Yes, here is an Open Thread ON TIME! Enjoy it and fill it.
MONDAY OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- StewGreen Dec 22, 00:14
Weekend 21st December 2024
Youtube just pushed a video at me that invading North Korean troops had been smashed cos they were using 19th… - StewGreen Dec 22, 00:09
Weekend 21st December 2024
“Jawdropping” propaganda from woke-Supremacist BBC and police https://youtu.be/IMuafLX0xhQ - Greencoat Dec 21, 23:22
Weekend 21st December 2024
Mantel was a deeply unpleasant, dishonest person. And her books? Next to unreadable. - tomo Dec 21, 23:12
Weekend 21st December 2024
Trump shooter…….. https://x.com/TonySeruga/status/1870474697676325217 - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:39
Weekend 21st December 2024
And that ‘Let’s get ready to rumble’ announcer is still going. He was doing the Tyson fights back in the… - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:35
Weekend 21st December 2024
Right going to watch the Fury fight now. The build up has been about 5 hours long. I think 4… - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:28
Weekend 21st December 2024
Indeed. I’ve seen few NK documentaries down the years. In a few of them, I’ve seen clips and interviews with… - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:12
Weekend 21st December 2024
I think we will one day see such things take place. The youngest generations (of white males especially) are, in…
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
Nicky Campbell and his pals on BBC 5 Live are getting all misty eyed about the Olympics – yet again. Anniversary Games, repeat of the Openning Ceremony, front pages of the Guadian and the Indy today and – believe it or not – novelty race between Bolt and Farah (goodness, what have those two lads got in common? Answer: They are BBC favourites). Really there is no end to this BBC Olympic nonsense. Oh, by the way, has the BBC staff memo about who’s going to Rio 2016 come round yet?
It has. It said “Take All”.
yep
unrelenting money no object – dead horse floggers
filling time until the next jolly! … eh panto!
squeeze more airtime out of that london-centric moneypit
am i really interested in watching more disabled athletes
races than the original ones … to be honest not really,
maybe if i had all the benefits of those on the bbc gravy train, i might see it differently.
What’s new with repeats? All TV stations traditionally gave you a ‘second chance’ to see during the summer as frankly who is watching in the heat!
The Olympics was a huge national success and for most people a pretty positive period so I can’t see any bias here. Just traditional summer programming.
Ah, I seem to have found the problem that I have with the Olympics………
Do you think the Greeks think back on the 2004 triumph and think back with rosy nostalgia as they survey the economic catastrophe that has engulfed them?
In effect the UK behaved exactly as a family with no income and no assets borrowing 40K from a high interest (borrow your way out of debt) company to pay for the ‘dream’ wedding of their selfish and stupid daughter. That’s why I hate the ****ing Olympics.
Watch out for the flying bed pan wielding Liverpool ‘care’ pathway ghouls
EGYPT.
Of course, it conflicts with INBBC’s policy of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, but censorship of current Muslim Brotherhood persecution of Christians is unacceptable.
At least Andrew Neil did some independent research into the Muslim Brotherhood (2011).
“More about the Muslim Brotherhood”
By Andrew Neil.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/dailypolitics/andrewneil/2011/02/more_about_the_muslim_brotherh.html
One doesn’t get the impression that such critical information has filtered into INBBC coverage of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Andrew Neil is the only journalist worthy of the name on the BBC. He is very good at research and is even handed. He makes sure he does his homework and knows his stuff. This is why he is now better qualified to report on Climate issues than any of the other very religious climate and natural world BBC correspondents, such as Roger Harrabin et al, who don’t know their arses from their elbows.
I think Private Eye might beg to differ. I’ve tried a few times to get a letter published with the infamous photo:
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/andrew-neil.jpg
Is that the best you can do?
Interesting interview on the Today prog about the changes to employment tribunals, and charging claimants to bring a case.
Very sad that the interviewer was so ignorant of the subject and didn’t ask the relevant questions.
The Employment tribunals are a joke – no one ever wins ! No wonder under the BLiars regime with its facades full of bluster the EU told the UK it had no effective anti discrimination redress. You would have thought given all the bluster about racism that Liebour might have done something, but all BLiar did was to write to tribunal chairs asking them to find for more claimants ! Needless to say nothing changed.
I’m sure that the general view is of people taking the slightest ridiculous offence taking poor employers to the tribunals yet the truth is that only 2% of cases are found in favour of the claimants. Those that do succeed receive pitifully small amounts in compensation.
Of course there are those cases which make the news where the claimant is a high earner of in the case of the BBC presenter Miriam O’Reilly where the case is high profile.
There was no exploration of the fact that the tribunals were set up as informal hearings at which neither side was supposed to be able to pay for legal reps, and as a result legal aid was not available.
Of course for years now the employers have been able to afford legal reps and used them massively skewing the balance in their favour.
Today we see a further massive skewing in favour of the employer with potential costs being awarded against the claimant – who is never going to win anyway, and still cannot claim legal aid to fight their case.
And so the rights of the worker in the UK are eroded to the extent that they have no legal protection, and the question might have been better asked, why they don’t scrap the tribunal system altogether for the use it is, and to have brought out the nature of another of BLiars façades, something which is there, and appears to the casual glance to work as it seems, but in reality does not perform any meaningful function.
Why is this BBC balance?
To my eye the left gave up representing working people a long time ago. They are mainly interested in bullying people with authoritarian constructs like ‘diversity’ which again is nothing more than a façade all about bullying while in reality doing nothing constructive.
You may be right that ‘no one ever wins’ at Employment Tribunals, but sadly your post ignores the reality that there are plenty of shyster lawyers and trades unions who encourage disgruntled staff to take action against employers, usually settling ‘on the courtroom steps’ after they have cost the employer lots of wasted time and money.
I now know to my cost that there are many serial claimants who move from one job to another, fabricating cases on the grounds of imagined discrimination, health & safety, whistleblowing or whatever scam they have just learned. My experience has been in the charitable sector, where the scammers threaten the charities with bad publicity – which would probably cost the organisation lost membership and income – and walk away with thousands of pounds, moving on to their next ’employer’. The worst case with which I was involved was a woman who lodged her claim on her second day in employment!
The Harrasment laws are insane too.
I am very fortunate that I work in an office where there is lots of sexual banter amongst the male and female staff. Not everyone is involved in it, but those that are do consent to it and the women involved initiate it, even to the extent that the office manageress has ordered me to sexually harass her verbally, and even pinch her bottom too. It is all a laugh and it is all consensual. Even my wife and the manageress pinch each other’s bums and have even grabbed each other’s boobs at work. I love working here in a totally politically incorrect office.
Sadly, we have two new starters begin next monday and I have been checking the law relating to sexual harassment, because, well, I have a bit of a big gob on me and I am bound to make some sexual comment, in jest, about, and to, the female new starter who is rather fit.
Well, I discovered that under the harassment laws, I do not even have to do or say anything to, or even about, the new starter to get the company in trouble. I can control myself and restrict my comments, jokes etc. strictly to those who enjoy engaging in such banter and leave the new starters out of it.
However, If the new starter even witnesses another member of staff saying something a bit risky to another member of staff, completely unrelated to the new starter at all, then the new starter can still go to tribunal for us “creating a hostile or threatening working environment”
That’s right, you can be done for harrasment without ever engaging in any harassment at all. Merely for continuing a working relationship with another member of staff which has been a very good, fun and professional working relationship, just because both those in that working relationship have the same dirty sense of humour and both enjoy the flirting and the banter.
This kind of PC intimidation creates a “hostile working environment”
My point being that there are staff, who go to work, not to work, but to try to get a payout from an employer. They wait until they witness something not PC and then go to tribunal.
‘… has ordered me to sexually harass her verbally, and even pinch her bottom too’
– where can I get an application form?
Calculus eh?
Is it true that the integral of 1/cabin.d(cabin) is
Log cabin?
There are 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary numbers and those who don’t.
Many followers of the RoP are not very enthusiastic about calculus – they like to differentiate themselves from everyone else, but utterly refuse to integrate.
Do you work at SWP offices?
