Monday Open Thread
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Up2snuff Dec 21, 15:49
Weekend 21st December 2024
MM, better sex education makes better rapists? The husband’s lawyer would say that, wouldn’t she? - JohnC Dec 21, 15:46
Weekend 21st December 2024
Everybody elses headline: Pair deny IS-inspired plot for gun attack on UK Jewish community BBC Headline: Pair deny alleged plot… - MarkyMark Dec 21, 15:14
Weekend 21st December 2024
“BBC correspondent Damien McGuinness in Magdeburg said the market was surrounded by concrete blocks. However, there was a gap for… - Rob in Cheshire Dec 21, 15:03
Weekend 21st December 2024
Bliar has unnaturally long fingers. I think the alien stories might be true. - Rob in Cheshire Dec 21, 15:01
Weekend 21st December 2024
I might consider breaking the law to rearrange his features with a cricket bat. Or is it only all right… - Rob in Cheshire Dec 21, 14:58
Weekend 21st December 2024
There are none so blind, as they that cannot see. - StewGreen Dec 21, 14:08
Weekend 21st December 2024
“London Welsh was formed in 1885 by and for London’s Welsh community, and has played senior-level rugby since then” WElsh… - StewGreen Dec 21, 13:58
Weekend 21st December 2024
If the man is an anti Islamist, then why would he attack a market full of non-Muslims rather than a… - MarkyMark Dec 21, 13:58
Weekend 21st December 2024
A Coldstream Guardsman who was the first to wear a turban during Trooping the Colour is understood to have tested…
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
INBBC report 2013:-
“Saudi Arabia: Teenagers who mock Islam ‘face therapy'”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-24429556
INBBC report 2017?:-
“Britain: Teenagers who mock Islam ‘face therapy.'”
Would therapy be some kind of euphemism for 50 lashes?
BBC News smugly announces that ITV have received some 60 complaints over the Downton Abbey rape scene ….
And when has the EDL ever been big enough news to appear on the BBC News homepage, they seem to have achieved it today, I wonder why…..
So the Beeb have no plans to repeat their 1967 adaptation of “The Forsyte Saga” where Soames Forsyte rapes his wife Irene? I seem to recall that even Mary Whitehouse didn’t complain about this scene. The episode just received good critical notices and added to the BBC’s reputation of making great period drama.
Or were they “different times” back in the sixties?
You will soon watch the bias twice, BBC 1 to launch BBC1+1, why? Just give us some bloody good unbiased telvision to entertain, educate and inform us, not anothe rchannel full of repeats…..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24442265
And I always thought that BBC1+1 = BBC2
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24439588
Last Comment : 554. Sally the Rothbardian
3 HOURS AGO (1pm)
First Comment: 1. GodsSon83
8 HOURS AGO
Now…closed.
A fair metaphor for the BBC’s notion of ‘consultation’.
Maybe the ‘Editor’s Picks’ were not getting the respect they deserved?
‘the BBC’s Newsnight has reported.’
A bit like the BBC ‘reporting’ Paxman, the BBC seems to see nothing odd about reporting itself.
Maybe, as it was Newsnight, they were not sure it was correct?
5Live drive and Matthew Collins, the holier than thou mouthpiece of the holier than thou organisation Hope no hate is invited on to comment on the EDL resignations.
Let’s leave aside the reasons why Collins would be asked to pass comment (without any kind of challenge) when he and his organisation stand accused of militancy, violence and extremism.
However, he merrily announces that the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby was “unfortunate”. Unfortunate?
Now you can imagine that such a term used in the context of such a barbaric act would be challenged immediately by such a seasoned presenter as Peter Allan.
You would right? I mean, “unfortunate”?
Well not a fucking bit of it. Allowed to pass faster than you can say appeasing bastards.
Complaint lodged. I shall await the patronising, dismissive response with baited breath
Today, BBC Radio Manchester have been recounting the tragic (lol) tale of a group of muslim pilgrims unable to attend the hajj because their visas failed to arrive at an Ashton travel agency.
No mention on the radio that they went on a predictable rampage.
‘Furious customers smashed a travel agents windows and mobbed his home.’
‘The windows of his shop was smashed. And a group of angry customers turned up at his house and the home of his brother demanding to speak to them, forcing Mr Hussain to call the police.’
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/angry-customers-attack-ashton-travel-6151778#comments
No mention of any smashed windows here either.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-24444100
Maybe… ‘It never happened’?
Your eyes are feeling sleepy… sleepy…
Watertight oversight ‘at work’ again.
A few years ago, a BBC producer used to engage with us frequently, under the name of “John Reith”. Needless to say there were complaints about this sort of thing even then, and he told us that the BBC was worried that reporting these incidents only gave fodder to Islamophobes who would use it to further ethnic strife. We replied that keeping quiet about it only lent support to the notion that the BBC kept quiet about these things deliberately out of some sort of pro-Islam bias.
I see nothing has changed. No lessons learned at the BBC on this issue.
