’s thus used as a proxy for the estimated maximum wind-speed of the tornado.
The current one has been initially classed as an EF4 – one step down from the most powerful EF5 category, although it is being widely reported (including by the BBC) as “One of the most powerful ever”.
Ah, yes – it has to be made to fit into the category of “extreme” weather, that, remarkably, no-one has ever experienced before.
And remember, “extreme weather” in the BBC’s book is a direct result of climate change, which is all our fault, and which has only ever occurred in the last few years.
BBC Environment Correspondent in fact-check shocker!!!
I didn’t think I’ live to see the day, but just now on the BBC1 lunch time news, David Shukman was given a slow underarm climate change pitch on the Oklahoma story:
“So are these tornadoes becoming more common?”
You’d expect him to hit it out of the park right? Something like:
“whilst you can’t directly link any one incident to climate change, Scientists Say this is the sort of event that we expect to see more of as the climate warms, so in that sense, some say, it’s a sign of things to come”
Not a bit of it. It went something like:
“Well you might think that as the atmosphere warms, these sort of things would become more common, but THE DATA SHOW THAT THAT’S NOT THE CASE. The damage here is due more to the location.”
Is this the first recorded example of the BBC passing up an opportunity to link a weather natural disaster to climate change??!!
It’s not often I say this, but well done BBC. See, you can still do journalism, rather than just cut ‘n’ paste activism, if you really want to.
I heard on a BBC report that the tornado was the most powerful since records began. Not according to SkyNews which referred to one in 1925 as the most destructive ever and one in the early 2000s (or was it 1999?) which was worse than Monday’s.
Now,who to believe?
‘Now,who to believe?’
—
Tough call.
If Sky was being objective, they seem to have strayed overnight, if possibly more in cause of ratings and filling the 24/7 news void.
I just switched off the usual morning breakfast drone after 30′ straight from the area.
It is news, and even human stories can have their place, but with so many air flown Brits chasing US emoting hairdos chasing storm chasers or a clearly endless supply of victims happy to talk, and talk, it simply became a recycled blur.
A brief attempt at ‘questions being asked’, but when you live in TornadoAlley going down a such a route is like demanding answers after folk are washed out of FloodPlain Mews.
As to science, it seems to have been elevated to a 5. Or not.
But their bouffant on the ground did trot out that they would need to get used to further future such devastation…. now. He seems to be aware this is the precursor of bigger, more frequent to come.
I’d be interested in the support for such a claim, preferably not from an overpaid mic-holder with 5 minutes of content faced with an hour to fill.
These things seem a fact of life there, and as the population expands more and more, even in the vastness of the USA, nature and hapless humanity seem destined to cross paths more and more.
If I was assigning funds, it may make more sense to invest in mitigating contingency plans than alluding to rather vast weather trends it maybe tricky for mere man to pull a Canute on by shunting reporters all over globe to speculate on matters they now have a poor record of trust in explaining.
How odd.
The FTSE100 is at its highest level since the dotcom bubble burst; a 12 year high.
Some good economic news to report?
Not at the BBC.
Nothing on the BBC website front page.
Nothing, even, on the BBC website “business” page, although to be fair, they only have space there to link to FORTY TWO stories.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e0f5cf36-c1eb-11e2-ab66-00144feab7de.html#axzz2Tuxu68RF
To be fair, there’s a good probability that this is very bad news indeed. Mind you, according to friends, BBC 24 was interrupted by a special “breaking news” theme concerning the new highs in the various indices. For those of us with memories going back as much as 5 years, this has all the marks of a bubble induced by the monetary incontinence of, at least, the UK, the USA and the EU.
As we see elsewhere, maintaining another bubble (house prices in the UK in general and London in particular) is apparently “good news” in the press although the sole downside – according to the BBC’s “News where you are” in London – is that the upgrading of areas of the capital (eg Brixton) does not benefit those who subsist on taxpayer subsidies via living in “affordable” housing.
