Hope no one’s been rudely cut off mid stream….here’s a fresh page to list the bias and other things of note and interest….
Open Thread Sunday
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Guest Who May 2, 2024 at 10:33 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024Sopes, Mason, Simpo… all of Labour… what has Trump got to do with anything? https://x.com/nickdixoncomic/status/1786112272047198459?s=6 ‘It’...
- G.W.F. May 2, 2024 at 9:52 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024I intended to vote and read the handful of election leaflets. They consisted of community this and community that and...
- StewGreen May 2, 2024 at 9:49 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024Campaign Against Antisemitism tweetHis caveated apology was a feeble attempt to mask his bigotry. Mr. Baptiste, known for Comedy Central...
- StewGreen May 2, 2024 at 9:43 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024GBnews topic now ..lefty comic not condemned, despite making a clear death threat https://twitter.com/joshxhowie/status/1785730810206679341
- Fedup2 May 2, 2024 at 9:36 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024If I stay in londonistan much longer I reckon I’ll be speaking polish - swahelli …Farsi … Turkish …
- Zephir May 2, 2024 at 9:31 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024My paticular concern is those who apporach a slip road at 70 or 80 mph and expect those on the...
- pugnazious May 2, 2024 at 9:30 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024But what do the animals call themselves? And shouldn't she change her, er rather appropriate name, Burke, to something more...
- pugnazious May 2, 2024 at 9:25 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024Appeasement doesn't work....We probably all knew that Biden's posturing on aid and ceasefires in Gaza was for the benefit of...
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
Last week the BBC went into gush fest mode in covering the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s, in the words of Radio 5’s Phil Williams ” monumental ” I have a dream ( fantasy ) speech. The way they salivated you’d think Martin was Jesus.
Nigerian Dotun Adebayo, the worst presenter on radio, did his show from America and there was a documentary on BBC 2.
Why are we subjected to this er, um, crap ? Did Britain have slavery ? No. Did Britain have segregation ? No. Did Britain have a civil rights movement ? No. Is it, as I suspect, to give whites in Britain a guilt trip ?
Incidentally King was a plagiarist, adulterer, went with prostitutes and sympathetic to marxists.
4 Things you didn’t know about Martin Luther King
1. His real name is Michael, he changed it to Martin because it has a more prominent ring to it.
Read the other 3 points here
http://www.snopes.com/history/american/mlking.asp
The FBI files on King won’t be published until 2027, Hmm, I wonder why so long ?
” I have a dream that one day little black boys and little black girls join hands with little white boys and little white girls as brothers and sisters !!! ”
Well, as we all know, there’s the fantasy and then there’s the reality.
3 year old white toddler being bullied and tormented by her black neigbours children, so proud of their actions, they filmed it and stuck it on their Facebook page.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2403070/Shocking-Facebook-video-white-toddler-3-racially-bullied-year-old-black-neighbors.html
I didn’t know he had changed his name, I always thought it was his given name and it was not his fault that he was named after a priest who courageously defied the Pope, exposed the corruption in the church; but then sided with the ruling classes against the farmers and encouraged the brutal treatment of ordinary people in putting down protests , but, near the end of his life advocated the killing of Jews.
Something which Hitler used to justify his policy of mass extermination.
Martin Luther was not the saint he is made out to be.
Thought it was his dad that changed it: he was Michael too and became MLK Senior (his son MLK Jr.)
From the linked comic below – ‘In which Destiny is heralded‘
“You think people generally live up to their given names?”
http://wondermark.com/373
If you follow the link rest the cursor on the comic to see what started that speech.
LOL, very good. Actually reminded me of my own take on stupid parents with weird names for their children:
http://owsblog.blogspot.co.uk/2007/08/onomatomanic-outrecuidance.html
which was partly inspired by the Freakonomics chapter “A Roshanda by Any Other Name – How do babies with super-black names fare?”
In case anyone is wondering how they should think regarding asylum seekers, the BBC has a helpful article about Australia’s situation, where a bunch of nasty racist politicians on both sides of the divide are using refugees as pawns in their power struggles.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23897625
Rather than provide us with facts and analysis, the BBC instead gives us a human interest story about ‘Kobra’, a refugee to Australia.
The BBC is playing a propaganda game here, and my read is that they are trying to get their readers to lump together all immigrants as being needy of the opportunities that western countries can offer. By quoting the fairly low numbers of immigrants who seek ayslum, it helps to make the overall issue around immigrants seem smaller.
Out of curiousity, I googled a bit until I found this:
Click to access UNHCR%20ASYLUM%20TRENDS%202012_WEB.pdf
Its the UNHCR report on asylum trends in 2012, and provides fairly comprehensive data on the origins of refugees, and the countries in which they seek asylum. As a UN report, it contains its own biases of course, but the provided data is probably reasonably reliable.
What would be useful is if a journalistic organisation was to take the UNHCR report, and provide us with analysis of the origins of asylum seekers including causes along with ethnicity and religious/cultural background. Of course the BBC, whilst it was created exactly to have the expertise to perform this type of analysis and then report on it to the british public, has long since ceased to have the capability, never mind the will, to do so.
“They’ve seemingly been trying to out-tough each other, clearly thinking a hard line is a vote winner.”
Very likely that’s because it is a vote winner.
More confusion in the hive mind on the Irwell. Tra la la.
I also await (with bated breath !) a follow up report explaining the manifest unattractions of the numerous countries our plucky aquanaut bypassed on her fantastic voyage to Skippy Land and its sportingly-challenged inhabitants.
Maybe Pakistan and the general M.E. are a bit too fundamentalist, but what’s wrong with India ? Malaysia ? How about Indonesia? Good enough for the larval stage of the bestest Prezzie in the world evvvver, but not for ‘Kobra’, eh ? And didn’t she used to be on ‘Gladiators’ in the dim and distant ?
I liked the Eloi guy with a gormless grin on is face, holding up a sign in crayon ” We welcome refugees !!! ”
If he likes refugees so much, he should go and buy a house in Somalia then.The bongo madness never stops, does it ?
Tim Blair’s site provides a regular parade of progressive Aussie twerpery just like yer man there for the delectation of the avid fan.
For example, I don’t think this monstrosity got any coverage here back in the Spring, did it ?
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/this_is_canberra/
Changed days from the famous Australian all white policy, huh ?
http://www.amren.com/features/2013/03/what-happened-to-white-australia/
BBC calls for Worldwide Sporting Ban on Australian Teams to protest about their racist policy of keeping control of immigration. Just our luck when we can win a historic 4th Ashes series in a row. The liberal left really know how to hit where it hurts.
I wish some of our politicians had the guts to do what the people want and stop all unwanted immigration into this country. They would be attacked non stop by the likes of the BBC but it would be a hugely popular policy and win them a lot of votes.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-23918155
So what makes these people vigilantes? In a normal world these would be called paramilitaries or self-defense militias. But the BBC wants to add the slur vigilante. So people who want to defend them self against a terrorist organisation are vigilantes. BBC once again demonstrates that it is a Islamist propaganda outlet.
The BBC is the problem.
“…BBC once again demonstrates that it is a Islamist propaganda outlet”
Yes, reading that BBC article it is pretty clear.
There is a link on that webpage to a Reuters article covering the same incident. The headlines and the content from the two sources have different emphasis.
Guess which is the BBC headline?
– Boko Haram ‘kills 24 Nigerian vigilantes in ambush’
OR
– Nigeria Islamists kill 24 vigilantes in ambush.
The BBC article takes a very passive line when using a sentence linking Islam.
For example “Attacks have increased recently despite a massive military deployment to areas worst affected by Islamist militants.” implying the military deployment has a share of the blame then? Provoking the Islamics by resisting them?
Yep – that’s the message.
“An offensive was launched against the group – which says it is fighting for the creation [note – ‘creation’ not imposition] of an Islamic state in Nigeria – and the military encouraged the formation of vigilante groups to help.
But now it appears Boko Haram is taking revenge against such groups, say observers – adding weight to fears that the vigilante groups may trigger an escalation of the violence.”
– ‘An offensive was launched against the’ [Islamists],
– ‘the military encouraged the formation of vigilante groups’
– ‘the vigilante groups may trigger an escalation of the violence’
Oh those poor Islamists!