A really dire programme, Shared Planet with Monty Don. Confirmation if you didn’t know that AGW is a religion. Can the established religions help the new Green Religion save the planet?
Bishop James Jones spouts his Christian perspective giving us such gems as ‘the Bible tells us to fill the world, not overfill it’. There is, of course, the mandatory Muslim on board but there is no need as the ‘on message’ Bishop never mentions the Bible without adding that the Koran backs him up too. Strangely Monty’ s Muslim friend never reciprocates the courtesy, but then if yours is the ‘one true message’ why bother?
The Bishop pushes a line that Religion has always stood up against power. Didn’t the Catholic Church extract 10% taxes and own most of the land in the UK pre-Henry VIII? Isn’t Iran etc. run by a theocracy?
BBC open ‘Have Your Say’ for comments on Tommy Robinson’s resignation. The thread appears to have lasted only 2 hours and 600 comments before being closed and no ‘editors picks’ either.
Wish they’d make their minds up-do they want our comments or don’t they?
By way of contrast the young adults’ poor literacy thread stayed open for at least 5 hours and the thread on the Higgs’ Nobel Prize is still (at the time of writing) open.
“The thread appears to have lasted only 2 hours”
—
Not, by chance, during a period when commentary may be restricted to those with daytime access to computers and the internet, even whilst at work?
Sort of a virtual QI process.
Even so, early closing usually means the rigging has gone astray.
so not available for the 95% of bbc viewers –
who frequently spank al bbc s arse on sunday morning live then … why not?
Breaking news on the bBC (its currently running on the ticker tape on the top of bBC news)
Pilgrims’ Hajj dreams “shattered” after visas never arrived
Almost 200 Muslim families’ “dreams have been shattered” after visas for their once-in-a-lifetime Hajj religious pilgrimage trips never arrived.The families, mainly from north-west England, paid up to £5,000 per person to travel to Mecca before problems with visa numbers emerged. It is understood the Saudi Embassy is issuing fewer visas this year.
Remind me again what the bBC news is supposed to report and to whom?
“It is seen as an embarrassment that this could happen in the UK”
—
Why this is seen as so seems vague. Still, they are very angry. Boy, did Paul Mason leave his post too early.
A professional reporter of his calibre may have delved a bit more into the aspect of the story skirted over here:
“A spokesman for Travel Star said: “We told agents not to buy any tickets until the visas arrive – we were trying to be helpful.”
Sounds to me they expected the Saudis to cave into their every whim, as would happen here, and reality caught up with them.
A non story of epic proportion (with possible edits to the actual story that was/is there), but the floral 8,000 in the BBC scribbling booths do need something to fill the content void with.
So, back home from work, checking the BBC website to see their headline on their homepage “IMF cuts global growth” you have to go deeper to find headlines that also state that at the same time the IMF have raised UK growth estimates – which you’d think would be news worth shouting about. Well it would be if there was a Labour government…
Such begrudging acceptance from the BBC that the economy is beginning to look a little brighter.
The BBC’s chief business correspondent Linda Yueh hasn’t got time for minor issues like the IMF when serious ones like this are there to be covered.
“It’s going pretty well until a massive wave drenches the bottom half of my dress. This is an hour before I am due on stage to moderate a panel with the presidents of Peru and the Philippines.
Nevertheless, we have to carry on. So, I walk around in my soggy dress ”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24421618
Most people are aware that you get waves on beaches…
Ms, Yueh still seems quite starstruck by who waving a BBC accreditation paves the way to mingling with. Though even the Presidents of minor P countries may be interested more in her broadcast pulpit than her.
Still, won’t be the first or last time a Beeboid has a soggy dress at such moments, one is sure. Even the women.
The BBC manages to forget that the IMF were previously calling time on the UK Government’s approach to fiscal consolidation, despite extensive coverage by the BBC at the time of the IMF’s erroneous assessment.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24444134
The Telegraph does manage to remember
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10363899/IMF-upgrades-UK-growth-in-embarrassing-about-turn.html
Just been announced that bBC man Simon Thomson has been selected by Labour as their candidate for Dartford. If this is not good evidence of lefty sympathies at the bBC then what else is needed?
Anyone here who remembers the BBC’s enthusiastic, supportive, resolutely positive coverage of the Occupy Wall St. movement a couple years back will not be surprised at their complete silence on a new movement of civil disobedience.
‘Catch us if you can’: Gettysburg visitors defy #SpiteHouse cones and Barrycades [pics]
Of course, the reasons for these protests are 180 degrees apart, so the BBC’s attitude will be as well. I can’t wait for one of the battalion of Beeboids working the US scene to tell us about how the “quality of civic duty and lawfulness that foreigners find so distinctive about American life in general has dictated the mood” of these new protests.
You will not see Laura Trevelyan or any other BBC journalist marching with them while “reporting”, like she did with Occupiers. I’m actually kind of surprised that there hasn’t been any BBC coverage of this, because it seems like another good opportunity for them to heap scorn upon the President’s opponents again.