Nikki Camp Bell’s phone in is about the tribunal fees. I wonder which “callers” the BBC phone police will allow through to speak. Expect union mouthpieces and lawyer gob-on-a-sticks.
BBC-NUJ’s political bias for Mass Immigration into Britain.
British people cannot trust BBC-NUJ’s propaganda on this.
“BBC chief admits: We had a ‘deep liberal bias’ on migrants… so has anything changed?”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2354713/BBC-chief-admits-We-deep-liberal-bias-migrants–changed.html
Melanie Phillips on the current widespread deceit on mass immigration:-
“The Tories are just as desperate as Labour to hide the real truth about immigration”
By MELANIE PHILLIPS.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2380430/The-Tories-just-desperate-Labour-hide-real-truth-immigration.html
Last night I have to say I watched the BBC’s excellent White Queen and the documentary on BBC2 afterwards and was very much impressed. Watching these shows reinforced my conviction that the BBC SHOULD BE PRIVATIZED so we can take the bits we want (certain dramas, space science and technology shows and nature programs) and discard the biased garbage i.e. current affairs, politics, culture, news and the Today program.
I was also watching some classic Keith Floyd yesterday which brought back fond memories and demonstrated how much the BBC has changed over the years in line with immigration and political correctness. Floyd on Fish, Only Fools and Horses etc were so politically incorrect and were British through and through. The BBC has changed in direct ratio to immigration and for me this means one thing: that they were in total support of this wholesale change in our culture. The BBC used to (and from time to time, still does) produce top quality programs but this is becoming ever more infrequent. It’s a shame but the BBC has almost become a barometer for the transformation of British culture, a transformation that has been imposed on us by ideological elitists using our money and votes.
“and nature programs”???
So they can lecture us on their alarmism about global warming? No thanks!
Sorry, I meant wildlife programs – though even these perhaps have their propaganda value!
Yep, the BBC are die-hard peddlers of the global warming swindle like they are with immigration and Islam and some of their eco-propaganda has been appalling. However, I can see where Alex is coming from for once in a while they have brought to our screens some pretty incredible wildlife coverage (they once did a great series on the endangered Amur tigers which actually had a positive impact on poaching and illegal medicine trade!) so, if we are to be grown up and taken seriously on this site, surely we must recognize the good bits whilst highlighting the predominantly bad. No?
Quite agree. The BBC is more than its news output. Attacking the Olympics is one of those tilting at windmill exercises that misses the real issues over impartiality and omissions. The latter is my bugbear when only one voice is heard because of ‘time constraints’.
However also watched White Queen and the documentary. Talk about it being tough now! It’s the Sopranos in tight trousers with women who are even tougher than the males!
“Attacking the Olympics is one of those tilting at windmill exercises that misses the real issues”
I see lots of “real issues” in the way the Olympics was used as propaganda by the BBC and the Leftist establishment to promote correct thinking.
The recent repeat of the Olympics opening ceremony echoed that. Black cricketers in 19th century England, the ridiculous glorification of the NHS, subliminal use of the CND symbol, half-caste ‘families’ all over the place, etc. All accompanied by inane bBBC commentary – ‘that’s my kind of history’ – in case anyone had missed the point. All at our expense. Disgraceful.
Not to mention a speech from Britain’s wealthiest woman (and Labour supporter to boot).
I agree they make a few interesting documentaries which are nice to have without adverts. But overall I’d rather have the adverts and would cheer if 95% of the BBC’s staff found something else to do apart from social engineering. Their news is biased, comedy is unfunny, drama is awful. I’m sure the other creative and useful 5% could find employment with the commercial channels.
No lecturing from the bBBC is needed, as any interested observer of wildlife (or even a gardener) has first-hand experience of our changing climate. Birds nesting and amphibians spawning earlier, leaves falling and hedgehogs hibernating later, and so on.
Meanwhile, urbanites sit in their centrally-heated/ air-conditioned offices debating the meaningless statistic of a fraction of a degree in average global temperatures. All so that they can feel vindicated in wasting more and more energy.
Sometimes I wonder if there might be some at the BBC who would agree with you. A privatized BBC could concentrate on making good shows which the rest of the world would buy. It could drop the rubbish and much reduced in staffing could be a very good company.
It is the obvious answer to what to do with this out of date monster in the digital age.
Won’t happen with out a fight but it will have to happen eventually.
The BBC, like all other British TV broadcasters, now make programmes suited to the lowest common denominator. Reality series about bus drivers, car salesmen, call centres, removal men, families watching TV, even shop assistants (this week on BBC3). Mindless game shows, soaps about people so awful you wouldn’t cross the road to talk with, Talent shows for people with no talent. The latest idea to go viral on TV is A & E Departments – BBC, ITV, Channel4, Channel5, and Freeview channels all had (or currently have) series set in the Casualty Dept of various hospitals. No wonder the injured have at least a four hour wait to be treated. They probably can’t move for camera crews. The previous viral idea was for camera crews to follow Police Officers around.
All the TV companies are now stealing ideas from each other or re-introduce previous failed formats to a new generation. It shows that British TV programme makers are no longer creative and are bankrupt of ideas. The viewing public are no better, blithely accepting the garbage that passes for entertainment because they believe the hype about certain programmes. Dumbed down TV for a dumbed down population.
That’s why companies like HBO are cleaning up at awards ceremonies because they take risks with programming and invariably produce more hits than misses because of those risks.
British TV, with the BBC as its largest broadcaster, likes to play safe with cheap programming, soap style dramas, an overweening liberal/left-wing viewpoint and an obsession with “diversity” where every programme has to have a message.
As the CIA allegedly told its staff: DO NOT watch the TV! It is the most powerful form of subliminal indoctrination outside the classroom.
You hit the nail on the head Andy S. I don’t know if you read the Op Ed by Adrian Wooldridge in the Sunday Times last Sunday. He was filling for the every insightful Dominic Lawson. Adrian’s article was about this very subject, the decline of “one of our greatest cultural industries” which he sees as “withering on the vine”. Unfortunate I am forced to quote extensively as The Sunday Times web site is pay per view.
The cause of this decline he lays firmly at the BBC. He contrasts the current vibrancy and creativity of American television with “our black and white TV”. The educated Brit views all US TV as “rubbish” or “utter rubbish” when the reality is that over the last decade “almost all the best television programmes” have been American e.g. The Sopranos, The Wire and Mad Men (which” fizzled out in its third series”). There is more to come: Breaking Bad, which is yet to be broadcast.
Adrian asserts that “America has produced nothing less than a new popular art form – the television equivalent of the great Victorian novels”. These series specialising in blurring familiar distinctions: such as “between good and evil or between respectable society and the criminal underworld”. They also play with our emotions in that we are aware that “Tony Soprano is a monster ant that Don
Draper is a cold manipulator, but we cannot help but root for them”. These programmes also tackle “big social issues”. The Wire tackled the subject of “what happens when work disappears in an old industrial town”.
By contrast British TV has ossified. Why? Because, – “Public broadcasters have no option but to aim for the “mushy middle in order to give licence payers value for money. This means avoiding risk and sticking with well-worn formulas”. This is why the BBC devotes “most” of its drama budget on 3 soap opera’s East Enders, Holby City and Casualty. Tired old vehicles, thread bare and running on empty.
His conclusion is that the debate about the future of the BBC has been between elitists and populist. The elitist claim the licence fee is necessary to preserve “excellence”. The populist, that the poor should not be forced to subsidise the tastes of the well off. However, this debate is no longer credible, due to the advances in technology that have created the American TV revolution. “The BBC is failing to produce great television precisely because it is hampered by the public service model”.
I find myself in full agreement with the analysis put forward here. It not enough to focus on the narrow issue of left/liberal bias in the BBC, there is a wider issue that needs to be addressed. That issue is the pernicious impact of its dominance in all aspects of broadcasting on our culture.
Most of the drama I watched on the BBC is imported, mostly from Scandinavia e.g. Borgen and The Killing. I cannot think when last I watched a drama series created by the BBC. Luther started out OK, but then rapidly became pedestrian. The White Queen could hold my interest beyond the first 2 clichéd episodes.