The BBC are implying the military are the cause of the problem.
Apparently for encouraging people to band together to resist the violent imposition of an Islamic state.
And supposedly that resistance is responsible for the escalating violence, not the actual forceful attempt to impose a violent intolerance religious government.
The BBC message, then, is ‘don’t fight back’, especially when it’s Islamists who are trying to force their oppressive, totalitarian way of life on you through persecution and slaughter.
I’m still trying to understand why…..
In France, UK and USA a majority of the people are against military action against Syria. How is it possible that the leaders of those countries want actions which are opposed by a large majority of their own population. This is only possible by self elected left wing elite which dominate the MSM. This elite has allied itself with the Islamist. It is a sad state of affairs when a conservative PM is more interested in pleasing the left wing media elite instead of its own constituents. How would the left wing react when Russia said it would actively intervene because of genocide of the Alawites or the ethnic cleansing of the Christians out of Syria.
The BBC is the problem.
Is it not possible that friends in Saudi are not paying huge bonuses for “friends” to resolve a vexing problem.
Have been away from this site for a couple of days but TigerOC’s post above re Saudi Arabia’s involvement is interesting. has anyone seen the article by experienced Middle East journalist Dale Gavlak on the Mint Press News site?
He’s been in the area of the chemical attack in Damascus talking to locals and members of the rebel side. He says the rebels admit to releasing the gas, albeit inadvertently. The father of one of the rebels killed by the gas says the gas was supplied by agents of Saudi Prince Bandar Al Saud, apparently without telling the rebels what they were handling. The rebels,including the named informant’s son, were killed when they mishandled the gas canisters whilst moving them through their supply tunnels under the streets of the Damascus suburb.
Apparently Prince Bandar and other Saudis have been supplying the rebels with chemical weapons and other nasty munitions for some time now. Bandar is also well in with the CIA by all accounts.
It looks like the Saudis are manipulating the situation, including the USA, for their own ideological benefit. They are trying to get the West to fight their wars for them.
Unable to post a link to the article, but I’ve seen it posted on other sites, including Guido Fawkes.
Apologies if the link has been mentioned previously.
Did anyone catch the BBC News item from Manchester? Apparently this city has, according to the reporter, thousands of Syrians!
Two were interviewed, both with strong accents, and they were demanding that ‘WE’ take action. The ”WE’ of course meant Britain and British forces.
If only the reporter had the nous or guts to ask ”Well what are you doing for YOUR country instead of hiding away in Britain?”
There are so many young men from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia claiming refuge in the UK.
What better way to demonstrate their love for their country and culture than to join a Special Forces regiment, be trained as soldiers by the British Army (we train lots of those who remain) and then go and fight for their country, instead, as with the Manchester Syrian, expecting British forces to fight and die in their in their place?
The BBC could have a whole series on the different regiments and then trace their heroic sacrifices for their own bloody countries.
Incidentally, my daughter and her husband who live in Dubai, spent three weeks about five years ago touring Syria by public transport and taxis. They visited ancient sites and Damascus, they found the people warm and friendly, were given free accommodation by two Syrians they met on route, and until recently were in fairly regular contact with them.
No more sadly, she doesn’t know what has happened to their friends.
I recall in Manchester some time after Ghadaffi took over, there were lots of Lybians – asylum seekers – who were a menace driving around late at night in their fast cars looking for drinking clubs and women. Some were students, and one day decided to have a shoot out among themselves during a student union meeting, with bullets flying. A young lad, NUS president, was chairing the meeting and somehow regained order. He later became an MP and would have done well as a Speaker. But a naughty boy, was Phil Woolas, and was booted out.
From my experience Phil Woolas was only interested in climbing the political ladder and did not care for his constituents if it not fit the party line. Good riddance; wish it would happen to more such MPs.
Bones, True
I wonder if the Syrian community in Manchester will be celebrating the 100 anniversary of the British occupation of Damascus on the 1st October 2018? They must be angry that we then gave Syria to the French, otherwise they could still have been under British rule, instead of having to claim asylum in Britain. The same is true about other asylum seekers. The British Empire had far more space for these people to live under British rule, than today, in our small island. The Lefties are what must be called “Inverted Imperialists”.
Having just watched this “tribute” to Sir David Frost I can only conclude that it’s just another blatant, shameful piece of BBC propoganda.
Right from the start we have 2 full minutes of Conservative bashing and what a surpise – look who they start with and note how all the questions/clips selected are negative…..
Then we have the son of arch enemy Rupert Murdoch being asked about “lying”….with some mysterious canned laughter inserted at the end!!.
And let’s not forget the “big bad banks” with Nick Leeson.
Oh and we simply couldn’t forget a chirpy, cheery Saint Nelson Mandela…..”boogying” to an African band…..
And what on earth is that part about where DF asks if Tony Blair and George Bush “pray together” then when TB gives a somewhat startled reply it’s edited over with canned laughter!!. What??.
And as for the last minute of the film I’m truly struggling to figure it out but it’s interesting how after Tony Blair and Gorden Brown(New Labour) they show a segment where James Callaghan declares himself as just “Labour”.
Solidarity brothers!.
Unbelievable…..
Forgot to insert the link…..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23920044
Frost himself gave up on the inherently biased BBC and went to Al Jazeera. This article almost seems like a deliberately amateurish revenge effort.
What does it say of Frost’s political preferences to see him end up with a programme at Islamic Al Jazeera?
David Frost dated and was engaged to Diane Carroll in the 1970s, a very daring thing at the time.
http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/david-frost-and-diahann-carroll-news-photo/90102358
I think we know whose side INBBC is on in this:-
“NSA spied on foreign targets including Arab news network Al Jazeera claim latest leaks from whistleblower Edward Snowden ”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2408317/NSA-spied-foreign-targets-including-Arab-news-network-Al-Jazeera-claim-latest-leaks-whistleblower-Edward-Snowden.html
Surely it would only be a surprise if the NSA didn’t spy on Al Jazeera? A TV network sponsored by a Muslim state with wide appeal in the Arab world. I’d hope the NSA was interested.
Frankly if Mandela was white his performance here would be dismissed as ‘Dad Dancing’. Absolutely no rhythm whatsoever. Many years ago I used to help out a friend by playing the old joanna for the occasional tea dances she organised for OAPs on Hastings Pier, and one old dear used to come by herself and dance with her zimmer frame: that rusty customer was bloody Eleanor Powell compared to this.
“I’ll give it Sevvvennnn !”
“Oh, sorry, I meant : Zeeeeerrrrrooo !”
An erroneous report from some source had Nelson Mandela already dead, when in fact some mong had misread that what was intended was for Mandela to be discharged home, as there was nothing more that could be done for him in the hospital that couldn’t also be done in his home (specially equipped, to be sure), and for him there to await and meet his impending death, in the company of his friends and family.
Give BBC credit that they did not run with the Mandela dead story– much as you know they would like to do so, since you just know they have mocked up a special on his saintly life, just (figuratively) gathering dust, because the old crock refuses to peg out on schedule.
Weekend at Bernies!
Hmm any bets on the BBC constantly dropping their name in Frost based storeys reminding everyone he was their man ! oddly in direction proportion to their dropping their name from every pedo and sex offender case where the accused no matter how long their BBC career was ,suddenly become a ‘broadcaster’!
Frost ended up at Islamic Al Jazeera.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/elbow-room.html
‘despite the over-population putting pressure on the lifts and toilets’
Possibly a metaphor or two there for BBC staff as the pen stories about the country as a whole, though they doubtless would be crushed quickly if made.
I just watched the “Coastal” episode of “Britain’s Big Wildlife Revival”. From the start, several contributors (including the ever more bonkers Bill Oddie) repeated the idea that “climate change” was a threat to British coastal wildlife. Nobody, however, came up with a hint of evidence to support that.
The explanation for the decline, for instance, of Puffin populations is no great mystery, in reality. While natural predators don’t help and Puffin colonies can be wiped out by the physical collapse of their burrows (which is inevitable, sooner, or later), the major threat to all British seabirds is over-fishing of Sand Eels, largely by Danish factory ships. This is – surprise, surprise – somehow wholly unregulated by the common fisheries policy of the benighted eu. The commentary did mention this over-fishing, but not, of course, the involvement of the beebyanka’s beloved Brussels.
