Time for a new one.
Open Thread Mid-Week
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Lefty Wright Nov 15, 19:10
Midweek 13th November 2024
Pug Let’s get this straight. The Far Left BBC is trying to convince me that the (allegedly} Far Right President… - StewGreen Nov 15, 19:00
Midweek 13th November 2024
Yes ITV-PRasNews do really recycle They recycle their “Last chance to save the planet” logos COP26 [img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEEjEoaWYAYO7Bt?format=png&name=small[/img] COP29 [img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GccoX5PWkAAgkGO?format=jpg&name=small[/img] - Zephir Nov 15, 18:58
Midweek 13th November 2024
Robert Jenrick quipped: “Reeves said she was an economist. Turns out she’s just economical with the truth.” Conservative commentator Chris… - Zephir Nov 15, 18:57
Midweek 13th November 2024
lying sh@ts the lot of them, including at the bbc : “Rachel Reeves caught ‘lying’ on her CV as GDP… - pugnazious Nov 15, 18:53
Midweek 13th November 2024
Tomo…he never hid it that well….and the anti-meat narrative is standard fare now on the BBC. Meat will be made… - pugnazious Nov 15, 18:41
Midweek 13th November 2024
Trump is, we are led to believe, a Putin stooge and apologist because he thinks that it is time for… - StewGreen Nov 15, 18:30
Midweek 13th November 2024
BBC1 6pm PRasNews show ending just now with a huge PR push for their Children In Need programmes tonight - StewGreen Nov 15, 18:29
Midweek 13th November 2024
They previously arrested Bernie to shut her up This week she tweeted “@Artemisfornown Nov 11 COP 29 – Taking more… - StewGreen Nov 15, 18:23
Midweek 13th November 2024
ITV local PRasNews Day 5 of the local weatherwoman pushing her Climate Change religion Today she is in York interviewing… - BRISSLES Nov 15, 18:21
Midweek 13th November 2024
All staged, just like all the old Jackie Pallo wrestling matches – all moves worked out beforehand.
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
IRAN- ROWHANI
Has INBBC reported the following?
Or has it stopped reporting criticism of Islam?
“Report: Rowhani Linked to 1994 Buenos Aires AMIA Bombing.
Iranian President-elect Hassan Rowhani was on special Iranian committee that plotted 1994 bombing of a Buenos Aires Jewish community center.”
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/169125?
Well, to most Beeboids, that’s a moderate position.
For INBBC, via ‘Sky News’:-
“Preacher Who Backs Wife-Beatings Let Into UK”
http://news.sky.com/story/1106292/preacher-who-backs-wife-beatings-let-into-uk
For Hampstead HARRABIN and co:-
“The ‘Great Renewables Scam’ unravels.
“In many parts of northern Europe, wind and solar projects may be highly visible facts on the ground. But the headline economic fact behind renewable energy is, and always has been, its sheer and blatant ‘unsustainability.'”
By Peter Glover.
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3827/the_great_renewables_scam_unravels
Another middle class protest, another Paul Mason stop the world the ‘yoof’ movement is radically revolting report. Funny, no matter where the protest, the BBC is always on the side of the protestors. I wonder why? Page one of textbook socialism, perhaps?
How dare the BBC even ask Labour politicians for their opinions on the economy after the damage they’ve done. Pathetic!
…or the Health Service
“Robert Spencer on the BBC on the Leftist push to keep freedom fighters out of the UK”
(inc 3 min video clip)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/06/robert-spencer-on-the-bbc-on-the-leftist-push-to-keep-freedom-fighters-out-of-the-country.html
‘INBBC London’:
– in the near future, after more years of Islamisation of London, more propagation of ‘multiculturalism’, and more demonisation of criticism of Islam, ‘INBBC London’ may look like this
1.) female presenter likely to be wearing a hijab;
2.) Robert Spencer of ‘JihadWatch’ will not even get a 30 second spot;
3.) INBBC will be broadcast from ‘the Shard’ in London, owned by the Islamic Emirate of Qatar, which owns the building, and Al Jazeera;
4.) INBBC becomes Al Jazeera.
“Al Jazeera eyes new London home in Shard skyscraper” (2012).
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/30/us-aljazeera-shard-idUSBRE84T0D720120530
“London’s ‘Shard’ skyscraper now EU’s tallest” (2012).
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2012/07/20127565157168536.html
Of course, many Beeboids (not only Muslims ones) would take the morphing of INBBC into the Islamic Al Jazeera as a political compliment.
Many ex-Beeboids now happily work at London studios of Islamic Al Jazeera, currently located in Knightsbridge, and on Albert Embankment.
Beeboid Colin Paterson is a prime example of the celebrity obsessed, achingly politically correct, media-liberal, junk-culture, dumed-down – yet supremely self-assurred (bow down to us you scumy white English working class drones) elitist BBC uber-persona.
Or so he Tweets….
Colin Paterson @ColinGPaterson 14h
My second cousin has just been made editor of The Sun. Would be great if it was one of my family who ended page 3.
Colin the BBC man by the way, some sixty years ago, may well have been wearing sensible cardies tortoiseshell specs speaking RP and keeping to himself those Lefty views he picked up at Cambridge. I digress.
He was born, however, in the 1970s and ticks all the right boxes…
Colin Paterson (born c.1974) is a Scottish journalist and broadcaster who is the entertainment correspondent on BBC Radio 5 Live and has beena presenter and reporter on BBC Three’s Liquid News
He attended the independent Hutchesons’ Grammar School in Glasgow, leaving in 1992. He then went on to study at St Andrews University in Scotland.
He began his career as a reporter for The Big Breakfast, and in 2001 he started writing a music column for The Guardian
He is a stand in presenter on BBC Radio 5 Live having covered for Richard Bacon, Tony Livesey and Simon Mayo. His job title is entertainment correspondent for Radio 2 and Five Live. He is the main BBC radio correspondent for the Oscars and Glastonbury. Until January 2010 he was a regular pundit on the Radio 2 Arts Show with Claudia Winkleman
In 2008 Paterson did an interview with Noel Gallagher in which he asked him to comment on Jay-Z being booked as a headline act for the Glastonbury festival. Gallagher replied saying that hip-hop was ‘wrong’ for Glastonbury. This resulted in much media controversy and Jay-Z hit back at Noel’s comments by playing out Paterson’s interview with the Oasis frontman before his headline set on the main stage at Glastonbury.
In 2011, Paterson relocated to the BBC’s new centre at MediaCityUK in Salford, near Manchester.
Our Beeboid’s Twitter pic appears to show our Colin, shaven headed top button of his shirt done (no tie – so why?) with an accessory black rapper. Colin of the Hood?
GROW UP!
On the subject of “types”, I’m sure someone must have flagged this already. If not:
David Starkey eviscerates Laurie Penny
I could watch it all day.
Sheer brilliance – there is nothing more entertaining than David Starkey giving some public school Marxist both barrels. I loved one of the comments on the You Tube video – “Verbal Hiroshima!” . Sensational!
Don’t worry lads, all is not lost – the BBC has a ‘Men’s Hour’
BBC Men’s Hour @BBCMensHour 19 Jun
How should men respond to #Saatchi episode? Well, we’ve asked @Guardian’s @suzanne_moore to write a poem called ‘A Playful Tiff’ – Sun 9pm
Forget your macho heros such as Jezzer Clarkson, Fred Dibner or Bradley Wiggins…. Suzanne Moore of the Guardian is here to tell us what to think.
In early-2013, Moore stated that her children were intimidated by traveling outside London, because the UK appeared so ‘white’.
In January 2013, a “throwaway” comment in an essay by Moore, which had been reprinted by the New Statesman, was criticised on Twitter as transphobic, to which she responded. Her response led to a larger row involving wider sections of the transfeminist and radical feminist blogosphere, and after her friend Julie Burchill came to her defence in an opinion piece in the Observer, which was widely criticised as hate speech and withdrawn by the Observer the following day, the row expanded to much of the British press.
