Weekend Open Thread By DB | June 29, 2013 - 11:59 am |July 2, 2013 BBC bias Better late than never, a new open thread. Bookmark the permalink.
from the end of last thread ,…
? will my little troll, will have to come across too?
after going through a few pages of google i found this from TAG from a site moreformuslims.co.uk, this was because of the ridiculous amount of islamophile reports
from the papers, sites, BBC, MSM
re the absurdly trumpeted by the UK press and of course
islamophile bbc …. the friday hate hour sermon, in ahem … “many”? mosques, supposedly focusing on the epidemic of muslim paedophile child gang raping cases,(that is obviously the tip of an abhorrent iceberg).
Whilst we would like all imams to participate in this campaign it is entirely up to them as whether they use the khutba and resource that we will be providing or not. The important matter for us is that on that day the subject matter .
… hmmm this seems to be very vague in nature , it continues later, with the more usual muslim/victim diatribe.
We fundamentally disagree with some racist extremist groups and others who are exploiting this situation to denigrate Muslims and Islam by suggesting that there might be a religious and/or cultural explanation for the action of these men.
The facts on this issue, which we are in possession of, based on extensive research by organisations like the Children’s Commissioner of England do not bear this out. We also have sympathy with individual Muslims and Muslim organisations, who out of total weariness from the Islamophobic attacks of recent years on the community, feel that this campaign draws further negative attention.
opinion on this? …, why do you get the impression that muslims here seem to be being portrayed as “victims” again in this ?, in fact this same nonsense has been mentioned even in some of the court cases.
this wasn t in all of the press/bbc propaganda? … was it?
These gangs sometimes related, often from the same mosque, and in such an abjectly insular community … nobody knew eh!.
The big problem is, this obvious complicion is so well known, it even gets mentioned on radio talk shows now
ie bbc asian network .. nihal only yesterday?
I could even run through this disgusting crimes mandating in the quran, mentioned earlier in this thread, but its not necessary now.
1. I don’t believe a word that any muslim says, particularly when it relates to their sodding religion
2. Where is the outrage about the poor 17 year old boy who happened to kiss a muslim girl in Turkey, while on holiday? He is almost killed by the animals who inhabit those lands; and we want them to live amongst us? Those who make these decisions on our behalf are insane and we should be incarcerating them for our own protection.
3. How is it that the blessed Obama can visit the god-like terrorist mandela, but can’t sent a representative to the funeral of Margaret Thatcher, the most faithful ally of the USA. Communists obviously stick together.
Is it just me or is the BBC going to ridiculous lengths to apotheosize both Obama and Mandela? It’s two for the price of one, I suppose, if you’re one of the poor unfortunate souls coerced into subsidizing the BBC 🙁
I have just heard ‘from our own correspondent’. Don’t think this episode is yet available on i-player. No Mardell as the Blessed One is in South Africa – but the adoration in a 10 minute item was unmistakable.
Ah yes, From our own correspondent – the place where BBC hacks go to prove their right-on credentials, their sympathy for all the ‘correct’ causes and their unbending moral superiority.
Even though Obamessiah is in Africa, INBBC makes no link between HIM and what happening to Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi in Egypt.
Banned American freedom fighter Pamela Geller has:-
“ANTI-MORSI PROTESTS SCHEDULED FOR SUNDAY, PROTESTS SWEEP EGYPT LEAVE AMERICAN JOURNALIST DEAD, 36 WOUNDED, 2 DEAD”
Supplementary: Obama and Muslim Brotherhood, which INBBC censors.
This I think is a deeper analysis of how far Obama is up the Muslim Brotherhood’s backside. (Gruesome image). How useless – nay dangerous – his foreign policies have been.
And where Obama and his unhinged foreign-policy team advisors go, the BBC follows and cheer-leads
Perhaps Kenya will take him back. We can but hope…
In the liberal mind Mandela, Obama, Michael King (sorry, “Martin Luther King”) and an empty bottle of Mary Seacole’s best grog blend seemlessly into one amorphous deity for them to worship and assuage their own chronic feelings of guilt, self-hatred and denial.
1. Christians should never take the side of muslims against Christians
2. White people should never fight the battles of non-whites to the detriment of whites.
3. Anyone who does either or both of the above is a traitor to their gene pool and birthright, and therefore an enemy of their culture, nation and race.
It is not often you see undiluted bigotry like this comment. It is pure racism. And before anyone does the “ooh, he said ‘waycism'”, puerile response anyone who talks about white gene pools is a disgusting racist.
12 people have liked this comment and not one person has spoken against it.
‘It certainly isn’t for me to say what this site should talk about’
Having scored a resounding yawn to your last hall monitor attempt and flounce poll, the presumption here must be that you have decided on the power of inference instead to rally the masses?
’12 people have liked this comment and not one person has spoken against it.’
The comment has garnered some likes and, given the numbers on that counter top right, from a small % of readership. Many have not. Poster’s choice to post; readers’ choice to like.
Your choice to be now one person who has spoken against it. Good that this site allows such robust counters; the BBC would not. You even have a like.
All as it should be.
However, you seem to be another again pushing the odd precedent of enforced, overt, generic expression of outrage as mandatory when deemed necessary (but by whom? You?).
This of course seems noticeable more in the selectivity adopted, especially when the BBC errs rather seriously and silence falls across the land from those most vocal… because the BBC has been clearly seen to err.
Such silence can be golden. If telling.
As are your contributions, which despite your kind offer to cease making them, seem too effective (albeit in ways one doubts the BBC will appreciate) to wish other than see repeated.
That and other on-topic treats such as Albaman posting all over the place how he has been banned from posting.
I knew that at some point the poster called Guest Who would step up with his 2p worth. He never fails to respond. I could set my watch by him.
So let me ask you a simple question.
Do you think John in Cheshire’s post is racist? If not, could you explain why not?
As for Stewart – stop your pseudo-intellectual equivocating. “White people should never fight the battles of non-whites to the detriment of whites.” If you cannot see that that is as racist a comment as can be made then you have no idea what racism is.
I wrote earlier this blog has a nasty overtone to it. This is not a nasty overtone, this is pure, out-and-out racism. That you seek to defend it, or you seek to attack someone who points it out says everything.
David Vance had a blog that was closed by the hosting company because other people abused his hospitality and posted racist material on his site.
Is your name really James Stables? Your writing style is eerily familiar but this site is host to a number of left-wing trolls assuming a multitude of names that I can’t figure out whose style yours reminds me of. Your claim that a previous site of David Vance’s having been closed down has been made previously by another troll using the exact same words. You are coming very close to the point of my previous post on censorship, where you will soon be demanding this site be closed down. Your Alinskyite tactics are so obvious.
William Tell -Is that who your thinking of?
“then you have no idea what racism is.”
your right, I don’t define it for me.
He never fails to respond.
Kind of how free speech works. Well, BBC excepted. They have an app for that.
A blatant attempt at lazy Leveson manipulation will often tempt me out, true. But actually, of late, you are wrong, and I have failed to do so on many recent occasions. Testing the non-feeding theory. So far… not sure it works. The taunts and offence claims seem to drip out no matter what.
You, and the pervasive cycling hit and run crew appear to have a bit of a problem not just with folk having a view, but really don’t like having the narrowness of yours highlighted.
As a BBC metaphor, apt.
Better yet, you don’t answer questions whilst seeing that as your sole right… eerily familiar.
‘So let me ask you a simple question.
This site is about BBC failures as a vastly overpaid, supposedly high-integrity, objective professional broadcast monopoly. I fail to see what my views on the appropriateness of those of another individual poster on a free and open blog on matters outside of this would add, especially to meet your demand to go public.
One of the greatest contributions to democracy in this country was secret balloting.
It broke the stranglehold a small, powerful minority had over the majority by preventing the former targeting the latter for not following their demands… and being seen to do so. Or failing to show support.
That you feel people should not be saying something is one thing, that you feel that you have the right to counter is another. That you feel everyone is damned by not rallying to your (rather selective) banner, a long step further.
If you can’t see that was where we parted company, also your choice. If, I suspect, blinkers deliberately applied.
Especially as you ‘knew’ that I would take issue with it.
I trust your watch, right at least twice a day, is still set firmly in its dogmatic single location.
Along with the strategy epitomised by that last paragraph.
Check the BBC FaceBook pages for News, World, Newsnight, Today, etc and see what goes up and stays up.
Then ponder precedent, and the hypocrisy of unique exceptions and exclusions.
Oh, how unusual. Somebody points out a Biased BBC commenter’s pretty obviously despicable comments, and Guest Who pops up to try and deflect attention away – “look, let’s not talk about the blatant racism, let’s talk about how the BBC doesn’t let me bang on and on and on ad nauseam”.
Guest Who likes to pretend that everyone else wants to shut down debate – but that’s exactly what he tries to do, by boring people into submission.