Just come across this website. Am I really reading a procession of demented rantings from silly, smug, self satisfied people or are you all just messing about?
C.
Please come in and refute. We may all learn something.
Thanks for the invitation Arthur but I know my limitations. Tell you what though, as bias is your theme, if the contributors to this site ran the BBC it would make the Daily Mail look like the Socialist Worker.
Unable to debate and unable to grasp the concept, then. You’re wise to decline.
‘I know my limitations’
—
Now you’re just bragging.
May get you a slot on Newsnight though.
Only to members of the SWP
Normal people would be glad of just having the facts presented to them and being allowed to make up their own minds
You remember facts Andrew? those are things that apologists like your self are continually demanding and then refuse to accept when they don’t suite
BBC-NUJ, which by its trade union policy is opposed to EDL, packs its anti-Robinson, pro-Islam piece with selected quotes against Robinson and EDL.
There is this misleading extract from BBC-NUJ:-
“Mr Robinson and Mr Carroll are due to face trial later this month, charged with obstructing police officers near the scene of the killing of soldier Lee Rigby.”
INBBC’s deliberately misleading wording above suggest that Robinson and Carroll could be somehow involved by being in the scene of a ‘killing’; whereas in reality, as BBC-NUJ knows, Robinson’s and Carroll’s presence was in memory of Rigby’s murder by Islamic jihadists.
And BBC-NUJ takes the word of Quilliam Foundation (QF) spokesmen uncritically, even though the three founders of QT are ex-members of the Islamic jihad group, Hizt ut-Tahrir.
A usual leftist, anti-EDL person is sought out by BBC-NUJ to say that he doesn’t trust Robinson; but no one is asked whether they trust the three Muslim ex-members of Islamic jihad group, Hizt ut-Tahrir who have set up the Islamic QF.
“EDL leader Tommy Robinson quits group”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24442953
BBC Caught Staging Syria Chemical Weapons Propaganda?
UPDATE: Within 2 hours of posting this story, the BBC filed a copyright claim with YouTube to get the 45 second clip removed. This shows how nervous the BBC is about this information coming to light. News organizations routinely rely on dubious copyright claims to censor damaging revelations. An copy of the video via LiveLeak is embedded below.
(h/t Vandamme 😉 )
“News organizations routinely rely on dubious copyright claims to censor damaging revelations.”
—
If that is the case (and I have the BBC bang to rights with a Michele Obama sycophantasy piece they ‘disappeared’ as the content was too embarrassing to their shot credibility to even leave in archive) hardly inspiring much trust in transparency then.
Or faith in those who would claim the right to hold others to account whilst ensuring they are not subject to the same scrutiny.
How did Lord Hall Hall’s ‘vision’ thing go today, btw?
News24: 8.30pm the OECD damming report about the state of our education is discussed. The bBC get hold of some guy from Bristol who spouts a lot of hot air that seems to try to diffuse the situation. Surely a good news organisation would get hold of a leading educationalist for an informed comment. Or perhaps they could not find one that was on message without slagging off the last ‘Education Education Education’ disaster.
The liberal elite want the education of our young to fail. Why I do not know. Part of their general self loathing and loathing of England. Plus the knowledge that their young ( if they can be bothered) will benefit from private education.
It would help if the BBC stopped employing the semi literate.
No more dropped consonants or goanna /yeres/ etc.
Also ending East Enders would work wonders . That show is a hymn to the illiterate.
Fail? That depends on one’s definition. The specific ideologies being successfully taught to your children would be viewed differently from their perspective.
BBC-NUJ: politically opposed to EDL by its trade union policy, and partial in its oppositional reporting on EDL, e.g.-
In the opening three paragraphs, My SYMONDS shifts from describing EDL as opposed to “Islamist extremists” (para 1), to saying EDL is “anti-Muslim” (para 2), and mentioning opponents of EDL, but not naming the groups, and not mentioning their censoring, intimidating actions (para 3).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24441879
re T Robinson
paraded like some “voice of reason”????
Waylon – Honcho of the gutter thugs – the UAF …
only at the al bbc eh!, folks its going to get a lot worse,
Panto Campbell has an … ahem … exclusive interview? oohhyeazzindeedee! …
And the Quilliam Foundation strangely turns from an anti extremism to anti fascism organisation within half an hour according to BBC reporting?.
Expect a production line of award winning, self righteous
Islamic R.O.Peace gobshites …
and all the usual political suspects to get a ” lorra! lorra! ” airtime on the BBC.
sorry to report
Panto Campbell outdid even his low standards, which takes some doing …
How far have the termites got? – bbc news had some airhead from the Gov Task Force on extremism – who wouldn t shut up about “far right Robinson and Islamophobia?” absolutely laughable.
People dismiss Robinson because of their perceived image and because of their own elitist snobbery.
Not one decent person in the United Kingdom wants a return to nightmare days of the NF of fear and violence.