Media Liberal Spats = YAWN!
Moore is all over the place. She writes these bizarre rambling pieces.
.
But yes the BBC do a ‘Woman’s hour’ to fight for power and influence for women, and when people mention that there’s no equivalent Man’s hour they create one … to tell men what to think and how to behave. Anyone have a problem with that? No? Good..
I really enjoy the spectacle when these petty, self-righteous, censorious, priggish, self-appointed guardians of ‘correct thought’ expend themselves in a frenzy of competitive moral masturbation. It’s best not to be in the vicinity, though – rather messy.
Beeboids assist Miliband in his search for inspiration.
In a politically gratuitous piece, taken from its chums at The Guardian’, BBC-Labour has:-
“Labour leader Ed Miliband inspired by Clement Attlee”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23012131
It doesn’t say much for past Labour PMs: Wilson, Callaghan, Blair and Brown then.
bbc news eh!
3 mins of build up of ad homs/put down “hatchet job”
including, 2 extremely misleading soundbites
from the 9/11 rally, to ahem … “describe”?
mr spencer?
for wait for it …. barely 15 secs 😀 opportunity for the man to fit a word in ? can t say fairer than that eh! bbc
note that paragon of honesty and integrity vaseline vaz has come out from under his rock and is leading the “thought police” section.
A history of lying, being investigated several times for not declaring large sums received from a solicitor, being suspended for showing ‘contempt for the House’, one of the worst offenders in the MP’s expenses scandal doesn t appear to matter … just so long as he can squeal “waycist”
… ow queer 😀
Pamela Geller:-
“VIDEO:
BBC LONDON EVENING NEWS ON PAMELA GELLER AND ROBERT SPENCER’S VISIT TO PAY RESPECTS TO JIHAD VICTIM ON ARMED FORCES DAY”
[Opening excerpt]:-
“It’s interesting to me that the BBC is all over this story and they go to the vicious hate propagandist ‘Tell Mama’s’ Fiyaz Mughal and Jihad sympathizers like Keith Vaz but show no voices in support of our work for freedom. It is a vicious, insidious piece of smear theater. Mughal of the recently defunded ‘Tell Mama’ hate group insists that the Rigby family wants to get on with their lives. What hubris.
“And Labour MP Keith Vaz, chairman of the Home Affairs select committee told HuffPost UK: ‘…Home Secretary should consider using her discretion to ban these two speakers from entering the country.’ Vaz is a notorious subversive and has been promoting a vicious agenda for decades. Back in 1995:
“It was reported on Channel 4 News around ten years ago that Vaz was secretly taped saying he ‘wanted to create an Asian [Muslim] colony’ in an area of Leicester, and complaining that not enough Asians were moving in and not enough whites moving out. ‘They (the whites) will know when to move out … they’ll get a visit from the men in grey suits, hahaha’.”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/06/video-bbc-london-evening-news-on-pamela-geller-and-robert-spencers-visit-to-pay-respects-to-jihad-vi.html
“Muslim hate preacher calls for jihad in Syria, then heads for London vacation”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/06/muslim-hate-preacher-calls-for-jihad-in-syria-then-heads-for-london-vacation.html
I remember watching that C4 news item and have since tried to get precise details but it has gone down a black hole. Vaz has never been questioned about it and probably has immunity from it being resurrected.
My memory however was that he was talking about Asians and I presumed fellow Indians, not Moslems, in an estate that was now mono-cultural and he was expressing great approval.
Egypt and Obama.
INBBC’s Cairo Bureau has not reported this.
Is it because INBBC supports Muslim Brotherhood and Obama?
“OBAMA SENDING U.S. SOLDIERS TO EGYPT TO PUT DOWN ANTI-MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD RIOTS”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/06/mmm.html
Another notch in His Nobel Peace Prize. Bush was a piker.
Here’s how, Mark, as if you didn’t know:
Letter from the President — Regarding the War Powers Resolution
Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)
Certain U.S. forces recently deployed to Jordan solely to participate in a training exercise. This exercise ended on June 20, 2013. At the request of the Government of Jordan, a combat-equipped detachment of approximately 700 of these forces remained in Jordan after the conclusion of the exercise to join other U.S. forces already in Jordan.
This detachment that participated in the exercise and remained in Jordan includes Patriot missile systems, fighter aircraft, and related support, command, control, and communications personnel and systems. The detachment will remain in Jordan, in full coordination with the Government of Jordan, until the security situation becomes such that it is no longer needed.
The deployment of this detachment has been directed in furtherance of U.S. national security and foreign policy interests, including the important national interests in supporting the security of Jordan and promoting regional stability, pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct U.S. foreign relations and as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive.
I am providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148). I appreciate the support of the Congress in these actions.
Sincerely,
BARACK OBAMA
Other US troops which were already in Jordan, eh? And now we’ve got Patriot missiles on the scene pointed at Assad.
Most. Belligerent. Reluctant. Warrior. Ever.
But isn’t this what the BBC tells us inspires Islamic extremism? Crusader troops in Muslim lands, etc.? Where’s your @#$%ing anti-war crowd now, BBC?
The Beeb has always liked Nelson Mandela. Here’s another piece – this time about his failing health: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-22870977
.
“When he dies…I suspect we shall all fail to live up to the magnitude of the moment”
.
Good job they’re ‘impartial’ – or I don’t know where we’d be.
.
It also contains some praise for his friend Mac Maharaj. I don’t know the story in great detail, but the facts seem to be that both were members of the ANC’s military wing ‘Umkhonto we Sizwe’. According to Wiki (I know I know, wiki..) police records “230 people were killed by terrorists. Of these, about 10% were members of various security forces and two hundred were civilians. Of the civilians, 60 were white and 140 black…Note that during this time, the ANC took little action to assert policy with regard to the avoidance of civilian targets, which had in some cases become confused with the need to intensify the struggle “at all costs””
.
Maharaj and Mandela may not have been directly implicated, and the BBC doesn’t have to mention these details every time, but the mindless tone of adulation with which Harding talks about both is questionable – you wonder why the tone has to be so heroic
When he finally dies, the tugfest amongst all of the media will be unbearable. However given the coverage of him being ill I would suspect the BBC will be leading the nation in grief for this Saint who it is suggested was indirectly responsible for murder.
It would be appropriate for him to be cremated by a tyre necklace, lit by his wife who has some expertise in that subject.
Nelson Mandela made South Africa what it is today.
The BBC’s unique funding model seeks to inform/entertain or educate (?) by showing a seemingly large number of programmes devoted to the buying & selling of CHEAP bric a brac. The programme concept might fall a little short of Reithian ideals & the cheap tat does nothing to excite, but reat assured the BBC have found a way of gold plating the production costs – they have transported the whole crew to Sydney (that’s Sydney, Australia I splutter in the style of the immortal Bryan Pringle)
That’d be Sydney in Australia, I take it, i.e. the very country where the Lions won the 1st Test today? Just asking since, for the life of me, I couldnt find any evidence of Auntie CashCow providing the usual radio coverage and naturally assumed she was down to the last few shekels. Evidently not.
Molto curioso, pero.
SYRIA.
BBC-NUJ’s subliminal headline: Syria and ‘friends’:-
“Syria ‘friends’ to debate rebel support in Qatar”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23012637
But:-
“AMERICAN MUSLIM INDICTED FOR JOINING SYRIAN JIHAD”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/06/american-muslim-indicted-for-joining-syrian-jihad-.html
SYRIA:
-given BBC-NUJ’s political sympathies for Sunni-Al Nusra-Al Qaeda jihadist side in Syrian war, it will be necessary to turn to (pro-Assad) Russian TV (‘RT’) for alternative reports and opinion:-
“CIA and the US military operatives train rebels in Turkey and Jordan – report”
http://rt.com/news/usa-cia-train-syria-rebels-087/
what a disgusting racist and sexist channel BBC3 is. They have No male or white presenters. i think its time for positive discrimination at Al Beeb even if its just a token white bloke
They have No male or white presenters
Rick Edwards presents Free Speech. Nick Grimshaw presents Sweat the Small Stuff. Greg James and Russell Kane present Britain Unzipped.