Meanwhile, I awaited with bated breath the next dramatisation of a Jane Austin novel. What new angle can the Tristums put on Mr Darcy rising form the lake, may be a cod piece instead of a six pack.
Couldn’t agree more with this. British TV drama is dreadfully old-fashioned. Full of cliches, badly scripted, sometimes very badly acted, sets look cheap and often filmed as if shot by amateurs. The politically correct message subsumes all other considerations. The Beeb, and channel 4’s drearily predictable message is usually : ‘it’s the old white guy’s fault’.
John Paul, I didn’t read the Sunday Times Op Ed But it’s heartening to know I’m not the only one with such opinions about the state of British TV.
I think the last decent series partly funded by the BBC was the historical drama “Rome”. They did, however, manage to foul up the beginning of the series by editing three episodes into two, omitting the development of certain important characters while retaining all the sex scenes which made the first two episodes look like soft porn. Even the episodes director, Michael Apted, bitterly criticised the BBC for its sensationalist editing. Of course the series only lasted two seasons because the BBC withdrew its part of the financing which forced the producers to telescope at least four season’s worth of storyline into one season, which made it look rushed. A pity, because the actual storylines, with one or two minor exceptions, were quite historically accurate – a rarity for a drama series – certainly more accurate than some of the multi-culti propaganda espoused by the dreary Mary Beard.
I think the case of the BBC’s treatment of “Rome”, a major series and popular with viewers (certainly in the US) just shows the short sightedness and lack of innovation at the corporation.
It seems that if a series cannot be used as a vehicle for politically correct propaganda ( the current, abysmal incarnation of Dr. Who is a good example) then the prevailing attitude is it’s not worth spending licence payers’ money on to produce. All the while television viewers are finding other, more useful things to do with their time and losing their affection for watching TV.
Rome was a great series, though I suspect more due to HBO’s involvement than the BBC’s.
I watched some of the interview of Alex Salmond of the Scottish National Party and First Minister of Scotland on Russia Today. He was asked how his case for independence from the UK was being handled by the BBC; his answer was that they were having great difficulty, because they have an identity crisis.
I would add to the comment about privatisation above that this could be resolved with a full reorganisation to reflect the political devolution taking place in the UK. Salmond said the BBC does not report accurately on issues of health and education, both subjects now devolved to the Scottish government. He said they report on issues arising in England without making it clear. I would say they have improved a bit lately but their reporting shows the fundamental flaw.
His problem of identity is mirrored in England. We the English often don’t know which nation the BBC is talking about, on these and many other subjects.
The first action would be to create a BBC England; there is a BBC Scotland so why not? The ‘regions’ will not do. England is a unity, the people have rejected regionalisation.
The BBC know this but refuse to accept it. They must accept the will of the people and not deny them.
Regionalisation is divide and conquer, pure and simple. The Europeans think they will be better off without a united England and they will, until they need saving from themselves – again.
As to Herr Salmond he is doing the EUs bidding by destroying the UK. But the man is a fool as the EU has no love for the Scots either. Plus all those Scots who laid down their lives to smash fascism are rotating so fast now he is going to reap the rewards. I hope he chokes on them.
Just been perusing the many BBC articles and reports on the immense pressures which the NHS is facing. NOT ONE OF THEM focuses as it central point on the enormous and intentional influx of immigration that happened under Labour, which is undoubtedly the true cause behind the creaking and buckling NHS infrastructure. I find it pathetic, childish and highly deceptive that no-one is talking about the real reason why people are languishing on beds in corridors for hours on end in our urban hospitals… there are simply too many people here, many who can’t speak English and so require interpreters and longer sessions to determine what is wrong. It’s happening in school as well: I used to work in the classroom before focusing on educational research and can testify that children of immigrants, who couldn’t speak a word of English, would just turn up one day and we were expected to teach them. If we complained we’d be admonished by our feminist, politically correct headteacher. Also, many parents, especially Muslim and Eastern European I had to deal with were rude and pushy and demanded that we better provide for their children. So, they came here for nothing and get everything for free and demand that we provide a beter service: if the same is happening in the NHS, then it doesn’t take a genius to work out why we are in such a mess.
The unlimited immigration under labour has had a major impact, but the strain on the NHS and A&E was made much worse by labour’s insane GP contracts which allowed Doctors to go “part time”. Now patients often have no choice but to go to A&E when they fall is as if it happens outside core GP opening hours, they cannot see their GP.
Just been perusing the many BBC articles and reports on the immense pressures which the NHS is facing. NOT ONE OF THEM focuses as it central point on the enormous and intentional influx of immigration that happened under Labour, which is undoubtedly the true cause behind the creaking and buckling NHS infrastructure. I find it pathetic, childish and highly deceptive that no-one is talking about the real reason why people are languishing on beds in corridors for hours on end in our urban hospitals… there are simply too many people here, many who can’t speak English and so require interpreters and longer sessions to determine what is wrong. It’s happening in school as well: I used to work in the classroom before focusing on educational research and can testify that children of immigrants, who couldn’t speak a word of English, would just turn up one day and we were expected to teach them. If we complained we’d be admonished by our feminist, politically correct headteacher. Also, many parents, especially Muslim and Eastern European I had to deal with were rude and pushy and demanded that we better provide for their children. So, they came here for nothing and get everything for free and demand that we provide a beter service: if the same is happening in the NHS, then it doesn’t take a genius to work out why we are in such a mess.
Reading the Sunday Times News review (on paper, as it’s paywalled), and a piece by Jeremy Clarkson.
Worth trying to locate.
I liked one bit where he describes the TG crew being cornered by a street gang, only to be spared by the intervention of a short girl with green hair who recognised him. Turns out she was once a producer for Newsnight.
Now on sabbatical presumably.
A bit more is explained.
That was on “Motorworld” back in 1995, when Jezza visited Detritus.
While viewing the Parliament channel and seeing a committee session it made me think of the similarity between a gov policy and selling a commercial proposition. i.e. There is no difference it is a sales pitch of a product. One could be a soap powder and the other climate change.
However the use of subliminal advertising of commercial products is illegal, but the bBC does inject it’s social/ potty progressive messages into it’s programmes. Surely this is subliminal advertising and therefore illegal – just a thought, slow news time at the moment!
A tidal wave of unremitting doom and gloom on 5 Live this morning from;
– Poor workers being denied access to Employment Courts
– Nasty energy providers ripping consumers off
– Nasty Tories ‘forced labour’ scheme (despite the courts finding that it wasn’t a forced labour scheme)
And then the gift. NHS 111 in crisis – NHS Direct give up the ghost.
All morning self-selecting participants have been ringing in telling us their woes, supported by an odd balance of guests….and we’re now promised the odious Andy Burnham after 1.00pm.
‘Ring 85058 with your questions for Andy Burnham’ we’re encouraged. I’ve got one…’Why haven’t you resigned?’
Well that was a 25p network txt charge down the pan! Burnham didn’t hang around to answer any questions – not that mine would have been asked, anyway….
But how is it possible that Burnham who……:
– blamed his civil servants for recommending foundation status for Stafford Hospital (that he signed off)
– blamed the patients and families at Stafford for not speaking up
– blamed legal advice for refusing to meet the Stafford families
– blamed his civil servants / advisers for suppressing embarrassing NHS performance
…can be allowed to get away with saying that Health Minister Hunt should get back to his desk and take responsibility?
Astonishing hypocrisy. Breathtakingly poor, but not unexpected BBC journalism
You can’t be mean to Burnham – he is the victim after all. He comes from Liverpool so must be the victim
Ouch, not all Scousers are members of the victimhood machine you know. I have never claimed for anything in my life. We should refrain from tarring all with the same brush as the trolls on these pages accuse us of doing. Picking on Burnham is fair enough, he is an oleaginous little squit who deserves the sack for his nasty and BBC aided stabs at the Government for his own failings but please, leave the general abuse of Liverpool people to those with an axe to grind.
Caaaalm Down
Touché, however we also have a sense of humour 🙂
Apologies – comment was partially in jest 🙂
No apologies needed, every city has its whingers, ours seemed to get more focus than others.