Anecdotally, here in leafy Muswell Hill in middle-class North London, the limited “affordable housing” appears to be allocated increasingly to those who appear to have difficulty speaking English and whose womenfolk wear hijabs but whose fecundity is stunning.
This is probably as you warn. A temporary high.
In my small market town the rentals being asked for shops etc bear no relation to the amount of income they can generate. The commercial property bubble will burst with spectacular results.
All the created money here and in the US in particular has gone to disguise the indebtedness of the banks . If it had not we would have had raging inflation. Nothing to do with BBC bias but an interesting scenario for the future.
Correct, the BBC has no concept of what sound money is, but this is a failing of the mainstream media and (non-austrian) economists in general.
From a purely mainstream position, the FTSE hitting highs is a ‘Good Thing’, and I’m sure that if it wasn’t that pesky coalition running things but labour instead, we’d be hearing about how Ed Balls is a genius (from Two Eds Flanders no doubt). Instead we have tumbleweed.
On the topic of sound money, one of the biggest non-reported stories in the media at the moment is the very odd behaviour of the gold market – recent movements point to market manipulation, with many sound money advocates suspecting that these are deliberate plays to shore up the idea that the dollar (and by extension, the pound and euro) are still valuable.
Still, the bright side is that those who understand how bubbles work can take the opportunity to make a killing by shorting shares and going long gold, just as almost everyone else does exactly the opposite.
Not on the front page but easily found. The article was last updated yesterday evening and as by the time you posted the Stock Exchange would be open and as such yesterdays close of business figure is no longer applicable.
“The FTSE 100 has closed at its highest level for more than 12 years, finishing 32 points up on the day at 6,756.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22604632
And further commented upon today:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11899862
Well done, you can search the BBC website for a specific term.
Nothing you said contradicts what I said. That this story is not one of the FORTY TWO stories on the BBC website’s business page.
That’s forty two.
…over sixty links in all.
NOT easily found Albaman, your continual attempts to excuse the clear ridiculousness of not openly linking to this story (whilst linking to shed loads of lesser stories, many days old) is getting tiresome.
I am surprised that nothing much has been made of the BBC’s own admittance of bias last Friday. It was touched on in Friday’s Open Thread but skipped over in preference to two examples of questionable bias.
More or Less [21:10] covers the allegation that more ex-Falklands veterans died as a result of suicide than in the conflict. Of course this ticks all the right boxes, ant-war, ant-MOD, ant-Thatcher, pro-army and pro-Malvinas. The only trouble is that the expected ‘killer’ report showed that the claim is wrong, indeed the suicide rate for the veterans is lower than the population at large. So the ‘expert’ gets stood down and the story dropped.
That means that the required message is well publicised and the ‘retraction’ is hidden away in a programme that, clearly, no one listens to! Almost like the sort of thing that one might expect the wicked Murdoch press to do and why we ‘need’ the Leveson reform.
BBC-NUJ spins ‘bad news’: INFLATION RATE down –
“Pound falls after surprise dip in inflation”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22605884
-whereas ‘Evening Standard’ has:
“Welcome present for new Bank of England Governor Mark Carney as inflation drops”
http://www.standard.co.uk/business/business-news/welcome-present-for-new-bank-of-england-governor-mark-carney-as-inflation-drops-8625475.html
The BBC article clearly shows the relationship between the drop in inflation and the fall in the value of the £ against the $.
In what way is this bias? You could equally say that the Standard was biased for not mentioning the link.
So, Albaman, for the sake of argument, let’s suppose the rate of inflation had risen. Would the BBC have written a more ‘positive’ article?
a) Only if Gordon Brown was in charge
b) Only if there was a Labour Government
c) The BBC never covers “good news” news.
But id did not rise.
Gordon Brown is not in charge.
At present we do not have a labour government.
Is this good news? Inflation dropping is certainly good news for consumers but much of the drop was due to fuel prices and with food and other costs still rising and wage inflation virtually zero consumer spending will still be restricted.
A weakening £ against the dollar (and the beleaguered euro) may be good news for exporters but not for those importing and especially for oil related business as oil is generally traded in $.