But fear, segregation and violence is exactly what Islamism has already delivered by the shedload right here and is continuing to do so, he is simply the messenger.
More Beeboid Anti-Tommy Robinson, anti-EDL on Radio 4 ‘The World Tonight.’
Beeboid Ms Ritula SHAH’s hostile interrogation of Robinson, replete with her hostile interruptions, seemed intent on getting Robinson to say that he was no longer critical of Islam, otherwise he was politically condemned.
Then Shah interviewed a Mr Goodwin, who is pro-Islam and a regular critic of opponents of Islam; he was not interrupted, and not challenged when he used the word ‘Islamophobia’ as though it were a fact and a crime, to throw at Robinson (who by this time was not present).
[By the way, Beeboid Ms Shah is of the Jain religion of India. As she must know, and I won’t pursue further, the Jain city of Valabhi in India was destroyed in the Islamic invasion of India, 782.]
We all know that the BBC is politically correct to the point of ludicrosity, except in the matter of hireing and firing women (and occasionally men – think Peter Sissons) over 50. But it’s surprising, all the same, to see a BBC reporter (young, female) showing such overt ageism against her own gender in this nasty piece of writing that includes the term “hook nosed” (be careful of that one, girly!) and allowing this Winchester couple to make fun of the portrait of “an old crone” (imagine hearing such sexist ageism on the BBC – can you imagine a corresponding racist insult to be allowed?). The reporter might have pointed out to the old boy in question that he’s not such an oil painting himself (!).
Can’t watch on the iPad without disturbing Mrs. GW who was working late last night, but this does seem at first blush yet another of the new breed of total non-stories that appear issued to the floral 8,000 cubicle dwellers simply to get ’em out the office to justify their salaries, and fill vast content voids with something… Anything.
As you say, the text alone is an odd read for any alert to red flag territory.
Also, if sent a painting in such a way, it seems to take a special mindset to pick up the phone to drag out a film crew from the BBC to deride it and not wait for Cash in the Attic.
Having been part of many a worthy event that has failed to inspire even the lone lady in her radio car to get out of bed for less than 10,000 listeners county-wide, the pitch for the full AV treatment must have been a winner.
Can’t wait to see it.
Must be getting old cronish and forgetful! Here’s the link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-24391779
Ah the joys of headphones!
And I am greeted by Emma ‘Isn’t she horrible?’ Millar’s Southern English lilt.
What a thoroughly nasty piece of (reporting) work, with logic fails abounding.
If so despised, and worthless, why all this effort for an unloved piece of tat?
And I must look up the weight and dimension limits to the Royal Mail’s parcel dispatch for anything sent without any details save enough postage.
I sense there is more to this than meets the eye, unless the BBC really is reduced to giving lonely old whingers their 3 minutes of fame to complain so much about an unloved work of art they still seem determined to keep looking at and keep returning to.
The similarity with BBBC Flokkers is purely coincidental.
Top news this morning…..the badger cull has not met it’s target numbers!
The useful idiots then show us a clip of the usual suspects in anoraks roaming around in the undergrowth at midnight shining torches down holes with concerned looks on their faces. This is then followed by the usual one sided whining animal rights interview with Brian May the well known Queen lead guitarist and astronomer who bangs on and on without question about How the cull will do nothing to solve the TB in cattle problem and is totally unnecessary. This is then followed by a trial of some bloke from the NFU by the two useful idiot presenters armed with the usual carefully selected negative e-mails from viewers. Then to round it all off they trot out Maria Eagle of Labour who demands that the minister must immediately present himself to the house of commons to explain why the cull has totally failed, but when asked what she would do about the problem hasn’t a clue.
So five sets of negative attackers against one bloke on the pro side….total and unadulterated bias and unfair reporting and wholly disproportionate time spent on an issue that most of us probably don’t lose any sleep over.
I wish someone would cull the BBC !
Lardell continues to steadfastly refuse to see his idol’s clay feet:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24453693
“The US government partially shut down operations on 1 October after Republicans who control the House of Representatives refused to approve a budget, saying they would only do so if Mr Obama’s healthcare reform law were delayed or stripped of funding.
Mr Obama and the Democrats have thus far refused, noting the law was passed in 2010, subsequently approved by the Supreme Court, and was a central issue in the 2012 election which Mr Obama won.”
The truth is actually the opposite of course: Congress has passed a number of budgets now, which have all been refused by the Senate (except I think one that was to continue paying the military, which passed unanimously in Congress). By twisting the wording, to ‘Congress has refused to pass a budget’, Lardell continues to insist that its the Republicans at fault.
What the fat fool doesn’t want to tell you is that Congress explicitly has the power to approve and deny funding as it chooses; this is one of the checks and balances implemented through the Constitution. Instead, he throws in the non-sequitur that ‘the law has been passed’ when he should know full well that there are two aspects to this in the US system: passing the law, and then subsequently funding it.
That Obama cannot fund the law is entirely down to his partisan approach to passing the law in the first place.