That and other on-topic treats such as Albaman posting all over the place how he has been banned from posting.
Albaman was saying that one IP address he used – from home, if memory serves – had been banned. The same thing has happened to me. It may have been Vance’s finger on the button, it may have been Alan’s – either way, it was the act of a petulant little child who only wants debate if it’s people agreeing with his own narrow-minded little views.
Oh, how unusual. Somebody points out a BBC shill’s pretty clumsy well-poisoning strategy, and Scott pops up to try and deflect attention away – “look, let’s not talk about the fact that one of the home team is trying to push the collective responsibility thing again, let’s talk about the person raising it, and do so ad nauseam like a sacrficial parrot”.
Scott likes to pretend that he and his colleagues also address matters of actual BBC failure, but are clearly nowhere to be found here (or anywhere else) when it can’t be wished away, preferring ways to try and shut down debate by various means, from attrition to ‘offence’ markers – but that’s exactly what Scott does, by boring people into submiss… spending an amazing amount of time on persons they are seemingly so bored by, versus even going near the point being made.
One presumes that you feel the failure of a Humphrys or a Paxman, and indeed the entire BBC complement, to publicly decry a Bacon comedian recommendation or the ME desk (almost all, bar Mr. Bowen, of course, pursuing other interests now) punting out propaganda as fact, sets the corporation up for a shut-down?
Albaman was saying that one IP address he used – from home, if memory serves – had been banned. The same thing has happened to me. It may have been Vance’s finger on the button, it may have been Alan’s
That Albaman was still saying it made it rather quaint as a ban. And, if memory serves, several pointed out he was not alone. This site seems to have quirks. I still await answers from the site owners as to how a person I was debating with suddenly became another person and then flipped back.
Frankly I think no one should be banned for simply debating, even robustly, which rather raises the question as to what you would have the site owners do to posters that fall foul of, say, James Stables’ selective value systems. Or is this another set of mystery rules and guidelines you and a your merry band get to set, know about and demand be applied, depending? Again, very BBC. Speaking of whom…
‘either way, it was the act of a petulant little child who only wants debate if it’s people agreeing with his own narrow-minded little views.
Since you raise the matter of petulance and seeking only agreement, what say you to this as a reason for banning someone from holding anyone, or thing to account…
‘It appears that your focus is on ideological contrarianism than seeking to genuinely debate the issues of BBC bias, inaccuracy and integrity.. There’s also a suggestion you often fail to fully consider the responses you are given.
In our view, this correspondence therefore now represents a disproportionate use of BBBC owner and reader time, and consequently of increasingly limited resources.
In accordance with no framework for handling complaints as we don’t have one like the BBC, we must inform you that the BBBC’s expedited complaints handling procedure will now be applied to any further comments you make.’
Note there’s no attempt at dealing with argument; simply taking the ball away because one cannot be found. A banning, in effect, for a self-defined claim of ‘time-wasting’.
Be very careful how you answer, as despite your best efforts some may not be happy to see this spin away from the narrative currently preferred on a site for now still running and/or outside full control of the BBC rules and guidelines.
And one where you appear, still, to enjoy full opportunity to patrol.
Odd. Usually the response is swift and unmerciful.
Maybe the team response strategy meeting is a wee bit deadlocked as the subject of the BBC using ‘waste’ as a justification for censorship has come up at a rather inopportune moment?
‘inevitably lead to more waste, less efficiency, more tenured incompetence, more useless idiots on unjustifiably inflated salaries, more cock-ups than would ever be tolerated within the private sector.’
Rather oddly, the private sector really doesn’t have to respond much, other than to get nanny state nags or the legislation off their backs.
But most do.
The BBC however takes the model perfected by the envy or the world care system oversight body, CQC, and adds the quaint extra quirk of folding it in-house, in-secret and so incestuous it would make a Pharaoh blush.
Possibly such an iniquitous arrangement is what is giving you pause as you marshall your reserves?
Or is this just some more bad timing when the BBC is in the news for reasons that suddenly make the bunker a happier place to be again?
Oh so anyone who doesn’t name a witch is a witch?
What did you say earlier, oh yes
“Goodness me, I make a comment, go out, come back and find I am part of some massive conspiracy to surpress free speech.”
But now its
“anyone who talks about white gene pools is a disgusting racist.”
A racist yes, anyone who defines socio-political groups genetically is a racist ,but disgusting ?
Is that everyone that believes in ‘Identity Politics’?
What about those who group people according to class ,Marxist/Leninists, are they disgusting
What about people who group according to nationality .Are they disgusting? all of them including Scots ,welsh, Irish and Basque nationalists ?
You talk glibly about bigotry but your knee-jerk reaction is that of a fundamentalist zealot
The rational reply to that post is this
You are wrong people should act on what they believe to be morally right in the context of each case.
To compromise what you know to be right for reasons of tactical advantage demeans race, culture and the individual
Traitor to their gene pool?
Thanks for giving me a genuine laugh-out-loud moment. I’d stick to paddling in the shallow end if I were you.
“When a girl has not shampooed her cooter for quite some time and wears the same panties for weeks on end…like old tuna salad left on the engine block of a cutlas supreme.”
My what a contribution to the gene pool you are, at the fetid end you could say.
yeah al beeb does think the Obamessiah is the best thing since the licence fee.
i can only think of one good thing he’s done on the world stage. launching all them drone strikes to keep us safe by killing all them terrorists. apart from that, whats his legacy?
Interestingly, you just summed up this BBC video quickie about the protests in South Africa over Johannesburg U giving the President an honorary doctorate.
The protesters are angry with Him about the drones (naturally we get the obligatory anti-Zionist banner), but His real legacy is His skin color. No prizes for guessing which voice closes the piece.
On BBC earlier today they quoted Jacob Zuma as saying that Mandela and Obama would be linked in history as the first black presidents of their countries
It’s His only positive accomplishment after all.
Bit unfair on Mandela though I thought , to lump him in with the Kenyan like that
And for the first wimmin Presidents: will it be Michele or Hillary for the US and Winnie, who now declares her love of Nelson, for SA?
I bet Obama thinks Mandela’s being a right selfish bastard, – stealing his limelight whilst back in Da Muddaland.
Tommy Robinson arrested.
Tommy Robinson is not Binyam Mohamed, so BBC-NUJ political line is that EDL must be politically opposed (and banned) as the main enemy of the ‘left’-Islam alliance.
From banned American freedom figher, Robert Spencer’ of ‘JihadWatch’ –
“UK: EDL leaders arrested for attempting to walk through ‘Muslim area'”
“They’re (police) saying it (Tower Hamlets) is a Muslim area but to me there is no Muslim area, there are just areas of my capital city that if I have to walk from A to B then you have to walk through.”
“And so Robinson said to police when he was being arrested, ‘You are enforcing Sharia law.’ Or are there areas in London where police forbid Anjem Choudary to walk? (Not to imply the remotest equivalence between the two.)”
VIDE$O CLIPS now added to ‘Jihadwatch’ piece:-
Don’t know if any one posted this yet just turned up in my email
Sorry try this whatever you think different from BBC version
Well there we have it. The police are the enemy. If it was ever in doubt, this short video demonstrates what we are being subjected to. The people we are paying to protect our rights are now helping our enemies and harming our friends. The day of reckoning must surely be near.
The police, the judiciary, street thugs in the UAF, the BBC and the Government of Appeaser May and Cameron, have a clear objective – to suppress and misrepresent opposition to the multiculturalist project, with its de facto structure of unelected authorities, community and faith leaders. They are not talking about the need to combat racism or promote a society of equals under the law; they are promoting an ism, akin to communism, fascism or national socialism, where the law is twisted for political objectives, where people are encouraged to report on Twitter messages, record on video and report offensive rants in public places, and demonise all opponents. Truth is not a defence against this movement; if truth is politically undesirable it must be opposed. In all of this, as in any other departure from democracy, a centralised monopoly of news is required, and the BBC serves this purpose well.
Hopefully the “cheridee” scam is now shown up for what it is.
You`d have thought that raising money for treating the cancer of a child would have given Robinson his free pass to say things that we may not like…but still we need to hear, perhaps?
But no…the BBC will squash any efforts to raise money for charity unless their grinning goons and mopsies can dress up and pretend to be pop stars, or get a new lease of life for a flagging career.
Next year-send your Red Nose crap to Tommy instead…maybe if has a street party to champion Emily Davidsons anniversary, that would screw the heads of the BBC bunnies.
Let`s twist their melons man!( St Shaun of Ryder…no relation to Steve!)
Where in this post is the evidence for your rant?
The EDL ‘leaders’ were asked by the Police to change their route and refused. So they were rightly arrested.
Wife beater Robinson is hardly going to find prison a new experience as we was only recently released. Again.
Very few people will care!
“Wife beater Robinson” He addressed that on radio interview but still the Sex Without Permission drones push the party line
Isn’t that true ,comrade delta?