Still, never mind, Beebinator – you’re still in the running for Biased BBC’s very own presentation: “Talking Bollocks, Because Lying Makes Us Feel Better About Ourselves”. Granted, there’s quite a bit of competition for that little job…
wow – three white blokes.
that’s alright then.
scott
i should have said introducers or anchor girls, the only time i watch bbc3 is when family guy and american dad are on and the women that always read the trendy news things then aint white and there aint no fellas either, if it was the other way round mind
scott also, dont forget stan smith is white, peter griffin is white as well, so is brian the dog, but roger is grey
In other words, “I should have stopped making shit up. And now that I’ve been called it on it, I’ll just try and dig myself a further hole.”
So you don’t watch bbc3 very much, but think this means that you can call a channel racist? What idiotic behaviour. No wonder you fit in so well around here. Brain dead racists are always welcome at Biased BBC: bigotry loves company.
not at all my good man. i said bbc3 presenters, not ppl that present bbc3 shows. bbc3 presenters, are all female and ethnic minorities. you’ve been called out not me my good friend
im not racist, i dumped a black girl for a chinese girl once
but thanks for the abuse, are u a member of the nazi UAF?
I liked the “bigotry loves company” line ,
Still leading with your chin Scott?
Unless you can prove that the selection process for BBC3 presenters discriminated against white, male candidates then you have no basis on which to assert that the channel is racist.
absolute nonsense. if they were all white men leftists would be accusing it of sexism and racism
I agree, and they shouldn’t accuse it of sexism and racism. But by the same token, you should not accuse BBC3 of anti white male discrimination just because there aren’t that many white male presenters.
What evidence do you have that BBC3 has discriminated against white male candidates?
The lack of them
In a country were white males represent at least 45% of the population their under-representation (as presenters) on the BBC in general and BBC 3 in particular defies coincidence and must be indicative of a form of institutional racism
But you don’t know how many white males applied for these presenters positions on BBC3. You suggest that the lack of them means it ‘must’ be a form of institutional racism, when it is also possible that fewer of them applied for whatever reason. Unless we know how many applied, and what the selection process was, we should not assume that it is racist. I would say the same thing for a position where there were very few women or ethnic minorities represented.
Argumentum ad ignorantiam (“arguing from ignorance”) — A fallacy that occurs when someone argues that because we don’t know something is true, it must be false.
It is reasonable to infer that the BBC actively select against male white presenters because:
a) It is their satated policy to have racial employment quotas*
b) Where are the white male presenters?
*http://www.bbc.co.uk/diversity/workforce.html
“because we don’t know something is true, it must be false.”
I have not said that it must be false. I merely said that we need evidence. The onus is not on me to prove that the BBC does not discriminate against white males: the onus is on you to prove that it does.
A commitment to diversity (interestingly, nowhere on that link does it mention the word ‘quota’) is not the same thing as anti-white discrimination.
If you’re asking where the white male BBC presenters are: Bill Turnbull, Jeremy Paxman, Matt Baker, Bill Oddie, Chris Packham, Richard Bacon, Colin Murray, Mark Chapman, Peter Allen, Huw Evans, Gavin Esler, John Humphrys, James Naughtie, Eddie Mair, Justin Webb, Nicky Campbell… do I need to go on?
Skimmed it did you and missed this statement – these are clear quotas.
“The BBC has clear diversity targets which were set in 2008 and were for achievement by December 2012. Our 2012 corporate targets were:
12.5% all staff BME (12.4% as at September 2012)
7% Senior Manager grade BME staff (6.5% as at September 2012)
5.5% all staff disability (3.1% as at September 2012)
4.5% Senior Manager grade disability (3.1% as at September 2012)
As a matter of interest can you prove to me that that the racist South African Police in 1962 didn’t actively discriminate against black applicants for senior ranks? We know they did discriminate because it was their (wicked) policy (point ‘a’ above) and because there were no black police officers above the rank of Sgt (point ‘b” above).
(Sorry, I accidentally clicked ‘report comment’)
Those targets are all quite small, don’t you think? And you still haven’t explained why it amounts to anti-white racism. If you can prove that a white candidate did not get a job at the BBC because of their ethnicity, then I will accept that as evidence of anti-white racism.
Are you trying to equate the discrimination practised by the South African police force with that practised by the BBC? Firstly, whilst there were no black officers above the rank of sergeant, there are white people in the upper echelons of the BBC and on the frontline of TV and radio, as I showed in my list. Black people were forbidden from these positions in the police: white people are not forbidden from these positions in the BBC.
Are you conceding that there are clear racial ‘targets’ in BBC recruitment? If so, irespective of size, isn’t this by definition racist?
My deliberately silly comment about the SAP was to demonstrate that I didn’t have to have the detail of their recruitment policy, the selection criteria they applied nor did I have to prove on a case by case basis that they applied a policy of discrimination. Because by observation we could see that they did discriminate.
Given the clearly disproportionate recent recruitment of BME individuals into presenter roles (I concede that there are lots of white males in situ – historically recruited) the onus is indeed on you to explain why this is happening.
“if they were all white men leftists would be accusing it of sexism and racism”
Amazing, isn’t it, how Biased BBC commenters can say exactly what “leftists” will do with such authority, but can’t actually provide any evidence for their own assertions.
Why, it’s almost as if hey have no evidence at all for their own bigoted viewpoints, and are instead just sad little men, sitting at home, making stuff up.
pot kettle black, name me one man or one white person who introduces BBC3 programs
“name me one man or one white person who introduces BBC3 programs”
*sigh*
So apparently I have to repeat myself, as “The Beebinator” is too thick to scroll up a bit.
Rick Edwards.
Russell Kane.
Greg James.
Nick Grimshaw.
And let’s add Russell Howard, since his Good News comedy series has been running for several years.
I know you don’t think these count, but from what I can see your only reason for omitting them is that they disprove your original comment and expose you for the idiot you are.
Oh, and let’s add Gavin Inskip to the list: he’s part of the channel’s continuity team.
Last reply wont wash old man statistical evidence has historically been accepted as evidence of racism in sport in media in employment and in policing why else have quotas?
(This is a reply to CCE)
Yes, I do concede that. However, I do not think that is evidence of anti-white racism. It could be argued that it is racist to BME groups, as it implies that these candidates only got the job because of their ethnicity and not because they were the best-qualified. I agree that these ‘racial targets’ are wrong, but not because I see them as evidence of anti-white racism. I think they are a misguided attempt (based on the fact that the BBC was until recently populated almost exclusively by white people) to make the BBC reflect the make up of the nation, when they should be focusing solely on employing the best candidates. That is not the same kind of racism as has been experienced by BMEs, and indeed is experienced by white farmers in Zimbabwe, for example.
I think I agree in part, this isn’t explicitly racial discrimination a la Mugabe (who also did do a ‘good job’ of massacring tens of thousands Matabeles for good measure) nevertheless in a quota system some people are actively discriminated against – and these would appear to be white males.
