I can see that Monday’s thread is overflowing so time for a new one! Here you go and off you go!
MID WEEK OPEN THREAD!
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Fedup2 Dec 21, 17:38
Weekend 21st December 2024
I think one of the reasons the msm is top toeing around the German slaughter is because of the CCTV… - Sluff Dec 21, 17:36
Weekend 21st December 2024
Sometimes it is the choice of story that gives away the BBC bias. Here’s one from the front page of… - Lefty Wright Dec 21, 17:24
Weekend 21st December 2024
moggiemoo I have found that if you make a close study of his facial features they resemble Cheetah the chimp… - Sluff Dec 21, 17:20
Weekend 21st December 2024
….so says the person who let us remember was employed by the BBC as the ‘impartial’ economics editor on Newshite,… - Fedup2 Dec 21, 17:19
Weekend 21st December 2024
510 bbc tv news – guess what re Germany – Islam mentioned ? No – Muslims mentioned ? No -… - pugnazious Dec 21, 17:16
Weekend 21st December 2024
What BBC Verfiy ain’t telling us…a very good reason why our Islamophobic Islamist didn’t want to be returned to Saudi… - pugnazious Dec 21, 17:11
Weekend 21st December 2024
Well yeah…not as if there isn’t something to ‘exploit’ is there? The real problem is those who wish to cover… - Fedup2 Dec 21, 17:05
Weekend 21st December 2024
Looks like the full disinformation smokescreen is being deployed in Germany – an election in February and – hopefully -… - Lunchtime Loather Dec 21, 17:03
Midweek 18th December 2024
Rest assured, neither do I. I just use the web site as “ammunition”, and there is plenty of it.
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
Mr Miliband…. David…. oh I’m sorry – you’re Ed…. I’m afraid you have failed your interview for employment…. er…. freelance non-PAYE status – with the BBC. You see we just don’t think you would fit in. We just can’t have our presenters making politically incorrect gaffes.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2013/07/ed-miliband-tries-to-make-friends/
An interestinmg sidelight on Ed’s big union speech here
‘The Labour leader was clearly distracted. In the course of relating an anecdote about US politics, Miliband used the term ‘congressmen’. Mr Steerpike nodded sagely — knowing the meaning of this innocuous noun — but Miliband, who is always keen to be ‘right on’ and ever so politically correct, evidently thought he’d done something unmentionable. Horror crossed his face. Awkwardly, he corrected the mis-step to ‘congressmen and women’; thereby drawing attention to a boob that nobody had noticed and only he seemed to care about.’
Never mind. It is a given that had David Cameron made the very same slip we would never have heard the end of it ‘across the BBC’ from Newsnight to the Now Show.
So although Ed Miliband wouldn’t be allowed to work for the BBC at least the BBC workd for Ed.
Every Government announcement is immediately dismissed with the retort “But Labour says …..” – Miliband statements seem just to be accepted by BBC unquestioningly with any comment coming from various sections of Labour/Unions. Why no “But Conservatives say ……”. Also when discussing that not all union members vote Labour I heard three differernt commentators refer to Tory, LibDem & Greens – not one mentioned UKIP.
“Miliband, who is always keen to be ‘right on’ and ever so politically correct”
Addams Family Values?
“Horror crossed his face.” And stayed there.
Sorry, but unlike the BBC, I just can’t take him seriously.
He digging a big hole for himself with the ‘opt in’ requirement for union members. I don’t know how he is going to get out of it but I bet he does. I am sure this was a knee jerk reaction to Cameron’s taunting at PMQs and the revelation (by a Tory MP) of Unite’s fraudulent bolstering of Labour party membership without the knowledge of some of those who were signed up.
No doubt a huge u turn will come out in due course and the elaborate ‘fudge’ which will no doubt be concocted to explain it will be sympathetically received and reported by the BBC. Still I am very much looking forward to the squirming.
I agree, he’s digging a big hole. I don’t see how he can deliver, as he is reliant on the Unions changing their rules to make it work. From a position of Opposition, it is difficult to see how he can enforce. Still Cameron made his offer during pmq’s today, but it hasn’t yet been taken up.
As Guido says, its all in the flow of the money. If individuals donate directly to Labour its worked. If payment is still via the Unions then it hasn’t.
Typically the BBC’s reporting of this (and to be fair MSM generally) is moving between lamentable and non-existant.
It’s been decades since I was, forcibly, a trade union member so my memory may be fading but … wasn’t it always the case that union members could state which party the political levy was to go to? Maybe it depended on the union but I remember there being some concern that union bosses would use political affiliations to rig elections. This would be by not sending ballot papers in time or at all, to sites where there was a majority of Conservatives, excluding Conservatives from postal votes etc.
Unfortunately I can’t remember what the outcome was – although there was such a scandal with one public service union doing some shenanigans similar to that in Sheffield IIRC.
There are also democratic concerns over the intimidation of people who belong to the wrong point of view. For example asking Unite to pass subs on to the BNP would be a guaranteed way of losing a job.
It’s a mine field only the foolish would enter eh Mr Bean?
Like you Pah, for me its many decades.
However my recollection if the system was that upon joining, you only had one chance to opt out of the political levy. It was just that, an opt out if you took it.
If you did nothing the presumption was that you paid political levy. I actually did opt out in my join- up paperwork, however I never had any idea if my wishes were followed, as I paid in total the same fees as anyone else.
There never was any choice for a member to choose where the money went. They did then, same as today, just as they wished.
With any luck the minefield will work well.
With any luck the minefield will work well
In the sense that minefields are supposed to work I hope! Well, one can dream.
Metaphorical of course sir.
What else?
Look out the Government are about to do something stupid!
How do I know?
Well I listen to BBC 5 Live. First I hear a line from the unions telling me that privatising the Royal Mail is bad. I reckon they are probably correct because I have so often heard that the public sector is so much better than capitalistic free enterprise – once again I’ve heard this on the BBC.
Then I hear that nice man Chucka Umanna who tells me this privatisation is all a nasty plot by the Tories. The BBC do raise the idea that this was originally Peter Mandelson’s plan. Chucka reassures the BBC interviewer (Tony Livesey?) that this is wrong. The BBC man also asks: given what a bad idea this is will Labour plan to reverse the privatisation? Chucka doesn’t commit himself.
I think Chuka must be an honest and well meaning politician because at the end of the interview the BBC man says ‘Chucka Umunna, as ever, thank you…..’
Sounds to me as though privatisation is a bad idea.
I begin to have my impression reinforced as I hear a couple of texts (Tweets?) read out. It seems as though the general public also think privatisation of the Royal Mail is a bad idea. And gosh, they are quite angry and also rather witty. Goodness they sound just like 1980s alternative comedians. Now I feel all nostalgic.
I can’t wait for that nasty Tory Minister to come on and try to justify his evil policy. Here he comes now. Frankly I think he is getting too much of that BBC balance. Blimey I think I’ll complain that the BBC is too right wing!
I thought post office privatisation was a nasty plot by the EU. Funny how Chuka and the BBC never mention that.
http://www.caef.org.uk/d113rylml.html
Chucker because the EU provides jobs for the boys, bBC because of its EU grants and loans.
“MPs set to quiz BBC chiefs over redundancy packages for senior staff”
[Excerpt]:-
“In a three-year period up to last December, the BBC spent £25 million on severance payments for 150 high-ranking staff, according to the NAO report, and since 2005 it has made payments totalling £60 million to 401 senior managers.
“In almost a quarter of the individual cases reviewed by the NAO, the BBC paid out more than the staff were entitled to under their contracts.”
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/mps-set-quiz-bbc-chiefs-over-redundancy-packages-senior-staff?