“hardly going to find prison a new experience as we was only recently released. Again.”
Who ,who opposes the liberal inquisition does not feel their iron hand?
Do the ‘left’/Beeboids criticise Mandela for having gone to jail?
or blowing up innocent people?
I think you’ll find that most lefties believe that Mandela was innocent of the charges that got him banged up.
Of course he was a senior member of an organisation that was killing black people with regular monotony. That killed and killed in often horrific ways but rarely killed those who were actually oppressing them.
The ANC were pawns of the USSR and that is the reason why Apartheid lasted until the USSR was done. The West could not allow the USSR to get hold of the militarily highly significant Cape. Funny isn’t it how once the threat was gone – so was Apartheid?
Since the collapse of Apartheid more people have died than before – and that’s black and white. Whilst Mandela was President South Africa became the murder capital of the World.
Mandela’s legacy is one of failure and death – so of course the left love him.
remember, the threatening sharia “patrol” vids, where aggressive
erm “youths” bleating “this is a muslim area” and “move away from the mosque” …
it appears we have the real thing.
things really have gone down the pan.
much to stewarts obvious delight, be careful what you laud, my misguided fellow … once the precedent is set , whose next? on the list?
No delight, old man, no delight
my sincere apologies – stewart
directed to :- loyal? and true?
… one has to ask who the hell to?
I thought that as well .Very little I suspect, not even his own conscience
Loyal and True to British values.
In order to stop riots caused by the Blackshirts the UK brought in the Public Order Act so that marches could be rerouted or banned if they could result in public order issues.
I assume you would of course stand with the Jews who took on the Blackshirts when they marched into Jewish areas of London and applaud them. And the police for preventing the Fascists marching.
The EDL is a petty fascist party. Same rules
So what did happen to those muslim patrollers? Were they arrested and charged? If so did the BBC fail to record this event?
Minitruth pushed them down a memory hole
The EDL seems to be allowing the high ground of ‘the media game’ slip away where once they had a chance of empathy. The rationale offered was clearly provocative to solicit PR, and obviously successful even from the most integrity-conflicted ratings-whore media.
So where they go I see no great advantage to being anywhere near.
However, I must have a quick check in the laws of the cradle of democracy and free speech that is the UK, for the crime of not changing a route in the public domain because the police ask you to. I thought that was the preserve of yet another of those exceptions that works so well, like NI parades. Especially if it’s based on the authorities being told that others will create violence based on apparent territorial sub-possession on national soil I was not aware existed. March… provocative, maybe. Attacking it… actually illegal. Odd where the powers are deferring.
Seems the authorities were indeed between a rock and a hard place, and opted for the least bad…. if in negative national MSM PR terms.
However, international credibility as anything other than spineless concession junkies on a level that makes Ethelred look Churchillian…. not so much.
Still, could have been worse, Mr. Robinson could have been cycling through the wrong gate and used robust words that our trusted establishment enforcement branch could have then ‘enhanced’ via their fellow public sector mouthpieces to wangle the row they wanted.
Until caught out. Again.
How often this process will get to be played out before the head of steam bursts in areas they may not be expecting remains to be seen.
I don’t ‘do’ activism, or marches, or protests.
But when I don’t trust the state police and the state media to say or do anything straight any more, especially when they apparently get in lockstep with political pygmies addicted to policy via Danegeld that clearly is another historically unlearned downward spiral, I’m getting quite close to thinking enough is enough.
I just have the now warranted concern that some things I might see as my right suddenly see me too ‘rightly arrested’, with some loyal, true fellow citizens standing by with their mobiles gurning and applauding… until they find that they are turned on too. At which point some who do not care may suddenly, if tardily, reassess.
Pastor Niemoller refers.
‘Provocative’ of course joins an already ignoble selection of vague criteria the politico-judicial-media estate likes to keep to hand, along with ‘proportionate’ or ‘reasonable’ (as in force).
They can be pretty much what anyone wants them to be, to use in defence or imposition simply by adjusting the flame from simmer to roar. Or, of course, off, if the wrong dish is in the pot.
Provocation does for sure have nuance, and can also range from the active to the passive.
But what is taking place here (best I can judge) is passive. Word and deed of walking yes, but no more (unless a berk in the party kicks off).
What’s interesting is when passive provocation suddenly can become… indeed flip like a switch to being entirely right and proper in the eyes of some, and any adverse reaction to it the worst abuse of fondly treasured rights imaginable.
Think of the furore if a woman was assaulted and a judge erred on leniency for the attack being justified on the basis of how she was dressed?
Or if a youth lay dying from a stab wound and it transpired it was simply for a taunt they may have made?
Why, then, the difference here, and from all quarters who in the cases above would be on the highest of high horses declaiming the perpetrators and not the victims, even if they may well have had a hand in their own fate.
It’s almost like the rules change not for the facts of a situation, but on the basis of who the protagonists are.
In a debate it would be akin to playing a person rather than addressing their argument. Which can happen, I gather.
What becomes a worry is who have collected together in concert to ‘deal’ with some people more because of who they are than what they are saying. All while very much not dealing with others, again precisely because of who they are.
The government, police and BBC may not find being known by who they have allied with and joined forces against serves them well as history unfolds.
Create multiple standards and it’s probably unsurprising if folk decide to cherry pick what they fancy, and if enough do then the direction is anarchy.
The EDL ‘leaders’ were asked by the Police to change their route and refused. So they were rightly arrested.
What banal pap: why was he arrested and why was it “rightly” so if he was asked by police?
Do you mean he was ORDERED by police on pain of arrest? Loyal and true to what are you?
Loyal and true?
Earls Court rebranded?
As I say above sir!
It`s going to be a charity walk and so surely is beyond criticism( or so the liberals and the BBC would have us believe the other 99% of the time).
Isn`t he being wise to map out the route, keep it simple from A to B? and isn`t he being quite brave to dare risking the walk into Tower Hamlets…so unlike the BBC hacks and hi-viz police…no dogs allowed of course, lest it offend the Religion of Peace.
You`re right that very few people will care-but they don`t about Mandela(but that won`t stop them keening and wailing as if it mattered a damn).
In the meantime a white bloke can`t even walk across London for charity-and a couple of white Americans can`t even lay a wreath for Lee Rigby-might offent Islam you see.
Not that you care though eh?…do remember that those who trade freedom for hoped-for “security” not only lose that freedom…but probably deserve to as well!
Enjoy the caliphate.
See my comments above. That’s what I believe. Tommy Robinson and his associates are the only visible sign that we still have a force in this country that thinks the indigenous peoples count for something.
The Beeb had me worried there!
Tuned in randomly to the Godawfully useless “Any Questions” with Ed Miliband-or is that the other useless younger brother of Notting Hill/Richmond privilege on the left that is Dimbleby Minor?
But I digress.
The issue being discussed was the systemic smearing of people by State agencies.
“Oh, at last”, I thought…too late for Potters Bar, for Dorries, even for Mitchell perhaps…but at least the BBC are debating the scandalous smearing of Kay Sheldon for going rogue on the NHS and its “Care Quality Commission” that revelled in mid-Staffs and Morecambe.
“At last” I thought- a scandal that has killed a thousand in our own country in recent years is finally getting the media attention it deserves…Nicholson, Bower, Williams and Finney ,amongst other blowfly scummers, feeding of the bloated corpses of dead babies and pensioners.
Silly me-the Beeb blowhards were fussing over Stephen Lawrences mates, Hillsborough and -should I care to listen on long enough-the rights of Choudury or Bin Laden to be prejudged. So unfair!
Phew-thank God the BBC is consistent at least…as long as Lawrence, Hillsborough, Bloody Sunday can have new life blown into their cadavers, then what the NHS has been doing, the BBC has been doing, and the Labour Party are doing-well, here`s a Guardian pillow to smother the dissenters and critics with.
“Clear the streets” as Joe Strummer once said.
And that means you Geller, Spencer, Wilders and Tommy too!
Dimbleby J is often at pains to repeat that the panel do not know what questions are coming up on “Any Questions?” Note that he says ‘the panel’. Sometimes, however, he stops a panellist from straying into another related topic because he somehow knows that a separate question on that is coming up … so he at least, as chairman, must know something of the questions, which are obviously selected.
This is why, despite impeccable party political balance on “A Qs?” or “Question Time”, the bias is still there: the ‘batting order’ of questions, and indeed the selection of these questions, is made to fit in with the anti-police, anti-Tory, pro-NHS, pro-Black, anti-Murdoch BBC agenda. This week’s offering had nothing about Mr Spencer and Ms Geller, Morecambe Bay NHS, the murder of Lee Rigby and the aftermath, Obama’s troubles in the US, etc.
I hadn’t thought along those lines (silly me) but you are quite right. Why did the Guardian chose last week to raise the Lawrence issue? Surely, as with Levenson, they knew, perhaps years in advance, of what was going on?