Then the programme turned to the threats that face White-tailed Eagles, as they criss-cross Scotland: boxes ticked for poisoning, shooting, collisions with railways…
And the proliferation of wind turbines on every rural hillside in Scotland? Strangely, that didn’t get a mention.
Odd.
”And the proliferation of wind turbines ”
Probably takes a hundred wind turbines to light a candle.
the puffin decline was due to the “extreme” weather we had, in other words the cold killed them off after years of freezing weather. but according to the rspb the numbers have since recovered
RSPB plans to kill thousands of birds –
http://britain-today.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/what-rspb-doesnt-want-you-to-know.html
Puffins migrate at the end of the breeding season, as do the various terns, the other auks and the Gannets, so they really aren’t affected by freezing weather, unless the breeding colonies are still ice-bound when the parents return in the spring. That hasn’t happened in my lifetime (and I’m a fair bit older than any Puffin).
Rather conspicuously, in the context of Puffins, the programme referred only to an English and a Welsh reserve. I suspect some less well-protected Scottish colonies (and most British breeding seabirds are in Scotland) are more severely depleted and more obviously so by the factory ships.
The idea that “climate change” somehow affects Shetland, or the Bass Rock, but not Skomer, or Lundy, would be a tricky one to adapt to the Message (global alarming is supposed to be “global”, after all).
“Probably takes a hundred wind turbines to light a candle. ”
And then only if you rub them together!!
The BBC’s wildlife output has hit a shockingly low point. When it isn’t thinly veiled Green propaganda it is presented as if aimed at an audience of retarded children – the recent Burrowers series being a case in point. For all the BBC’s huge technical resources and ability, the scripts and presentational styles are patronising rubbish.
Other than being a completely unfunny fat lefty feminist what the f&%# does the unphotogenic Jo Brand know about judging a photographic competiton on Countryfile?
Could she not be beached and refloated as some kind of island meant for migrating birds to rest upon before setting off somewhere?
She’s a former psychiatric nurse, so has experience dealing with the ravings of unwashed idiots.
E petition to stop non citizens claiming benefits
Why hasn’t someone thought of this before?
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/
Here’s the exact URL –
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/54350
Cheers!
Thanks Ian, but I think we are too late. The petition closed on 29th August.
A great pity this wasn’t given wider publicity. I don’t know of anybody who isn’t sick and tired of being taken for a ride by every scrounger and chancer who simply turns up. The current system is nothing short of suicidal insanity, with no sign whatever of any official will to change it significantly.
There again, those with a vested interest in retaining the status quo are also the very same people who appear to have their sweaty hands on the levers of power (and the media…and education…..and the public services….and so on) while the poor bloody taxpayer gets shafted again…and again…and again.
Which may explain why nobody heard about the petition until it was too late to be counted.
Listening to 5 Live’s “Man’s hour” tonight.
Has ever a more limp wristed, skin crawlingly wanky programme ever been broadcast?
Special guest was the Beeb’s favourite pin up boy of sporting diversity Clark Carlisle – pass the sick bucket please.
Funny how his erstwhile colleague Paul Elliott’s not heard of much nowadays………………………
Yep, that says it all about the BBC’s bogus attempts at balance.
On the one hand we have Women Sour.: a whole hour dedicated to Milly Tant nutcases peddling unlikely atrocity stories and Gurl Powah nonsense. On the other, we get palace eunuchs discussing new ways for men to abase themselves before the Sacred Femme.
“David Cameron is a vainglorious fantasist. He should quit.”
By PETER HITCHENS.
[Excerpt]:-
“In some ways, most shocking has been the behaviour of the BBC. It uncritically promoted atrocity propaganda from the beginning, making no effort to be objective. It frequently treated opponents of the rush to war with nasty contempt. If the BBC Trust is to justify its large budget and fancy offices, it would do well to investigate this grave failure to be impartial.
“BUT it was not just the BBC. Until a couple of days before Mr Cameron’s War was abruptly cancelled, most of the media were still braying for an attack.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2408071/PETER-HITCHENS-David-Cameron-vainglorious-fantasist-He-quit.html
‘If the BBC Trust is to justify its large budget and fancy offices, it would do well to investigate this grave failure to be impartial.’
Given the number and outcome of previous grave failure investigations by the BBC’s internal wallpapering department, if they do, best anticipate another non-programming hit to the budget, along with a few pay-offs, hush-ups, re-hires and new hires.
So if watching smug, unaccountable do-nothings getting away with no more than navel-gazing is your gig, knock yourself out, Peter.
The only way to deal with the BBC ‘s failure to be impartial is to flood them with complaints and pursue those complaints. They are obliged by law to answer complaints by BBC license payers and it would cost them loads of cash in resources and to employ staff to do so.
IMMIGRATION.
Of course, the issue of continuing mass immigration is a key political issue on which BBC-NUJ has been strongly criticised for not being impartial, and for not reflecting the views of British people.
‘Sunday Times’ website:-
“Voters say immigration hurts UK”
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/article1308078.ece
Also for BBC-NUJ:-
‘Sky News’-
“Million Commonwealth Migrants Can Vote In UK.
Campaigners warn people who are not even British citizens could have huge influence if there is a tight vote in 2015.”
http://news.sky.com/story/1134134/million-commonwealth-migrants-can-vote-in-uk
That Sunday Times survey was HUGE. And utterly clear in its messages.
But not a single mention of it on BBC programmes today ? Any serious “review of the papers” should have referred to it..
But at the BBC – deep-six it, because “we” don’t like its crystal-clear conclusions. Don’t tell the rest of the plebs how strongly a 20,000 pewrson survey of public opinion is against BBC groupthink..
Supplementary.
“Immigration is hurting us, say six out of ten British voters:
Fears over impact on jobs and public services”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2408621/Immigration-hurting-say-British-voters-Fears-impact-jobs-public-services.html
If there is a meeting between Ed Miliband and Robert Mugabe it might be time to start buying shares in Ryanair?
No – Thomas De La Rue
Eek!
Thought the Simon Schama programme was OK, and just heard most of Roger Scrutons Point Of View today-equally fine by me.
Is the worm turning at the BBC?…or are we talking 0.00005 of their content for the year?
Wonder if More Or Less could look into it for me?
Dr Scruton stated the unfashionable view (for the BBC, anyway) that the EU was undemocratic, because it could not be described by its member states and citizens with the first person plural pronoun (‘we’), and concluded by saying that democracy ends when ‘we’ end up being governed by ‘them’.
For universalists of the Left, there is no ‘we’, only humanity in general, the brotherhood of all (wo)men; hence their mistrust of and disloyalty to their own nation state, which they think is an outdated and narrow idea. But how many people outside the political class would agree with that? And what if people in other parts of the globe quite reasonably reject ‘our’ values?
Talking of pronouns, the Spanish ‘nosotros’ actually fuses the idea of other/separate with the older word for ‘we’; similarly, ‘we French’ can be rendered in French by ‘nous autres francais’, where ‘autres’ means literally ‘others’. Italian has something similar, with the form ‘noialtri’ where, once again, ‘altri’ means ‘others’.
The Simon Schama programme was surprisingly good. It was very disjointed though and seemed to rely on the viewer knowing the history and approximate dates beforehand, and missed out vast chunks. Jewish history up to the end of the 2nd temple period is so huge, I was disappointed it only had one programme dedicated to it. Wondering where the remaining 4 episodes will go?
Schama had nothing to say, and said it a great length. An hour of my time I am not going to get back.
You’re right. I was so surprised it wasn’t a cynical sneer-fest, it blinded me to the reality.
“cynical sneer-fest”
That starts next week
“where the remaining 4 episodes will go?” … hmm
how big a chunk will go into the …
who would believe after WW2,that Jews would now be the misappropriators of
“Palestinian Land”(TM), the ahem
persecuters of the “poor” (TM) disenfranchised, Palestinians who
“only want peace” (TM)
and now live in a “concentration” camp
as Israel is an “apartheid state” (TM)
The content of Schama’s program wasn’t bad at all. A reasonable summary of the early, developing years of the religious culture and texts, and no real twisting or skirting of history. Just about every time I said, “Well, he better now bring up X….”, he brought it up. His histrionics and speech cadences were so annoying, though, that even friends watching it with me who had never heard of him before were complaining and asking if he was always like this. They also complained about the (Michael) Palinization: “Is this whole thing going to be him walking up hills going on boat rides and sitting in front of something, waving his hands around?”