As for me, I don’t take offence at what you said dude, free speech is hanging by a thread in this country and we should all be free to make gags.
im from liverpool. i must live in a crappy council house, be on the sick and because my car does 0-60 in 4 secs, im a drug dealer!
Dad, its you!!!!
‘Ey ! Calm down, calm down !
See above
I’ve just been reading up on that NHS direct article and was really surprised by this little snippet:
NHS Direct used to be paid more than £20 per call when it ran the old 0845 number. The payment is between £7 and £9 per call for the new 111 service.
£20 a call under the old system and even the new one at £9 a call is far too much, remind me somebody how the NHS is currently running out of money and how you would address the situation. You’d think any half decent reporter would pounce on a story like that.
Nothing on the BBC web site about this,yet?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2380709/Naomi-Oni-acid-attackers-poured-acid-mother-walked-year-old-twins-home-school.html
Dez will provide the link when it appears. He’s good at that.
Horrific, but doesn’t fit the narrative so BBC thinks we shouldn’t know.
I browsed through the transcripts of some Letters from America from the 1970s at the weekend. Alistair Cooke could never get the gig on the BBC today. I howled with laughter when he described assorted race-hustlers, feminists and gay agitators as “malcontents” – he’d get six months in diversity awareness training were he to say that now.
I also listened to someone called Sarah Dunant in his old slot on Sunday morning. She laid into the Catholic Church for protecting paedophiles, and even went as far as mentioning Jimmy Savile. But somehow she didn’t manage to bring herself to attack the BBC which, we now know, was the leading enabler of paedophiles in Britain – Stuart Hall even had his own room at the BBC for the purpose – for decades. Funny that.
Ironically I was listening to LFA from the 80’s on the podcast archive a couple of days ago*. I think Alistair Cooke may have kept his slot on the BBC as he was an ultra-partisan Democrat who worshiped the ground Lyndon B Johnson stepped on and he sanctified the odious Kennedys on practically every episode. Having said that he was a brilliant journalist.
Compare and contrast with the dire shallow and inaccurate twaddle that we have from the BBC’s finest today.
*There are hundreds to choose from, I listened to the one about Mrs Thatchers’ election in 1983 (Cooke thought that Thatcher would do very badly……) – it was clear that Cooke had no time for Mrs Thatcher and loathed Ronnie Reagan.
Watching a documentary on Charles Wheeler. Wheeler claimed that he and many other people wanted Cooke gone, but his popularity with the public and people high up in the BBC. this was impossible. Cooke had a view that his job was to portray the views of middle America, the mainstream opinion where as Wheeler wanted to give a voice to the progressive and radical views, can you imagine the difference in tone there would be if there was someone like Cooke was reporting on the Obama administration or the Trayvon Martin case.
Funny how they don’t lay into abuse and paedophilia when is comes to the RoP.
Or Jimmy Saville
A tale of two stories – it was the best of intentions, it was the worst of pandering to the liberal media….
A new Arch Bishop of Canterbury is installed and he wants to get off on the right foot with the liberal media (ie the BBC).
Check the list of BBC/Labour Party bad guys:
Tories = too political
Bankers = that’s been overdone – leave it to Giles Fraser the Arch Marxist of St Paul’s
Wonga.com = now you’re talking (on the BBC)
Arch Bishop makes anti-Wonga declaration.
The Lefty Beast Politic is not satisfied. It wants more and can sniff out the hypocrisy.
PR Fail
CofE will have to run further faster Leftier next time.
The Co-op is in financial difficulty.
Oh dear it looks just like any other big bank.
Check the list of BBC/Labour social campaigns – and let the supermarket division lead the way
Gay marriage = Dave done that
Euthenasia = not ready for death kits at the supermarket just yet
Legalise narcotics = ditto
Lads Mags = now you’re talking (on the BBC)
Co-op/BBC : Modesty bags not fun bags
Co-op makes anti-Nuts declaration
Prediction : The Lefty Beast Politic will not be satisfied
Tesco don’t need to sell euthanasia kits as the NHS provides its own pathway to hell …
Can’t wait for the BBC to explain this one away:
Lockerbie bomber release linked to arms deal, according to secret letter
An email sent by the then British ambassador in Tripoli details how a prisoner transfer agreement would be signed once Libya “fulfils its promise” to buy an air defence system.
The disclosure is embarrassing for members of the then Labour government, which always insisted that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s release was not linked to commercial deals.
The email, which contained a briefing on the UK’s relations with Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s regime, was sent on June 8 2008 by Sir Vincent Fean, the then UK ambassador, to Tony Blair’s private office, ahead of a visit soon after he stepped down as prime minister.
Mr Blair flew to Tripoli to meet Gaddafi on June 10, in a private jet provided by the dictator, one of at least six visits Mr Blair made to Libya after quitting Downing Street.
IRRC, a lot people at the time suspected there was an oil deal behind it. Looks like it was even worse than that. Okay, Beeboids, off you go.
Yep, in the Telegraph print edition yesterday…so no excuse for not reporting it…..and yet…where is it on the BBC?
where does that leave Kenny MacAskill and the Scots Gnats?
Guido spots a grievous case of plagiarism by old BBC/Guardian/Observer hand Rawnsley. Not seen or heard much of Rawnsley on the box recently (might be because I don’t watch much TV anymore) Has this lefty he been struck off the BBC speed dial because of his revelations about psycho Brown?
http://order-order.com/2013/07/29/rawnsleys-rehashed-research-rumbled/
The truth is that if one is to police plagiarism in the media (passing another’s work off as your own) one would need 48 hours in every day.
“Facts” are repeated whether they are true or not. It takes scholarly research to track down the first use of a quote or fact – time most of us do not have.
This site (and others) does something towards navigating through the smoke and mirrors of willful blindness and deliberate deceit (here, the BBC’s touting of the global warming stuff is great) but what is sorely needed is a “snopes” type site manned by professionals who can put the task as their first priority. The BBC is simply one of the many media outlet that misleads the public by both sloppy and deliberate practice. Eventually even history books print falsehoods.
Watch this clip which states facts and then compare it to the BBC’s reporting of the same subject:
Did I hear on the Max Keiser programme on Russia Today this morning that not only did mad Gordon Brown sell off Britain’s gold at around $250 a ounce (today about $1300) but he did it to bail out the US bank Goldman Sachs?
It seems that he did! At the time, Goldman Sachs was short selling gold and when the price increased they stood to lose hundreds of millions of dollars. Don’t forget that a previous chairman of the BBC, Gavin Davies, was an advisor to Brown at the time of the gold sale. The advertising of the sale of the gold by Brown , something unknown for gold sales, “coincidentally” led to the lowering of the market price, thereby saving Goldman Sachs some embarrassment.
And British banks, who were over-leveraged under his watch. The idea was to help them get back in the black. How’d that work out, by the way?
“Are there too many managers?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23462290
Next week?:- a case-study- The BBC.
Only kidding.
I see that one of the BBC’s collection of lefty profs, Mary Beard, has had to glam up to continue with her TV career. She is sporting a fresh set of hampsteads to tell us about Caligula tonight
‘This wasn’t just the feeling that, however tactfully you dress it up, the United States had it coming. That is, of course, what many people openly or privately think. World bullies, even if their heart is in the right place, will in the end pay the price.’
Nice one, Mary.
Note the weasely ‘many people’.
Now who else uses the phrase ‘many people’ when they really mean ‘we at the BBC’?
Oops, gave it away.
My bad.
“World bullies” could just as easily apply to the BBC.
See, you can indulge in (what to me looks like) gloating over the deaths of 3,900 people and nary a squeak of protest from the libby left.
Get dissed on twitter by some nomark and cue full howl from Droidsville with Ni-i ‘zaslamaphobic’ Camel at the head of the mob.
I’m afraif Beard deserves everything she gets on Twitter
Would the burka solver her much-documented problem of looking like Michael Foot?…albeit without the Eric Morecambe specs?
How did the classical Romans cope with such sexism?…yes, they hid in all-women colleges and get paid by the Senate to tell the demos that the Greeks deserved all that they got.
Weirdie Beardie?…no relation to Rowan is she?