Also not mentioned is that Congress did offer to pass the budget with the ACA intact, provided it was delayed a year. This by the way is the same exception that the president agreed with big business and for specified special interests. Its interesting that he doesn’t want to allow those exceptions across the board, and would rather hold the US hostage than get rid of the concessions he granted (some would argue illegally) to his special interest groups.
But from Lardell, all we get is deafening silence on the president’s foibles and a breathtakingly partisan character assassination of the republicans, and the tea-party in particular.
Mardell must have difficulty seeing his own feet.
Apologies, Gunn, I missed your comment before posting my own below.
What Mardell and so many others (including a couple of journalists who used to visit us) refuse to understand or accept is that the House doesn’t have to obey the President if they don’t want to. As you say, the House does have a duty to pass budgets, but the way they see fit. It’s not extremist or intransigent to think that: it’s written into the Constitution. That may be an extremist document to Mardell, though.
Also, excellent point about the Republicans only wanting the delay for individuals that the President has already granted to His donors and political cronies, something which the BBC has refused to admit. They know about the various waivers, but have decided you don’t need to know about them.
Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!!!!
I am so angry!!
A mate posted some article about curing cancer. The link is from the BBC – guess what – you can’t read it if you are BRITISH!! Because it is a part of BBC Worldwide, so we can’t read it bla bla etc.
Guess they forgot about the £6billion we give them every year!!
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20130701-perfecting-early-cancer-detection
Eh? So by that logic the rest of bbc.co.uk is only available to license payers in the UK? What on Earth are they thinking?
Does not compute!
I don’t know why they bother, when you can go to hidemyass.com and see the page. They must know this.
Can’t reproduce the video, but here’s the text:
“Pancreatic cancer is a killer – and one that is very hard to detect. One of the reasons its survival rate is so poor that it has few symptoms in the early stages.
Partly spurred by the death of his uncle, 16-year-old scientist and researcher Jack Andraka vowed to find a quick and cheap way to test for signs of the disease.
Andraka’s research – incuding writing to 200 science professors – led to him developing a dipstick diagnostic test which searches for a biomarker for pancreatic cancer. It can also be used to test for lung and ovarian cancer.
He tells BBC Future about his quest.”
They’re off again
This time BBC 5 Live are banging on about the Commonwealth Games
Well worth a BBC push and a puff especially since Alex Salmond is jumping aboard for a free ride home on this knackered old supermarket trolley
How different to the BBC’s treatment of the Jubilee – how uncool was that kiddies?
Noticed an article on BBC News this morning about the Commonwealth Games. The commentator was making great use of a ‘moving map’ which was showing places around the world to which the Queen’s Baton message would be taken and displayed. Big, red, pulsing dots indicated the far-flung parts of the world to be visited. Lots of mention of how many countries and regions of, for instance, Asia, Australasia, and Africa, with specific mention of many of the destinations – then the moving map moved on, to a destination somewhere in the South Atlantic, but by then the commentator was focussing on the Caribbean and North America, since nowhere of any interest in the Commonwealth exists in South America…. wonder why the South Atlantic destination, one of the big, red, pulsing dots was glossed over ? Couldn’t possibly be that we were afraid we might annoy any Argentinians who might be watching, could it ?
I have just heard Mr Vine introducing the subjects he will be covering on his show.
He is going to cover the declining literacy and numeracy standards in England.
I suggest he listens to his own voice. Sloppy, bad grammar , the dropped consonants and endless goannas etc.
Presenters on national radio like him are part of the problem .
What on earth is the matter with them?
Do they have such a poor regard for our language ? If so why?
I think the problem is cultural. Some years ago Digby Anderson wrote a book called “All Oiks Now”, meaning that the many now have habits formerly associated with, shall we say, the least fortunate, e.g. eating in the street, drinking to excess, swearing in public, etc. In my view, we are all (pseudo-) proles now.
Take George Osborne’s speech at the Tory conference, which I actually thought was quite good in terms of content. There were lots of dropped final consonants, to make him sound more ‘demotic’. It felt deliberate to me.
To be fair to Osborne, he would be damned whatever he did. If he talks “posh”, then we get the BBC/Labour narrative of Eton toffs, ‘out of touch’, ‘don’t know the price of bread’, real name was Gideon not George, etc. If he proletarianizes his speech, people like me point out that it’s fake.
The trick of the treacherous, rotten, middle class Left is to appear just proletarian enough to be elected, while actually hating and fearing the ordinary people. Don’t ever tell me that Blair, Edward Miliband, Harman, Hodge, Shirley Williams and their crew are more ‘in touch with ordinary people’ than Cameron, Osborne and Boris. I remember Anthony Neil Wedgwood Benn, the Second Viscount Stansgate, and his “yer see”, “yer know” and “mi mobile phone”. It’s de rigueur now.