Mac Cartoon
(2 July, 2013).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/coffeebreak/cartoons/mac.html
Mac’s BBC cartoon: direct access-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2353277/MAC-ON–BBC-pay-offs.html
In light of ongoing discussions on who gets to see and/or comment on what, I may note that my clicking on this link delivers a page that currently says:
Access denied
You are not authorized to access this page.
Then again, the banner does say ‘Journalism Today’.
Can’t argue.
There is a heart rending report on the BBC news site about the inquisition of Hall and Patten…
BBC Trust chairman Lord Patten has called the size of severance payments made to senior BBC managers a matter of “shock and dismay”.
Lord Hall has said he believed the BBC “lost its way on payments in recent years”.
“These payments were from another era and we are putting a stop to them,” he added.
The BBC announced in April it was consulting staff on capping redundancy payments at £150,000 or 12 months’ salary, whichever is lower.
The poor lambs – having to make do with a year’s salary or even a pitiful £150,000 – you have to have some sympathy for their suffering.
“These payments were from another era and we are putting a stop to them,” he added.’
—————————————————————–
Correct: that would be The Patten Era.
Thank god those days are long gone.
“These payments were from another era and we are putting a stop to them,” he added.’
—————————————————————–
Correct: that would be The Patten Era.
Thank god those days are long gone.”
*******
Funny you should mention that.
The sun is too tempting, and Western Electric too prone to snipping cables in our area, so I think the great outdoors now calls.
However, one last share for the morning, as matters of editorial input (inc. the unique ability to chip in selectively) seem de rigueur…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/blogbbcinternet/posts/News-App-Push-Notifications?
Always interesting how promisingly such ra-ra stories start, but as the public become aware things can spiral a bit.
I note this one:
25. Primus84
9TH JULY 2013 – 16:53
Interesting how after a volley of negative feedback and reviews on the App Store Alex Perry has now gone quiet!
Usually that’s cue for a closing. We’ll see.
Not that RT, like any other news outlet, can be entirely trusted but watching does give one a fresh outlook on events unfolding in the world at present – events not always reported by the BBC. Interesting story this morning about new ‘evidence’ that’s emerged which indicates that the chemical weapons found in Syria have been deemed too crudely made and slipshod to be of industrial production, meaning that it’s likely that the rebels, with poor resources and a lack of manufacturing means, made them and tried to pass attacks off as perpetrated by Assad. Now, whether this is believable is debatable, but shouldn’t all sides of the Syrian story be heard/investigated/reported? I suppose it doesn’t fit the BBC narrative.
Kremlin TV isn’t a reliable source on the Syrian conflict.
RT is a state broadcaster that actually says what its government tells it to.
The Beeb is a state broadcaster that only says what the Left tells it to.
At least everyone knows whose tune RT dances to and can interpret accordingly. The BBC maintains the fiction that it dances to no-one’s, and too many people believe it.
Yep, as I clearly alluded to in my post, RT is pretty much an untrustworthy and biased source. However, is it anymore disingenuous than the BBC? That’d be an interesting comparative debate, for sure.
Back in the seventies that same left were convinced that Moscow was the only source of truth and all the rest was capitalist lies
I admit that, while I’m having breakfast, I don’t listen to Radio 4 with the care and attention it obviously deserves. However, it seems that Today and Radio 4 news at 8:00 have dropped the latest judgement by ECHR concerning life sentences for murderers into the memory hole (although it’s possible it was referred to in passing on the “What the papers say” item). Moreover, at 10:30 there was no obvious reference to it on the BBC Home, World, UK or England website pages.
I think we’re all agreed that the main item of current news (10:30), to the effect that “Healthcare assistants ‘should get standard training” is the most important issue in the world but you would have thought that the ECHR judgement – although announced yesterday and covered by Today in the usual unsatisfactory “news in advance” method (ie an excuse for slanted speculation and agenda-setting) – merited some further discussion in the light of the hard facts.
Is this treatment bias or the BBC trademark journalistic incompetence? Both I suspect since the judgement doesn’t exactly help the ‘uman rights lobby for which the BBC is such an effective mouthpiece.
On PM last night it was attentive, sympathetic Eddie Mair listening and prompting the journalist who applauded the ECHR’s decision, even though he wrongly used the argument that currently prisoners serving these sentences have no right of appeal.
Lord Faulkener then came on and suddenly the bristling, challenging Mair appeared, obviously not happy with Faulkener’s opinion that a judge should have the right to put dangerous criminals away for the rest of their lives. He also pointed out that when hanging was abolished a life sentence should mean precisely that. Since then, of course, the bleeding heart liberals have chipped away and chipped away until a life sentence is now meaningless.
Mair’s interview was a clear example of the same liberal bias, pure and simple. They just can’t help themselves, can they?
While Millipede’s announcement is still echoing I note that senior members of his party are taking heed by not taking on second jobs…. good for them!
Er…
http://politicalscrapbook.net/2013/07/david-blunkett-joins-oracle-capital/
im sitting in the house with the air conditioning on. wasnt it 3 weeks ago the countries most intelligent people, the climate scientists, trumpeted by the BBC, were telling us we were going to have cold damp summers. gotta love the bbc and its climate scientists. if i made as many bad predictions as them in my job, i would have been sacked a long time ago
The BBC response goes something like this;
You need your air conditioning on due to man-made global warming.
Our cold and extended winter was due to weather extremes called by man-made global warming.
Our forecast of a series of cold wet summers was due to man-made global warming.
Our inability to look out of the window and tell you whether it’s raining or not is due to man-made global warming.
In other words whatever the weather, we’re always right and you’re always wrong.
Now be quite and pay your TV tax
But I can’t pay my TV tax, because of global warming.
Frequently I despair at how the BBC has affected the ability of this country to think for itself. But occasionally the comments to stories such as this (“Ossett cafe owner ‘warns’ customers she is black”) give one hope. Especially when the top-rated comment is:
25.rockin_steady
perfectly illustrates everything wrong with this country. not only the fact that she automatically assumes anyone who walks into her cafe and doesnt like the smell, decor, food on display, prices, other customers etc is racist, but also the fact that this MP automatically assumes she is right.
I foresee early closing. Unlike the café, which has had wonderful publicity from the BBC by playing the race card.
and if a sign went up in birmingham saying:-
Attention! everyone beware i am an english and always will be. if you are allergic to non believers dont come in
it’d be called racist!
Sounds like a typical, attention-seeking drama queen to me. Probably made the whole lot up to get a leftie sympathy vote and therefore more customers.
There is an excellent cafe near to where I work which is run by a Jamaican guy on his own. The place is always busy whenever I happen to go in, but perhaps that is due to the fact that he is very friendly and always makes you feel welcome. I don’t think race comes into it.
Forgot to mention, the food is good too!
Interesting how many of the top rates mention the subject of personal preference and choice being more of an issue for them than the latest ‘ism affront being attempted by the industry that brought you Hustle.
There’s an interesting metaphor at play too.
Imagine the injury atop of insult if, having entered the cafe, found nothing suitable or to taste, before you can seek other venues you are still compelled to pay the owner anyway.
No wonder the BBC seem keen.
Now, on matters of modding:
Your post has been placed in a moderation queue, and will be reviewed by a moderator before posting. Explain.
Can’t wait to hear some explain that, yes.
One presumes the management of the BBC canteen operates on a similar Hotel Californian basis?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/the-bbc-canteen-really-is-awful-say-148980
‘Grabbing his ’59 Les Paul, Chief executive Andrew Main insisted, in song: “You can check out any time you like, but you may never leave. Mostly”‘
Seems people have distaste for her product and not her skin colour . But the race card is always worth a try ,and trumps all in bbc land.
So what if some people in Ossett make a choice, as customers, on the basis of racial preference? Is that not their choice? ( we haven’t heard from the owners of local Chinese or Indian restaurants to know if that is the case but lets assume it is)
The law requires the owner of a restaurant to not discriminate on basis of race effectively forcing him or her to act against his/her racial preference (if any)
Is the BBC saying that customers should be under the compulsion?