BBC-NUJ, and UNITE on ex-Tory PM, Mrs THATCHER, today-
1.) BBC-NUJ
“Funeral of Baroness Thatcher cost £1.2m”
(Part paid for by her family.)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23488443
2.) ‘UNITE’
“Labour still dances to a union tune”
By ANDREW PIERCE
[Excerpt]:-
“Len McCluskey was a guest speaker at the recent Durham Miners’ Gala. At the end of the rally, attended by thousands of Labour and trades union supporters, there was a cynical standing ovation to mark the death and funeral of Margaret Thatcher.
“McCluskey enthusiastically joined in. What disgusting company Ed Miliband keeps.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2380478/Labour-dances-union-tune.html
He should read the NUM’s own website, which makes it clear that more pits closed under Harold Wilson.
Bunch of thick old dinosaurs.
Bunch of thick old dinosaurs
Wrong in every aspect. Mucklusky is the head of the largest union in the UK. A union created by the amalgamation of may other unions large and small. A union led by left wing extremists who have bought their way into the Labour party and hold, by the throat, many of Labours MPs and candidates. Unite is a major player in left wing politics but many people will not even have heard of it nor Mucklusky.
They know full well what the mine closure stats are – they just don’t give a flying fuck about them. All they care about is that the public ‘knows’ it was all down to Thatcher. And they have pretty much succeeded in that respect. Even Maggie’s supporters often trot out this line, often with pride, despite the fact it is wrong in every aspect.
So no they are not thick and they are not irrelevant old dinosaurs. Unite is a clear and present danger to the liberties of the people of the UK.
Remember when the bBC commissioned a Poll in which to try and silence those people who claim that the country will be swamped by Bulgarians and Romanians come the end of the year when restrictions are lifted.
Polls: No indication of huge Romanian-Bulgarian influx
Work restrictions expiring later this year for migrants from Romania and Bulgaria have had little impact on the numbers planning to move to the UK or wider EU, BBC Newsnight polls suggest
Well here is the latest Euro poll on the subject
Tens of thousands of Bulgarians will head to Britain says European survey
The survey by pollsters Afis found that around 400,000 people – more than 5% of the population – indicated they would leave the country in the next two years with UK the destination of choice for nearly a quarter. Previously, Spain, Greece and Italy had been Bulgarians’ top venues for migration because of the language similarities. But now Britain with 22.5% and Germany with 22.9% per cent are favourites. If the same percentage is repeated from January 2014, when Bulgarian citizens – along with those from Romania – will gain free movement in to the UK, it is estimated that 80,000 Bulgarians will arrive in Britain.
The bBC,the traitors within our midst
Anybody notice the vast mount of Pro-Ramadan articles from the bBC, why if I didn’t know better I’d put money on the Table that the bBC HQ is in.. Pakistan. Well here’s something the bBC won’t want to advertise about the Islamic holy month:
Ramadan Death Toll: Monday 29/07/13
Just think what it would be like if they weren’t so peaceful.
Bug-eyed BBC favourite Bari Atwan appeared on the Dateline London last Saturday. He claimed that there would be no bother in Egypt because they were a very peaceable people. Wow double peaceable! No worries!
Heavily trailed program on turkey advertised on radio four. Lots of ominous sounding clips aboutwhere it may be heading, all due to the dark forces of, can you guess, “conservatism”. No mention of the real driver of the ominous changes – the religion of peace – at all.
They must have a good chuckle in the editorial meetings when they manage to get that word in a negative context. And the way they say it, it’s as if it’s something just trodden in.
Yes, the default political position of BBC-NUJ-TUC-Labour Party-E.U-Obama, etc, is to get TURKEY’s 80 million Muslims into the E.U. as soon as possible, so as to speed up the Islamisation of Europe.
BBC GUIDE TO USEFUL FOREIGN EXPRESSIONS FOR THE 21ST CENTURY:
(No. 473 in a series of 500)
Zenginleştirme (Turkish)
= Enrichment
So has anybody read this bBC whitewash of a story about how ‘South Asians’ are more prone to drive without insurance:
Safe driving campaign targets South Asian communities
Former Eastenders and Bend It Like Beckham star Ameet Channa is backing a campaign against driving uninsured.
The actor has been in Bradford, West Yorkshire, to raise awareness of the dangers of driving without insurance.
“It’s because insurance is expensive that a lot of young boys try and get away with it but putting other people’s lives and your own at risk is simply not worth it,” Ameet says.
So according to the bBC, young Asian boys who can’t afford to pay high insurance costs may (i say May) take to driving without insurance. Which doesn’t explain why the bBC then interviews 3 girls. and then round off their POV with this snippet:
Many people, it seems, still do not understand the facts and laws around car insurance.
Really bBC, people who know how to claim Benefits, play the racist card and while comprising between 3-4% of the British population constitute over 20% of the prison population. Me thinks there’s more of a story here than the bBC makes out. But hang on what this in the little side bar:
Postcodes with the highest percentage of uninsured drivers
Bordesley, Birmingham, West Midlands (B9) – 7.9%
Small Heath, Birmingham, West Midlands (B10) – 7.0%
Frizinghall and Heaton, Bradford, West Yorkshire (BD9) – 6.6%
Winson Green, Birmingham West Midlands (B18) – 6.5%
Whitefield, Bradford West, Yorkshire (BD8) – 6.5%
Now a quick check informs me that all those areas rather than being South Asian are actually predominately…Pakistani and guess what remember those so called spy cameras in Birmingham, they were actually set up in which to catch …car insurance dodgers.
The bBC. the traitors within our midst
Further to my last while the bBC is promoting the people behind these insurance jobs as ‘South Asian’ they have no problem referring to the people targeted by number plate recognition cameras in Birmingham (Set up to catch insurance dodgers) as…..’Muslims
Birmingham Project Champion ‘spy’ cameras being removed
More than 200 so-called “spy cameras” installed in largely Muslim areas of Birmingham are being dismantled.
So when the police try to catch insurance dodgers its ‘racist’ towards muslims, but when the bBC report on the story it’s ‘Informative towards South Asians”.
The bBC, the traitors within our midst
Peace Talks Watch
This one is going to be interesting to keep a weather eye on. The peace talks between Israel and Palestine are anticipated to begin tomorrow. Already the BBC are behind the curve:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23486045
In the version I’m looking at updated at 18.06 they quote:
Also on Sunday, the Israeli cabinet approved the release of 104 long-term Palestinian prisoners by 13 votes to seven.
The inmates are to be released in four stages over a number of months, linked to progress in the peace process….
Their identities have not been published, but according to reports they include those who have killed Israelis or Palestinian informers
Would this be that unpublished list (apologies – second link):
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=617421&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
I’m going to be interested in following this for several reasons (especially if they collapse) to see how much BBC blame lands at Israel’s doorstep. The Israelis have sanctioned this prisoner release despite its unpopularity. On the face of it, the Palestinians have refused to come to the table blaming the Israelis for setting preconditions – yet it’s Palestinians setting them now.
Will the Israelis get blamed for moving the goal posts? To do so would have to omit that the Palestinians were the first to move the goal posts. This prisoner release did not start at a request for 104 prisoners – it started at 84 prisoners, but the Palestinians upped their demand.
Is it BBC bias? Not yet. It’s more of a heads up as to how the BBC (based on previous form) might choose to report any stalling in the talks.
“Other Palestinians, however, believe that Abbas’s decision is no more than a clever political gambit. They say that Abbas will return to the peace talks for a number of months, after which he will once again pull out and hold Israel fully responsible for the failure of the peace process.” [My emphasis]
Here
Don’t worry: The Obamessiah has met with negotiators. So it will definitely be Israel’s fault if it goes nowhere.
State department spokeswoman Jen Psaki suggested the goal of initial talks would be to chart a way forward rather than try to tackle the thorny issues between the two sides – which include the status of Jerusalem, Jewish settlements on the West Bank, the borders and functions of a future Palestinian state, and the status of Palestinian refugees.
All of which are issues on which Israel is constantly criticized, and on which the Palestinians are never pressured to grant concessions by the so-called international community. But no, it’s never a kabuki dance, right, BBC?