So it was a distraction all along designed to hide from the public what is going on in the NHS. Trouble is their febrile minds seem incapable of accepting the scale of the problem whilst the public is only to aware and, with each dead relative, is getting more aware.
Re Geller and Spencer.
Is it not within the wit of the EDL to have them fly into Brussels or some other Sharia-compliant Euocapital, don a burka , travel in a gypsy caravan spewing hate against the Pope, but demanding we all pay our TV Licenses as it makes its way through Kent with a BBC4 documentary crew telling us all of the persecution of those who seek only to enrich us with Euranium or whatever?
Come on lads…taqqiya need not be a one way street…embrace your inner Romanian, if desperate!
many a true word spoke in jest
This bloke is great isn`t he?…maybe we should ask HIM to lay a wreath for Lee Rigby before the trolls tell the BBC/UAF/Hope Against Hate about him.
Scholarly-knows his Koran-lucid and a “real and present danger” to the dhimmification of the plebs and chavs, as desired by the BBC and the Guardian muppetry.
Tch tch, the only white yanks allowed to fly into Britain should be converts to the ROP, with their hollowed-out “new world” translation of the koran…
I’ve just watched a news video about Carlos Tevez on the Guardian website. It was preceded by a 37 second advert for a BBC TV programme, The Call Centre.
Anyone know how much licence fee cash is spent by the BBC on advertising, and what proportion ends up at The Guardian?
I had an idle daydream earlier.
Imagine, just imagine that both St. Nelson and the Obamessiah were to croak it on the same day. Say a meteorite landed on the Holy Soil of South Africa, squishing them both like bugs.
The spectacle of the Beeboids and their fellow travellers trying to outdo each in other in their weeping sycophancy and gushing anguish would be at once beautiful and terrible to behold.
And then, they would all hold their Tweeting little gasps of breath on the third day, as they waited in vain (we hope) for which one would be resurrected first.
And when disappointed, they would all flock sobbing to the nearest cliff and throw themselves off it, lemming-like, to join the Holy Pair in the Blessed Hereafter, where all Waythithm and Thexthithm had been expunged and their peace would pass all understanding.
How would we ever be able to cope without them?
Ah well………..coffee break over……….back to the real world………sadly.
Encouraging their followers to throw other people off the cliff for not being believers is more the BBC style.
This looks like a lady spokesperson for the BBC :
The BBC only employs wimmin, never ladies.
the old geeezer nelson mandela is probably sitting in his bed saying to the bbc and sky news journalists.go away you pests and let me have a bit of peace in my dying days ,i having never ever seen so much coverage about this one man from the bbc and sky news,its become hysteria now,just bizarre.
What made me laugh was that the white world is in emotional turmoil about the imminent demise of one of their terrorist deities and his family are getting uppity about all the attention he is receiving. Bizarre or what?
This site needs more investment. There are fewer and fewer threads and the quality is not what it was until quite recently. As a result the OTs overflow, which may contribute toward so many posts going missing.
I’m a massive fan of the site and don’t want to seem overly-critical and its not aimed at anyone personally; it’s just how i’ve felt for a while now.
I think this site has an unfortunate preoccupation with Islam that gives it a very unpleasant overtone. It also seems to be more about complaining about things in general than about allegations of BBC bias. But, if that is what people want to do, then fair play to them. Such is the freedom of the web.
I can’t recall James Stables ever making a comment complaining about BBC bias. Can anybody else?
People who come here to criticize are generally not here specifically to defend the BBC. They’re here to fight the righteous fight with ideological opponents. Any defense of the BBC is coincidental.
That’s right people are preoccupied with elephants
In case you haven’t noticed Islam has been in the news quite bit lately, both here and abroad. and that despite the BBCs best efforts (that’s the problem)
What ,by your leave, should we worry ourselves about. The BBCs coverage of Wimbledon ,Glastonbury or Formula 1 and leave or betters (You do see your self that way don’t you James?) to worry about how the BBC report Soldiers butchered in broad daylight ,young girl brutalised in to sexual slavery and the abolition of free speech.
It certainly isn’t for me to say what this site should talk about, and if the contributors want to spend their time talking about Islam that is absolutely their right.
All I am saying, as an observer, is that doing it gives this site an unpleasant overtone. But you already know this, there was a warning from the site’s owner about it.
“It certainly isn’t for me to say what this site should talk about”
Oh no do tell old thing ,do tell.
What in your urbane ,bien pensant view suitable dinner table conversation?
What is this unpleasant overtone of which you speak?
Is it more unpleasant than the acts themselves?
Are thought crimes worse than physical ones is that what your saying?
What is the liberal inquisition’s position?
Enlighten us ,you seem strong in the faith
This is how censorship starts. James Stables begins by pointing out that some of the threads on this site criticise Islam. Next other trolls will appear (Scott, Dez are you there?) and agree with Stables before adding a degree of complaint and/or condemnation about contributors having the nerve to criticise the Religion of Peace. Those trolls then wind up contributors who then make further replies before they are being labelled by the trolls as “Islamaphobes” or “racist” – dog whistle tags. Then before you know it the site becomes described by these defenders of free speech as a hate site and clamour to demand it be closed down by the authorities.
Best to ignore trolls like J. Stables and the others unless they make legitimate points that enhance debate.
Let them continue to post by all means. That way we know who the trolls are.
He said “talking about”, not criticize. Of course, all discussion here is negative, and everyone is entitle to their opinion. But why do you think arguing with Stables will cause this site to be labeled a hate site and closed down? Your logic seems very questionable.
David, you misunderstand what I say. It doesn’t matter that posts aren’t racist or Islamaphobic. Even you should know that many lefties use the teachings of Saul Alinsky to achieve their aims. The EDL, as far as I know ISN’T a racist organisation, having welcomed a number of ethnic minority members. But the MSM, especially the BBC, have continually described them as a “far right organisation” and racist. Say it often enough and the label sticks. That’s why Tommy Robinson was arrested by the police yesterday, because it has become accepted that he is a threat to public order, when in fact it his opponents in the UAF who intentionally bring violence where the EDL congregates. Alinskyite tactics by the “Hope Not Hate” campaign led to the spineless Theresa May banning Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer from entering the country. THA’S the point I was trying to make in my post.
Goodness me, I make a comment, go out, come back and find I am part of some massive conspiracy to surpress free speech.
One thing I have noticed is the strong tendency to label anyone who doesn’t toe the line as a “troll”. I don’t think I have acted in a troll-like manner, and if I have then it was unintentional.
So let me ask a question and I will respect the outcome. If you would rather I didn’t come on here then say so. It would be crass to stay if I am simply annoying people.
Much rather you stay and no you are not crass just a little priggish but (even if you wont answer any other question) I would still like to know what you think it is acceptable to question BBC about
‘I would still like to know what you think it is acceptable to question BBC about’
I’d also be interested whether the BBC has been questioned by this poster on anything and, if so, what the result was?
Unless the stance is that the BBC has no cause to be questioned at all, while those who may feel it does require taking to task at every turn. Including labeling with all-inclusive ‘isms in advance of making a complaint.
It would explain a lot. If excuse little.
when any complainant mentions “tone” in relation to an issue, baby their on “thin ice”
James have just been linked to this from the Independent
Is this the unpleasant overtone you mean?
Is the Independent now discredited ?
No, no more than the BBC would be if they gave such dissenting views , hearing . And then we could all complain about something more to your liking .Still not sure what that is though
I think this is equivalent to asking people to stop saying what they think.
The BBc are always talking about Islam, barely a day goes by without some or other islamic topic being aired.
Maybe you should ask why we are so negative and what has made us this way . Bit like the BBC do with Islamic extremists.
a soldier butchered in broad daylight, young girls brutalised into sexual slavery, the abolition of free speech.
Yes the way in which the BBC reports trivial stuff like that – why can’t we talk about what the Left want us to talk about, such as how bad it is a to have a free press, or what that foul mouthed Tory politician said when the police refused him permission to ride his bike along Downing Street. OK the police made up that story in order to smear him, and The Guardian made up that story about The News of the World deleting the Milly Dowler’s messages, but get with the programme. You can say anything you want, but you have to get permission first. The BBC (and it seems James Stables) will tell you what to say.
How sickening is the current Administration? So sickening that they tried to get the NFL and NBA involved in promoting ObamaCare to the masses. Two of the three biggest sports organizations in the country would have been openly working to convince us that a government policy was in our best interests. They tried to the cross the line between government and private enterprise, and make some of the most popular teams in the country promote a policy.
Fortunately, the NFL is starting to back out, after getting a stern letter (and probably some angry phone calls) from Republicans in the Senate. I don’t know what the NBA is going to do, but since I have no respect for the outgoing commissioner’s integrity, I wouldn’t be surprised if he signs a deal (there would be a load of advertizing cash coming the NBA’s way, which is the number one priority) on his way out the door.