My suspicion is not that the BBC wants to ‘reflect’ society but that it is fairly clearly pursuing a policy where it is an active agent of change. The BBC has stated categorically that it “is not neutral on multi-culturalism” (or AGW for that matter). I agree with you that the ‘best’ candidate for the job should be selected. In true weale worded terms this depends on your definition of ‘best’. if the ‘essential job requirements’ include having a person who visibly reflects the extreme diversity of bits of London and not, say, Surrey then I guess a white bloke from Guildford doesn’t have any chance of getting the job. In any case this ia all a bit academic as I do not believe that any of the ‘presenter’ posts are advertised in any meaningful manner or recruited in a normal process. (perhaps someone can link me to an ad if they exist, I fancy trying out for a 95K ‘person who can read a bit’ post)
“i said bbc3 presenters, not ppl that present bbc3 shows.”
Hilarious that you think that’s an adequate defence of your idiotic views. You do realise that if someone at the BBC came out with something so moronic, Alan’d be posting twelve nonsensical posts a day for two weeks about it?
Scott
Are you suffering from a persecution complex ?
Ah, speaking of liars who aren’t man enough to admit it, look who comes along. David Brims the liar. “I said the BBC didn’t report anything on this subject. All those links to their website? They don’t count. And those other people who heard and saw the BBC report it? They don’t count either. And I’m going to carry on denying that I lied because I, David Brims, don’t have the balls to be honest.”
Scott
I’ll take that as a yes then.
You can take that as “I don’t care what the lying idiot David Brims thinks, as his opinion was clearly worth nothing.”
But hey. I’ve responded to you. So now you can feel all validated and important and not just a pathetic little man. Go you.
Not just us biased BBCers then….?
‘I often think in this country at the moment that if you want to have a go at anything, the two things to have a go at are the English and the Christians’.
Melvyn Bragg
BBC Radio 4 In Our Time
The Examined Life : Thusday 9th May 2002
Melvyn Bragg investigates how our preoccupations about how to live have altered over time. Including guests AC Grayling, Janet Radcliffe Richards and Julian Baggini
http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/iotp/all
quote can be found at c19.30
He comments further on the gathered academics….
‘I know you would all like to go on the rampage against Christianity….’
What on earth is the BBC doing wasting licence payers money on this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/outreach/
How much is it costing and how do we stop it?
This came to my attention from this Manchester Evening News article http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/fighting-back-at-food-poverty-4698035
Where a BBC ‘senior project manager’ attended. What this has to do with the BBCs remit is beyond me.
Nicola Crowther , senior project manager, BBC Outreach, said: “I came wanting to hear more about the stats, which were very interesting and quite shocking. Now the trick is to listen to what charities want and need from us.”
Firstly Nikki – WTF is “BBC Outreach”? It would appear that you have decided to actively campaign on this front (we have noticed) Anyway I can tell you what they want Nikki: lots of free air time with soft and leading questions providing an uncontested platform for them to advance their own social(ist) agendas.
Noticed on Any Questions the BBC was pushing the meme that the invasion of Afghanistan was a mistake and was all George Bushes fault.
The Beeb must have a short memory for they claimed that it was they that liberated Kabul!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2001/nov/13/warinafghanistan2001.bbc
the only reason Al Beeb got there first was cos no afghan taliban terrorist would chop the head off a reporter from the terrorist supporting BBC, their chief source of propaganda
The BBC is to right-wing.
as salt is to coffee ?
No. As salt is to wound.
if the BBc took i pace to the left, it would push communism off a cliff
SYRIA.
In BBC-NUJ’s latest ‘report’, as Western nations join e.g. the Islamic states of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar in providing military assistance to the Sunni Islamic side of Syria’s war, BBC-NUJ gives the impression that the jihadist Hezbollah group is a main enemy, but the Sunni jihadists of Al Nusra, and of Al Qaeda, etc, go unmentioned!
“Syria ‘friends’ agree urgent support for rebels”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23012637
P.S.
British soldiers were told by MoD recently that if they are sympathetic towards the English Defence League, which opposes Islamic jihad, they will be dismissed; but presumably if any British soldiers support Al Nusra or Al Qaeda Islamic jihadists in Syria, they may get a medal!
i can imagine a lot of squaddies telling their CO that their EDL supporters just to get out
When i was in the army, a mate who wanted to get out told everyone he was gay, so he was put in-front of the adjutant who told him he didnt believe he was gay, so he said bend over the table and i’ll show you whos gay. he got 14 days in jail for insubordination and never got kicked out 😉
Melanie Phillips:-
“How ignorant Britain sneers and sniggers at the threat from Iran”
[Opening excerpt]:-
“For a distressing snapshot of how Britain is steadily sliding into irrelevance and indeed civilisational defeat, take a look at this week’s edition of BBC TV’s Question Time where I was on the panel. My statement that Iran currently posed the greatest threat to the UK and the west provoked a display of truly shocking ignorance amongst the political class, as well as venomous imbecility and resistance to truth-telling amongst the public.”
http://melaniephillips.com/how-ignorant-britain-sneers-and-sniggers-at-the-threat-from-iran
oops we re running out of time 😀
A… typical bbc, “we ll have to leave it there” moment
why do those moments always happen to be at precisely the same time as someone blowing the al bbc narrative out of the water?
It makes my blood boil how the BBC, Keith ‘Daz’ Vaz and the ‘moderate’ faith groups protest about the entry to the UK of these two speakers and yet the socialists are silent when Muslim scum burn poppies and preach vile hatred in mosques up and down the land. It seems the Left can dictate who is and who is not allowed to debate Islam
There’s a weirdness and lack of commonsense about this country which I wouldn’t have believed possible.
Everything seems to have been inverted.
Very true, Joshaw. And far from being organic change it has been rigorously engineered, a project of destabilisation aided & abetted by the BBC, amongst many others. Look no further than the Frankfurt School’s blueprint for the destruction of the nation state. London is, of course, the flawed ‘jewel’ in the multicultural crown, ‘weirdness’ central. And who better than Eddie Izzard (running for Mayor in two years, apparently) to be ensconced in that weirdly lop-sided Mayor’s nest/City Hall building down by the Thames when the excrement really hits the outmoded air-con machine? It’s going to be divinely ‘enriching’, without doubt.
“Eddie Izzard (running for Mayor in two years)”
i just wish lizzard,was still “worthy” running in S Africa in his “mandela marathong”
odious creature.
Keep making it all about Robinson, BBC. Very clever. He even knows what you’re up to and still can’t stop himself from helping you do it, so well done.
simply because its about the facts, the truth
… in fact david, this denial narrative of them is so blatant, so absurd, you could easily write a book about it, it would be hilarious – ala D Murray 😀 eh!,
or to answer joshaw above a total inversion of the glaring reality another ala melanie phillips 😀 … robinson? …
spencer, geller? … how about wilders, bat yeor
hirsi ali ? … or fitzgerald, or ray ibrahim, ibn warraq etc etc
I didn’t watch The Voice but from the BBC this morning I hear that a young girl in a Team Ireland vest won first place.
There was me thinking it was all about ‘the voice’
Perhaps the show ought to be reorganised as the GB qualifing round for Eurovision? The BBC seem to be getting the hang of this balkanised-singing-competition business.
If you want a vision of the future imagine the BBC shoving a shamrock up an English nose – forever.
A classic comment from a denizen of this blog :
“I didn’t watch The Voice…”
But does that stop me coming out with a load of anti-Irish bilge. Course not.
for the record (as I did watch it with my family which I have unlike most of the sad lags hers) two British girls from Nothern Ireland were in the final.
“If you want a vision of the future imagine the BBC shoving a shamrock up an English nose – forever.”
Red Hand of Ulster actually represents Northern Ireland. You stupid racist twat.
Careful son, that sounds a bit like a hate crime that does…
Waycist! Waycist! Waycist!
You must be a fan of the BBC where daily I put up with a load of ‘anti-[English] bilge’
Perhaps that is why you are a friend of the BBC?
Vanal
You don’t need to eat the whole apple to know it’s rotten, just take one bite.
Or not take a bite at all, but declare it rotten anyway because, well, who needs evidence when you can lie, eh David?