Plus, Kim Ghattas assures us that Sec. of State Kerry is determined to get a peace deal done.
INBBC’s Middle East priorities.
INBBC relegates Islamic jihad crisis in Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, and instead promotes Saudi Arabia metro plans to third top item on INBBC’s Middle East pages online.
What INBBC is not keen to make clear, unlike ‘Canada Free Press’ here:
“Muslim Brotherhood demands the U.S and NATO to invade Egypt and destroy its army”
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/56864
Somewhere, Jeremy Bowen’s head just exploded over that one.
Bullseye!
Oh, sorry, that’s Jim Bowen.
“You can’t beat a bit of bullshit.”
Which head?
If INBBC wants to report Saudi Arabia, will it report this?:-
“Sharia in action in Saudi Arabia: rights activist gets 7 years jail, 600 lashes for insulting Islam”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/07/sharia-in-action-in-saudi-arabia-rights-activist-gets-7-years-jail-600-lashes-for-insulting-islam.html
1.) BBC-Democrat and Anthony WEINER:
“Anthony Weiner admits more online relationships.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23459177
2.) ‘JihadWatch’ and Anthony WEINER.
“Why It May Be Easy for Huma Abedin to Stand by Her Man.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/07/robert-spencer-at-pj-lifestyle-why-it-may-be-easy-for-huma-abedin-to-stand-by-her-man.html
Often wonder how many secret converts there are at the BBC
I stumbled across a site once called, something like ‘beautiful stories’ it was a list ,with photographs, of western Muslim converts ,Mainly, if not all (it was some time ago) women amongst the judges, lawyers, academics and civil servants were half a dozen employees of the BBC
Wish now I had taken more notice
The BBC is too right-wing.
no-one take the bait 🙂
well done everyone 🙂
Mondays BBc Breakfast On a credit union promotion. Only drawbacks are of course which they did mention are that you have to be a member of the union, they don’t have enough money to lend to meet the current demand met by pay day loan companies and what I wasn’t aware of most of them don’t make money and have to be supported by charities and Government.
The interest rate apparently works out as around 27-27%APR Funny enough this is around the interest rate banks may charge depending on circumstances and amounts (not mentioned of course) and banks may charge lower percentages depending on the amount borrowed and circumstances all conveniently not mentioned course plus of course banks have to check their customers ability to repay. Also they were making a point that credit unions unlike the banks have no shareholders…err isn’t that basically the same as a building society?
Nice to see the weather forecaster in front of a blue screen and not in a forest/ wood/ camp site on location.
BBC playing environmental bingo this morning with an article on the Alaskan village of Kivalina (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23346370). Apparently it’s being badly affected by global warming (tick!). It will be the birthplace of America’s first “climate change refugees” (tick!). It is populated by Inuit people (double tick! although I think they mean Inupiat, but hey they’re Eskimos or something ethnic). It’s due to the Arctic ice melting (tick!). And it’s all the fault of Big Oil (tick!) although President Obama’s strong action will save the day (bingo!). Of course, being the BBC it doesn’t like to tell the entire story. Kivalina is most famous for having sued Exxon Mobil and numerous other oil and energy companies, on the basis that their activities were responsible for the imminent demise of what some have described as “basically a glorified sandbank”. The case was dismissed by the US District Court in September 2009. Now, I wonder why the BBC chooses not to mention that?
10 out of 10 for the BBC on their recycling efforts. Newsnight had a go at this same Alsakan village bingo card at least a week ago.
I’m beginning to notice this sort of thing on the BBC. The second coming of a report supposedly out of nowhere just discovered by the Beeb but actually lifted off the shelf.
Similarly Panorama comes out with a critical report about the on line dating industry last night. Trouble is BBC radio had a tilt at the very same issue (and the same rogue company) in a show broadcast months ago.
Something else you won’t see on the BBC:-
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/07/02/the-sixth-first-climate-refugees/
Who to believe, Beeboid Sakur
For the first time in decades not a single bowhead whale was caught from Barrow.
or a blogger?
The ice prevented whaling crews from hunting as the whales migrated by and only one crew took a whale late in the season.
What to believe? A polar bear weighs more than an all terrain vehicle loaded with people and equipment?
We [Sackur et al] motor across the offshore ice on all terrain vehicle
“The ice is too thin for the polar bears to hunt on so they’re stuck onshore searching for food. You don’t want to be on your own when you meet a hungry bear,” he [local guide Brower Frantz] adds.
Inuit Herman Ahsoak shows aptitude for a job at the BBC.
“We have to adapt to what’s coming, if we’re gonna keep eating and surviving off the sea, but no whale this year means it will be a long cold winter,” he says
Don’t tell anyone the whales migrate past Barrow again in the Autumn and therefore there’s a chance make a catch(es) during the Autumn whale hunt. Perhaps he’s just one of life’s pessimists.
Shishmaref, on the Seward Peninsula, is another village built on a coastal bar subject to erosion (and an island, to boot) that is used by unscrupulous warmists lying through their teeth that the erosion is due to ‘global warming’ (aka climate change, climate disruption, climate wierding).
Full story here:-
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/07/02/the-sixth-first-climate-refugees/
Beeboid homosexual lobby really goes for this story (non-story?) –
it’s been top item on BBC-NUJ’s Europe page for over a day now:-
“Pope: Who am I to judge gay people?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23489702
The Pope makes a strict distinction, correct in my view, between celibate homosexuals and those who who are not – not judging the former, but certainly judging the latter for their sinful practices that are contrary to biblical teaching.
Another self-indulgent Beeboid interest:-
“The era of the sexually charged office.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23489444
Next week, a case-study?:-
‘Broadcasting House and the era of the sexually charged office.’
Only kidding.
TUNISIA:
-more INBBC apologetics for Islam and Sharia law.
Here’s a politically empathetic piece, largely put together by the pro-Islam, pro-Muslim Brotherhood, INBBC ‘ARABIC’ (paid for by UK taxpayers).
“Justice kiosk: Tunisia’s alternative law enforcers”
By Tim Whewell,
INBBC News, Tunisia.
In a politically curious opening paragraph INBBC’s Mr Whewell, who got himself politically embedded with Salafists in Tunisia, says this-
“For years, the Arab world’s dictators kept radical Islamic groups in check, but the uprisings of 2011 gave them freedom to operate more openly. In Tunisia, where the Arab Spring began, a tiny but well-organised minority of fundamentalists, some of them violent, have mounted a major challenge to the state.”
Whewell implies that-
1. ‘Arab Spring’ gave freedom to Islamic jihadists (not the usual INBBC line);
2. that such Islamic jihadists are only, of course, the famous ‘tiny, ‘tiny’ minority of Muslims;
3.) this ‘tiny’ ‘tiny’ Muslim group are violent, and are threat to state.
Whewell is somewhat politically beguiled by these Salafists, as Beeboibs are inclined to be in the Middle East. After all, how threatening can the Islamic jihadists be? – They are influential with the Obama-approved Muslim Brotherhood.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23469218
On the (very) thin pretext of commenting on the Snowden “whistle- blower” case, Today gave 5 minutes to John Le Carre to unload his self-loathing bile onto the public doorstep. On Snowden, it seems that le Carre is minded to give him a free pass and silently approve of his preference for the democratic havens of Russia or Venezuela (or Ecuador).
On other matters dear to the heart of the BBC, apparently – according to Le Carre – the Old Etonian component of government (local and national) existing despite the Attlee government’s promise of heaven on earth is a cause for shame and disgust. His survey of Attlee’s education policies forebore to mention that that government was implementing the 1944 Education Act, a piece of legislation agreed by all political parties and which opened grammar school education to all – rich and poor. Further, Le Carre didn’t say – and wasn’t asked – if the abolition of state grammar schools might have had something to do with the present prominence of the privately educated in government (and everywhere else).
Anecdotal but, AFAIAA, until the (almost complete) abolition of grammar schools in the 60s, the private education sector was on its last legs. In the real world, what parent would cough up real money when they could get an equivalent – usually superior – education provided by the state? So Le Carre can thank Labour and the vile Shirley Williams and Tony Crosland for the Old Etonian-led cabinet and the flourishing of the private education sector: not that you’d find the BBC mentioning that possibility to him (or anyone else).