George Bernard Shaw wrote: “It is impossible for an Englishman to open his mouth without making some other Englishman hate or despise him”
We should have grown out of this by now but I think it’s actually got worse – at least over the last 20 years or so. It’s not just about accent, try discussing something like opera in the wrong company and wait for the bile to flow.
(It applies to Scotsmen as well, in spite of what they like to pretend.)
Sound view. That it has led to a stupider nation I have no doubt.
It is only necessary to compare old television documentaries with the current ones to see this to be so.
However as this country grows ever more stupid the rest of the world does not. East Asians in particular will soon outperform us in most fields. We are destined for third world status and the fault will be ours.
More particularly the fantasists of the liberal elites.
Rarely has a country been so badly served by those who have responsiblility for it.
Once again we see the worst generation in our history and what they have done.
And these same people will look down their noses and laugh at stupid United Statesians for supposedly always having people with posh British accents being the villain in our movies, if that betrays an inferiority complex and fear of the intellectual or something.
PMQ verdict discusion-
Presenter to sadiq khan- “can I confirm the my explanation of your parties energy policy is correct?”
Sadiq Khan- “yes. It’s almost as if you read from the same script as me”
Conservative – “can I say aloud that we all believe that”
Ditto on Islam, and on most political issues.
Even the PM is taking digs at the BBC today.
It can’t be true can it?
PMQs and Messers Miliband and Balls faces were an absolute picture of aghast disbelief when Cameron declared – words to the effect – ‘even the BBC has reports today that support my policies’
They know it, he knows it, we know it
The BBC is biased toward Labour
Someone please do something about it
The person who Beeboids really want as unelected Prime Minister is their editor chum of ‘Guardian’, Mr Rushbridger, judging by Ms Kearney’s interview with him on ‘World at One’ today.
“Guardian has handed a gift to terrorists’, warns MI5 chief: Left-wing paper’s leaks caused ‘greatest damage to western security in history’ say Whitehall insiders.
“MI5 chief Andrew Parker called paper’s expose a ‘guide book’ for terrorists.
“He said the coverage is a gift to ‘thousands’ of UK-based extremists.
“Secret techniques of GCHQ laid bare by Guardian.”
By JAMES SLACK.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2450237/MI5-chief-Andrew-Parke-The-Guardian-handed-gift-terrorists.html?ICO=most_read_module
Us ordinary Englishmen are unthinkingly loyal to our country. That means we never equivocate. It is part of us this loyalty and it has always been part of us.
Now the liberal is not like us. He serves other masters. His version of truth and reality.
Such men are never to be trusted. They are not my friends.
The Guardian is made for such men. So is the BBC.
It is fortunate indeed that when our land need loyal men these people were so few in numbers. Today there are many of them and the land suffers.
But what action will U.K Government take re-‘Guardian’ Editor, and threat to West’s security?
(Will Beeboids even ask?)
China and Islamic jihad.
Will INBBC report this, or is it waiting to see Al Jazeera’s political line on it?:
“China arrests 139 Muslims for urging jihad”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/10/china-arrests-139-muslims-for-urging-jihad.html
I blame Chinese foreign policy and inequality.
Leave it to Mark Mardell to see the President telling the Republicans to cave in temporarily as “a very slight concession”.
Obama: I’m not budging but here’s a hint
President Barack Obama is playing hardball, but there was one throwaway line that suggested a way forward, a very slight concession.
In his news conference he repeatedly accused Republicans in the House of Representatives of “demanding ransom”, “extortion” and “hostage-taking”.
He also kept saying that he would talk to anyone about anything – but not until the shutdown was lifted and there was agreement on the debt ceiling.
“Stop the excuses – take the vote – end the shutdown today,” he said.
He also said he understood why it was difficult for Republicans to vote to lift the debt ceiling – it’s a lousy name that suggested the debt itself was being increased.
Of course it means the debt is going to be increased. Only an economic illiterate like Mardell believes it’s not. Why else was the President about to embark on a trip to China (before the shutdown made Him postpone it) to borrow more money? Again? I don’t know if Mardell simply isn’t aware of it, or just doesn’t understand what it means.
But that’s not my main point here. This is:
There are no more rabbits in the hat, Mr Obama said. If it didn’t happen there would be economic chaos.
But the barest glimmer of a suggestion came when he said that the Republicans could vote to lift the threat for the period that it took to negotiate.
That was pretty much a throwaway line, but it could be a way forward for some.
In other words, if the Republicans cave in now, the President will agree to sit down and talk with them. But Mardell sees it as a concession. Why? He speaks of Republicans taking a “hard line”, but not the President. Based on all his previous output regarding economic policy and government budgeting (see here, here, and here, for example), I’d suggest that Mardell agrees with the President’s position 100%, and sees it as normal, the middle ground. So of course any opposition to it must seem to him to be way out on the fringe.
The president has been so clear, so often, that he cannot blink. But he has offered a way out if the Republicans step back from the brink.
But the President isn’t also on the brink, right? He’s taking a hard line? Never in life.