Funny, when inflation rises they tell it how it is:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21842585
“UK inflation rate nudged up to 2.8% by rising fuel costs.”
Now they do mention the weak pound in the article but of course there’s no need to put it in the headline as they already have their bad news.
“Now FTSE hits 13-year high as traders buy in to ‘modest recovery’ in UK economy”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2327937/Now-FTSE-hits-13-year-high-traders-buy-modest-recovery-UK-economy.html
BBc miday news. Blah blah African union 50 years blah blah Ghana is bucking the trend of the global economy. I assume Mr UK taxpayer is still handing out although not mentioned, suprise. http://www.modernghana.com/news/125083/1/uk-ghanas-biggest-bilateral-aid-donor.html
If they are doing that well because we can pull the aid.
might be wrong, but I don’t think this has been on the bBC news…
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/londons-36bn-benefits-bill-is-bigger-than-the-uks-whole-defence-budget-8623674.html
In that case, wouldn’t it kill two birds with one stone to give them all guns and send them to Afghanistan?
The obvious flaw is that some of them have probably done this freelance already.
Well the latest poll data shows that the constant banging on about Tory woes might have had exactly the opposite effect the BBC wanted.
Tories -5
Labour -1
UKIP +6
This now places the Tories on 24% and UKIP on 22% or near neck and neck. Surely it cannot be far off the day when UKIP pushes the Tories into a position of minority. There’s only really room for one socially liberal party and if the Tories try to steal that ground as lefty Dave has they will leave their traditional supporters behind.
eh? This IS the effect the BBC want IMHO. Split the Conservative vote.
Probably ,but Tories cant win next election anyway. And by looks of those bare figures UKIP are taking a few votes from labour as well.
If Cameron had any balls he’d go for electoral pact with UKIP regardless of what BBC or the rest of bourgeois liberal press had to say about it.
Left Dave is far too left wing to be able to stomach a pact with UKIP especially after he called them “fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists”.
Then there have been the smear stories the Tories have been spreading about UKIP candidates.
The real source of dismay is that the Tories simply haven’t realise the deep hatred British people have for the oppression of Political Correctness, the only thing they can see is the EU angle.
Sad because until they wake up they’ll just keep on being irrelevant.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/10070245/Jeremy-Paxman-I-have-heard-top-Tories-call-activists-swivel-eyed-loons.html
I actually could care less what new mess the Tories dig themselves into, but the media obsession with who said what can get downright silly.
Interesting Mr. Paxman has entered the fray, if a bit coy on sources too.
Still, his own ears heard it, and that’s good enough to join the fray no doubt.
Shame even this still vague bit of stirring was not matched in verification when his colleagues were shafting Lord McAlpine.
The word of a BBC professional being now perhaps less than some may be inclined to accept these days, especially if it serves various tribal purposes.
RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: “The paying public are sick and tired of being ignored and patronised. So who are the real swivel-eyed loons?”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2327997/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-The-paying-public-sick-tired-ignored-patronised-So-real-swivel-eyed-loons.html
I blame lead in petrol.
The BBC : reporting by the public sector / on behalf of the public sector.
Peter Alan on 5 Live this afternoon notes that a panic story about an impending crisis in NHS A&E is his show’s ‘third similar report in three weeks’. Alan editorialises : ‘I suppose with all these stories there must be something in it’.
A neutral observer (one not depending on the public sector for his daily bread and jammy pension on top) might draw the conclusion that the BBC were simply picking up on the regular cries from interested parties who want an ever larger slice of the tax payer cake.
Alan later rather gives the game away when we hear attendances at A&E are up 50% in the last decade.
Well that spikes the Tory-Cut-Backs angle.
There are more of us. We are older and more sick. Oh and the GPs won’t work out of hours. Remind me who it was it who wrote the GP contracts?
Whoops, we’re straying from the prime directive here!
Then Alan asks us listeners (the licence payers/NHS patients/tax payers) to contribute to the discussion – except he doesn’t – he tells us he only wants to hear from the professionals. Only medics and administrators are to be allowed to comment.