I was wondering two things while watching. First, what kind of “complaints from both sides” will this evoke? You can be there will be anger at the BBC promoting Jews as having an historical, religious connection to Israel. The anti-Israel crowd will see this as proof of Jewish control of the BBC, and as Israeli propaganda, much like how many people complain that a documentary on something to do with Islam is in and of itself a propaganda piece and evidence of BBC dhimmitude.
The second thing I was wondering is that, while the first episode was rather positive about the resilience and thriving nature of the Jewish people, on what kind of note will it end? This is a third-party production, but surely the BBC will have some editorial control. I’m not optimistic about it ending on anything other than a very negative note.
The series will end with the Holocaust and its relationship to the creation of the Jewish state . This emphasis as highlighted by Simon Scharma himself “This issue will be dealt with frankly, clearly and intensely” shows that the usual BBC historical distortions and bias against Israel and the Jews is the clear agenda. ie That it was only the holocaust that was responsible for the foundation of the Jewish State and to show the poor Arabs as vicitims of Jewish colonisation.
One thing for sure there will be absolutely no mention of Israel’s remarkable achievements and contribution to the world as seen in weekly news at http://www.verygoodnewsisrael.blogspot.com
Even ABC, the network which once sort of prostituted itself to help the President promote ObamaCare, while refusing to air an ad critical of it, is fed up with the behavior of the President. In a full report following yesterday’s war speechifying, ABC quoted the key bit of the President’s speech, and then wrote this:
Obama then left with Vice President Biden for a golf game.
People are noticing. The Beeboids are really struggling to avert their eyes at this point.
Barack Ogolfa.
I hear the military brass are pissed off about having been recalled from taking the holiday weekend off in expectation of starting the Obombing, and then had to watch Him hit the links while they were stuck on base waiting for Him to give the order.
How the bBC has become the willing mouthpiece for Islamic terrorism.
Taliban bomb US base in Afghanistan
The Taliban have attacked a US base in eastern Afghanistan, with reports of a series of explosions.A local official was quoted as saying that the attack triggered a gun battle and Nato helicopters were flying over the base. A Taliban spokesman told the BBC that the group was behind the attack.
Reading that almost euphoric report, you see that the so called impartial bBC not only sensationalises the headline, but by offering as little information as possible with the entire emphasis of the article directed at the mastery of Islamic terrorists to strike at will. Here is a much more detailed account of the event from the so called leftwing Guardian:
Afghanistan: suicide bombers close Nato supply route
A group of suicide bombers attacked a US base near Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan on Monday morning, leading to multiple explosions, a gunfight and the closure of a key road used by Nato supply trucks, officials said.
The Taliban claimed responsibility for the strike in the Torkham area. In a statement, Nato confirmed “a series of explosions” in the area but said none of its personnel were killed. The military alliance does not release information on any of its troops who may have been wounded
and if I go over to AFP you get to read this:
A group of Taliban suicide bombers and gunmen have attacked a US base near the Pakistani border in eastern Afghanistan, sparking a three-hour shootout, officials said.
A group of Taliban suicide bombers and gunmen have attacked a US base near the Pakistani border in eastern Afghanistan, sparking a three-hour shootout, officials said.
No member of the US-led NATO mission in Afghanistan was killed in the attack on a base in Nangarhar province, said a spokesman for the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). “There were a series of explosions that occurred in the vicinity of a forward operating base in Nangarhar province,” an ISAF spokesman told AFP.…..Ahmad Zia Abdulzai, Nangarhar governor spokesman, said that insurgents first attacked NATO supply trucks.
“Today morning, Taliban insurgents attacked and burned supply trucks delivering supplies to NATO which belonged to foreign forces near the US base in Torkham,” he told AFP.
“Later, three armed suicide bombers started gunfire and clashes with Afghan forces and US forces, and they were killed after three hours of fighting. “At the moment, the stand-off is over, and the situation is under control.”
Gee how come everybody else, who have to earn a living can report the facts, but the tax funded bBC, well they just report a glowing sanitised report about Islamic terrorists. I quote from the AFP article:
The Taliban have launched a spate of attacks across Afghanistan in recent days, with scores killed in suicide bombings, ambushes and rocket attacks, and also executed five aid workers in the west. On Sunday, the bullet-riddled bodies of seven civilians kidnapped one week ago by the Taliban were found in Ghazni province, just south of the capital.
Now if ISAF had shot those people, you can bet your bottom Dinar that the bBC would be reporting it in full. I wonder how long it is before the bBC start reporting from within the Taliban:
I counted them all out for Allah, and I counted them all back in again”
The bBC, the traitors within our Midst
Exciting new develpments are expected today in the BBC’s frantic search for a “gay” Premiership footballer.
In recognition of the potential disruption to clubs that willy nilly mass “coming out” of players throughout the season might cause – the BBC is to impose a Europewide ‘gay window’.
So midnight tonight will be the ‘gay deadline’ prior to which all ‘coming out’ business must be complete.
Nicky Campbell : anti-Semitic joke this morning at 8.05am BBC 5 Live
‘Spurs will go crazy with that money from Bale’s transfer…. they will have a wonderful Christmas’
Next week our Nicky tells the one about the Somali, the Pakistani and the Algerian who walked into a Carehome for sex?
No? Thought not.
Global Warming still alive and kicking at BBC local Radio (Devon)
Didn’t catch the full story, (the news bulletin was only about 15 seconds long) but according to our local BBC radio station, because of Global Warming, bugs and critters are heading north from somewhere because it is getting warmer due to Global Warming. And that was about it.
All those other reports about no Global Warming have fallen upon deaf ears at the BBC hasn’t it? I wonder why?
Heard much the same report on the ‘Today’ programme earlier….supposedly research based on the last 50 years….. unfortunately, almost everyone agrees (including the Global Warming fanatics), that there has been something like a decade and a half of no significant warming whatsoever.
So, perhaps some other factors are in play here, just like there are possibly other factors in the variation in the global climate than man-made carbon dioxide emissions…..which have mysteriously been increasing over the past decade and a half when there was all this global warming going on….. oh, wait a minute…
But no, it’s so much easier to ignore facts when something doesn’t fit your theory, or just invent a new mathematical model which does agree with your hypothesis…. job done… now, where’s that grant money ?
Seems there is a point where ‘Asians’ just won’t do in headlines…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23921570
Is there a Sikh code of silence on sexual grooming?
Our Zack evidently also a keen advocate of the gadget brochure technique of sticking any old claim in as a question to make it appear more legitimate.
I am also unclear as to who the groomers of the Sikh victims may be, as that seems to have been left vague.
Next up, what’s up with those violent Buddhists?
Presuming this is the reporter (the quoted URL goes to a holding page):
@zackadesina
BBC TV director/producer/reporter – Current Affairs/Documentaries/News
London · zackadesina.com
Views all the BBC’s too, one presumes?
Unsure if he is an employee or not.
I agree, there doesn’t seem to be any reference to exactly who the groomers are. I must admit I have only speed read the article but I didn’t see any clues in there. The article makes out in its headline that there is a Sikh sexual grooming problem, alluding to the conclusion that Sikhs are the ones doing it yet I suspect there is more to it than that.
‘there doesn’t seem to be any reference to exactly who the groomers are’
As Pounce has kindly followed up upon, the reason may yet emerge (Subject to confirmation. Names can sometimes still be a poor guide of faith followed).
However if it turns out as suspected, I’d be putting that headline up as one the BBC’s more cynically bent semantic twists, dragging in the victims’ faith in a way designed to make it look like the males of that same faith were the perpetrators.
I am now seeing a lot of bylines that suggest tribal loyalties can often govern the partiality of reporting, through skew to downright misrepresentation.
It’s not a good trend, especially as managers seem to run a mile if staff stand ready to scream an ‘ism if they are called out for simply being pants.
I love the way the BBC tries to say the fault is with the victims community by implying that the Sikh code of silence is the real problem here, not the community doing the grooming.
Sadly I can’t say I love it at all.