And don’t overlook the fact that Webb introduced the propaganda piece as being from the “great” John le Carré. Nothing like a bit of lefty guidance to the listeners to reinforce the agenda.
Oh yes: God (or Allah) forbid that the great unwashed should think for themselves on the basis of un-nuanced and comprehensive information delivered by an impartial medium. OTOH Le Carre does happen to be a great author. However, just being a great author (or great guitarist or great window-cleaner) does not make your opinions on matters outside the parameters of that greatness any more valid than those of an intelligent and well-informed* listener.
*”Well-informed” means obtaining information from a wide spread of sources outside the BBC/Guardianista truth ministries.
You can chart the decline of England from the abolition of Grammar schools.
Williams and Crosland ensured the triumph of that old vicious ruling class that at last was on the run. Ironic is it not?
Cameron and his chums must be laughing.
We will never get rid of them now.
Newsreader droid this morning on the ‘what opponents have referred to as a bedroom tax’ subsidy.
Droid: … those seen as having a spare room.
They have to with every breath don’t they.
Right, treacle, let me help as it’s obviously hard for you to understand. If there is a husband and a wife and they have one child, they need two bedrooms. If the house has three bedrooms then the third bedroom is ‘a spare room’. Not difficult, love, is it.
Yes, yes, yes I know, with the help of your chums in the Labour Party and Unite union you have trawled the length and breadth of the country and managed to find one elderly couple who keep her life support system and his iron lung in ‘the spare room’. Well yes, we’ll cut them some slack. And nice try.
Spare room – oy vey would have loved one. I shared with my brother from the day I was born til we left home at 14.
14 Bup?
Yes, our parents were doctors and they needed the beds.
Of course, when there is a change in any system – not a change which solely comprises shovelling yet more taxpayers’ cash down a convenient hole but one which appears to cut back such largesse – there are losers. However, the “losers” by and large in this case are losing something which they arguably shouldn’t have had in the first place. Of course, there are deserving cases who should (but I’m not sure will) be recompensed from other sources (eg discretionary payments from local or national sources or even – Allah forfend – charities which are in reality third sector tax-farming businesses; yes I’m looking at you Oxfam). As an occasional listener, it is obvious to me that the BBC concentrates on the most “sympathetic” losers in order to make a political point (not purely by coincidence, the same point made by Labour) of condemning thereby the whole benefits rearrangement. Unfortunately for Labour, even BBC propaganda cannot change the apparent broad approval of the new arrangements by a majority of respondents to polls.
One of the major arguments in the past for Socialism was that it made for a more rational and efficient allocation of resources. Horse feathers of course, but some people fell for it. One could argue that the benefits changes are just such a rational measure, “from each according etc”.
At least that’s one bit of Socialism that the Beeboids seem to have abandoned. Progress of a sort.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/07/29/why-obama-doesnt-dare-speak-about-detroit/
This is an opinion piece about Obamas failed economic policies across the US, not just Detroit. It is an indictment of the failure of exactly the economic policy the two Ed’s propose to foist upon us.
It is as good a debunking of the large state, high tax and client state model as I’ve read. I would send it to Robinson and Flanders but to them it would probably be porn!
There is no such analysis on the BBC, there is no such criticism of the Glorious Leader anywhere across the BBC’s many platforms. It is the economics of national suicide and with the compliance of the BBC it will come our way if Red Ed and Balls get into power.
I often say, I weep for my country, reading this I would guess millions of Americans weep for theirs too.
Daniel Greenfield (Sultanknish) has a superb essay on this written Sunday.
This policy ( Obama and New Labour) is the ultimate expression of the liberal flight from reality.
It guarantees economic devastation.
The upside is that such devastation will lead to the end of liberalism in all it’s absurd economic and social guises.
Perhaps the West can than get it’s head straight and restore itself.
Imagine a world free of political correctness and liberal absurdities where those that work hard and create are back where they should be. . No room for state leeches then and no place anymore for the BBC.
Except as a privatized rump fit for the 21st century.
Way to go, Democrats…
There’s been about fifteen feminista articles in the last week alone, including ones that suggest that women are the only victims of cyber-bullying (complete rubbish), one saying that Susie Wolff is the victim of sexism despite the fact that her times are so far behind her male and even female compatriots that if anything it’s sexism that’s allowed her to still have a career, and one today about “redressing the gender balance” in comedies. Not to mention the story yesterday about the Coop forcing all lads mags to use ‘modesty bags’ but not applying the same rule to the disgusting and depraved female-targeted equivalents. Plus before that there was the article suggesting that Muslims are being unfairly targeted and how this is evidence of ‘Islamophobia’ as if that’s a bad thing in a non-Islamic country. This was also a few weeks after the documentary about how great it is that Muslim footballers are changing the culture for everyone else despite being less than 10% of all players within the Premier League.
I’m centre left and hate Murdoch’s output but the BBC and the Guardian right now are as dangerous as any state propaganda institutions you can name. At least the Guardian is self-funded, though – the fact that we’re supposed to pay almost £150 a year to fund the BBC’s sick crap is unbelievable. Especially when their failed departmental bosses get massive retirement payoffs, unless they’re women in which case they get to keep their jobs on the grounds of being women.
“At least the Guardian is self-funded”
Well, after a fashion . . ..
Susie Wolff didnt get her seat testing for Williams F1 because of her driving skills, she got it because her husband is Toto Wolff the executive director of the Mercedes AMG Petronas Formula One Team.
Guess what engines Williams will be using next year? Giving Susie a go of the car has probably saved Williams F1 tens of millions of pounds per year in engine cost’s plus millions of pounds of free publicity for the advertisers by having a woman testing.
luckily, this woman didnt drive into the back of a truck in the pit lane and nearly kill herself like the last female driver a couple of years ago
forza minardi
Congratulations to Victoria Derbyshire for squeezing in that last caller who made comparison of the government’s spare bedroom policy to the Nazi’s extermination of disabled people. Just got him in before the end of the programme and thanked him for his call. Well done.
Beeboids’ political line?:-help Islamic jihadists, not Christian victims.
Beeboids endlessly mulls the issue of Western military intervention in SYRIA to assist one or other group of Islamic jihadists there, who are hostile to non-Islamic West.
There is no discussion of West to intervene to assist Christian victims of Islamic jihadists in NIGERIA.
Latest in Nigeria:-
“RAMADAN BOMBATHAN IN NIGERIA: 12 KILLED IN MULTIPLE BLASTS IN CHRISTIAN AREA OF KANO CITY”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/07/ramadan-bombathan-in-nigeria-12-killed-in-multiple-blasts-in-christian-area-of-kano-city.html
The BBC love to ram the meme ‘Muslims are oppressed and are the victims’ constantly down our throats via sewage factories like The ‘Big’ Questions, Sunday Morning Lies and Question (but no real answers) Time. However, they never seem to highlight these types of incidents as lead stories, and if they do have a wee report tucked away on the World section of their website, the words ‘radical’ is used and hardly any mention of Muslim extremism and fascism:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/418474/10-dead-in-Nigeria-explosions
Sheesh, this religion of peace sure is peaceful!
“Bosnia: The Serbian Orthodox church of Saint Sava in Sarajevo, where Muslims make up approximately half of the population, was “desecrated” and six of its windows panes broken. The unidentified vandals wrote “Allah” in dark paint twice on the church wall. A month earlier, unidentified persons tried to set the church on fire.” source
Maybe if they’d written ‘EDL’ instead ‘Allah’ the Beeb might have mentioned it.
Instead (searching the Beeb news site for Sarajevo in vain for a report on the above) we get this:
‘Sarajevo hosts its first ever halal food fair’
“The three-day event was organised in response to a rise in demand for halal food products in the wider Balkans region and beyond in recent years.” No reasons given as to why . . .
I blame Serbian Orthodox foreign policy and inequality.
The Serbs are hardly blameless.