I think the words of Labour councillor Tony Richardson are very revealing
“It has shocked me very much,” he said. “I have spent 20 years as a trade unionist and fought against this sort of attitude and I certainly won’t put up with it in Ossett.
“We have got to say it potentially could smack of racism and if it does we have to crush it with everything we have got.”
Crush it with everything we have got ,what does that entail?
Don’t get me wrong I think that Ms Kolleh has every right to put up a sign saying ‘no racists’ or for that matter ‘no dogs’ or no, er no not that ,that would be illegal.
And I don’t dispute the BBCs decision to run it as story it clearly is .In fact I’m glad they did as it opens a window into the mind of the liberal inquisition and verifies my opinion that ‘Anti Racism’ (even after 40 years of legislation ,indoctrination and intimidation) is the most constructed of social constructs.
“we have to crush it with everything we have got.”
Interesting choice of phraseology from the bold Tony Richardson, Labour councillor.
Especially after hearing Andrew Neil in the full flow of his recent rant against (sorry, I mean “interview of”) Tommy Robinson, where he quoted the EDL leader as saying that Muslim extremists would “feel the full weight of the EDL”.
In Mr. Neil’s considered Beeboid opinion, this was tantamount to an implicit threat of violence and marked Tommy out as nothing more than a “street thug”. He brushed aside any suggestion that this was not the case.
Still, as a trade union activist of 20 years’ standing and long-time Labour Party member, presumably Mr. Richardson is not unacquainted with the efficacious use of a bit of “street thuggery” himself.
“”I hired a white woman called Tracey. When Tracey is in the cafe she does well and people will come in and it will be full, once I stay in the background.
“But if Tracey is not working and I’m working nobody comes in.””
Perhaps Tracy was rather lacking in the piss-poor attitude stakes, and actually smiled at her customers, rather than glaring at them with suspicion and contempt. Just a thought. Perhaps the customer is always right after all.
The customer is always white after all 🙂
Amazing how this one woman’s word is taken as gospel – is it cos she is black?
Oh dear.
Public Falls Out of Love With BBC.
“We are forever hearing that Auntie Beeb is one of the institutions cherished most by the British public, admittedly usually from the BBC itself.“
You mean, just because they say something is so, doesn’t mean it actually is.
I’m shocked, I tell you… shocked!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-editors-23032145
‘But as our new director general Tony Hall has said, the BBC’s best days lie ahead of us.’
Maybe he meant the BBC’s best lies are days ahead of us?
If it is all going so well surely that makes it all the more ripe for selling off. Shares to the public , management buyouts, the whole works. What a future it could have freed from state interference. And all of us would be better off.
I’d like to draw a comparison between the reaction to the “Shock and dismay” felt by Patten over the size of pay-offs to top-level execs and to Murdoch’s lack of knowledge of his senior management activity during the phone hacking scandal. There’s really not much difference between the two failings.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23253276
(Why is this story hidden on the entertainment page of the website? That’s a different question)
Murdoch was massively beaten up (verbally) for his perceived lack of control, by Tom Watson and the BBC in particular… and yet for precisely the same, Patten just wrings his hands and puts on his most super-slimey look.
Shouldn’t this guy be considering his position? After all, he does have at least 10 other roles to fall back on.
Murdoch was / is the head of a global corporation, sat 3 and a half thousand miles away in New York. Delegation might be something of an unknown concept to Watson, one of the control freaks that was ‘team Gordon Brown.’
Patten, on the other hand, sits in the same effin’ building surrounded by the bastards.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-23254754
I see the BBC have failed, yet again, to priorities news items accordingly. This gem was hiding in the Berkshire section. Note also the beebs reluctance to state the mans ethnicity. Pathetic.
Left wing thinking, Diversity, the BBC, and the race to the bottom.
The darling flagship of the left is its commitment to ‘diversity’, of course it’s definition of diversity is not the same as the dictionary one, and some diversity is better than others. It isn’t really a commitment to diversity at all in reality.
In order for this construct to work, there needs to be a problem, these are described as the ‘isms’ and the ‘phobias’ which are like diversity not actual phobias at all !
So we have a constant need for problems which the leftie activists can ‘sort out’ and each of the competing ‘diverse’ groups need to keep presenting new problems and issues which they experience. Those who fail to present new problems rapidly fall off the radar, this is a construct where he who shouts loudest is very definitely true.
For those favourite groups which don’t appear to actually have too many problems, left wing activist groups will move in to identify them for them ! An example of this is the non existant ‘islamphobia’ which occured following the murder of Lee Rigby.
We have seen this week a mind boggling report which tells of the discrimination faced by aging gay people who have HIV ! There must all of about 100 people affected in the whole country !
An absolute anathama to these minority groups is the positive side of their minority so it’s kept as quiet as possible. You won’t hear that gay men have a much higher income level, and a disproportionately higher disposable income, nor will you hear that they should be taxed at a higher rate to make sure that they ‘enjoy’ equality.
You won’t hear womens groups pressing for fair settlements in divorce or fair access to the children, because they don’t actually want equality.
The reality is that ‘diversity’ is a culture of negativity which relies on a constant stream of negative stories – often with these being championed by the BBC, There is no just getting on with life because there are too many problems being dreamed up.
Worse still this odd ‘equality’ totem is in reality a superiority movement, by minimising the negative whilst failing to even acknowledge that there are advantages at all!
Here’s a little light reading for Jeremy Bowen as he convalesces. After all, it wouldn’t do for such a distinguished correspondent not to keep up to speed, even from his sick bed.
AT LAST !
Funny how we’ve been saying this for ages that the mainstream eventually catches up, reminds me of the Schopenhauer quote
“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
Call for BBC Trust chairman Lord Patten to quit
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23263072
Actually it appears in BBC Wales which is where the link takes you – somewhere few go.
I see another BBC type has seamlessly moved to politic for the Labour party sadly for Miriam O’Reilly she failed to get picked as the party passed her over for a much younger model !!!
lol wonder if she will sue ?
First the BBC, now the Labour party…perhaps she’d be less discriminated against in the private sector.
If you’re going to use that as an example of bias, how are you going to deal with Esther McVey who presented several BBC programs before joining the Tories and ending up as minister in charge of persecuting the disabled !
Now why would I do that ? that is the job of the BBC chorus line to find the one out of thousands to prove how wrong we are !
And here is another:
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2011/07/03/former-bbc-scotland-journalist-could-become-next-leader-tory-party-scotland
And you told me there were no Tories in Scotland perhaps your
being selective in other areas
http://gaiusmarcellus.blogspot.com/2010/03/unacceptable-links-between-labour-and.html
I once said that there were more Panda’s in Scotland than Tory MP’s in Westminster. At no time did I say that there were no Tories in Scotland.
Are you absolutely sure you want to start a list of connections between the BBC and the various political parties?
“Call for BBC Trust chairman Lord Patten to quit”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23263072?
When discussing male victims of domestic abuse becomes a pretext to dismissing male victims of domestic abuse…
The women, went on to admit that, due to the difficulty of obtaining assistance, male victimization must be under-reported, yet continued throughout the video to try to downplay female perpetration and male victimization, and turn the conversation back to emphasis on female victims, even in reply to Ian’s stated concern that downplaying the experiences of male victims would discourage reporting and hamper the ability of abused men to obtain assistance.
With such a nonchalant display of bias against male victims of intimate partner violence airing on BBC radio, could it be simple coincidence that BBC management’s mishandling of a 2012 sexual harassment complaint by BBC Journalist Russel Joslin led to his suicide?
http://www.avoiceformen.com/updates/news-updates/news-but-what-about-teh-wimminz/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-23196139
Public sector mentality, that daren’t stray from the acceptable narrative.