V – anal
the red hand of Ulster actually represents the 9 counties of ulster, not the just the 6 counties that are in northern ireland
so it would appear that you are the “stupid racist twat” as your ignorance about what you are talking about is outstanding
congratulations, UAF must be very proud of you for shouting racist
TALIBAN.
From INBBC World Service’s Dawood Azami:
A Taliban ‘joke’:-
“The Taliban chose Qatar for the office because they saw it as a neutral location.”
(Has Qatar broadcast this INBBC ‘joke’ on its Islamic ‘Al Jazeera Arabic’ TV network yet?)
“How Qatar came to host the Taliban”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23007401
Bother at t’mill Lead article on BBC politics website.
Has BBC-NUJ reported that yet?
“Labour MPs claimed for 1,541 business class flights on expenses – Tory MPs for just 24”
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/leftwatch/2013/06/labour-mps-claimed-for-1541-business-class-flights-on-expenses-tory-mps-for-just-24.html
BBC-NUJ wouldn’t want to report that, not least because it could remind people of Beeboid expenses’ scandals.
“Conflict of interest row over BBC stars paid thousands to ‘moonlight’ at high-powered conferences.
“Senior BBC journalists make thousands of pounds attending conferences.
“Tory MP Alun Cairns called for register of BBC journalists’ outside earnings.”
By MILES GOSLETT
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2346612/Conflict-row-BBC-stars-paid-thousands-moonlight-high-powered-conferences.html
You’re wrong. Stephen Nolan was discussing this on 5 Live last night. During the discussion, I was wondering why the party affiliation of those involved was never mentioned. Thanks to you link above, I now know why.
Times has named Landsley as wanting to sack NHS whistle-blower (on basis of what he was told btw, not him being a nasty…but ), countdown a few seconds for BBC’s sudden wish to name politicians and political parties despite inability over previous months to mention labour/Burnham et al.
lefties suddenly interested…
Interesting the bbc never reports these sort of incidents. http://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/crime/graves-sprayed-with-red-graffiti-1-5207180
Obviously done by the EDL so I wonder why the BBC has kept so quiet? /sarc
what do you base that on where is your evidence do you even live in the area.
Which part of ‘/sarc’ do you not understand?
Please engage your brain before posting.
BBC wont report it because of the negative effects on social cohesion. If, however, the letters EDL were written on graves of members of the religion of peace, we’d never hear the end of it. racist this racist that
Nice to see the balance on the Andrew Marr show this morning during the newspaper review, Socialist Helena Kennedy spouting her usual pap and Russell Brand showing his yoof credentials by slagging of Tories, toff and bankers.
Scott ”So now you can feel all validated and important and not just a pathetic little man. ”
Self projecting again. Have you ever thought of seeing a psychiatrist ?
Funny how you’re seemingly intelligent enough to decide that I’m projecting, but not intelligent enough to admit that you’re a liar.
You do seem to have a problem with people disagreeing with you. Why is that, exactly? It can’t be for lack of experience.
you wanna chill out scott, youre going to give yourself a heart attack.
From laughing at the idiots who think they’re intelligent, but can’t ever provide solid evidence to back up their racist conspiracy theories? Fat chance.
scott, when u can name me one bloke who introduces BBC3 programs, or even a white chick, i’ll admit im wrong, but you cant so you just shout racist like a typical UAF nazi
but in the mean time. please sit down, close your eyes, take deep breaths, and chant maggie akbar! maggie akbar!
“scott, when u can name me one bloke who introduces BBC3 programs, or even a white chick, i’ll admit I’m wrong”
Presenters of BBC3 programmes, repeated yet again for the hard of thinking:
Rick Edwards.
Russell Kane.
Greg James.
Nick Grimshaw.
Russell Howard.
All male, all white.
On the BBC3 continuity team, providing links between programmes:
Gavin Inskip.
So go on. Admit you’re wrong. Or try and wriggle out of it yet again.
And then maybe you can explain why you have so much difficulty with women or non-white people presenting in the first place.
Scott, it’s like hitting the frogs in an arcade game.
You can hit them as many times as you want but they never learn and still stick their heads up with maniacal nonsense. This site does serve as a virtual ‘care in the community’ project. Could you imagine the trouble they would cause if they left their sheltered accommodation?
Hmm using those with mental health issues to mock your idealogical enemies ? nice !
I think “ideological enemies” is paying the idiots on Biased BBC far more respect than they deserve.
And while you do have a point about using implication of mental health issues as a putdown, those Tommy was haranguing have a history of doing exactly the same thing.
But I supposed that’s Biased BBC in a nutshell: big glass house. Lots of stones being lobbed out. Temper tantrums when one or two end up heading in the other direction.
scott i keep telling you but youre not listening. the ppl you list present programs on BBC3, they dont present BBC3 theres a difference.
its not just non whites, its the sexism as well, you fascists seem to concentrate on the race issue
” ppl you list present programs on BBC3, they dont present BBC3 theres a difference.”
Nobody “presents BBC3”. Just as nobody “presents BBC2”, or “presents ITV”.
The channel has a lot of programmes, many of which are presented by white males. It has a continuity team, of which at least one member is a white male.
You said that you would admit you were wrong. I didn’t believe you. I was right.
Now, would you care to admit why you have a problem with women or non-white people presenting TV programmes?
because the left is too quick to shout racism when its the other way round
aint ya?
That’s not an answer. Why do you have a problem with women or non-white people presenting TV programmes?
doo doo scotty don t! … 😀
give yourself a thrombo dear …
give yourself the “mutley” medal
and keep yourself smug for the afternoon
So, nothing to contribute yourself, then? What a surprise. Still, at least you get to feel marginally less unimportant. Go you.
for crying out loud … what is it scott
“wrong week” have a fairy cake and calm down dear.
“you get to feel marginally less unimportant” 😀 ROFL
… it appears that i have inadvertently misunderestimated 😀 your over representation in tenaciously machinegunning replies to one mr beebinator …
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23017961
BBC reporting on how his holiness, the obamassiah, is going to tackle climate change by forcing laws through by executive order avoiding the law making process
no mention from the hero worshipers at al beeb of any criticism of the chosen one, like the Speaker of the House John Boehner, who described Barry’s plans as “absolutely crazy.”
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/boehner-obama-s-plan-climate-change-absolutely-crazy
And, of course, had a certain former US president, of a different political party, attempted to by-pass the usual law-making process, the BBC would have simply opened their mouths in awe at the bold audacity of the fella…… right…. ???
And, in the future, should any president of a different political party (i.e. not a Democrat) attempt to carry out precisely the same manouevre in order to get his own way, despite all the evidence to the contrary that such a move is not justified, I’m sure the BBC will once again stand open-mouthed in admiration of the bold audacity of that man…. yeah, right !
Note the intentional connection between hurricanes and AGW:
Mr Obama has come under pressure to cut emissions from power plants. from prominent figures in north-eastern states hit by Super storm Sandy in October 2012.
According to the BBC, Sandy was caused by Global Warming. Who are those “prominent figures”? Irrelevant. The Message is clear.
Note also the complete absence of one of those “Analysis” insets the BBC likes to provide on important issues. No Beeboid will dare point out how cynical this move is, that it’s merely posturing to appease a severely and serially disappointed base, who, like Mark Mardell, have gone through a crisis of faith over the NSA snooping revelations and Syria, among other things.
This is Politics 101. Ratings among your fundraising base slipping? Make a big gesture that appeals to the moneyed fringe. But no BBC journalist dares call Him on it.
Will BBC-NUJ make clear that its trade union, the National Union of Journalists, supports this?