They are not ‘trying’ to say it, and when push comes to shove (FOI excluded) they’ll claim semantically it was furthest from their minds, but all I’ve shared it with thought that is exactly what was being claimed and meant. In fact most first presumed it was Sikh men doing the ‘groo’… peadophilic abusing, which it appears from other reports it was not.
If so, such a dirty diversion from the guilty to the innocent needs to be fully held up, and to account.
Imagine if anyone from outside the BBC bubble tried to tarnish any victims from their raft of approved ‘ism groups as they have like this?
As he seems to have fallen over the line elsewhere, I’d be fascinated in Stephen Fry’s thoughts on such a punt by colleagues/employers who seem very much keen to mention some and not mention others in their ‘impartial’ reporting.
Guest who wrote:
I am also unclear as to who the groomers of the Sikh victims may be, as that seems to have been left vague.
I mentioned this when the bBC first reported this, of the six 4 have very
IslamicAsian names:Aabidali Mubarak Ali,
Rakib Iacub
Wajid Usman,
Hamza Imtiazali,
Bharat Modhwadia, (Hindu first name,)
Chandresh Mistry, (not sure, thinks also hindu)
As usual, it’s all in The Times, whose reporter Andrew Norfolk appears to be the only journalist prepared to go beyond the leftie prejudice that Muslims mustn’t be blamed for anything.
Pity it’s behind Murdoch’s paywall but today’s Times (p. 6 of print edition, 2 September) says that five of the six men were Muslim and one Hindu.
The Times article also states that this grooming was behind the attack by 50 Sikh men on a Muslim restaurant (Moghul Durbar) in January: some of the abuse of the Sikh girl took place in a flat attached to the restaurant. The Police immediately decided that this was ‘not a faith-based issue’. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-21060288
Interesting use of the word ‘groomer’, used casually in the same manner that one might say ‘footballer’, ‘teacher’, ‘shopper’ etc. It sounds so less innocuous than something more descriptive like paedophile or child rapist doesn’t it, BBC?
” BBC journalists cheered the news that the ‘wicked witch’ Lucy Adams is to go, but the DG won’t”
By Ian Burrell.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/opinion/ian-burrell-bbc-journalists-cheered-the-news-that-the-wicked-witch-lucy-adams-is-to-go-but-the-dg-wont-8793784.html
http://www.parliament.uk/pac
The committee will consider written submissions to its inquiries. Please ensure submissions are received by the committee office at least seven days before the meeting to which they relate.
Written submissions should be sent to
pubaccom@parliament.uk
09 September 2013
3:15 pm
Subject: BBC severance payments recall
Witness(es): Mark Thompson, former Director-General, BBC, Marcus Agius, former Chairman of the BBC Executive Board Remuneration Committee, Lord Patten, Chairman, BBC Trust, Anthony Fry, BBC Trustee, Sir Michael Lyons, former Trust Chairman and Lucy Adams, HR Director, BBC
Deadlines…deadlines.
“Last Night of the Proms were ‘dangerously English,’
says ex-BBC boss Sir Nicholas Kenyon”
By ALASDAIR GLENNIE
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2408607/Proms-dangerously-English-says-ex-BBC-boss-Sir-Nicholas-Kenyon.html
Cripes, how long before any outbreak of “Dangerous Englishness” may require Obama to authorise a pre-emptive strike?
The flag-waving on the last night of the proms must surely be a ‘red line’ not to be crossed.
The interesting thing about what he has to say, is that 99.999% of the flags on show are the Union flag of England,Scotland and Wales. In others words British.
As usual a cock sucking ethical latte drinker who thinks he knows f-ing best for the people of these isles which happens to include people of all colours,faiths and creeds.
Myself brown skinned and born in Yorkshire.
BBC health warnings?
Always interesting to hear how the BBC introduces the sources of the opinions it airs.
This morning we have ‘Neil Clark – jounalist’
Who he? I hear the Licence Payers ask….
http://neilclark66.blogspot.co.uk/
‘Neil Clark
An anti-war, anti-neo-conservative blog to counter the lies of those who wish to condemn us to perpetual conflict. All this, plus horse-racing, football, books, films, television, and plenty of other topics too…..’
A pacifist then? OK that’s a point of view and not really relevant to this guy’s opinions on the subject of 5 Live’s debate this moring which is something about overpaid footballers.
But wait….
‘About Me…..
On domestic issues I support re-nationalisation of the railways and public utilities (I am co-founder of The Campaign for Public Ownership), a new top rate of tax on the very wealthy…..’
Pretty far-left then eh Neil? Wonder why the BBC didn’t tell us about?
Rule #1 in effect, as usual.
I see the BBC are back holding hands with the Howard League again bemoaning the terrible conditions that rapists, murderers and crooks have to endure.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23923321
Wonder how the “alleged suspect” in the “sad death” of Drummer Lee Rigby is doing?
His chipped tooth seems to have been dealt with, why else aren`t we getting updates and bulletins on his recovery?
Now Mandelas out…time surely to ask again for heads to roll( er, is that the phrase the BBC would use for this case?)
Well-at least another Leveson-style enquiry at least…how did our `umble pilgrim with a dodgy steering wheel` manage to chip a tooth?
Jewish shekel in the muesli?…his halal Linda McCartney sausage had been overdone in the microwave?
Panorama…at the very least!
The BBC are definitely on the side of the accused in this case.
The inmates in prisons are (political prisoners and non-TV license payers aside) all volunteers. If conditions are so bad, why do they do things to get themselves imprisoned? According to the Howard Penal League’s annual report “The U R Boss project, funded by the Big Lottery, contributed 46% of the charity’s income for the year”. BBC and HPL – liberal-lefties financed by the public and acting against their interests?
I remember when the BBC spent its money on programmes rather than bosses: Bill Oddie.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/bill-oddie-the-birdwatching-broadcaster-talks-pompous-drummers-and-blasted-leafblowers-8788685.html
Unbelievable report on Buddhist violence against muslims in Burma on BBC News Sunday morning. Apparently there is a young Buddhist monk who heads up a 969 group who advocates against muslim expansion and erosion of traditional values. This group circulated stickers for Buddhists to display on their businesses to show they weren’t muslim. The reporter gave 2 instances of violence in the region where several people had been killed but one of them was referred to as ‘an argument in a muslim pawn shop which got out of hand and a buddhist was killed’ As usual the BBC narrative was muslim=victim, however listening to this entire programme made me think two things – 1. All this sounds like we should be in the UK, coming together to defend our nation and heritage against a primitive invader and 2. If this twat had done this programme in Saudi Arabia and put these questions to a representative from the House of Saud, his head would be on a spike somewhere. Utter leftist BBC shit.
Another day another burst of climate hysteria:
“Climate change ‘driving spread of crop pests'” sobs the BBC, rehashing a press release from the Journal Of We Would Say That Wouldn’t We? (aka the risible ‘Nature Climate Change’)
Apparently the movement of crop pests is driven by ‘climate change’.
So what has been happening for the past 17 years when it has, if anything, got colder?
The BBC’s faux science coverage has got beyond belief now. It’s bad enough that mediocre science is being done and applauded (Prof.Lindzen was excellent on this recently) but the BBC’s shameless promotion of it deserves all the ridicule it can be given..
I genuinely think – with regards to so-called CAGW – that the BBC is now doing little more than acting as an EU/UN IPCC propagandist; if they were genuinely interested in the science of ‘man-made’ climate change they’d be enthusiastically reporting the well-documented (and officially verified) ‘pause’ in global temperatures for the past 17 years (while CO2 levels continue to rise – thus, breaking any alarmist link between temperature and CO2). And, btw, a ‘greening of the planet’ is being observed as the direct by-product of these heightened CO2 levels. CO2 is actually a bringer of life – not the BBC seem to want to acknowledge that.
Also, the BBC were breathlessly quick to jump about shouting about the ‘record’ ‘shrinkage’ of Arctic ice last year (just after the usual annual summer melt), but seem curiously unwilling to report on this year’s RECORD Arctic ice extent (and the Antarctic, too, continues to do very well, indeed in terms of ice extent). Looks like the Polar Bears are safer than ever, after all.
I can only conclude that as far as this shameless Corporation is concerned any science – no matter how well verified and impeccably sourced – that doesn’t fit the agreed ‘catastrophic’ meme is to be ignored in favour of maintaining the agreed political narrative of ‘imminent catastrophic destruction’ from our wicked, materialistic ways.