“BBC investigators spied on 30 members of staff during probes into alleged criminality and rule breaches.
“BBC’s Investigation Service monitored e-mails of 30 workers last year.
“They included one BBC worker suspected of bribery and two of theft.
“Corporation said staff would not have been aware of monitoring.”
By JAMES RUSH.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2359487/BBC-investigators-spied-30-members-staff-probes-alleged-criminality-rule-breaches.html
“£949K payoff to Mark Byford is ‘uncomfortable’ for BBC”
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-07-10/hr-head-949k-payoff-to-mark-byford-is-uncomfortable/?
It was “customer practice at that time,” she added.
Okay, I’ll bite: Customer practice?
Classic public sector attitude over here. I am, apparently, a “customer” of Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs. However withdrawing my custom is not an option. Not a legal one anyway.
‘withdrawing my custom is not an option. Not a legal one anyway.’
*****
There is a fair bit of that about.
Often to a unique extent.
She actually said “custom and practice”:
The BBC HR director Lucy Adams says Mark Byford had an expectation of a payment in lieu of notice of 12 months because it was “custom and practice at that time”.
Adams says that Mark Thompson was keen that Byford stayed to look after royal wedding coverage so she negotiated a settlement with “as minimum disruption as possible”.
She admits the payout of nearly £1m to Byford was “uncomfortable” and could have been better negotiated.
“Whilst it was uncomfortable there was custom and practice. With hindsight looking at that deal there was eight months we could have asked Mark [Byford] to work.”
‘….could have been better negotiated…’
but what the heck, it’s just public money.
‘…because it was “custom and practice at that time”.’
Presumably, that it was a ‘different time’ is now taken as read in hope that if it is intoned enough it becomes true?
Meanwhile, in other news, the Titanic deck chair & pinhead angel-counting committees are pleased to announce Lord Hall has found space for 15 calls on his expertise…
Custom and practice good old fashioned union phrase translates
‘we have no legitimate claim for this money but while we have the upper hand well go for it anyway ‘
I remember it well
‘Custom and practice’, is nothing more than the Nuremberg defence for corrupt practice which is not illegal.
The Quisling Broadcasting Corporation would go apoplectic if this defence was used say about bankers bonuses so why does Albaman feel it is acceptable for the Quisling’s to use it in their own defence.
To be quite frank in Quisling Byford is crucial to covering the royal wedding then it does not say much for the competence of the Quisling Broadcasting Corporation.
QBC Excuses List:
(1) “We were only obeying orders.”
(2) “A lot of the truth didn’t come out at the time.”
Ah! Nuremberg, yes, we have been here before.
Where did I say that I found it acceptable? I merely pointed out that the ITV article quoting “customer practice” was inaccurate.
You do not win an argument by continuing to bloody argue.
You win it with reason and good humour.
However, 1/10 for writing your name down.
So why did you not make it clear in the first place, that it was simply a clarification of what she said? After all it adds at best marginally to the clear view (not perception) that the Quisling Broadcasting Corporation sees itself as above scrutiny.
No you did it as a piece of disruption/deflection, and until you make it clear that you do not agree with Lucy-Quisling’s Nuremberg defence it is correct to assume you find it acceptable.
And now I have your attention are you going to respond to mine, or any other posts, to your arrogant presumption that all views (save your own) about bias are mere perception. And therefore are (again save your own) not valid.
Fist line of the post:
“She actually said “custom and practice”
How much clearer do I need to be!!!
But, like you, it adds nothing. So why post it.
Typical bBBC response. Proved wrong so attack the person. Very classy.
Nope definitely says ” “customer practice at that time,” in article
here’s the cut and paste
‘ It was “customer practice at that time,” she added’
perhaps you should try reading it old man.
Stewart, the ITV article (cited by George R) wrongly quoted her as saying “customer practice”. Please try to keep up.
readers can only respond to what is reported and were not therefore proved wrong. context old man context
Your clarification was excepted.Most of us knew what she meant regardless of what she said. your the one who pressed on regardless
Do you seriously contend that the exact wording makes such a substantive difference that it is worth pointing out? So again – save distraction/deflection – why post?
Also will you be explaining how bias is always merely perception, and therefore cannot be valid (save your own of course).
Again you add nothing. So why post?
‘Typical response. Proved wrong so attack the person. Very classy’
*****
One feels your pain.
Ps: I have edited BBC-style, for space, and real world style, for accuracy, as you may find such a response is typical of more than some individual comment conflated with a free, independent blog’s contributors.
“BBC accused of ‘cronyism’ over executive payouts.
“BBC Trust chairman admits ‘overpaying’ after being questioned by MPs over £25m paid to 150 outgoing executives”
By ADAM SHERWIN.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/bbc-accused-of-cronyism-over-executive-payouts-8700962.html
Lord (Tony) Hall (the DG) has said he believed the BBC “lost its way on payments in recent years”.
“These payments were from another era and we are putting a stop to them,” he added.
I like the careful continuous present tense he carefully uses as ‘another era’ includes now. James Purnell admitted last week these payments are still being paid to those who got their claim in before the shutter went down and it would be ‘illegal’ not to continue with them.
It’s like a burglar who is caught, insisting on hanging on to his loot as he once had an expectation that he would be able to retain it.
Hall should have just stopped after “the BBC lost its way….”
‘Sky News’ (inc video clip)-
“BBC Boss ‘Shocked’ Over Bumper Pay-Offs
“The most senior figures at the BBC appeared before MPs to answer questions about huge pay-offs to outgoing managers.”
http://news.sky.com/story/1113967/bbc-boss-shocked-over-bumper-pay-offs
A top Beeboid: ‘I’m shocked, shocked to find that this is going on at the BBC.’
Underling Beeboid: (handing top Beeboid a brown envelope):
‘Here’s you severance pay in advance’.
Top Beeboid: Oh, thank you very much.’
With apologies to ‘Casablanca’.
quality 🙂
The Today programme told me this morning that the Muslim Brotherhood will not get into any kind of national pact or consensus in any Government under the military interim leadership.
This evening the 6pm news tells me that the Muslim Brotherhood continue to protest the fact that they`re being “excluded” from talks to find an interim Government of national unity-and refuse to leave the mosques (outside them anyway) until they`re invited for talks.
In the meantime there are arrest warrants out for MB leaders that presumably instigated the riots of the other night.
So the BBC want Morsi released, and the MB to be brought to the table for talks…but the MB refuses to negotiate with the infidels/apostates etc.
Send for Sarah…Jim`s had his go, and has failed to solve this bit of unpleasantness.
As long as Sharia Islam wins, that`ll be dandy with the BBC.
Basically the MB are correct to do whatever headstands, handstands they like…free pass at the Beeb as always.
hoping this link works fully makes interesting reading
http://s3.datawrapper.de/vB1u2/?fs=1
More BBC bias by omission. They don’t seem to have found room to inform us that income inequality in Britain is at its lowest since 1986. Despite all the Labour years (1997-2010, although the bBBC won’t remind us of that), and all Ed Miliband and Ed Balls’ oft-repeated lies about the rich getting richer whilst the poor get poorer, it turns out not to be true. This Conservative-led government ((c) bBBC) has done more for equality in this country than the lefties did.
Where is Stephanie ‘bike’ Flanders when you want her?
Am I going to have to drop the “Two Eds” nickname in favor of “Bike” now?
“Grifter” actually works in both cases. 🙂
The Raleigh Grifter – had forgotten that one. Childhood memories.
It would be a ‘Chopper’ surely (fnuur)
A Chipper surely?
Ramadan starts today – Happy Ramadan everybody. May Islam bring peace and harmony to the world. Allahu Akbar
So far-
http://thereligionofpeace.com/
George, have a read of this report (you’ll never see the BBC reporting on Christian persecution under Muslim rule):
http://www.mnnonline.org/article/14591
Also:
Raymond Ibrahim-
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/
Shouldn’t that be Happy Summerval, in accordance with the approved alternative to that nasty Christian festival in December ?