“The People’s Assembly is Labour’s UKIP”
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/the-peoples-assembly-is-labours-ukip.html
After all, BBC-NUJ doesn’t want this from its Labour Party:-
“Labour rules out borrowing to reverse coalition cuts”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23010073
you cant compare UKIP with this band of subversives. the peoples assembly is organised by (amongst others) the NUJ, UK communist party, Black Activists Rising Against Cuts, Greece Solidarity Campaign, socialist resistance etc
is this were Al Beeb gets its agenda from
Meanwhile, trade union voting is under way at BBC:
– for the next strike.
“Voting well underway in BBC pay ballot”
http://www.bectu.org.uk/news/1951?
Why is the BBC describing the traitor Edward Snowden as a ‘whistle blower’?
‘whistle blower: an informant who exposes wrongdoing within an organization in the hope of stopping it’
alt
The disclosure by a person, usually an employee in a government agency or private enterprise, to the public or to those in authority, of mismanagement, corruption, illegality, or some other wrongdoing.
This is not what Snowden has done, he has released secret data from UK & US secret services in the way they operate. Nothing has come as surprise, but rent a gobs like Chakrabati have used it to make some ridiculous assertions, like the government is listening to every single phone call & reading all our Emails. No matter how hysterical or unlikely the objection, the BBC seems to give them airtime.
A man charged with espionage with an international arrest warrant out for him, fleeing between countries not exactly known for their human rights records is an unsavoury sight. It is absolutely not the behaviour of a ‘whistle blower’.
We now learn he is going to Cuba via Moscow – not what I’d call a friendly country – probably the US would call it an enemy country.
There maybe a further move to Venezuela (Caracas) home to ex Ugo Chavezzzzzzzzzz again what might be considered an enemy country.
I wonder if the BBC now regards other spies like Burgess Philby & Maclean as ‘whistle blowers
Sky is using the same term today
http://news.sky.com/story/1107174/whistleblower-snowden-leaves-hong-kong
We were all aware that the secret services were intercepting, Snowden has just clarified how much. If you are happy to have the CIA crawl over everything then deny it, fine. You don’t have to be in Liberty to find the idea pretty repugnant.
Also using Whistlebower:
Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2346765/Edward-Snowden-Whistleblower-left-Hong-Kong-Russia-help-Wikileaks-day-US-charges-spying.html
Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/hongkong/10136430/NSA-whistleblower-Edward-Snowden-can-escape-extradition-to-US-says-Hong-Kong-lawyer.html
Do the search yourself. Everyone in the media calls it whistleblower.
Since he’s facing incarceration in a jail were pass the soap or hide the sausage will be a daily reality, I’m not altogether surprised he’s on the run. He’s taken a huge personal risk in exposing a real attack on all our civil liberties.
one mans whistle blower is another mans traitor
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10127864/Edward-Snowden-is-a-traitor-to-the-United-States-he-must-be-brought-to-justice.html
But that’s the point they’re not ‘crawling over everything’.
If you believe that someone might read you’re Email then you’re wrong! There are billions sent per day, but they have to filtered just to flag the ones which actually do matter.
It’s a balance, one in which peoples lives are at stake, against the minute possibility that someone else might read your communications.
I take it from your position that you’d be happy to see another 9/11 just so long as your coms aren’t filtered?
thoughtful, ive been in the army, ive got medals for fighting terrorism so i take offense to your 9/11 comments
what have you ever done for your country ? do you wear your help for heroes clothing with pride?
sorry thoughtful, my bad, i thought u was having a go at me
That’s OK Beebinator, but just so you know I worked in defence electronics.
I’ll not go into too many details but my designs are still used in very many pieces of equipment still.
hi thoughtful,
as im sure youre aware, mass interception of communications is nothing new. When Willy Whitelaw was home secretary, he got up in parliament and denied the government did any such thing. The next day the press published details of operation tinkerbell. this current debate regarding Snowdens revelations is nothing new, if ppl didnt think it happened they are living in cloud cuckoo land. sorry again
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2199&dat=19800203&id=5aQyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=P-cFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3402,396355
Funny that no ones mentioned the ‘Echelon’ system. There have been protests against it which involve them deliberately using ‘trigger’ words or phrases. We all knew that was going on since way back when. This guy has gone much further by telling where the nodes are which they use to gather the data, and that alone amounts to espionage
St. Edward is both whistle-blower and traitor. He took the former a couple steps to far, and is now the latter. The result of his efforts hasn’t been to reform the NSA and end the government’s powers, but to harm US interests. Keep in mind that’s what St. Julian’s ultimate goal is as well.
The one silver lining for me in all this is the fact that we at least have a white boy criticizing the President’s policies and the BBC isn’t calling him a racist. Although that’s probably because they agree with him, so there’s no accusation of a sinister motive lurking underneath.
BBC-NUJ and Chakrabarti still.
BBC-NUJ’s political chum, Chakrabarti, of ‘Liberty’ (!) is very selective of her causes, favouring such as Binyam Mohamed and others of Gitmo; and favouring the Gaddafis at the LSE, where she had a role.
“Where’s the liberal outrage at this sinister threat to our freedom?”
By RICHARD LITTLEJOHN (Feb 2013).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2273451/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Wheres-liberal-outrage-sinister-threat-freedom.html
Oh! Chakrabarti’s finally come out of hiding has she.
She’s been keeping her head down since Labour the Lib Dems and Hacked-Off stitched up the free press over Leveson.
The Index on Censorship and all of those who value freedoms, across the world are appalled at the prospect of state regulation of the free media – the purpose of which the odious Harman let slip a few days ago; to stifle those on the right.
Mind you Chakers needn’t have worried, as the leader of the anti-Murdoch coalition, the BBC would never have dared to embarrass the silly cow.
Canada and Jihad.
INBBC barely reports Canada anyway. (Too ‘white’? Too much British heritage?)
So it’s no surprise to see it isn’t reporting this:
“Canadian jihad murder plotter: More jihad murderers may ‘appear amongst the one million and a half Muslims living in Canada'”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/06/canadian-jihad-murder-plotter-more-jihad-murderers-may-appear-amongst-the-one-million-and-a-half-mus.html
I must commend the World Service for 2 half-hour programmes by a woman journalist exploring how the rifts between Shia and Sunni Muslims and countries such as Iran and Saudi – and the rifts within the Sunnis between Wahabis and Sufis – has badly infected Iraq and now Syria, and is now starting to infect relations within Muslim communities in the UK. The journalist is a Sunni, but her treatment of the issue and the interviews she conducted seemed very fair and balanced. And informative. I have not heard any of this stuff on mainstream BBC news,
Channel 4 News has had some useful items recently on the nature of the Sunni-Shia conflict, e.g.:-
1.)
“Sunnis and Shias – the key questions”
http://www.channel4.com/news/sunni-shia-islam-muslim-syria-middle-east-key-questions
2.)
JONATHAN RUGMAN Foreign Affairs Correspondent:
“Will Syria’s civil war spread to Lebanon? – video”
http://www.channel4.com/news/hezbollah-shia-sunni-lebanon-syria-civil-war
TURKEY.
In contrast to BBC-NUJ’s ‘one the one hand, on the other hand’, reporting:-
1.)
“ERDOGAN’S ISLAMIC SS FIRE WATER CANNONS AND TEAR GAS AT THOUSANDS OF MOURNERS AT MEMORIAL FOR FOUR KILLED AT RECENT FREEDOM DEMOS”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/06/erdogans-islamic-ss-fire-water-cannons-and-tear-gas-at-thousands-of-mourners-at-memorial-for-four-ki.html
2.)
“Covert crackdown: RT’s correspondent water-cannoned in Ankara night raid (VIDEO)”
http://rt.com/news/rt-barton-water-cannon-ankara-118/
The BBC report does its best to make us deplore the government tearing S4C off the taxpayer’s teat & having to rely only on the license payer
The TV channel received £6.7m from DCMS in 2013, down from £101m in 2010.