Within the hour, Republican House Speaker John Boehner had rejected the president’s suggestion, calling it a demand for unconditional surrender.
Which it is. What part of “I will not negotiate until….” does Mardell not understand? If they make a deal about something or other afterwards, it’s still unconditional surrender on the debt ceiling. What the BBC’s US President editor is doing is anticipating a possible compromise from the President later, on another issue entirely, and calling that a concession now.
He said they needed something in return. I know that sounds like a pretty firm rejection, but I wonder.
He didn’t mention Obamacare, and only talked about the cost of government.
Yeah, ObamaCare costs have nothing to do with the cost of government. Mardell smells victory because Boehner didn’t evoke ObamaCare by name in one statement.
Perhaps he may be right that there will be a negotiation of some kind in the end. Now if only Mardell could tear his gaze away from the President’s beatific countenance and notice that actually Sen. Harry Reid has taken over the negotiations because neither the President nor the Vice President (previously a key figure in White House deals with Congress) can’t be trusted not to cave in on something to protect His public image.
Reid is also going to put forward a “clean” increase bill, with no specific policies attached to it. Assuming the RINO establishment will go along with it, that means the House Republicans will be left holding the bag, putting more pressure on them to cave. So that’s what the President has up His sleeve when He says that He’ll sit down with them if they agree to it.
But only the Republicans are taking a hard line, and are unwilling to compromise, right?
What’s the point of Mardell if he can’t get this right? His BBC colleagues and superiors probably think he’s done brilliantly, and will promote him for it. I think he should quit journalism and become a spin doctor or adviser to a political party or politician, where he’d be better suited.
As a commenter on this US veteran site notes
“The White House closed the memorials to vets, yet allowed illegal aliens to rally on the National Mall, and provided services for it. When asked, WH reps said it was allowed because of First Amendment rights. It will be fun to see if the WH extends those same rights to actual citizens and veterans, or if they are only available to illegal aliens”
It’s rather like the UK government closing Whitehall and thus access to the Cenotaph on Remembrance Sunday morning and then bussing in jihadists from Bradford for a demo in the afternoon.
With this Administration, some people’s First Amendment rights are more equal than others. Not that the BBC would ever say that.
What UK media is really concerned about?:-
“BBC vs ITV in battle of Salford Quays parking permits”
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/bbc-presenter-takes-itv-cameraman-6162603?
Why should INBBC report this?:-
“Qatar: ‘Un-Islamic’ statue of famous soccer player draws outrage”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/10/qatar-un-islamic-statue-of-famous-soccer-player-draws-outrage.html
Another clip on the BBC news channel which I saw this morning involved a lady newsreader interviewing another female talking head, discussing the report being released by the Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, concerning the failure of the e-Borders project to meet its goals.
Almost every sentence, and every criticism in particular, seemed to be framed in the present tense, and any involvement of the previous Labour Government (who initiated the project 10 years ago) was completely air-brushed out of the discussion….I thought at one point, the talking head was about to give the game away , but she stopped herself just in time, and moved on with her criticism of the project in the present tense, being a ‘failed government initiative’ which she commented had been badly planned and organised from the outset.
The only mention of Labour was at the end of the interview, reporting its criticism of the current government (note – not the project, or its initiators), and it’s sheer failure to get immigration under control. Almost ‘sotto voce’, the BBC commentator finally mentioned that a government minister had responded by saying that his department were making improvements.
Now, I had previously heard the government minister on radio commenting on the report, and he indeed DID say that, but that comment had been prefaced by words to the effect “….. this project was inherited from the previous government, and it was in an absolute mess…..” and his department was making progress in sorting out the project and driving towards making it successful.
On earlier BBC news bulletins on the radio, the project had clearly been identified as a Labour initiative, started 10 years ago, which had been, until recently, failing miserably…. by 10 a.m., all mention of Labour in the context of this failure had been erased, and the impression clearly being left was that this was a failure of the current government.
Really quite disgraceful reporting; mis-direction by omission and lack of context.
Good news, everyone. ObamaCare is going to benefit India, too!
Obamacare has hidden benefits – for India
Republican opposition to President Barack Obama’s healthcare law is at the heart of the government shutdown in the US. The same law is creating new jobs and business, thousands of miles away in India.
As millions of Americans are encouraged to enrol in health insurance plans under the new system, executives in India’s generic drug and software industries foresee an upswing in business. Nearly 40% of the generic drugs used in the US now come from India, and industry insiders say sales will grow as the reforms collectively known as Obamacare roll out.
Muralidharan Nair of Ernst and Young says Obamacare envisages savings of $150bn (£935m) per year from drug cost reductions. That is also the size of opportunity for people who work in the industry.
“Obamacare will be a harbinger of a tectonic change in the way generic consumption is going to happen in the US, and India stands to gain significantly,” says Mr Nair.
He forecasts a year-on-year growth of 25-30% in the generic drug industry in India, already branded as “pharmacy to the world”.