Do I give a tom-tit ?
This reply was to the ‘Happy Ramadan’ greeting, as I happen to be one of the 60+ million non-Muslims living in the UK.
Apparently the US Department of Justice helped out with the protests demanding George Zimmerman be arrested. The Community Organizer-in-Chief sent His minions to provide, among other things, “technical assistance” and “support for protest deployment”. Of course, rule of law in the US pretty much ended once He was anointed. He got the show trial He wanted, but I’m not sure the result is going to be the “correct” one.
How’s that hopey-changey stuff workin’ out for ya now, BBC?
The BBC will never tell you this, nor anything else that makes the President look bad.
State now reduced to charging Zimmerman with “Walking on the cracks in the pavement” or “Looking at me in a funny way”
The BBC must be gutted. They must have made hundreds of hours worth of documentaries and news items on the life and times of freedom fighter Nelson Mandela ready to be shown when he popped his clogs. sadly for nelsons fellow communists at al beeb
Nelson Mandela ‘responding to treatment
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-23261027
get well soon Nelson, hope you live forever
I reckon he popped off ages ago, the ANC are having an extended ‘Weekend at Bernies’ moment so the journos continue to ignore the colossal eff up they have made of a once prosperous country.
test…comments not showing
Any bets this’ll make the BBC’s weekly US Twitter roundup?
Muslims on Twitter outraged over Obama’s Ramadan wishes
Muslims on Twitter are expressing their outrage after President Obama tweeted his Ramadan wishes Monday night.
“‘I wish Muslims across America & around the world a month blessed with the joys of family, peace & understanding,’ —President Obama #Ramadan,” he said.
But some Muslims are thinking the president’s greeting was not so sincere.
“My mom just told me that Barack Obama wished all Muslims a happy Ramadan, I told her that maybe he should stop killing us too,” one user wrote.
Many of those criticizing the president had issue with the forced feeding of Guantanamo Bay detainees during Ramadan fasting, as well as drone strikes in the Middle East, calling him a “hypocrite” and “insincere,” Twitchy reported.
“I am assuming Obama’s greetings to Muslims wrt Ramadan are also directed at Muslims he will be force feeding at #GTMO during that month,” one user wrote.
“Obama wishing Muslims a happy Ramadan while he drone bombs them is like Hitler wishing Auschwitz a happy hanukkah #samedifference #ramadan,” another user said.
Oh, my. But…but…I thought….
How’s that hopey-changey….oh, screw it.
..but, but.. that glorious Cairo speech fixed everything…
http://4freedoms.com/group/freespeech/forum/topics/egyptions-protest-against-obama-s-support-of-muslim-brotherhood-f
certainly didn’t see any thing like it on minitruth news ,even before they pushed anti Morsi demonstrations down the memory hole.
Perhaps Chrisuemada can give me a link to it in any other parish news
Mardell is pretty sure this is just someone who doesn’t understand the President’s “level-headed diplomacy”.
The one consistent call from the White House has been for an end to the violence. Monday’s events in Cairo, whomever you believe, do not fit that bill.
The trouble is that the White House looks powerless, when it obviously has a great deal of power and, quite literally, investment in Egypt.
In the end, Mr Obama’s passivity may turn out to be level-headed diplomacy. But it looks bad to those who accuse him of prevaricating.
It doesn’t feel like leadership, and the number of harsh judgments on his foreign policy is growing.
Gee, ya think?
Let’s be honest. “Muslims outraged” isn’t exactly news. It’s more of a permanent state of existence in some quarters.
you know what really annoys me about stephen nolans weekend shows on radio 5 live is his hostile bias and sneering against ukip or any other guest with centre right views,god last friday was the worst when he got gerry the fake conservative hayes and mohammed i shout everybody down shaffique to attack katie hopkins and the ukip education spokesman with some vile insults.it was total one sided bias from nolan and his leftie mates as usual and i am getting sick ot it,nolan when accussed of bias which is queit alot just lately always defends himself by saying i try my hardest to be impartiial,really stephen,you should try a wee bit harder matey.
Being very delicate how I phrase this. A couple of years ago Nolan reported a crime which we investigated. His attitude to the police shocked a lot of us. I haven’t listened to his programmes, my BBC intake these days being limited to TMS but those who have heard him, is he impartial towards the police on his programmes?
“BBC accused of ‘casual disregard for public money’ for not knowing about staff getting bigger payouts than they were entitled to.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2359437/BBC-accused-casual-disregard-public-money-knowing-bigger-payouts-staff-entitled-to.html
“BBC accused of snouts-in-the-trough culture over managers’ payoffs.
“MPs condemn top executives over excessive redundancy six-figure payouts, which they say amount to a dereliction of duty.”
By John Plunkett.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/jul/10/bbc-accused-snouts-trough-payouts-mps
Corruption and overpayments at the BBC..
Morsi, Egypt and slaughter…
Ed drops the unions (or not….)
BBC top story…
Shopping trolley ridden at 44mph in Devon man’s ‘record’
FFS
Can anybody explain how this got to be a featured headline story on the BBC web page?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23262498
‘Stupid Woman’ is the very least of the imprecations hurled – recently – at Mrs Thatcher by leftists. Is there any chance that we could have some quotes of the much loved (by the BBC) ‘character’ Dennis Skinner famous for his ‘pithy parliamentary wit.’ FFS!
So evil bigot sexist Tory has ‘offended’ someone and therefore there is an excuse to highlight the Labour diversionary attack line on Tory funding.
After all as far as I am aware from the limited BBC coverage of the origins of the debate where Hague offended so grievously – there are no Labour Party funders who have created bogus union funded ‘ghost’ party members who manage to vote for UNITE candidates even though they don’t even know that they are members of the party. And I was told – without challenge by the BBC -that issues are ‘one-off’ by the wife of a man who became an MP from an all female shortlist who was a leading light the same union in question and she assured me (again unchalenged by the BBC) that there is/has been no Entryism in 41 safe Labour seats.
***stench***
Compare and contrast Tory funding coverage – anyone recall the Ashcroft funding inquisition – where Ashcroft dominated the BBC news agenda literally every day for months?
So… was she a woman or not? Are we arguing over that, or her being called stupid? Is there some rule that says we may not think someone is stupid? I confess I wasn’t aware of it. Is it somehow worse than “stupid man”, which I doubt would have made headlines.
Unless applied to a woman.
from Guido….Nuneaton Labour candidate selected
“Vicky defeated former BBC reporter Miriam O’Reilly* for selection…….”
*The lady who won the age discrimination case against the BBC
Discuss……………
will the BBC report this? US dept of Justice facilitated anti-Zimmerman protests
http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/10/doj-provided-security-for-anti-zimmerman-protests/
Both sides have finished with all their witnesses in the George Zimmerman trial in Orlando – Thursday afternoon will have the prosecution summary of its case, the defence pouts its summary on Friday morning followed by any brief prosection rebuttal, with the jury going out Friday midday.
I have followed the case very closely at this excellent LegalInsurrection site – which has had live TV coverage, full daily summaries after lunch and in the evenings plus several special articles on case law etc – all presented by the author of a book on self defence as a legal defence.
But I have seen virtually nothing on the BBC even though serious race riots are forecast around the US if Zimmerman is acquitted. Is this because the prosecution’s case, so warmly endorsed last year by the BBC, has been a travesty ?
The defence has blown the prosecution case apart – in spite of an obviously hostile judge – but there remains a risk that a scared female jury will “split the difference” by acquitting Zimmerman of the 2nd degree murder charge but finding against him on the “lesser” charge of manslaughter which carries a mandatory 25 year sentence – effectively a death sentence inside prison for Zimmerman.