The BBC will contribute £76.3m from the licence fee in 2013-14, falling to £74.5m by 2016/17.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-23019588
The report fails to mention that this £100m pa is for the benefit of an audience of less than 50,000
http://www.barb.co.uk/viewing/weekly-top-10?
thats 2 grand per person, isnt that a good enough reason to shut it down
Scott ” Why do you have a problem with women or non-white people presenting TV programmes?”
You probably haven’t noticed Scott, but Britain is a majority white country, so it’s a bit strange when you turn on the television it doesn’t reflect that fact.
It’ll be like turning on Israeli television and seeing a lot of gentiles and hardly any jewish people.
it’s a bit strange when you turn on the television it doesn’t reflect that fact.
Except that it does. Chalk another one up in the “David Brims is a stupid liar” column. If there’s room.
Hi scott where i live its well over 95% white. Ive never seen anyone wearing a burka except on the TV. I presume its different in multicultural london
In promoting multiculturalism, the BBC floods the TV screens with ethnic minorities. It does not reflect the reality of white working class people
What is the reality of white working class people since you are the spokesman. And how does it differ from non-white working class and the many mixed race working class couples.
We await the pearls of wisdom.
Ps I suspect the experience of living in a recession hit country is pretty similar.
white working class is someone who gets shafted constantly by the liberal elitist left wing media and champagne socialists
Where you live is not necessarily representative of the whole of Britain.
The BBC does not have a responsibility to specifically reflect the reality of white working class people. It has a responsibility to reflect the reality of modern-day Britain.
Please justify your use of ‘floods the screens’. That implies the majority of BBC presenters are from ethnic minorities. A scan through the BBC’s output at any time will show that this is not true.
a BBC director also agrees there are too many ethnic minorities on the BBC, and hes asian as well
http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/823236/Asian-BBC-director-claims-ethnic-minorities-TV/?HAYILC=RELATED
OK, if we accept that as true, that still doesn’t justify your use of the word ‘flood’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/diversity/workforce.html
This link CCE posted yesterday shows that the targets are 12.5% BME across the whole BBC. How is that ‘flooding’?
Maybe there are too many, but, as Samir Shah in your link acknowledges, it is an occasional overcompensation in an attempt to do the right thing. It’s also worth pointing out that the spread of ethnic minorities across the BBC is not constant, but varies depending on the target audience.
In any case, surely what is important is what is being broadcast, not who is broadcasting it?
“And how does it differ from non-white working class”
Uniquely they are denied a voice ,an identity,a past or even less a future specific to themselves
Uniquely they are told that their race ,ethnicity, colour does not matter
and that they are wicked and evil to think it does
Uniquely their extinction past present and future is predicted with joyous triumphalism by the liberal inquisition
Theirs and no others
And who are “we” that care to know
How are they denied a voice? Or a past?
Where are they told that their race, ethnicity or colour does not matter?
Where is the extinction of the white working class predicted with joy?
By the liberal elite every time they use the word racist to suppress decent from the received truth by fail to give them voice
By patrician class academics who continue the lie of the nation of immigrants
By multicultural zealots who cry racist when ever the term indigenous or ethnic English is used
By the bourgeois intelligencer who seek to “end racism by ending race”
and characterise the ‘whiteness’ as disease
The BBC have done this and more
I have heard their words, seen their disdain
My experience is not subject to your approval.
Have the courage of your convictions
Examples please.
Calling someone a racist is not the same as trying to suppress their voice.
How is talking about a nation of immigrants the same thing as saying that their ethnicity does not matter?
In what way does ending race solely mean the extinction of white people?
Where has whiteness been characterised as a disease? And even if you find one example, that does not mean that every liberal agrees.
Actually, I’d suggest that a recent Tommy Robinson appearance on the BBC is evidence of just that. “How am I a racist? What did I say that was racist?” he kept asking his critics on the panel and in the audience. “Because you’re a racist,” was the reply, over and over again. He might very well be a racist, but nobody explained how.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kn479gPxA00
from about 4 minuets in
she goes on to make a crack about Nuremberg race laws ,the irony,but she at least is honest
“Examples please.”
” if you find one example, that does not mean that every liberal agrees.”
I’m not chasing down your weasel words no examples will be enough you will always find some context to cower behind
For like all bourgeois liberals you hide from your own conclusions
My experience is not subject to your approval
When I read the words of Sontag, Toynbee or Alita Nandi I don’t need you to interpret them for me
Have the courage of your convictions
Standard arguing practice is that you need evidence or examples to prove your point. You have not provided any, so why should I accept your argument?
And how is explaining the context ‘cowering behind’ it? Context is all important in everything.
Why are my words ‘weasel words?
Liberalism is a projection of unreality . In this projection there is no room for the concept of nation, patriotism, cultural uniqueness, historical differences of outlook and world view and so on.
It denies the reality of these things and is determind to impose it’s absurdities upon this ancient country. A prime example is the lie that this is a nation of immigrants . The mythical endless waves that flooded England in the 12th, 13 th, 14 th, 15 th,. 16th, 17th, 18 th and 19th centuries.
The are attempting to refashion a people in the image of a dream. They are insane.
From the Hong Kong/Chinese government regarding St. Edwards flight to Moscow:
As the HKSAR Government has yet to have sufficient information to process the request for provisional warrant of arrest, there is no legal basis to restrict Mr Snowden from leaving Hong Kong.
The HKSAR Government has already informed the US Government of Mr Snowden’s departure.
Meanwhile, the HKSAR Government has formally written to the US Government requesting clarification on earlier reports about the hacking of computer systems in Hong Kong by US government agencies. The HKSAR Government will continue to follow up on the matter so as to protect the legal rights of the people of Hong Kong.
In other words, “Up yours, Barry.” St. Edward has illegally collected and released information which aids a political enemy and harms US interests. It’s whistle-blowing when he tells about spying on US citizens within the US, but this is betrayal.
The BBC is playing this angle down so much that they’ve censored the last part of the HK government’s announcement. They mention the bit about the US supposedly not giving them enough information to process the request, but censored the part about their concern over US cyber-espionage. All you know about what St. Edward stole and leaked is this:
The leaks have led to revelations that the US is systematically seizing vast amounts of phone and web data under an NSA programme known as Prism.
That’s not all they’ve led to, BBC. Obviously Hong Kong stonewalled because they’re pissed off about what St. Edward revealed the US is doing to them. It’s not like they had no idea, of course. But his actions gave them succor. It’s pretty silly for the BBC to act like everyone is surprised a “simple procedure” went wrong. It went wrong because St. Edward gave China a reason to impede the US, period.
Yet the BBC either doesn’t see this, or doesn’t want to. Instead, we get the orgy of coverage over St. Edward’s flight to freedom. It’s nice to see the reflexive anti-US attitude return to the BBC after five years of promoting the policies of our President, but come on.
Here is a sweetie just made for the BBC. A scientist (well, a social scientist) argues that climate skeptics need therapy.
http://www.examiner.com/article/oregon-professor-climate-change-skeptics-diseased-need-treatment
i dont know what frightened me more, her looks or her looney left ideology
OMG, that is disturbing! What planet does that come from?
It looks like that it has being grazing on too much muesli and needs to be restrained so that it cannot harm the world any more!
How long before people like her suggest that supporting the BNP means that you need remedial therapy? Or the EDL perhaps? Then we could move on to UKIP and the right-wing of the Tories too, so that in the end no dissent will be heard. As Uncle Jo Stalin said, “No person, no problem.”
Heard on the news that St. Edward is ultimately headed to Ecuador. He sought help from Wikihacks, whose legal “experts” have aided in securing his safety as he moves around various enemy territories, no doubt leaving freedom in his wake. Wikihacks founder St. Julian, remember, is holed up in the Ecuador embassy in the UK, also in trouble for being a freedom fighter against the US.