That’s better. Vested interests – so much more in tune with the BBC agenda.
BBC : Bias Bias Comrade
‘‘I suppose with all these stories there must be something in it’.’
Cripes. Substantiated confirmation like that and BIJ could rush through a story on tonight’s Newsnight no trouble. Still.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/an-jHfJJ7nYJh7bb/singin_in_the_rain_1952_moses_supposes/
Nifty ditty. No way to run a once trusted objective, professional news monolith.
Am I right in assuming that Andy Birnham was firmly put in his place by the response from the Health Minister?
The BBC were bigging this up on 5-live just before the announcement – the next news I heard after it was that the request had been made – and it now seems to have completely dropped of the news.
Bit of Gavin Elser of Scotland bashing:-
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3582/video_bbc_presenter_slapped_down_over_question_of_farage_s_drinking_and_smoking_habits
That’s pretty messed up. It was pretty clear what Esler meant, and it’s still a stupid thing to say.
http://www.publicserviceeurope.com/article/3482/brits-should-recognise-the-value-in-being-citizens-of-europe#comment
Former BBC hack Jon Danzig tears the EU to shreds in this puff piece on Public Service Europe.com. Oh wait, no he doesn’t. He straps on his knee-pads and goes doooown. And this quisling was the kind of hack responsible for the BBC’s “impartial” reporting on Europe…
How the bBC rewrites the facts on the Syrian/Israeli shoot up this morning in which to make sure the reader blames…Israel
Syria and Israel in exchange of fire
Israeli and Syrian forces have exchanged fire across the ceasefire line in the occupied Golan Heights.
So the Syrian Government wanting to deflect attention from the pounding it is giving to its own people hits israel not once, not twice, but three times and the bBC reports it as..Exchanging fire. Then in which to further point the guilty finger at Israel they write:
“Syria says it destroyed an Israeli vehicle which it says crossed the ceasefire line into territory its forces control.”
The thing is, the IDF have responded saying their vehicle didn’t cross into Syrian territory (Which the bBC doesn’t mention) and they (IDF) explain that the vehicle being shown on Syrian TV as captured is a vehicle they left behind in the 90s (easily verified) But the bBC don’t even mention that. The bBC then reinforce their Anti Israeli stance by repeating the above:
A statement from the Syrian army said it had “destroyed an Israeli vehicle with everything that it had in it”. The statement said the vehicle was shot after it crossed the ceasefire line and headed towards the rebel-held village of Bir Ajam.
Then the bBC go further by pointing out that the Jews are helping the rebels (so in the bBCs eyes can’t be classed as Muslims)
says the BBC’s Jim Muir in Beirut. It has used the event to highlight what it calls the close co-operation between Israel and the Syrian rebels – whose wounded in that area are in fact reported to be being treated in Israeli medical facilities, he says.
He ends his own little jew baiting spot by ending with:
Playing the Israeli card certainly suits Damascus well. It is hard for any Arab quarter to criticise a country that is standing up to Israel.
The bBC, the propaganda arm for intolerant Islam in the Uk and the traitors within our midst.
As we now seem firmly in an era when one man’s pedantic semanticist is another’s BBC Editorial team analyst (or glee club clogger), it is always a joy to see a nifty turn of phrase deployed…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/rolling.html
‘James Harding may pop in, fresh from a grilling by Justin Webb, in front of news staff’
Sounds simply beastly.
Certainly Ronnie’s snapshot of another hard day’s apres office chillin’ places the market rate stresses in sharp focus.
Egypt.
INBBC still believes in the ‘Arab Spring’ ( i.e. “Revolution”!) myth of 2011, so it keeps up the political propaganda for it, despite the Muslim Brotherhood reality of Islamic rule.