Anyway – still nothing on the BBC website’s US page.
But there is room there for a major tweet by Katty Kay – “Egypt is ;looking precarious right now”. You don’t say ??? – what brilliant journalism. No wonder we have to pay her gazillions, such rare brilliance comes at a very high price.
The Mail – so despised by BBC staff – has an extremely full report on many of the latest developments. It also gives a lot of the background to the case3 that the BBC has studiously avoided. Well worth reading for a catch-up – it really shames the absence of reporting by the BBC and their dozens of staff in the US.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2359406/George-Zimmerman-trial-Judge-Nelson-walks-court-13-hour-session.html#ixzz2Yg9a1mM7
I think the left are aiming for a re-trial, given the case for the prosecution has been so weak
This shows how seriously George Zimmerman has been targeted by the race-baiters – from Obama downwards. It really is a huge scandal – effectively the President collaborating or leading a witchhunt that could kill Zimmerman, he’d have no chance of survival in jail..
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/racial-politics-supported-by-state-power-come-down-on-george-zimmerman/
and this focusses on the perniciousness of Obama and his Attorney General :
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/10/Trayvongate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AP9MWWjwS1U…len mcCluskey pandering to muslims and boasting about violence against the edl
Desperate for members Unites, real paying membership is now lower than the old TGWU prior to amalgamation
And all but 16% of that in public services
It is exactly this lap dog of bourgeois liberalism stance by union aperachicks that destroyed trade unions not Thatcher .If I had a pound for every time I was told ” I’d go to branch meetings if they would talk about pay and conditions instead of justice for Cuba” I would be retired now. That of course made it possible for the likes of the SWP to take over branches. Who in turn spent most of their time battling with the officer class ,All muckamucks in the labour party , for control of policy
which in turn alienated ordinary members further
That was my first hand experience of the TGWU I’m confident other unions were the same.
Their symbiotic relationship with labour is even stronger now as with out Labours expansion of government (mainly white collar) jobs the Unions ,we have, would have ceased to exist
Weekly foodbank story………
http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/0/23230098
“Budget menu: Tips to cooking well for £1 a portion ”
Oh no, I know what’s next…. some completely unqalified and un substantiated statements……..
“Many people in Britain face real food poverty – which means a daily struggle to eat and to get enough nutrition because of lack of money.”
“Half a million people in the UK are using food banks, and a third of children are going to school on an empty stomach”
Where does the BBC get this crap from?
A THIRD OF CHILDREN ARE GOING TO SCHOOL ON AN EMPTY STOMACH. Thats a rock solid fact is it? Absolute shite, Child Benefit is 20 quid a week
for a start, plenty for breakfast. The real issue is that some parents can’t be arsed feeding their progeny in the morning or perhaps as a general principal elect to spend on things other than food.
The BBC is spreading detestable emotive lies without any semblance of balance. Basic foodstuffs are pletiful and cheap, anyone who says they are hungry because they don’t get enough free money is either a liar of physically/mentally unable to look after themselves.
The eternally ‘entitled’, the feckless, the lazy, the stupid and the selfish may choose to spend the benefits handed to them on things other than helthy nutritious meals for themselves and their children but it doesn’t give them the excuse to whine and it doesn’t mean that the world is unjust.
nice bit of propaganda by al beeb, kidz stravin’ cos of the evil tories (death be upon them) when in reality
“lack of time in the morning was the deciding factor in skipping breakfast at home”
http://costsectorcatering.co.uk/one-three-children-are-going-school-empty-stomach
BBC hive mind?
That food report with dodgy food bank propaganda is by BBC gal Anna-Louise Taylor
By their Tweets ye shall know them…..
nod to feminism and be-careful-its-not-what-you-say – but how-you-say-it ?
Anna-Louise Taylor @bambibomb 9 Jul
Feel a bit sick that I didn’t know who Virginia Wade was and was swept away in Murray headlines! http://gu.com/p/3h647/tw via @guardian
Tick
love multiculturalism and support mass-immigration?
Anna-Louise Taylor @bambibomb 6 Jul
@marksettle I’m off to #stpaulscarnival in Bristol for jerk chicken, big beats and dancing in the sun asap don’t worry
Tick
homosexual ‘marriage’?
Music News @OneMusicNews 17 Apr
New Zealand parliament has legalized same-sex marriage. http://bit.ly/11cpxGC #NZ #GLBT #Gay #SameSex #Marriage #Equality
Tick
loyal supporter of the liberal anti-Royals writers club ?
Anna-Louise Taylor @bambibomb 19 Feb
I wonder if the nation’s women-bashing has stopped today. Mantel’s actual article about a lot more than Kate. See link from @fleetstreetfox
pro-wimmin but that Thatcher – she weren’t sexy
Anna-Louise Taylor @bambibomb 9 Apr
Find it quite weird how many #Tory lords on the #BBC #Marr #Thatcher documentary referenced her as deeply sexy #creepy #nowthatchersdead
Tick
It is possible to feed a family on a budget, if the parent knows how to cook their own food in the first place.
Example: Family dinner for 4
Roasting chicken – £4
Potatoes – £1
Carrots – 50p
Other veg in season – 50p
Dessert: Fresh fruit in season with yogurt – £2
Total £8 excluding fuel.
Sadly, many parents would opt for a greasy, unhealthy takeaway for several pounds more.
I’m sorry but I’m going to take issue with this, as many people are facing hardship – particularly those who are working.
The cause of this is often the incompetent civil service who for some inexplicable reason forget to pay them on time.
Government cut backs have been structured by Labour councils in such a way as to hammer those working whilst protecting the feckless and ethnic minorities. Working families can end up paying nearly £4000 for their council tax, and that’s an outrage.
Far from this article showing left wing values I see it as teaching those on low budgets that it is possible to eat a nutritious & healthy diet on the money they have, and that they don’t need to resort to food banks or go hungry.
The supermarkets and food companies have produced food in such a way that cooking skills have been lost and a new generation needs to relearn them.
Having said that the author is completely out of touch with reality here, hideously middle class. Buy a big loaf & freeze it? Yeah because the poverty stricken can really afford large chest freezers, and the power to run them. Bake your own bread it costs a bit more (3 times as much according to her not including the power to cook it!)
Apparently market traders don’t work on the weekend ! (new one on me). Grow your own herbs in pots! Trust me here most of these people will never have heard of herbs let alone thought of buying them! Many won’t have a garden either.
Gammon £12 in the supermarket !!! (Harrods?) that will wipe a budget out in one go! even if it is marginally cheaper at a butchers.
Yep hideously middle class leftie out of touch with reality, but proving that despite those cries to the contrary it is possible to live and eat healthily on a low income.
You seriously think a third of children go to school on an empty stomach due to Government cutbacks?
The Manchester Evening News has a wonderfully biased paragraph on this which actually manages to tell the truth in one sentence.
“The charity said 52% of people were referred to the foodbanks by care professionals as a result of benefits problems, up from 43% in the same period in 2012.”
In other words civil service foul ups which are getting worse !
On the small point about baking bread, in my current experience, home-baked really is no more expensive than buying a reasonable quality loaf. As for energy, cooking loaves for 35-40 mins (+ 15 mins getting to baking temperature) in a 2kW oven @12.85 p. per kWh costs only c. 24 pence.
Yes I know that many people are on low incomes, primarily those who work and a large number of people in the country illegally – but certainly not the ‘benefit aristocracy’ and as I said child benefit (specifically intended for the needs of the child and not the parent) is 20 quid a week, so the issue is not money it is the allocation of money.
Everyone can afford to eat if they make some effort at buying carefully and cooking for themselves. But I get the strong impression that there are loads of people who have never cooked anything at all in their lives. The fact that someone has never made the effort to learn how to cook or budget doesn’t give them the right to a higher level of income.