The BBC isn’t sure whether the diplomatic car that picked him up after landing in Moscow was from Ecuador or Venezuela. Now, why would Venezuela be involved at all? St. Edward’s friends in fighting for freedom seem to include some of the least free places on the planet. Nobody at the BBC has batted an eyelash at it.
The BBC’s report is still focused only on the information about PRISM and collecting data on US citizens within the US. Still no mention of the harm done to US international interests, which misleads the audience into believing it’s all about information the US public has a right to know, etc., the US government needs to be more transparent, etc., which is the Wikihacks creed as well. The debate about aiding enemies is shut down before it begins. Job done, BBC.
Why should the BBC or indeed anyone outside of the US give a fig about US international interests? Since you loathe Obama why should you care if US prestige takes yet another hit? I thought you Tea Party types wanted this sort of outcome.
What is utterly laughable about this is that a guy on a temp contract can have access to so many secrets. After wikileaks it exposes the CIA as utterly inept. That’s the real reason the yanks are crying. They look really stupid!
You’d find BBC bias in a bagel served in their restaurant (it would no doubt be left leaning).
Tommy, it’s not really that you or anyone outside the US should care about protecting or harming US interests, but about how the BBC is glossing over, practically suppressing that aspect of St. Edward’s actions. I see the BBC has successfully misled you on that score.
Your declaration that I shouldn’t care about my country’s prestige misses the point, possibly due to your own anti-US prejudices. It’s about harming some rather delicate and very current foreign policy goals: those US interests we’re talking about. I find your suggestion that I’d welcome damage to my country simply because I dislike the current President to be rather disgusting. You reveal a very disturbing side of your mindset there.
The BBC’s focus has been on the domestic side of St. Edward’s illegally gained and distributed information. As long as they keep it that way, the story is about freedom and truth-seeking, speaking truth to power, heroically standing up for his fellow citizens. You can see how sanctifying him in this way can lead the audience to support his actions as well. We tend to support the actions of people we like, you know? It’s a natural reaction. I don’t see how the info he revealed makes the CIA or anyone else look especially stupid. Unless you believe that fighting back against China in their cyber war is stupid.
The BBC is playing up the speaking-truth-to-power angle, and seriously sweeping aside the actual main reason the US government is charging him with espionage. So those who trust the BBC are misled in the same way you seem to be. Really, I’m talking about the content and narrative of BBC reporting on the whole story. Whether or not you or I support or dislike or simply don’t care about what St. Edward has done is irrelevant.
Having said all that, it’s in fact not laughable at all that “a guy on a temp contract” has the kind of access he had, and I laugh at your belief that was the case. I can only assume that you’re rather uninformed about his past. Didn’t you even read the gospel about him according to the BBC? He had the clearance already having worked for the CIA. BAH hired him after that, so their giving him clearance is a given.
Personally, I think if I was CIA/NSA, or even BAH, management, St. Edward’s posts on Ars Technica would have raised some serious red flags with me. Not the sex or anime or gaming stuff – the concerns about IT and government secrecy. I wouldn’t be too eager to hire someone to work as a gatekeeper who thought maybe the gate shouldn’t be locked. Not to mention the fact that he’s a Paulista, although it’s wrong to even think about not hiring someone due to their support for any politician, and I’m more ashamed of myself for thinking it than Robert Peston was for wondering about the juicy Murdoch divorce gossip. But his Ron Paul support combined with his concerns about the exact job he was hired to do might have raised an eyebrow or two. I guess our spies were too busy tracking Romney donors and Tea Party organizers to care about him or the Boston bomber. Yeah, I’ll grant you that we look stupid on that score.
“I find your suggestion that I’d welcome damage to my country simply because I dislike the current President to be rather disgusting.”
That’s not what Tommy said. He was referring to your country’s prestige taking a hit, not any actual physical damage. Unless Tommy does actually want the US to be attacked, you’ve been dishonest there in an attempt to discredit him.
Chris, you are not the sharpest knife in the box are you, just be grateful David Preiser has more patience with you than you deserve.
Why do you say that? What have I said that was wrong here?
Chris, read this again:
“Since you loathe Obama why should you care if US prestige takes yet another hit?”
Since you loathe….why should you care…?
I’d welcome damage….because I dislike…
Other than the syntax and your split semantic hair, what’s the substantial difference between them two?
Your comment implied that Tommy said you would welcome actual damage (i.e. physical damage, in the form of an attack) to the USA. He actually talked about the PRESTIGE of the USA taking a hit, i.e. no physical damage, a very different thing.
Please let’s not pretend that a hit to prestige is meaningless in a geopolitical sense, especially considering the timing of the release of certain information and the summit with China. Please, let’s not pretend there’s no connection between that and Hong Kong/China deciding that the US didn’t fill out the paperwork properly.
You misrepresented what Tommy wrote in order to accuse him of having a disturbing mindset. That’s all I wanted to highlight.
I didn’t misrepresent anything. Tommy mischaracterize what this is about, deliberately conflating the vague, superficial concept of prestige with actual damage in the geopolitical sense. Your hair-splitting is more of the same.
off topic …
but there have posts and many posters on this subject.
my feeling is all those cases already tried, are the tip of an abhorrent iceberg.
never mind men … asians … attackers … groomers
the bbc should be highlighting this cause as a matter of duty.
I agree with you Noggin, a public broadcaster or news agency with any integrity should be hammering away at this issue, demanding that the authorities are exposed and required to defend themselves in court.
Any other cause and this lawyer would put straight to air on the BBC.
“Audio: Robert Spencer on the BBC takes on Left-fascist Nick Lowles and discusses the Qur’an with an imam”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/06/audio-robert-spencer-on-the-bbc-takes-on-left-fascist-nick-lowles-and-discusses-the-quran-with-an-im.html
A Muslim can say this on Islamic Al Jazeera:
“Muslims are the trouble with Islam today.”
Can a non-Muslim say this on BBC-NUJ?:-
“Muslims are the trouble with Islam today.”
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/headtohead/2013/06/201361091619207870.html?
Surely it is good that some Muslims have the courage (and it is truly courageous ) to engage in the same kind of introspection that Christians and western atheists have been doing for hundreds of years
However, as an out side observer, I would say she has the cart before the horse
It should be ‘Islam is the trouble with Muslims today’
‘JihadWatch’ on her:-
“Irshad Manji’s expansive and broad-minded Islam is her own creation, with no basis in Islamic tradition. Hugh Fitzgerald said it back in 2008: ‘Irshad Manji has certainly created her own private Islam. She is the child of Asian refugees from Uganda. She has never lived in a Muslim society. She has always enjoyed the freedoms of the West. But she feels, out of filial piety, and perhaps for other reasons, that she will do best if she continues to identify as a Muslim and if, furthermore, she keeps claiming that Islam itself is or can be made into something perfectly acceptable to people such as herself. She’s wrong. And any apostate, who had been born into and grown up in a society suffused with Islam, would be able to set her right.’
“But why don’t we see more Muslims calling for any kind of reform in Islam? Here’s why: even half-hearted and deceptive attempts at ‘reform’ like Manji’s are labeled un-Islamic.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/08/sharia-in-action-in-modern-moderate-malaysia-to-haul-publisher-of-banned-book-on-reform-in-islam-bef.html
No doubt the BBC is gearing itself up for 20 days mourning. Probably issued an emergency recall to all its journalists and ready to fly 75 top quality (ah hem) reporters to South Africa.
There was a time when Auntie wore a pair of sensible stout bloomers – nowadays she is more likely to be caught in a borrowed set of Guardian pick liberal panties still damp from an attack of the hysterics over the revelation that undercover cops do a few secret investigations!
The Guardian of course is still in a seismically over-size tizzie about spies doing espionage.
The BBC : The Guardian with moving pictures