Is this any way for a $3.5bn pa public broadcaster to be behaving? Isn’t wilful misrepresentation of the facts some kind of breach of its Charter..?
The trouble is, Phil, when it comes to the Charter they are self-policing. They really are ‘The New Untouchables’. Bring back Eliot Ness, I say!
I am the only one who wishes the BBC would get shot of Chris Packham and replace him with someone who has a personality?
Obviously well regarded at Al Beeb who seem to think that both he and Jo bloody Brand are well qualified to just a wildlife photography competition for the 2014 calendar.
Personally I thought the 12 ‘best’ pictures were pretty crap, still it eases the BBC’s guilt, all proceeds to Children In Need….
Was watching the new Sunday night drama ‘What Remains’ with the OH last night, again the BBC have surpassed themselves. Lesbian overtones aside, we have an intelligent Asian woman cohabiting a complete thug of a white guy, but the BBC have managed to give her character a Hindu first name (Vidya) and mix it with a Muslim surname (Khan) either stupid or more likely extending their multicult remit…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b039ft8x/profiles/vidya-khan
Don’t forget the creepy white teacher who seems to have a ex student locked up in his ground floor flat, ‘serving’ him. Another box ticked!
Has me hooked unfortunately. David Threlfall, eyeliner aside, is rather good.
Threlfall gave a career performance in Conspiracy. A quite chilling but riveting interpretation of Wannsee.
The BBC co produced this stunning film which shows they can when they try. Why they don’t concentrate on such excellent drama rather than the lightweight shite they pump out most of the time is shameful.
Have you noticed how V (where can you find a bank you can trust nowadays…and here’s our next caller who banks with the…oooh, Co-op (well blow me down)) D goes for the throat of any of her guests who don’t answer her questions – the proviso seeming to be that they are people that she doesn’t like, this morning’s guest from the Employment Agencies (who are in dispute with the TUC) being an example.
Listen to her ‘chat’ with Chucky this morning about chemicals exports and how she lets him posture and get away with blue murder, waffling on, avoiding the questions and misrepresenting, particularly when going on to discuss last Thursdays vote.
Umunna asserted that Cameron wanted to take Britain to war against Syria with no further evidence. That was totally untrue, Cameron had committed himself to a further debate and another vote by MPs before action was taken after, to paraphrase Miliband , some ‘UN time’.
Why didn’t Derbyshire challenge Umunna?
Why wasn’t there anyone else there to balance the discussion on the issue of chemical exports (which weren’t actually exported)?
Why did she give Umunna such an easy ride?
Was it bias? or that she wasn’t on top of the story? or was it that she couldn’t be arsed?
To me it sounded very much like a set piece set-up for Chucky to showboat, courtesy of the BBC.
He’s the British O’bama, dontcha know?
So his Wiki entry says.
#88 – I think you’ve answered your own question about the lack of any challenge.
‘Umunna asserted that Cameron wanted to take Britain to war against Syria with no further evidence. That was totally untrue, Cameron had committed himself to a further debate and another vote by MPs before action was taken after, to paraphrase Miliband , some ‘UN time’.
It’s BBC business as usual: making sure history – even this recent – is re-written to conform to the shifting Labour narrative. Must be hard for them to keep up sometimes.
When the bBC has a story it wishes to report: nit will go full throttle in which to ensure that everybody gets to hear about it.
Be it DAvid Frost interviewing Nelson (PBH) Mandela, How Bombing Syria will help Al Q or even if the US have arrested somebody from Somalia,who was illegally living in London (thus a British citizen by default) who just happens to be swanning around Afghanistan looking for a course in which to get him off drugs. So on that note how many people have seen this bit if news:
UK forces ‘did not mutilate Iraqis’
A British officer has denied claims UK forces mutilated the dead bodies of Iraqis after a notorious 2004 battle.
Col Adam Griffiths also said he was unaware of allegations prisoners had been mistreated or unlawfully killed after the so-called “Battle of Danny Boy” firefight.Col Griffiths had been worried about a witch-hunt by the Royal Military Police so had made copious notes about the day’s events soon afterwards
In a nutshell Iraqi terrorist in vast numbers, ambushed a convoy thinking easy pickings, instead they died laughing their cocks off as the soldiers fixed bayonets and advanced into contact across fields and up a hill in which to show Allah’s finest, how to fight. To the bbC (And the left) this was bitterly unfair and that by fighting back, these Islamic terrorists didn’t have a chance in which to kill another day.
The bBC, the traitors within our midst
BBC commissioning opinion polls?
There is also a new ICM poll for the BBC. This doesn’t have any voting intention figures (the BBC doesn’t like commissioning them!), but has some more general questions on Syria. 71% think MPs were right to vote against military action (20% think they were wrong). Asked if they approve of how David Cameron has handled the situation in Syria 40% approve, 42% disapprove. The figures for Ed Miliband are 33% approve, 39% disapprove. Full tabs are here.
http://twileshare.com/ayik
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/
Have you ever seen the bBC speak highly of an invader well not when the person is British: Be it the Middle East,South America,North America or even Europe to the bBC Empire from the British point of view was bad, that we should make amends to all the world and that we should break up the union so this can never happen again. But what about other empires, How about the Ottoman Empire which existed for a lot longer and actually ruled over more people than the British. Well according to the bBC, the Ottomans were a fine bunch of people who treated everybody nice (you really should read up on how the bBC rewrites the history of Spain and how the Spanish were ungrateful bastards for kicking the Muslims out) and so it continues with this sop to the invasion (and occupation of Hungary by Turkey)
The search for Suleiman the Magnificent’s heart
Later this month a team of Hungarian researchers will publish a report on the whereabouts of the heart of one of Ottoman Turkey’s most famous sultans. But why has this become such an important historical riddle to solve?
The French statesman Cardinal Richelieu described it as “the battle that saved civilisation” – the siege of the Hungarian castle of Sziget, 447 years ago, almost to the day. The Muslim Turks finally took the town in September 1566, but sustained such losses, including the death of their leader, Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent, that they did not threaten Vienna again for 120 years. Now researchers are digging in the soil – and the archives – for the good sultan’s heart.
Gee, can you see the bBC promoting anybody who fought and died in the defence of the Uk as having a good heart? Christ they attack anybody who is proud to be British (Unless you are a Muslim and then you are the most loyal of all her majesty’s subjects) Be it Churchill, Bomber Harris or even John Hawkins who helped defeat the Armada. Then we should be all be ashamed to have their names written into our History. Yet a Turkey Sultan who invaded and occupied vast tracks of Eastern Europe for over 200 years and according to the bBC he was a jolly little fellow. While the bBC (And its ilk) is happy to bitch about John Hawkins, what they don’t mention is the amount of misery perpetuated by the Turks in lands they ruled with an Iron fist, Look up :
Janissary
Greek Independence
Serbian Independence
Romanian independence
The Turks had to be physically kicked out of every land they occupied and yet the bBC sings high praises about Ottoman rule. Think I am kidding here is how the bbC finish off their article about the nice Ottoman Sultan who invaded and occupied Hungary with over 100,000 crack troops.
With Prof Pap, I kneel in the mosque to examine dervish graffiti in the plaster – calligraphic images of the face of God, frowned on by mainstream Islam. Somewhere beneath us, in the dry Hungarian earth, Suleiman’s heart beats faster.
The bBC, the traitors within our midst.
This morning on the Today program on Syria was a remarkable piece of double speak. This was in reference to Mali and the intervention of French forces to force an end to the terrorist insurgency and make the land safe for peaceful Muslims. No mention of course that the ‘terrorist insurgents’ were Muslims inspired by the Qur’an and carrying out a jihad ! Talk about hypocrisy.
Apropos of nothing in particular, I’m rereading Evelyn Waugh’s Scoop at the minute. Came across the following passage:
Many of Corker’s anecdotes dealt with the fabulous Wenlock Jakes. “. . . syndicated all over America. Gets a thousand dollars a week. When he turns up in a place you can bet your life that as long as he’s there it’ll be the news centre of the world.