” Egypt: Echoes of the revolution far from Cairo ”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22570486
Of course, INBBC’s Cairo Bureau does not report the following as it would shatter the myth-
“Egypt: Anti-Morsi petition gathers over 2 million signatures”
[Opening extract]:-
“This is a staggering number in a country in which the electorate numbers fifty million. It is a manifestation of the widespread Egyptian discontent with the Muslim Brotherhood and Sharia rule. But it is unlikely — in fact, inconceivable — that Obama will support these pro-democracy protesters. He only supports such people when they are working to establish an Islamic supremacist regime, not when they’re working against one.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/05/egypt-anti-morsi-petition-gathers-over-2-million-signatures.html
For BBC-Democrat to censor?:-
“NEW BENGHAZI REVELATIONS:
AMBASSADOR STEVENS WAS IN LIBYA TO BUY BACK MISSILES CLINTON HAD SOLD TO AL-QAEDA”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/05/new-benghazi-revelations-ambassador-stevens-was-in-libya-to-buy-back-missiles-clinton-had-sold-to-al.html
Does anybody remember seeing any positive article about Israel on the BBC website? Even those that should be, like when Israel treats wounded Syrian civilians, are turned around to make Israel look devious, or else they ignore it altogether.
But the BBC have no problem running stories that can show Palestinians in a good light, but inevitably they will use it to also vilify Israel. So as soon as I saw this one on the BBC Mid-East webpage, I knew it was going to follow suit.
Keeping alive Gaza’s culinary traditions
Despite food shortages and irregular power supplies, people in Gaza are finding ways to keep their culinary traditions alive – and eat their own distinctive spicy dishes
The first couple of words in the opening sentence tells you really how this ‘human interest’ story is going to be slanted. I’ll cut to the chase and just give you what the BBC really want you to know inserted in it.
1. The Gaza Strip is a small, coastal sliver of land that is home to over 1.6 million Palestinians. Most people’s primary associations with it probably involve its Islamist Hamas government, militants fighting Israel and the Israeli border blockade.
And the reason for this blockade is???
Well to find that out you will either have needed to remember the incidents at the time Gaza was given over to the Palestinians, or look elsewhere. They don’t even mention that Egypt has also blockaded its borders with Gaza recently following their security staff being kidnapped.
2. “An overhead view of a bombed-out building, something exploding, people wailing or a masked gunman, those are kind of the images that are conjured up when one sees Gaza in the news,” she says.
Does missiles and rockets being fired out of Gaza have anything to do with it? But this is clearly too complicated for the BBC.
3. There is also diversity in dishes because the majority of Gazans are descendants of refugees from a wide area of historic Palestine, where there were different tastes and ingredients. They were displaced in the 1948 war that led to the creation of Israel.
Now Wikipedia tells us this:
After the dissolution of the All-Palestine Government in 1959, under the excuse of pan-Arabism, Egypt continued to occupy the Gaza Strip until 1967. Egypt never annexed the Gaza Strip, but instead treated it as a controlled territory and administered it through a military governor. The influx of over 200,000 refugees into Gaza during the war resulted in a dramatic decrease in the standard of living. Because the Egyptian government restricted movement to and from the Gaza Strip, its inhabitants could not look elsewhere for gainful employment.
Clearly the BBC doesn’t want to overload their readers with too much information though – only complicates things.
4. In recent years, it has often been hard to keep culinary traditions alive in the Gaza Strip because of food shortages and power cuts. Israel tightened its ground and naval blockade of Gaza in 2007 after the takeover by Hamas, which it views as a terrorist organisation. Restrictions were partly lifted three years later
Here’s a website where you can see some pictures of Gaza supermarkets. As for power cuts, perhaps Hamas firing rockets at the Israeli power station providing much of it would make the supply more stable. Still no mention by the BBC for just why Israel considers Hamas a terrorist organisation, or the fact that so does the United States, Canada, the European Union, and Japan also classify Hamas as a terrorist organization.
5. “Two-thirds of the Gazan people are considered poor. Those need assistance from (the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees) UNRWA or other international humanitarian organisations. Unemployment is officially 45% but in reality it is much higher,” says economist, Omar Shaban.