My cirticism of the article is that it states – states – that people are hungry because of a single cause, lack of money. Whereas in reality there are many causes for their hunger. Lots of people choose to spend money on things other than food. In virtually every case children go without breakfast because they are not fed, not because there is no food, people use food banks because they are free etc. None of these important issues are ever examined by the BBC
This article is peddling an outrageous lie (and as you say is hideously patronising and middle class). Poverty is not the real issue, stupidity and laziness and a lack of responsibility for children are issues but the underlying problem is a cultural one. How tens of millions of people, including the poor manage to feed themselves well?
You are right £4k pa for council tax is an outrage especially as out here in rural SE England Band H is just under £3k pa.
What sort of property attracts £4k in Council Tax?
Austerity, there’s no effing austerity. Just waste, victimhood and lots of fat people whining endlessly about not being able to feed themselves.
Tescos do gammon for £5.00 for a 460g Wiltshire Finest. Serves 2 so a tenner for a family of 4 so £12 is not far off wrong for almost a kilo of prime pig.
Surely the poor shouldn’t be spending their dosh on gammon. Gruel is only 50p a bucket …
Food Banks are big business charities in the USA. Need I say more as to why the BBC have latched onto the concept of *Food Banks*?
In homage to BBC ‘reporting’ style, sources are saying:
http://bbcwatch.org/2013/07/11/bye-bye-bari-at-the-bbc-too/
‘One has to wonder if anyone at the BBC will think to join the dots between the chronic promotion of fringe voices such as those of Atwan and the fact that a new poll shows that a majority of licence fee payers do not think they are getting value for money’.
Or any present at the ‘shock and/or’ of the NAO ‘Weeeee’re sowwwwy…. Again. So what?’ latest outing by the latest BBC ‘it was a different timers’.
Unique.
Talking of fringe voices…. some activists from the provisional wing decide to cause disruption and public cost by climbing the Shard. So the BBC put their Greenpeace spokesdudette straight to air on 5 Live.
Are Greenpeace still going? Thought they were part of the homogenised WWF/Oxfam/RSPCA/Eco loon cabal.
Just goes to show, don’t watch the BBC and these loons fade out of the consciousness.
I remember reading an article by one of the founders of Greenpeace, which said that the organisation involves itself in high profile stunts because the publicity is always followed by more donations by well wishers. It seems the stunts are more about raising money than concern with the environment.
speaking of founders of Greenpeace
here’s an interesting exchange of views
That your not likely to get on the BBC
http://joannenova.com.au/2011/04/greenpeace-founders-fight-it-out/
Oh and it makes the point that not all sceptics are of the right as suggested on earlier thread
“Brainwashed from birth: the cult of the BBC”
By James Delingpole.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/arts/television/8959151/brainwashed-from-birth-the-cult-of-the-bbc/?
‘the cult of the BBC’
Ah… but… it was all different ‘then’.
Time.
Place.
Money.
People.
Memories.
http://audioboo.fm/boos/1496211-bbc-payments-emails-indicate-trust-knew
Given that world temperatures haven’t risen for the last fifteen yeas, the BBC has toned down the hysterical alarmist nonsense poured out by Richard Black. However, the lie is still inserted, usually in the last quarter of any article.
Here’s Matt McGrath towards the end of his online article ‘Battle over wind turbines in the land of Sleeping Beauty.’
“Whether people are objecting to electricity pylons or the building of wind turbines, much of the opposition appears to be practical and not grounded in climate change scepticism. A majority accept that rising temperatures and the need for secure, sustainable energy sources means the energy transition must go ahead.”
Fortunately, I live overseas and don’t have to pay for this crap.
I wonder which “rising temperatures” they are referring to? And what could be more sustainable than nuclear, coal, oil and gas?
I wonder if the general public wonder, too?
Sorry – should have been ‘years’
Absolutely no offense to Scotland or my many Scottish friends but I’m glad my contract in Scotland ends next year as I cannot bear any more SNP propaganda or the BBC’s special treatment of the Yes to Independence camp. Take this example of Nicola Sturgeon getting yet another easy ride from a BBC Scotland interviewer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-23267581
No heckling whatsoever. Before, however, a MoD spokesman was absolutely grilled over the issue of the UK’s rehoming of Nuclear weapons following a potential Yes vote. I’m afraid, although Albaman will naturally disagree with every point I’m making, BBC Scotland want independence and that’s why the Yes campaign get such an easy ride. On a political point, the SNP seem to believe they can pick and choose what they want in the I independence debate and discard the rest. If the Scots choose Independence it should mean exactly that: no sharing of our currency, welfare, armed forces, economic leverages or anything else for that matter.
“If the Scots choose Independence it should mean exactly that: no sharing of our currency, welfare, armed forces, economic leverages or anything else for that matter.”………..
It is not your currency. Sterling is a tradable currency and as such any country could use it as their medium of exchange and there is nothing the UK government could do about it.
They are not your armed forces – Scotland already contributes to the Defence budget and manpower and in the result of a yes vote then a negotiated settlement would need to be reached..
Scotland currently spends a lower proportion of its GDP on welfare than the rest of the UK.
BBC Scotland has been objective in its reporting of the forthcoming referendum. That it has not resorted to supporting the scaremongering of much of the pro-union camp is to its credit not detriment.
Have you ever seen the Darien chest in the museum in Edinburgh?
http://www.nms.ac.uk/our_collections/collection_highlights/the_darien_chest.aspx
It contained half the capital value of everything in Scotland in specie. In one small box. Independent Scotland was utterly poverty stricken, inconsequential and literally peripheral in the 1690’s. That is why Scotland entered the union voluntarily; it had ‘nae arse in its troosers’ and was living on thistles and oatmeal. It has benefited out of all proportion to what it has contributed to the Union since 1707.
Why not come more up to date and refer to the McCrone Report from 1974.
“The report predicted that North sea oil revenue would have given an independent Scotland one of the strongest currencies in Europe and a large tax surplus. On this basis, it went on to say that officials advised government ministers on how to take “the wind out of the SNP sails”. The incoming Labour administration (and subsequent governments) classified the document as secret over fears it could give a further boost to the SNP’s policy of Scottish independence”
Existing reserves in Scottish waters will last for another 30 to 40 years producing some £50bn in tax revenue annually.
The SNP should follow their convictions as unconditional internationalists. If Scotland became independent then as a symbol of their break with the narrow nationalisms of the past they should offer all of ‘Scotland’s Oil’ to the UN. And then allow the UN to utilise the revenue as it saw fit.
To do otherwise would be selfish, or even worse ‘Thatcherite’.
Firstly, I would like to say that the Scots have contributed immeasurably to the glorious British Empire and many continue to do so. However, after 300 years of reaping ineffable benefits from the Union, which Scotland would have been hard pressed without, you SNP dreamers harp on and on about the oil wealth of the last forty years. You’ve basically just said: when times are bad let’s stick with the UK and take what we can (like you did in the UK’s American colonies) but when times are hard let’s take our new found resources and get out and to hell with the English. Well, I’m afraid it don’t and won’t work out like that, my friend, simply because what’s left of the dwindling oil reserves, some of which belongs to England and is extracted by international companies, won’t be enough to subsidize your current bloated public sector-driven economy. I look forward to the day when Shetland and Orkney stick two fingers up to the anti-English, bigoted and superficial SNP and request for their independence.
Alex – bloated public sector in Scotland ? – too true, my friend.
Even the current Scottish government figures report that almost a quarter of all employed people in Scotland are in Public Sector jobs. (And I’m almost willing to bet hard cash that this does not include all those in Private Sector companies contracting to the Public Sector.
Basically, for every three people engaged in creating real wealth in Scotland, their taxes are paying for another person’s job.