“Why, once Jakes went out to cover a revolution in one of the Balkan capitals. He overslept in his carriage, woke up at the wrong station, didn’t know any different, got out, went straight to a hotel, and cabled off a thousand-word story about barricades in the streets, flaming churches, machine guns answering the rattle of his typewriter as he wrote, a dead child, like a broken doll, spreadeagled in the deserted roadway below his window — you know.
“Well they were pretty surprised at his office, getting a story like that from the wrong country, but they trusted Jakes and splashed it in six national newspapers. That day every special in Europe got orders to rush to the new revolution. They arrived in shoals. Everything seemed quiet enough, but it was as much as their jobs were worth to say so, with Jakes filing a thousand words of blood and thunder a day. So they chimed in too. Government stocks dropped, financial panic, state of emergency declared, army mobilized, famine, mutiny — and in less than a week there was an honest to God revolution under way, just as Jakes had said. There’s the power of the press for you.
“They gave Jakes the Nobel Peace Prize for his harrowing descriptions of the carnage — but that was colour stuff.”
Put me in mind of Jon Donnison’s Gaza reporting.
Did you watch this Jeremy Bowen interview with the FM of Syria?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23925037
The whole affair is to give floor to his policy agenda. No question about what’s going on the ground at all, how do they dare to mass kill their citizens, etc. No, the topic is the US.
Sharp contrast to any interview with anybody from Israel.
But at the end, Bowen asks a question:
‘Do you have any message to the US Congress?’
Hear for yourselves. I already felt several times that Bowen does not play for the audience, but he is fully aware that his reporting – since it appears on the BBC – will land in all those press clippings around the world, so he can easily uptalk viewpoints, dismiss anothers, frame issues, etc.
But I have never experienced something this direct.
So no, I do not buy the idea of lousy journalism at the Beeb, more often than not it is full blown deliberate propaganda and lobbying.
The bBBC have now e-mailed me to say that it may take them longer than two weeks to reply to my complaint about their biased (=false) ‘news’ about the Zimmerman/ Trayvon Martin trial during their eulogy to Martin Luther King’s speech.
This is to let you know that we have referred your complaint to the relevant staff but that it may take longer than 10 working days to reply.
Complaint Summary: Factual inaccuracy about Zimmerman trial
Full Complaint: The bBBC TV 10 o’clock ‘news’ (24 August) stated that George Zimmerman claimed to have shot Trayvon Martin in self-defence. But Zimmerman didn’t make that claim: try reading any of the reports of the trial, except for those on the BBC, of course. I expect your biased ‘journalists’ to make false statements in other programmes, but the news is supposed to be accurate and factually correct.
You didn’t expect anything else, surely?
‘The bBBC have now e-mailed me to say that it may take them longer than two weeks to reply to my complaint about their biased (=false) ‘news’’
It’s a fact. Either a correct one, or incorrect.
Say so or put it right. And apologise.
14 days. 10 working days to do what in response now?
Well, other than drag things out until it has gone away or doesn’t matter.
Transparency & trust the BBC way. Unique.
But you are making them work, empty their coffers and hopefully put an end to their corrupt journalism.
I stumbled across this indy article about the BBC’s very own high priestess of the new faith Stephen Fry.
I felt I must share it and while I make no comment (it needs none) I draw my learned friends attention to the last paragraph -I’ve heard that phrase before I’m sure
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/stephen-fry-hits-back-at-accusations-of-islamophobia-8793025.html
Must really grind anyone’s gears to have legitimate concerns intercepted almost from the first hurdle by battalions of ‘ism warriors used to one utterance seeing a foe’s career destroyed.
That article is so full of chickens coming home to roost it’s difficult to know where to start with a quote, but this really made my day:
‘In a strongly worded blog post, the actor and comedian lamented that the “squeezed liberal finds himself in the position that he cannot criticise Islamofascism because it’s somehow ‘racist'”.
He continued: “It is a topsy-turvy smothering of debate and an Orwellian denial of free speech to declare that speaking out against violence will cause violence.”
Time, methinks, for Mr ‘Paedophile Limerick’ Fry to reflect on ‘homophobia’ and ‘climate change denial’.
Industrial Relations at Broadcasting House-
“NUJ withdraws BBC union-busting claims from website after legal warning.”
By Dominic Ponsford.
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nuj-withdraws-bbc-union-busting-claims-website-after-legal-warning?
The irony of the Nation Union of… Journalists having to pull a supposed story because of lack of substantiation, after a legal threat on this basis from… the BBC… is rather sweet on a variety of levels.
They clearly needed advise from ‘a lawyer’ or a
‘another journalist’ or some such
The Howard League for Letting Everyone Out of Prison says;
‘One in four’ prisoners in overcrowded cells
Um, I’m telling. Prisons aren’t very nice. Bad people are there. Bad things happen. Prisons should be more like a Butlins holiday camp. Sending people to prison for life is ‘inhumane’. I’m telling the BBC, I’ve got them on speed dial. They print all my press releases as if they are real news. Just like they would if I set up an Edited Highlights League for Seriously Punishing People, who like you know murder our soldiers in cold blood, and reduce our neighbourhoods to crime ridden no go areas. In the interests of balance and impartiality of course.
I assume there is an equivalent organisation championing the rights of pensioners given equal time on the BBC?
As a BBC old lag and liberal media type lets slip his fear that the Proms might be ‘dangerously English’ [whatever that means]…..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2408607/Proms-dangerously-English-says-ex-BBC-boss-Sir-Nicholas-Kenyon.html
…..naturally, as a TV Licence Payer, I have been wondering what the BBC seems to imagine is so wrong with ‘Englishness’?
Current BBC bods are not always quite as frank as they might be on this issue – so we have to examine the liberal media carefully for hints.
Keith Watson may not be currently with the BBC but he has all the right [I should say left] credentials: He is ‘gay’ [whatever that means] hates former PM Margaret Thatcher [let it go Keith – you must have been too young to pay the Poll Tax and I’m guessing you weren’t a coal miner], he does however slave away at the coalface doing TV reviews in Metro free newspaper and he is generally a left-liberal media type.
Today he says (I quote) ‘I sometimes wish I was something. Not a Jew necessarily, nor a Catholic, but “something”. Growing up English and seaside suburban, you’re left with a wishy-washy sense of indentity that doesn’t extend much beyond football clubs and pubs.’
When that sort of arse about face thinking comes from a lefty media type – I have to ask….. whose bloody fault is that then?!
Say what you will about the Graun, they know what, and who they like…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/order-order.html
‘Both BBC men are deemed more influential than their new editor James Harding’
Influential? What, you mean when ‘Sources who say’ decides to big up or put down a pol or policy the herd swings in behind the guys with the £4Bpa broadcast only megaphone more?
Shocked, I tell you… shocked.
Lucky they aren’t prone to going beyond mere reporting what is known then.
As to…
‘James Purnell, Director of Strategy and Digital at the BBC, the man who thought up Ofcom, is at 35 – whilst his old BBC sparring partner, Ed Richards, running the thing, is at 65.’
One can see how Mary Hockaday thought that being overseen by them was no bad thing, what with half of Labour’s yesterday’s men being so involved, but still a shame a head of news didn’t appear to know it was all comfortably under the Trust and all the ciph… numbers doubtless making up that internal ring main.
How many on the list are BBC, then? What percentage of the 100 most influential people does the BBC control? Anything like how much dominance the BBC has in the news market?
“Islamophobia breaks out at BBC:
special ‘uncovers the hidden scandal of sexual grooming of young Sikh girls by Muslim men'”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/islamophobia-breaks-out-at-bbc-special-uncovers-the-hidden-scandal-of-sexual-grooming-of-young-sikh-.html
Whatever will Beeboids discover next?
Muslim ‘sexual grooming’ of Christian English girls?
Liberal inquisition desperately trying to paper over cracks in rainbow alliance?
Cripes.
‘An Inside Out London special, uncovers the hidden scandal of sexual grooming of young Sikh girls by Muslim men’
One can only presume this was an effort at re-establishing that famous BBC ‘balance’:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23921570
‘..Inside Out London has uncovered evidence that there are potentially dozens of other young Sikh victims of sexual exploitation…’. But, by…er… whom?
Looks to me that within the BBC there’s a bit of inter-office interpreting of events going on too.
I wonder who is now currently more than miffed and who may be feeling a bit sheepish?
Well what a vile slap in the face to the underage victims, and smear on the Sikh community, that BBC article is.