That makes it OK, then, does it? No one is completely blameless, but so the hell what? Tu quoque is not an argument, it’s a diversion.
Care to explain why you think the BBC considers one story newsworthy and the other not? Go on, have a go, I can wait.
It was a response to David, as I am sure all but the dimmest would have realised.
My point is that the Serbian Orthodox Church is closely associated with Serbian nationalism. You seem to be unaware that there is ethnic/religious conflict going on in region, and that it has been going on for many centuries.
If you knew a little about the history you would not need an explanation for the presence of the Muslim religion in that region, and no that does not excuse or justify the vandalism of a Serbian Orthodox Church.
BBC upholds complaint against it’s self…… for not always providing facts for what it puts out on the air…
Finally some sanity … and then, you guessed it, it was cos it wasn’t left wing enough..
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/jul/30/bbc-welfare-reforms-impartiality-john-humphrys
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23503095
Anybody guess what the BBC Hive thinks of the ruling on housing benefit…..
– dubbed the “bedroom tax” by critics
– “absolute travesty of justice”
– ‘Incomprehensible’
– “This is our way of life we’re defending”
– “bitterly disappointed with today’s decision”
– ‘Devastating’
“As a result of today’s ruling, we’re really concerned that these families will now face a real struggle to meet their rent and may end up losing their home.”
Are you likely to be affected by this ruling? Are you a benefits advice worker? Send us your comments and experiences using the form below.
BBC 5 Live has an unwritten agenda to mix sport with Left-wing campaign politics.
This morning Nicky Campbell gives free rein to The Voice and then Kick It Out to air their supposed grievances. There were no challenges or any questions as to their beliefs which are all simply taken as read by the BBC man – in fact Campbell eggs them on to name more and more supposed discriminations.
We learn that 30% of football players are black and are told that a similar over representation of this minority group ought to be coaches and officials.
We are told women are discriminated against (this is fast becoming a BBC preoccupation).
Nicky then says ooh ooh ooh please sir ooh ooh what about Islamophobia?!
I would have despaired had it not been for a great quote from one our guest grievance hustlers:
‘discrimination is very diverse’
After everything that’s happened to the unaccountable, corrupt and profligate BBC, from the Saville scandal, the now legendary Newsnight cock-up and massive pay-offs to senior managers to name just a few horrific breaches of public trust, it seems the BBC has become more arrogant and contemptuous towards its funders than ever before. They have and still are spearheading an attempt by the Left to change our country by giving undue weight to Muslim, black, gay and feminist ‘rights’ whilst those rights of the English go out the bloody window. As a proud Englishman this makes my blood boil.
When was the last time you heard the BBC making a documentary on white English people’s rights or Nicki ‘I love myself and I’m only in it for the money’ Campbell debate white English people’s voice? It doesn’t bloody happen because these Left-wing, overpaid, snooty west-end wine/dinner party liberals don’t a toss about the English, even though it’s the English majority who fund their lavish, Left-wing lifestyle. The BBC disgust me!
Yes. Agreed. The BBC alongside all of the rest of the Left-wing middle class jazz enthusiasts hold the white working classes in utter disgust. It’s always been the same in Entland – the upper classes treat the poor like dirt and get them to do their dirty work (like fight wars and work in factories for pittance). It’s OK for the Scots, irish, Welsh, Blacks, Asians to have their cultural identity but the English? Nope.
So for balance (Mike Sergeant’s fair and neutral analysis, aside) we have the DWP, it’s Solicitor’s and Cleggie on one side; two claimants, a solicitor, and the charities on the other.
So a word count of 184 for the Government and 466 for the objectors (sorry to be nerdy) is the BBC’s idea of balance – which also includes two bold paragraph headings ‘Devastating’ and ‘Incomprehensible’.
The only thing ‘incomprehensible’ is that the BBC could write a piece like this without explaining the judge’s rationale for dismissing the judicial review.
There has been a torrent of unbalanced attacks on the Government over the past two days with more on 5 Live today. I wonder if this stepping up of BBC attacks is related to the trouble that Labour has found itself in and the upturn in Tory fortunes. It smacks of desperation.
If a judicial review is needed, it is into the BBC’s lack of impartiality and the increasing number of breaches of their Charter obligations.
(That was in reply to CCE)
Big interview on ‘The World at One’ with the claimants’ solicitor who said they were terribly disappointed, would appeal and in the meantime had to find the extra money required by the spare room tax.
Interviewer of course did not ask if any of her clients had been exempted from the tax via the government’s relief monies (£150m and rising) for hard/disabled cases. Inconceivable I know for a BBC interviewer to double-check a left wing solicitor’s facts.
BBC’s led all its early-morning radio bulletins with the story about “nurses ration care due to time pressures”, a story about how insufficient staff was the real cause of the ‘nasty uncaring nurse’ stories we keep hearing about.
Two major problems with the story… of course nurses are going to blame anything else rather than accept responsibility for any problems. Even so, I thought, the story doesn’t look good for the Tories. People are bound to hold them responsible.
Hang on a sec though, later reports – tagged on to the end as an afterthought – revealed that the survey was conducted in 2010 so if any problems were to be laid out the politicians door, it was due to that then Labour government. The BBC gave a totally misleading impression on almost all their news bulletins. It must have had a real impact on a lot of people. It even affected me, and I’m used to treating Beeb reportts with care.
gotta laff @ the bBC going large on the racist and threatening immigration poster vans touring uselessly round saarf london. I seem to recall they have a few of their own detector vans, threateningly, but uselessly touring around too…, you couldn’t make it up mrs.
Brilliant – what’s the difference?
I might steel the analogy, but pop it on Guido’s site, why don’t you? Must be ‘Quote of the Day’
help yourself 🙂
These adverts are identical in effect to those seen on tv couple years back.
They concerned benefit cheats.
The real targets of the tv ads? Benefit cheats?
Nahhhh…never, the real target of the ad was mr and mrs law abiding person. To make them think something was actually being done. When in reality sweet FA was done, the cheats just look at ads such as those and laugh their balls off.
But mr and mrs average are so impressed!
Then the politicians wonder why we hold them in such contempt.
Never have I heard such loathing of our leaders from the ordinary voter. These idiots have corrupted politics beyond recall.
Supplementary on BBC bias:-
“BBC triggers fresh bias row after censuring John Humphrys programme which lifted the lid on welfare state”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2381398/BBC-triggers-fresh-bias-row-censuring-John-Humphrys-programme-lifted-lid-welfare-state.html
So they get complaints from both sides once again. Ergo, the BBC gets it about right. Of course, this line of defense works only if the (don’t) Trust has censured a different BBC programme for being biased the opposite way.
From order-order: The very thing this site has complained about.
http://order-order.com/2013/07/30/what-the-bbc-doesnt-tell-you/
Weird how there’s not a defender of the indefensible to seen over at Guido’s about this. Why, it’s almost as if they really don’t care about defending the BBC at all and have another agenda entirely.
Don’t frack with Bianca. She is supporting a tiny bunch of protesters which the BBC are desperate to support.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-23504883
The committee concluded that the article’s headline and opening sentence did not accurately convey the story’s meaning, which was that Ward had apologised for addressing his comments to Jews, rather than Israel.
In its judgment, the committee said: ”The committee noted too that due accuracy is not simply a matter of getting facts right. Given the sensitivities, the committee considered the article concerned a controversial issue and it was incumbent on the BBC to consider all relevant facts, information and opinions to achieve due accuracy.”
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/bbc-news-website-wrong-use-israel-headline-about-story-relating-israeli-jews
Spot the missing witness details…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-23501370
Included here…
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/woman-killed-triple-brixton-stabbing-5384295
Silly BBC, they’ve missed a chance to portray the eye witness as racist for spontaneously mentioning the knife-wielding thug’s colour (cf. Zimmerman, who only mentioned Martin’s colour when asked), thereby discrediting her testimony. I mean, talk about racial profiling!
I’m always reminded of “the dog that didn’t bark in the night” when reading BBC crime and enrichment reports. When they don’t mention the ethnicity of the suspect you know automatically which of two groups is almost certainly involved with about 95% certainty. Hoisted with their own petards, methinks.