Good point, Shetland and Orkney by this logic would be far better off returning to Norwegian rule and keeping ‘their oil’ – after all they would only have to share it with 40,000 people then
Albaman – every time you put up this canard, it needs to be refuted. The McCrone Report is almost 40 years out of date. I have no idea where this figure of £50 billion of tax revenue each tear for the next 30-40 years comes from (it may be the whole of the revenue from oil and gas), but the Office for Budget Responsibility assessed only last year that the actual tax revenue from Oil and Gas for the whole of the UK will fall from the current level of £11 billion to just £3 billion by the tax year 2040-41.
It’s getting down towards ‘pocket money’ levels. Unfortunately, ‘Wee Nappy’ Salmond has so many people in Scotland convinced that independence will bring nothing but nectar and ambrosia for all Scots, and that no-one will ever have to dirty their hands again doing anything like a job.
This is like a divorce case where the wife of the rich man claims that her moral support entitles her to 2/3rd of his amassed assets despite her bringing only a bag of porridge and a severe Presbyterian scowl with her as her dowry.
One thing I’m not sure of – is wee Eck planning on assuming a fair share of the UK National debt, and PFI costs – Scottish Labour MPs have been totally instrumental in running up the huge UK debt for without them no Labour government would ever have been elected or is it ‘I’ll have half the house but none of the mortgage’
Frankly as long as the Scots are no longer represented in Westminster and that the economies are entirely separate and responsible – without hidden subsidies – for all costs so be it.
Hell mend them. Edinburgh is the Athens of the North, and in 20 years you won’t be able to tell the difference between it and the original
“It is not your currency. Sterling is a tradable currency and as such any country could use it as their medium of exchange and there is nothing the UK government could do about it.”
True but it is the UK government that sets economic policy and anyone used sterling has no say in how that is set
“They are not your armed forces – Scotland already contributes to the Defence budget and manpower and in the result of a yes vote then a negotiated settlement would need to be reached..”
They are the UK’s armed forces Scotland does not ‘pay for them’ any more than England or Wales does.There was a detailed examination of SNP’s risible defence policy by RUSI I believe. There are many enabling capabilities that would not be affordable after independence and therofre no guarantees that they would be available to whatever Scotland decided would be its Defence capability. As you say there would have to be a settlement – let’s not pretend it would be in any way simple – or leave Scotland with an effective defence force
SNP policy seems to be to completely ignore all difficult questions..Finally this whole suggestion stinks of the Guardian flying a kite. I wonder who the Defence source really is – some chap claiming to be one in some pub I expect.
lol How funny that you should pop almost immediately. I’m beginning to wonder if you have a few other aliases Albaman… Anyway, to your points, which I will destroy one-by-one if you don’t mind:
“Scotland currently spends a lower proportion of its GDP on welfare than the rest of the UK.”
Yeah, but Scotland ‘got’ £16.5bn more in UK public spending in 2010/11 than it contributed to total UK revenues – or a ‘subsidy’ of around £3,150 per head if you like. Additionally, the percentage of all UK public spending that goes to Scotland is greater than the percentage of all UK tax revenue that Scotland contributes. Don’t trust me? Just read the figures which you can find on the UK Government’s webpage.
And to your Sterling assertion: Do you really think that Scotland’s sizeable financial sector and other businesses would accept a position where the BoE, the lender of last resort, dictates rates and terms of a currency union? That would be naive! and defeat the whole concept of independence.
Listen, if Scotland becomes a separate country THEN IT WILL HAVE ZERO SAY over what the UK ARMED FORCES DO OR SAY. SIMPLES!
Objective? That’s nonsense and you know it. Scaremongering? Every time a paper or report is released that undermines the case for Independence, the Yes campaign immediately impugn its credibility. The Yes camp is eager to talk but reluctant to listen: the Yes activists simply shout their beliefs at people and refuse to listen, so in that regard their campaign could be said to be highly negative.
Aw don’t pick on Albania Man – you know he gets all of his ‘facts’ from ‘wacky’ independence websites with dark blue crazy fonts on a light blue backround, electronic bagpipes wailing as soon as you open a page, and little animated gifs (of the sort that were novel in about 1992) of William Wallace and Robert Bruce running around the page.
I’d love Scotland/ West Albania to get independence. It would last about a year before they’d have to call in the IMF to run the show. At which stage I would be standing on Hadrian’s wall, pointing my finger to the north, and roaring with laughter.
But, ooh don’t mock, at least there’s a remnant of entrepreneurialism up there
http://tinyurl.com/partd62
Meh, I always say,
if you can’t slaughter a Trot, twat a Nat.
” At which stage I would be standing on Hadrian’s wall, pointing my finger to the north, and roaring with laughter.” …………………….. I am sure the residents of Cumbria and Northumberland would enjoy watching you.
Most of Cumbria and certainly the great bulk of the population lies south of Hadrian’s Wall. That is – all of Westmorland and most of Cumberland.
Not so for Northumberland of course – the Wall ended at Wallsend on the Tyne.
But some might feel that losing much of Northumberland and its rievers would be a price worth paying to get rid of the Scottish economic burden and all the SNP claptrap. Much of the commercial heart of Newcastle would probably be kept – but not St James’ Park..
Yerr, learning Scottish Geography is actually on my bucket list. Sandwiched right there between learning Serbo-Croat and macrameing my nose hairs.
Knowing where Hadrian’s Wall is located is actually English geography.
Is your lack of knowledge on matters geographic the reason you keep referring to Scotland as West Albania or is that just a sign of your overall ignorance?
Addressing all these substantive points. How did the world survive before Albaman?
Surely it would be English geography?
Ha! I hesitate to say great minds, in the circumstances.
In other news Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond has today had his official car clamped while it was parked outside the Scottish Parliament building
http://tinyurl.com/me7v6s4
It’s interesting how quickly the BBC’s coverage of the Unite scandal (they’re limiting it to Falkirk) has morphed into a general party funding debate. In an unrelated development Miliband has been trying to move the debate over Unite to one about party funding in general.
Quite.
The BBC have fully complied with Miliband’s diversionary tactics, focussing on party funding and MPs’ outside earnings.
It’s quite astonishing how Beeboids have managed to play down the whole affair. Take Maitless on Newsnight last week. After, at last, reporting on a story that is all about the fight between the Blairites and the Brownites, the pragmatists and the hard left, a fight which has been going on since the election, Maitless introduced the discussion as an issue about one candidate in one constituency. NO it wasn’t.
And then in her interviews, she failed to reference any documents (which are in the public domain) detailing Unite’s plans to install candidateds in 40 constituencies or their desire, with Watson and the hard left, to introduce class-war based policies and remove any trace of Bliarism.
And how the hell could Sophie Raworth, on the Marr show, have the slippery Harriet Harman sat in front of her and NOT ask her about her husband’s links to Unite, his installation as candidate on an all woman short list in Erdington, or ask her about the repeated suggestions that a safe seat was being stitched up for their son.
Shocking negligence? Oversight?…or the same old BBC protecting their own?
We expect nothing more from the BBC these days.
Like the mud flounder kicking up the seabed in the hope we`ll not notice anything that might tarnish the Labour brand…after all, a lot of civil partners jobs in quangos and cheridees may well depend on the “networks of niceness” such as Miliband and that bike lady who does BBC Economics stuff( whilst her bosses filch our money in the next office suite, but beyond Stephs curious noseying apparently).
Luckily the BBC are so pawned and owned by the unions, the Commies and all shades in between, as long as Greens and Islam get on the palate-that only a moron would not notice, or set their callibrations to “obscene Lefty Lies”.
This is the Prebble Index, I believe we`re to call it these days.
The BBC….shameless, but minus the smarts of Frank Gallagher.
Still-they`re sliding on their greasy bottom into the sea by the day…catch the rusting seedy pirate hulk while you can!