Somehow this hasn’t deterred the Gazan population from being the 7th fastest growing in the world. Even the BBC acknowledged the high population growth in 2009, but don’t bother to mention it in this article. If they’re poor, then perhaps they should examine the factors that make this more likely to continue. Prior to the intifada, Palestinians enjoyed the highest standard of living in the surrounding Arab lands. Did they really think that attacking the source of this wealth was going to help their cause?
Remember this ‘human interest’ story is about Gazan culinary skills, at least that’s the ‘sandwich’ the BBC wants you to eat, with Israel as the indigestion.
In other words, not only those interested in maintaining Gazan culinary traditions (however unique those may be), but apparently the general populace had it better under evil Israeli occupation than under Hamas.
Well the simplified BBC line is; the Palestinians just wanted to enjoy their Hummus, but because of evil Israel they switched to Hammas 😉
French Historian Dominique Venner committed suicide today at the altar of Notre Dame cathedral in Paris. He was protesting against gay marriage and the subversion of a way of life which many of us here would like to preserve.
He left this note:
I am physically and mentally healthy, and am filled with unconditional love for my dear wife and children, and for life in general. I have no hope for my afterlife besides the continuation of my race and spirit. At the dusk of my life, I feel a duty to rise up against the immense peril threatening the French and other European nations. I feel it is necessary to sacrifice myself to break to break the state of lethargy that overwhelm us while I still have the strength to do so. I gift the remaining of my life in protest and as a founding act. I chose this highly symbolic place, the Notre Dame cathedral in Paris, a place that I respect and admire, because it is a testimony of our timeless roots and of the genius of my forefathers.
When so many men become enslaved with their lives, my decision epitomizes my proactive ethics and willpower. I inflict death upon myself to awake all lethargic minds. I refuse to accept fatality, a poison for the soul, and the invasive selfish desires that undermine our collective roots, especially the family, the intimate basis of our millennial civilization. While I support the right of each nation to defend their identity on their lands, I will not stand for the criminal replacement of our population.
Given the inability of the current political orthodoxy to overcome its lethal ambiguities, European nations must react accordingly. While we do not have a single religion to unify on, we share since Homer our own legacy, a ground on which we will build our new renaissance, putting an end to the current nefarious metaphysics based on infinite growth, and all its modern byproducts.
I ask for the forgiveness of all who will suffer from my death, most importantly, my wife, children and grandchildren, with the faith some can transcend their sorrow into pride and understand the meaning of my act. They will find in my recent writings the foreshadowing and explanation for my decision.
Que c’est bien dit! Qu’est-ce que cela va devenir, la mission civilisatrice de la France?
You’ve got to hand it to the BBC, they can give every gliimer of good news a liberal smearing ot journalistic excrement just to make sure you don’t get the wrong Idea.
Inflation falls – surely something to celebrate?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22605884
The pound has fallen after lower fuel prices led to a lower-than-expected inflation rate of 2.4% for April.
This was down from 2.8% in March, according to the Office for National Statistics, and the first drop since September 2012.
I’m learning every daym Perhaps a visiting BBC journalist can give me some advice on the story I have just made up:-
“Transplant victims will die”
A man who made a miraculous recovery from life threatening injuries today has denied eight people the chance of life says an organ sequestration charity………
France took a wrong in 1789 with its pursuit of the utopian fantasy of egalitarianism. It’s been suffering ever since.
A far-right historian – Why do I get the feeling that with the BBC there are ‘our people’, with whom we agree, and the ‘far-right’, with whom we don’t?
Is there no one who is ‘far-left’ from their viewpoint? That either means that their perspective is from the ‘far-left’ or, horror of horrors they are so biased against the ‘left’ that their activities are never reported!
France’s ‘far-left’ Reign of Terror, 1793-4:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reign_of_Terror
What has France’s ‘Reign of Terror’ to do with the BBC and bias?
It’s a long story, but quite a bit, ideologically.
“Left.”
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/guideDesc.asp?catid=144&type=issue
Yes, don’t recall “far-left” being used to describe Eric Hobsbawm