One thing I didn’t know until now is that the Boston Red Sox ran ads for RomneyCare. This would have been all local, and since it was a State thing there was no national outcry that I know of, so it wasn’t even in my radar. It’s just as bad, and had I known that it would have ruined what tepid support I did give Romney once he was the nominee. Feel all dirty now.
Oh God… the BBC I’m more ‘hippy and lefty than thou’ brigade are out in full force at Glastonbury. How many bloody reporters and commentators do they need there? Their bloody irritating, metro-trendy big mouths are all over that festival covering utterly pointless crap. The music’s bloody awful as well. Total middle class lefty garbage. Be interesting to see if the Stones can pull off a decent performance, though 🙂 That’s my bad tempered and miserable rant over for now.
The BBC was at it again in “Thought for the Day” on Radio 4’s “Today” this morning, a sort of Glastonbury special. Two words amongst those used to describe the fun fest were … wait for it … “vibrancy” and “diversity” … zzzzz zzzzz zzzzz.
Glad the Stones are screwing the BBC for the rights to watch them.
If that doesn`t upset the linen suits as they play air guitar to “Street Fighting Man” in their hospitality yurts and creative pods, then I`m Brian Jones.
Breadheads maan….thank you Mick and Keef!
Not BBC bias – just apparent ineptitude – at least on my tv. The advert on BBC with Glastonbury presenters standing on triangles always has their voices out of synch with their lips moving . All that money BBC and they cannot get it right – suppose they blew the budget on getting another BBC man into the Stones performance.
Its all about re-branding dontcha know:
What a golden opportunity for the religious police to visit Michael Eavis’ farm and teach all those BBC employees a lesson for taking drugs, not wearing enough clothes, and listening to infidel music.
Sharia for next years Glastonbury?…is there a pop-up mosque on site….and what of disabled Muslims…do they get equal access to see the Stones?
I myself will suggest this as a good project for public interest purposes-now do I place it with Religious Affairs or simply pass it to Sir James Savile at the John Peel Wing of the GlastoGlamCamp Yurt.
Peel, Savile?…Islamic gangs?…is there any connection I could make by way of creating that all-important “diversity celebration of colour blind practices that celebrate the joys of free love?”.
Any ideas welcome.
One thing missing from this BBC
lamentationreport about North Carolina losing Federal cash support for long-term unemployment benefits because they’ve decided to lower short-term unemployment benefits is the reality of those long-term benefits. The BBC leaves the impression that those benefits will be in place – keeping people from losing their homes and starving their children – until the person finds another job, presumably one which enables them to maintain their previous lifestyle.
In reality, even if North Carolina did not make the cuts which stopped the cash flow from the Feds, those long-term benefits eventually end. Unemployment benefits in NC normally last 26 weeks, and long-term just means an additional 13 weeks. That’s it. Three weeks shy of a full year of benefits, then you’re off it, and most likely off the radar of unemployment statistics as well. Now it will be only the six months of benefits, which is the same everywhere. Other States have differing extended periods.
To someone in Britain, where benefits are piled on top of benefits, and last much longer (I couldn’t find anything which states a limit), this decision by North Carolina Republicans may seem unduly harsh, cruelly throwing families out in the street. But the long-term benefits aren’t all that long-term anyway, and the reality is that people will simply have to take a lower-paying job sooner rather than later. There is no magical bean the government can hand out which will give the unemployed a new job matching their previous salary. The BBC pretends that’s not the case.
public disorder concern? hmmm …
concern that uncontrolled muslims will just attack them? … their useful idiots? … just like on the video?
what is this country coming to?
oh … that real time vid
Muslims attack Police in London, 3 Jan, 2009.
What an absolute disgrace. The political police, once again, proving to be as much use as a chocolate fireguard.
Listening to the radio earlier (not the Beeb) there was a mention of the arrest of Tommy Robinson and then an interview with a member of the vile UAF who described the EDL as being violent and threatening and dangerous. This clearly gave the impression that Mr Robinson had been involved in an affray. No other view point was allowed and no mention of the left wing thug’s assault on the bloke in the film.
Our once free and democratic country is becoming a banana republic!
Richard Purssell, left wing thug with the blue top and baseball cap a Guardian newspaper luvvie…Well I never!!
Will the BBC be door stepping him out side his house an helpfully giving his full name and date of birth do you think?
I wonder if the Guardian have a sense of humour…you know, mocking irreverent and a little bit cheeky, as “Jerry Springer-the Opera” would lead us all to believe.
I was only wondering if there`s a bet to be had on when Nelson Mandela leaves hospital….I think it`ll be soonish, but there`s a good case we might be in for an Al Magrabhi type saga?
Will he outlast Ian Brady we wonder?…BBC satire tells me that there`s no rules anymore, and this is a zany-type kind of game I`d have thought.
You know-like the way they treated Mrs Thatcher…just a bit of fun eh?
Cue tumbleweed machines and bad body language/stony faces all round the GlastoGlamCamp Yurt of Loveliness!
Ah well “you can`t always get what you want”…
Since you mention Mrs Thatcher, any bets on whether any of the encomia, when Mandela finally croaks, include the phrase ‘divisive figure’? I’d give 1000-1 against.
Have the police published a list of Areas where non- Muslims are allowed to walk without being arrested. Street signs with Muslims only down this street or that… would there be an issue if the signs were ‘whites only’ … thought we fought against that sort of thing…
As Muslims are allowed to protest at the Cenotaph or anywhere else they like without censure it would be nice to know..
Any update BBC.. oh no they are ‘right-wing’ so they have no right s and no freedom of speech… I forgot..
any room left in Australia to get away from this madness…
Apparently they have problems of their own ( I do hope James Stables wont mind me mentioning it) Check out ‘winds of jihad’
‘winds of jihad’?
That’ll be the sprouts then …
It does contain some very coarse humour that for sure But also reports a lot of news from Australia that you wont hear else where .Certainly not on the BBC
Interestingly Gilards attempt to impose press censorship and the press’ acquiescence which may have more to do with her current problems they the BBC are letting you know
The real problem here, is that Oz appears ti be going the same way.
I bet all this police harassment is being sanctioned by that cow Theresa May. She set the ball rolling by banning Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer from entering the country. So we know she’s an enemy of free speech. hat’s this country coming to?
I thought we’d had some bloody awful Home Secretaries in the recent past but I think May is worse than the Labour horrors when it comes to spinelessness and bending her knee to totalitarian belief systems.
I have always thought it would be prefable to have a labour government rather than this apology for a conservative one.
Not just over this but in most things. At least you knew were you were with Gordon Brown. Finishing off the Tory party is now a necessity if we are to ever have a choice again. I can never work out just why the BBC is so hostile to the coalition. It is not as if it is right wing .
don t count out OIC plant Warsi s influence
in this, along with the usual suspects,
i ve never known such abject moral cowardice
”To find out who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise.”
I think it’s Voltaire (hated by some Muslims as a critic of Islam), but don’t know French original.
Islamic Republic of PAKISTAN and persecution of Christians.
“Glimpse of England’s future: Pakistani Christian woman to be held two more years in prison before she can appeal ‘blasphemy’ conviction.”
“Sharia in action in Pakistan, and a preview of coming attractions in the UK: ‘Blasphemy convict: Aasia Bibi’s appeal at least two years away,'”
INBBC knows this go on, but relegates the common phenomema and eupemises the way it is ‘reported’ by its staff.
But here’s an inkling:-
“Pakistani girl falsely accused of blasphemy ‘in Canada'”
“Pakistani girl falsely accused of blasphemy ‘in Canada’” sounds like Canadian Christians are persecuting her, until you read below the headline.
Has BBC-NUJ been warned off reporting protests in Turkey?
Ah well, we” have to turn elsewhere:-
1.)”Turkey’s Erdogan: His own worst enemy?”
2.)”Turkish government combing Twitter in search of protest organizers to arrest.”
Are there any similarities between the protests in Turkey today and those in UK?
Whereas the Turkish protesters are protesting against the Islamising of the Turkish government, in Britain, the EDL is protesting against the Islamising of the British government.
important message to all edl supporters,change your name by depoll to anjem choudary and you wont be arrested by the met police
this week has been shocking, a turning point i think
don t forget
“Terrorism’s great achievement isn’t hijacking jetliners, but the way its been aided in hijacking the debate,”
from Canada’s National Post. it goes on
“Successful terrorism persuades the terror-stricken that he’s conscience-stricken.”
The bBBC continues as spokesman for the Scousers’ revenge campaign: today’s top news on their Merseyside website, about the Bishop of Liverpool’s retirement next month, is Bishop James Jones to continue Hillsborough work.
Has the BBC reported on the anti-obama protests in SA, or have they conveniently not bothered?