The BBC do not mention Muslim or Islam even once. But does any of this seem familiar:
– “…The man charged countless other men to have sex with her…”
– “…been the target of a group of groomers since she was 12 years old”
– “They claim that they have struggled to get the police to proactively investigate.”
Just a quick reminder that the “countless other men” that this groomer was able to trust to participate for some reason never seem to be pursued by the police or the MSM.
God knows what the addition of their numbers would do to the misleading fact that most child abusers are white, when most of the population is white.
It is obvious that ignoring politically-favoured criminals will skew the figures somewhat. Or countlessly.
Of course the incidence of the jailed grooming abusers within communities show that the BBC’s favourite group:
– massively leads in organised grooming,
– has a large (“countless”) client base within their community,
– is therefore protected by their community,
– is protected by the political Left,
– even the grooming gangs have rarely been investigated by the police, let alone the gangs’ clients,
– have rarely been investigated by most of the MSM (having its own Left agenda) which when obviously caught out decided to blame the predominantly white BNP and EDL instead.
Now the BBC implies the blame is with the Sikh victims and their family and their religion.
The BBC receives public funding to be factual, and independent of politics or ideology.
Instead it is vile and corrupt, it spays its corruption and poisons public debate.
It needs to be put down.
Yes indeed. Why is the campaigning BBC so reluctant to demand that the clients are arrested? Are they not law breakers and a threat to society? Why are the feminists and child care experts regularly heard on BBC so quiet on this?
What a fine example of a meeting of cultures in multicultural Britain, ladies and gentlemen (with apologies to Bernard Right-On).
Sorry, Bernard Right-On:
Call it a ‘storyline’ or a ‘narrative’ – the BBC loves a simple easily sloganised soundbite framework within which to push what would otherwise be an honest fact-based news item.
And it always seems to be a Leftist storyline.
Take the sad news of the death of Sir David Frost for instance.
Now David Frost was a fine journalist and presenter, something of a pioneer in the profession he did much to invent, and – I understand – he was a modest and charitable man.
I was irritated, however, by repeated BBC references to the marvelousness of his satire, the ‘pricking of pomposity’ and the ‘holding politicians to account’.
It seemed to be that some BBC jounalistic minnows were desperate to both self-justify and in a most unseemly manner to attempt to wallow in some of Sir David’s reflected glory.
And this ‘pricking of pomposity’ – where exactly has that got us?
Now when David Frost was still a lad there were dictators a plenty both of the tin-pot variety (eg Mussolini) and some rather more dangerous ones (eg Stalin).
Fortunately after some prevarication the West found leaders to stand up to them… Roosevelt and Churchill
I wonder how these two giants of the 20th century might have stood up to a pricking of their pomposity?
In this brave new satirical world we still have the dictators… Mugabe, Assad, that new Chinese bloke….
And in the West we have pricked our pomposity and now have Obama and Cameron. Great.
And to follow…. Clinton (Hilary) Miliband (Ed)?
Two sides to every story – isn’t that old adage just what the BBC has forgotten in the rush to push the left-liberal narrative?
Trawling through the TV pages in my daily paper (don’t really know why I do it as I haven’t got a T.V.) and I see there is a *New* nature programme on BBC 2 toinight. Read of its content (with Ben Fogel) an oh Christ, they will be banging on about Climate Change. Agenda? What agenda?
I place a mental bet on how many minutes into the programme we’ll hear the first mention of ‘climate change’ – at which point I switch off.
Climate Change is like a dry rot at the BBC – it pervades every corner of its broadcasting edifice.
orifice sounds better
Next time you hear George Galloway being subjected to the Jeremy Vine matey, backslapping interview technique he reserves especially for his favourite ‘maverick’ MP (oh, he’s a card that Gorgeous George!), bear this in mind:
‘The Respect MP had earlier rehearsed a conspiracy theory that was outlandish even by his standards: that it was al-Qaeda which had been responsible for using the chemical weapons, after being given them by Israel, who wanted the international community to be provoked into “the final destruction of Syria…..
What the colourful former Celebrity Big Brother contestant neglected to mention during his rare visit to the Commons last week was that he has lately pocketed £51,000 in cash – plus expenses for flights and hotel stays – from Al Mayadeen, a mysterious television station based in Beirut that has been linked to Assad and is certainly supportive of him. ‘
And see if he gets challenged on it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/10278115/What-George-Galloway-neglected-to-mention-in-Syria-debate.html
Gigi’s former best boyfriend Saddam, must be spinning into his grave rather nicely seeing how quickly was he abandoned in exchange for some Iranian petrodollars.
But hey, Gigi got to live and he has a wife younger than his daughter so I reckon, at this stage, every penny counts.
INBBC & the Ottoman Empire.
How far over the top is INBBC reverence for the Islamic Ottoman Empire?
INBBC:-
“The search for Suleiman the Magnificent’s heart”
By Nick Thorpe.
BBC News, Szigetvar.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23884892
Alternative:-
“The First Siege of Vienna”
[Excerpt]:-
“This is a brief overview of the First Siege of Vienna, when the Ottoman emperor Suleiman the Magnificent was turned back from the gates by a combination of bad weather and the cunning of the Viennese defenders. The CBN producers interviewed Raymond Ibrahim to get his input on the historical significance of what happened in 1529.”
[8 min video]:-
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/the-first-siege-of-vienna.html
No doubt beeboid hearts were all aflutter after the Conscience-in-Chief’s recent Oscar-rated ‘moral obscenity’ of a speech about Syrian gas, but awkward questions remain:
http://www.autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2013/09/02/john-kerrys-u-turn-what-has changed/
A lot of other very good posts on Syria on this blogsite that are worth a read.
Just speculating.
If Syria attacked Israel with Chemical/Biological Weapons of Mass Destruction would Israel be entitled to respond with its presumed nuclear weapons?
How would the BBC spin it?
You already know the answer to that.
The BBC would blame the evil Jews for responding to the provocation when the attack was accidental, or ‘rouge elements’ within the regime, and would take as supporting evidence and gospel truth the crazed ramblings of the first foaming one-eyed hook-handed bat shit crazy Mullah they could find spouting their preferred narrative.
In fact they probably have that interview pre-recorded and ready to run.
According toBreakfast News this morning the lack og primary school places is down to 1) Rising birthrates 2) Immigration, giving the impression that its Mr and Mrs White who are breeding like rabbits. Not rising birthrates also because of immigration.
.Why is it also when such a story is aired school footage is used with predominately white kids, yet any other story needing footage of school kids always looks as if it was filmed in Karachi…
The role of picture editor is a skilled and coveted one.
The main skill being knowing what the narrative requires.
Coveted because any awkward questions on oddly variable selection parameters can easily be dismissed with an FOI exemption.
The only exemption is submissions from ME stringers. They go straight through, though video might soon get a pre-vet to ensure no silly slip-ups in staging.
Same for local news.
http://bbcwatch.org/2013/09/03/attempted-terror-attacks-not-news-for-the-bbc/
Now one could say it happens so often it is no longer newsworthy ((c) A. Journalist), but saying that might send out another message that doesn’t serve.
Maybe if Messrs. Rishak & Shuafat had got busy with the spray cans and had ‘Fry is an Islamaphobe’ on the walls of the Mamilla Mall in complement, the Israeli gay luvvie community may have managed a PR piece?
Meanwhile, we can be assured of the key stories on what really counts over there.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23933544
What is certain is that there are certain communities that can be assured of coverage if they live in fear of an odd look, and others that really need to up their game and arrange to be seen wailing around a corpse (preferably not scratching an itch) at the drop of an HD camera button.
You know the answer. Pure liberal propaganda. Fools nobody but themselves.
My daughter started work today at a primary school in a large Northern city. There are 27 children in the class. 3 of them are white British. Need I say more?
BBC-NUJ seems to miss that information on the form and the extent of the colonisation of England.
To BBC-NUJ, it’s all wonderful ‘diversity’ and ‘multiculturalism’.
Probably why the BBC’s pinup boy is Mo Farah – The man who is British when it suits him.
Sky are going down the same route. As deadline day was nearing its end and Arsenal had signed Ozil, who else should Sky ring to pontificate on all matters Arsenal. Yeah, that’s right, Farah.