They did a quickie video about one protest, anyway.
i ve just checked sunday morning live to peruse the
points of debate … and well … there aren t any.
which points to al bbc selectors busy filling the airtime spots from their speed dial, before any of us “the peasants”
ah well, panto nikki campo can dust off his “wheel of fortune” jacket yep! as he s gonna grace us with his “interesting hair” and a lorra lorra dialog on surprise surprise reboot Lost Families which apparently …
(cue violin music) “sparked vivid flashbacks of his own emotional search” ya da ya da … sheesh!
Video of English Defence League, for BBC-NUJ to censor:-
-from banned American freedom fighter, Robert Spencer’s ‘JihadWatch’-
“Full video: EDL’s Tommy Robinson and Kevin Carroll assaulted, then arrested during charity walk in Woolwich”
(7 min video clip).
All the following THREE ITEMS ARE (in varying degrees) , inter alia:
a critique of BBC-NUJ’s dogmatic, propagandist political stance of being-
pro-ISLAM, and anti-ENGLISH DEFENCE LEAGUE.
“A bridge too far: Leftist writers argue that Spencer and Geller should be admitted into the UK”
“Why is the left so blinkered to Islamic extremism?
A report calls out the left for embracing fundamentalists”
By James Bloodworth.
3.)A 50 page report from ‘One Law For All’:
“Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left”
Click to access SidingWithOpressor_Web.pdf
BBC-NUJ CENSORS IT ALL OUT.
yep! .. the big issues around religion on the flagship
bbc sunday slot for this week are :-
upcoming debate on women bishops?
not an ejector seat imam in sight
no erm “difficult” questions, issue averted
Here’s one for you:
U.S. bugged EU offices, computer networks: German magazine
The United States has bugged European Union offices and gained access to EU internal computer networks, according to secret documents cited in a German magazine on Saturday, the latest in a series of exposures of alleged U.S. spy programs.
Der Spiegel quoted from a September 2010 “top secret” U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) document that it said fugitive former NSA contractor Edward Snowden had taken with him, and the weekly’s journalists had seen in part.
Well, I never.
Oh, by the way, this means St. Edward is technically a traitor. It’s way beyond informing US citizens about the PRISM scheme collecting our metadata. To the BBC, it means he’s more heroic than ever.
This mornings R4 bulletins have repeatedly referred to Snowdon as an ‘NSA Official’. He has never been such, his only employment with NSA was as a ‘security guard’. He has subsequently been a contractor at CIA and NSA, not an employee. Titles such as ‘security expert’ are probably somewhat over the top as well.
I am not sure why the BBC is flagging this as the top story this morning (followed by Mandella of course). Some of what he says may be true but most of us would have realised these things go on anyway.
why isnt the BBC labeling this man as a thief, and the information and documents he took as stolen. They did when the climate research unit was hacked. St Edward’s crime is worse, because he has stolen the information from his employer, a relationship where he was trusted.
With ‘The Guardian’ playing God, and Beeboids adopting their usual reverential role.
Ho. Ho, Ho
Just about all BBC news bulletins now include a piece on extreme weather somewhere in the world. They don’t mention Climate Change but the constant drip feed of these global events is, I am sure, intended to push the AGW/ACC agenda.
Last week it was the floods in NW India (during the monsoon so not entirely unexpected) and they have now moved on to the heatwave in the western USA. Apparently the temperature in Death Valley is expected to rise to within 2 degrees of the world record. They don’t mention that the world record is held by – Death Valley. So the anticipation that Death valley may not break it’s own record is worth a spot in the main news bulletin!!!
Death valley is hot, pope found to be catholic, bear…..etc etc.
“Just about all BBC news bulletins now include a piece on extreme weather somewhere in the world. They don’t mention Climate Change but the constant drip feed of these global events is, I am sure, intended to push the AGW/ACC agenda.”
Yep, nail on the head. The BBC long ago decided to introduce pro-CAGW propaganda across all their broadcasting in a continuous, subtle, drip-feed approach. By casually linking perfectly normal weather events such as droughts, floods, storms and even things like earthquakes (basically anything they think they can get away with) to so-called ‘extreme weather’ (or ‘global weirding’ or whatever this week’s favourite descriptor happens to be) the BBC intend to indoctrinate viewers with the subconscious acceptance of CAGW not only as a real threat, but also as a proven fact beyond any shred of doubt.
This is how the BBC works. Once it has taken a political position on any given subject all its efforts, across all programmes, are then deployed in a ceaseless but careful effort to wage a sly, insidious war on the viewer to slowly indoctrinate them with their preferred narratives.
What a despicable organisation. Peddling falsehoods dressed up as ‘integrity’, kidding themselves (and us) that somehow they still represent an ‘impartial’ view and some kind of ‘honesty in reporting’ on this and so many other issues. Anyone who saw the recent BBC news bulletins regarding the seven men recently arrested for child sexual offences will know just how far through the looking glass the BBC have actually now fallen.
Last week (or was it two weeks ago?) it was hot in Europe – so Europe wide maps were shown on all BBC1 weather bulletins – now the temperature has dropped 10 degrees – nothing. The Met Office/BBC only like to report weather that fits their narrative.
That record from Death Valley was recorded in 1913!
I see Katty Kay is writing another book with the wife of Obama’s press secretary:
Can you imagine a top BBC name writing books with the spouse of a Republican president’s WH press secretary? Me neither.
Also, the BBC is advertising a new job:
BBC News in Washington is looking for an experienced reporter and blogger to write and curate a NEW opinion blog for the U.S. edition of bbc.com/news…
The blogger will be expected to write several blog posts a day, identifying the most interesting commentary on relevant engaging stories and must be able to write both light and heavy under a tight deadline.
Heavily odds-on (1/50?) that the chosen candidate is a lefty. The bods at the BBC Washington bureau probably have someone in mind already. Background in left-leaning online media, possibly someone many of them follow on Twitter.
Says the candidate requires a “sense of humour”. This from a corporation which still markets The News Quiz as humorous, so there you are.
So step forward, Candidate Prickstocke: your time on the teat is not yet at an end.
Also “able to establish rapport with people at all levels within the BBC” – easier to do if you share the prevailing pro-Democrat, anti-GOP views.
“401K/403B, Dental, Health” – when Obamacare kicks in health insurance costs will rocket for BBC America. The Obama-supporting hypocrites of Hollywood are planning to make even more films abroad to avoid “irksome” Obamacare laws.
What does Katty Kay actually do for the BBC? She seems to fill her time appearing on MSNBC, NPR, on Twitter and writing books. Perhaps the US Beeboid opinion blogger job should be assigned to her. The f.**.ker from Twitter will have to wait.
“The f.**.ker from Twitter will have to wait.” That made me laugh.
Even her appearances on US TV are vacuous. Maybe they hire her as token posh totty ?
She looked an absolute idiot in a recent session on Morning Joe with the odious Russell Brand making a fool of everyone round the table. A real posh lady would have told him he was acting like a prat – as usual.
Katty is a daughter of the elite, yes indeed. She’s also the most hyper-partisan of all Beeboids working in the US.
Can’t take Katty Kaye seriously. I don’t take in what she says as her immovable botoxed face captures my total attention.
Another fucking opinion-monger for the BBC in the US? Is this some kind of joke? The Charter & Agreement is a mere fig leaf, isn’t it?
Get the hell out of my country. I don’t accept the BBC’s divine right to rule.
I think they’re going for “opinion-wrangler” – collating opinion, blogging about it. But of course the politics of the successful candidate will determine the vibe. I have a sneaking suspicion that this position has been created with one person in mind.
“To write and curate”. So their own opinion is paramount. A news aggregator would be more impartial, and much less expensive. I’m going to lie down in a dark room now.
An algorithm would be better, or they could link each day to a couple of the hundreds of online outlets that already provide this service. But that’s not good enough for the anal retentives at the tax-funded BBC. The very idea that there are people getting opinion without the filter of the BBC is too much for these control freaks.
Why are there BBC reporters in the US at all? Do they not have television over there, or journalists? It is a bit like regional news television in England – completely redundant and utterly uninteresting. They either repeat what others have already told you, or tell you about things that are of no interest to anybody except to those to which it has already happened. It is not even accurate. It is just the usual circle wank of Guardian readers on an all expenses paid holiday. I wonder who pays for it?
“It is just the usual circle wank of Guardian readers on an all expenses paid holiday.”
in other words it is the dictionary definition of BBC News and Current Affairs.
I think the only current Beeboid in the US who used to work for the Guardian is Daniel Nasaw. He’s in charge of what goes up on the US & Canada page.
I know that its circulation is declining, but as far as I am aware it has not yet reached the stage where you have to work for the Guardian in order to be a Guardian reader
TALIBAN, and ENGLISH DEFENCE LEAGUE.
It seems the UK’s political class (from Cameron to BBC-NUJ), supports TALIBAN, and opposes the EDL.
– for Beeboid, Hampstead HARRABIN –
“Dirty tricks of the the fracking deniers:
“How Green zealots peddle cynical propaganda to stop Britain mining
£3 trillion of shale gas…enough to keep the lights on for 141 YEARS.
“Friends of the Earth said to be spreading misleading claims about dangers of shale gas.
“Campaigners aimed to stop fracking by manipulating the planning system.”
By DAVID ROSE.
For Hampstead HARRABIN:
Christopher BOOKER on Shale Gas, etc-
BBC arts correspondent Colin Paterson informs us that there were no surprise guests on stage with the Rolling Stones last night at Glastonbury. Col is obviously too hip to be able to identify that the portly player with the lived in face was none other than former golden boy & killer guitarist Mick Taylor.
We’re on Andy Marr’s Sunday morning show and in between an increasingly dotty Sue Macgregor plugging her next Radio 4 sinecure and Bob the Cat and his pet busker* plugging his latest book – (at least the latter duo have to sing for their supper rather than simply have to recall how to suck hard on the public teat) we have a return for Labour education spokesman Stephen Twigg with another chance to explain his confused but clearly anti-Gove policies.
Jeremy Vine makes a half-hearted effort to elicite clarity but lets it go at that.
Can’t the BBC cut to the quick ask why it is that Twigg simply speaks for the vested interests of the NUT and of local councils?
Now this is better for our Jeremy – Lenny Henry has it all – Showbiz and Waycism in one lovable package. BBC Central!
* Apparently the pet cat helped the busker get over his drug habbit – meow meow?
Maybe it did, but the poor hapless sod now has a cat habit instead.
While on the subject of Ol’ Wingnut, I note that he has had the immortal neck to credit Mrs Marr with ‘saving his life’ in the papers this a.m. – obviously shagging like a mink is a sign of gratitude in media lefty circles.
The BBC’s lead story this morning is ever so slightly OTT:
‘A top EU official says ties with the US could suffer over a report, allegedly leaked by fugitive Edward Snowden, that America bugged EU offices. ‘
Right, so we’re seriously to believe that the EU is going to fall out with the USA over this, despite the fact that friendly countries have spied on each other since time immemorial?
“checked sunday morning live to peruse the
points of debate … and well … there aren t any.
which points to al bbc selectors busy filling the airtime spots from their speed dial, before any of us “the peasants”
sorry folks it gets worse …
men … not needed, swith ome bint blogger (mumsnet?)
nelson mandela (lord save us)
some drone about women bishops
samira ackkkmed and “right on sista” bonnie greer with
CofE bod, and looks like hitchens ….
1 minute of my life i won t get back
Bonnie Greer reckons male invovlement with their childrens developement only dates back ‘a couple of hundred years’
Leftie nutcase talking – turn off.
I didn’t think there were any examples of it in her ‘community’.
We keep Bonnie Greer but turn away Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer.
Maybe if Spencer offered to put up a plaque to Jimi Hendrix or Marie Stopes-and not one of those “negative and dreary” wreaths for some northern squaddie type-then he too would be admitted into this country to dig its grave for us.
Or does he have to black up and pretend he went to college with Borat O` Bamma lamma ding dong( thank you Leslie Phillips!)
“Foreign media portrayals of the conflict in Syria are dangerously inaccurate.
” It is naive not to accept that both sides are capable of manipulating the facts to serve their own interests.”
By Patrick Cockburn.
“In the middle of a ferocious civil war it is self-serving credulity on the part of journalists to assume that either side in the conflict, government or rebel, is not going to concoct or manipulate facts to serve its own interests. Yet much foreign media coverage is based on just such an assumption.
“The plan of the CIA and the Friends of Syria to somehow seek an end to the war by increasing the flow of weapons is equally absurd.”
I realise that this isn’t about the BBC, but Sky’s reporter Sam Kiley seems to have become an advocate for arming the Syrian rebels. I’ve seen two of his recent reports, one in a rebel bomb making factory where they make their own artillery shells in dangerous conditions, and another about how the rebels are coping with lack of heavy weapons where a rebel spokesman was demanding the West (especially the USA) send them the weaponry that was promised them. Kiley actually had the gall to repeat the message that arming the rebels would save lives!
I cannot believe that an experienced war reporter like Sam Kiley would be gullible and naive enough to accept what the rebels would say at face value. So is he going all BBC al-Bowen on us and sneakily supporting the rebel Islamists?
Maybe Sky people and Beeboids drink in the same bars out there, away from Islamic alcohol banning zones.
The Syria reports of Patrick Cockburn, ‘Independent’ (who, is of the political left inevitably) are more discerning:-
“A return to Homs: ‘The atmosphere here is poisoned by fear of a kind I have only ever seen once before’”
Why does the BBC so readily tend to throw its weight behind political campaigners?
The BBC has supported everthing from celtic plastic bag bans via road speed limits to homosexual marriage.
Perhaps the BBC has found an answer…
because it makes them happy
Can we make ourselves happier?
By Pascale Harter BBC News
According to studies from all over the globe collated by the World Happiness Database in Rotterdam, we can.
Studies collated by the database say you tend to be happier if you: [top two items]
Are in a long-term relationship
Are actively engaged in politics
“A politically active romance might score double happiness points?”
Yup, all those happy, loved-up protesters we see at every May Day peaceful protest (riot), at every economic summit exchange of views (riot), at every UAF march against intolerance (riot)……….hang on a mo…..
Nice article: five happy* pictures juxtaposed with a bunch of agitproppers: were we supposed to elide them together in a happy warm glow perchance, BBC ?
*’Happy’ maybe, but threateningly vanilla, so there’s one picture compositor looking for a new job come Monday morning.
‘Men tend to be happier in a society where women enjoy greater equality’.
Try telling that to the men whose children have been taken away from them for no fault of their own, or the small business that got sued for thousands for not employing a pregnant woman to lift heavy boxes in a warehouse…
And the idea that ‘equality’ (however you choose to define it) is something that women ‘enjoy’ is also debatable.
because it makes them happy ?
many beebots shouting aloha snackbar to that eh!
not high on bbc s “happiness index”
literally disbelief across the pond
from 11mins 05
Considering most of the people I know that are involved in politics are embittered ne’er do wells, with chips firmly stuck to both shoulders, who blame their own abject failures on others; I somehow doubt that is true.
They are miserable buggers to a wo/man. Mind you some people are happier when they are miserable …
There’s nowt as queer as folk.
ive just noticed
“conservative reader of erotic literature”
After 5 full days of dramatic testimony in the Zimmerman case in Florida, there is still not a squeak from the BBC on their website – not even among the 30 stories listed on the US and Canada page.
I wonder why ?
I suppose Katty Kay hasn’t got time as she is fully occupied on writing her book (on whose time ???). But surely one of the other dozens of BBC staff in the UK could have got round to reporting events this past week >
Heaven forfend that the BBC’s silence is because the stitch-up case against Zimmerman is being blown apart , contradicting the BBC’s earlier biased reports.
The defence has not even started to present its case – I expect the BBC will give it full coverage – NOT.
Mardell won’t say anything because he’s in China right now working on his documentary about how awesome China is and how the US’s economy and entire future is intimately and inextricably intertwined (sorry for the alliteration) with the aweseomely roaring success of China and their 1 billion people on the cusp of becoming middle class.
As for the rest of them, Dymond can’t use the trial for his “Republicans Old & White & In The Way” agenda, and the rest of them are too busy keeping the vigil for St. Edward and doing all those “bespoke” lightweight video magazine pieces.
A news aggregator managed by my friend’s parakeet would keep you better informed.
Maybe Lardell should read this article before he starts bigging up China too much:
Mardell wouldn’t be interested. He’s more fascinated with the notion that Communism has lifted a billion people out of poverty and into the middle class, and how that is now taking over world leader status for the big bad warmongering US. As he’s said in his own announcement about it, his view is that China’s economic future and the US’s are intertwined, which most likely means that any future US success is dependent on China’s success. He dreams of a billion Chinese with middle class incomes waiting to spend it all on US exports.
I’m sure it will all go swimmingly unless the evil Republicans mess it up for the President.
Just remember that the UK has 10 times as much purchasing power parity per capita as India and 4 times as much as China.
‘Middle Class’ is relative.
Well, of course. Never mind that only a small percentage of the billion people Mardell dreams of will have any kind of real spending power at all. But we’re talking about reality here, and Mardell is in ideological la-la land.
Sitting outside my local village pub earlier in lovely sunshine and with an excellent pint of bitter, I realised how much I was enjoying this, the first of ‘ten soggy summers’ promised by the met office. Rainfall in the area for June is 37% of average (last year 173%). Temperature today 27C.
Sorry if off-topic, I can’t remember whether the BBC reported the Met Office’s prediction but assume they did and I just wanted to share my contentment with you all.
INBBC interview policy: Nusaybah yes, Geller no.
In contrast to the speed with which INBBC got a friend of murderer of Lee Rigby on ‘Newsnight,’ and the soft, uninterrupting tone of the interview of Muslim convert ABU NUSAYBAH (minutes before his arrest on terrorism offences), INBBC censors any interview with e.g. PAMELA GELLER on being banned from U.K.
See first 5 mins of this Pamela Geller video clip:-
” A Few Words ”
Syrian rebels behead a Catholic priest before a cheering crowd. Where’s the MSM reaction?
Where indeed, BBC?
“Interfaith outreach in Syria: –
Obama-backed jihadists behead priest as crowd chants ‘Allahu akbar'”
I blame Vatican foreign policy and inequality in Syria. Or something. Maybe Geller and Spencer gave a speech there, and this was the inevitable result?
Does West’s ‘liberal intelligentsia’ rationalise such Islamic jihad atrocities by pretending there are no Islamic jihadists based in Britain, who are now killing in Syria; and that Islamic jihadists do not behead English people in e.g. London?
“Britons fighting with Syria’s jihadi ‘band of brothers'”
(13 min video)
The murder of a Catholic priest is not seen as important, as that faith is more despised than Islam by many in the MSM.
It’s now on the Daily Mail website.
re the Zimmerman trial – this links to a video of Zimmerman at the scene, one day later, telling the police what had happened. BEFORE he had a lawyer to craft his replies.
Virtually everything he says in this clip is being supported in court – especially by the only eye-witness to the fight and Zimmerman being bludgeoned. And no credible evidence has been brought to contradict what Zimmerman says.
Sometimes people say “Don’t say a word until you have a lawyer”. That is obviously the line the guilty would take. But for someone who is basically honest, there is a lot to be said for telling the truth straight out, unrehearsed and clearly. That is what Zimmerman does, I think – he comes across as credible and honest ?
The BBC has 50 pr more staff in the US. Have NONE of them seen this video clip, the day after the incident ? Have NONE of them thought it should be shown to Mardell before he keeps shoots his mouth off ? It is not a new video – it has been available for months.
Chances are, the prosecution will not show it. It is too damaging to their case.
The Beeboids knew about it. They just didn’t believe him. They had their Narrative already – racist, cold-blooded murder, a cypher for the entire racist, white-supremacist US where some places are just a couple drinks away from lynchings.
Remember, even after we knew Zimmerman’s story, meaning we knew about the physical altercation, the BBC still ran with the Stand Your Ground theme, a law which became irrelevant the moment we knew about the physical contact. They even put together four case studies to further enlighten you about what they saw as a ghastly law allowing cold-blooded murder. The Florida police initially said that was why they didn’t charge Zimmerman immediately, sure, but that went out the door very quickly. The BBC didn’t care as they already had their Narrative.
The BBC kept running stories about how Martin’s family denied that their boy provoked or attacked Zimmerman, while playing down Zimmerman’s side of the story, all the while hyping the racist US stuff. They pushed it and pushed it. Now that the incident is turning out not to be a racist slam-dunk, they’re ignoring it for other, easier stories, like yet another story about how China is saving the US from economic failure (which was done to support Mardell’s upcoming documentary on this subject), an acrobat’s accidental death during a show, and something about Jennifer Lopez singing happy birthday to a dictator.
That Zimmerman video, though is not usable as evidence of any kind, is it? He wasn’t under oath or anything. He’ll get a chance to testify at some point.
a genuine sense of bafflement in this article
“Why DON’T these ungrateful Spaniards like the lovely EU? I mean, look at all it’s done for them”. No analysis at all of the ruinous Euro entry, the catastrophic property boom and bust or the reasons for the Club Med countries suffering so much
Yet the signs are all there to understand why the EU project was disastrous. This bit made me laugh:
These men remember what it was like to live under Franco – and subsequently the boom times that followed, as the Spanish economy, fuelled by EU structural funds and a decade-long property bonanza, went from strength to strength.
“In those days, everything seemed possible,” says Miguel sadly, “but now where has the all that money gone? The problem is the EU is no longer a collective, it’s just different rules for each and every country.”
Um, when was this not the case? The BBC still doesn’t get that the money not only ran out, but much of it never existed in the first place.
“The Secret Life of the Sun:
BBC wastes cash sending Kate Humble across the world.
“Sunday People TV critic Adam Postans rages at the air miles racked up by Beeb presenters Kate Humble and Helen Czerski.”
Kate Humble ‘Wild Shepherdess’
The Lake District?
Don’t be silly, this is the BBC
Kate Humble takes part in a muster of sheep in Outback Australia….. then she’s off to Peru (the apaca industry don’t you know)
Doesn’t she have a farm somewhere near Hereford where she keeps alpacas and sheep and other like animals and teaches people for a fat fee how to do the same?
Is she thus getting some additional experience to help her with her business paid for by the BBC?
Can’t seem to find a reference to this one the BBC… Strange it’s a culture thing for Islam, but you end up in Jail over here if you try anything like it…
To be fair they are all wearing skirts …
Impact of housing benefit changes ‘worse than feared’
“The impact is at least as bad as we had anticipated, in many respects even worse,” says David Orr, chief executive of the National Housing Federation.
So that would be David ‘Labour got it absolutely right’ Orr of the NHF…..
In fact as far as David Orr is concerned Labour are nowhere near generous enough!
‘NHF chief executive David Orr said: ‘Labour is absolutely right that to reduce the need for housing benefit we need to build more homes that people can afford. But we can’t limit the amount of help people need to meet their rising housing costs before those homes are available or housing costs begin to fall.’
The National Housing Federation are, by the way, pie in the sky merchants…
‘We believe that everyone should have the home they need at a price they can afford.’
or in other words……”From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” as we say in The Party.
The whole point of this change is to cap housing costs, so this is an indication of success isn’t it.
“two housing associations have told BBC News that since the welfare change, they have large family homes lying empty because tenants cannot afford to move into them.”
If this bothers them so much why don’t they reduce the rents? No? Can’t do it because it would cost them money eh. Welcome to financial reality. The UK cannot afford its welfare bill.
Meanwhile in the People’s Republic of Jockoslavia those perky private tenants ……
“A worried tenant called her letting agents to tell them that woodworm were “making noises in my dining room chair”.
“Meanwhile in the People’s Republic of Jockoslavia”
hehe, love it,
not offended in the slightest either 😀
I notice that Orr chooses to use the Labour terminology of “bedroom tax” to go along with his support for that party’s policies
If BBC is so worried about escalating rents perhaps they should stop showing ‘Buy to let property porn’, programs like ‘Homes under the hammer’
The BBC has been criticised by the National Audit Office for paying out £25m to 150 senior BBC managers in severance payments.
The top 10 payments in the three years to December 2012 accounted for 20% of the total paid out.
So, there were ten people who received an average of £500,000 each, more even than George Entwistle, the biggest failure of the lot. Who were they?
“BBC’s shameful severance pay deals revealed:
How 150 senior managers were given vast pay-offs which came in at £25 MILLION”
Nasty, wasteful BBC…
Interesting snippet from “Till Death Us Do Part” on Toady this morning. All sorts of nasty words mentioned, and feigned horror amongst the liberal, pc, hand-wringing presenters.
It was refreshing to hear old Alf again, with his spot-on ranting (which most of us probably still believe in today, but are not allowed to repeat).
I was under the impression, that “Till Death Us Part” was actually a liberal parody of the ‘backwards’ working classes. Probably a little too subtle for the present day Guardian-reading types, they don’t really do much intellectual heavy lifting these days.
As some one pointed out on another thread recently. Johnny Speight who was active leftist (An original Labour Lovey in fact) said he was satirizing Tory voting working class ‘bigots’ like Alf Garnet, but Alf became a cult hero for the wrong reasons.
The same thing happened to Harry Enfield’s
‘Loadsamoney’ Character and Enfield, he says, ‘killed him off’ for that reason
Interestingly Speight revisited ‘Alf’ long after he was passed he sell by date with a more obvious ‘right on message’ but less success
I wrote a comment on Alf, but here is another one, in similar vein. from a Speight supporter:
“If you laugh with Alf, you will have merely been entertained, but if you laugh at him, you will have been both entertained and informed – and that’s a victory for Mr. Speight.”
This quote summarises the bien-pensant group thought still prevalent today
To be fair to Alf G, he was an old man frightened by the changes around him (among others mass immigration) and finding it hard to adapt. The irony of Tony Booth playing his argumentative Lefty son-in-law is almost weird, given the damage to Old England that Cherie’s husband was to inflict from 1997.
Time to look out the thermals…
Met Office predicts warm July ahead
last week it was cold and wet
BBC Blows £25 Million on Golden Goodbyes
150 top-ranking staff were given the huge severance payments over the last three years. George Entwistle pocketed £470,000, as well as £107,000 for costs for appearing as a witness at the Pollard Review. The other big winner was Chief Operating Officer Caroline Thompson, who trousered £683,000. In one in four cases the Beeb paid out more than they were entitled to…