That’s only if one assumes it will all work perfectly, which this Beeboid (yet another one in the US. How many are there now?) does:
More than 30 million American citizens will be part of the new healthcare system and this will mean a huge change in technology.
It’s already fact, I guess.
Ed Nair of Dataquest magazine foresees a total re-engineering of the healthcare provision system.
“All of this requires a whole lot of systems to be deployed – and a whole lot of people to be deployed, which presents a huge opportunity for India,” he says.
Yeah, that’ll save money. And it’s all rolling out so well at the start, isn’t it? Er…..
Looking after their comrades…
BBC reports MI5’s warning about terrorists and Snowden leaks. Not one mention of the Guardian
But no. Not one mention in 800 words. I found this so odd that I even asked Microsoft Word to search for the word “Guardian” in the article in case I’d missed it. Nothing. Can someone explain this extraordinary omission?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100240567/bbc-reports-mi5s-warning-about-terrorists-and-snowden-leaks-not-one-mention-of-the-guardian/
BBC-NUJ supports ITS ‘P.M’ Rusbridger, in deciding to do what he wants with West’s security information.
BBC-NUJ largely regurgitates ‘P.M’ Rusbridger’s interview on Radio 4 ‘World at One’ with Ms Kearney here.
The Beeboid piece, of course, gives more prominence to ITS ‘P.M’ and political chum Rusbridger, than it does to the mere Director General of MI5, Mr Parker.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24464286?
It’s official – the BBC is biased in FAVOUR of climate sceptics.
Ah…our ever so informed political masters.
Someone send this chump a link to details of the ‘secret 28’.
I posted the list
Not BBC related, but I know many here will concur…it’s a belter…
I haven’t checked in here in a while – *waves to regulars*
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100240679/exclusive-labour-1997-2010-was-the-worst-government-ever-and-this-is-why/
So the BBC is now making an effort to cover the national park closure fiasco a little more. Naturally, the bias is on display.
US shutdown: Park rangers ‘bear brunt’ of public anger
Some 5Live Beeboid talked to a Yosemite Park Ranger spokesman on the phone (I don’t think it was Ranger Smith) lamenting about how dismaying it was to keep having to turn people away from the park. He and his staff are the latest victims of Republican extremism, along with the poor wedding parties and school children. It’s all one big sob story – and rightly so – but it’s all part of the agenda to demonize Republicans. Viewed (heard) in the larger context of BBC reporting on the story of the shutdown, we know who is to blame, so any story about negative repercussions will only go to support that.
If these were Occupiers, the people abusing park rangers and driving past checkpoints would be praised. Can anyone find me a clip of a Beeboid commiserating with the a policeman about the abuse they suffered from Occupiers?
This story is probably typical of the BBC’s USA reporting.
Rhod Sharp, (your ‘Beeboid’) sits at home in Marblehead, MA watching the US media in the daytime and in the evening putting his feed into UK Radio 5 Live (nice work if you can get it).
So the extent of his journalism is following up stories that catch his eye on US TV. Of course it is a lot easier to get in touch with a park ranger than a turned-away visitor.
As an aside, if the ranger doesn’t get paid why is he at ‘work’ turning people away. If he loves his job so much why not carry on as before, or has he had instructions from above? Rhod Sharp could have asked that question.
‘Sharp by name, rod by nature?’
Surely somebody must have a little input on what he talks about on his show, no? No producer or editor or line manager at all?
The NPS has had orders from above. Gediman said so. “We’re of course not in a position to make that decision.” (@2:25 in).
Gediman, by the way, is not your average park ranger slogging away in the trenches. He’s the public relations manager for the park, with a degree in journalism/public relations. I’m not at all saying this means he’s not a ranger or that we shouldn’t trust him. He obviously is telling the truth here, and isn’t advocating for anything. I’m just saying that the BBC describing him as a mere ranger at the front lines isn’t the full truth, and is a little misleading. It’s not really confirmation of our Rule #1, but it resembles the pattern.
If I can find an archived recording of the full show, I’ll check it out to hear the full context of the interview, to see if Sharp takes the same perspective on this issue as all other BBC coverage has. That would tell us why Sharp didn’t ask who gave the orders.
INBBC:-
“Pakistan Taliban head Hakimullah Mehsud ‘open to talks'”
(-I bet he is, INBBC reporters, Ahmed Wali Mujeeb and Aleem Maqbool.)
And after all, Obama seems to define a successful policy as Western troops getting out of the area regardless of the type of Islamic state which follows.
This INBBC ‘report’ turns out to be quite a political plug for Islamic jihadist. Nothing unusual there.
(At least the Taliban is not the EDL, eh?)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-24463839
How do the BBC get these interviews with Taliban leaders when the Pakistani security forces, CIA etc surely could be better cases for getting that “interview”?).
Maybe if the Americans stated that they were merely getting that Libyan Al Queda bloke for an “enhanced, exclusive interview”…then the BBC would stop bitching on, despite the Yanks operating a rival service to the BBCs “hug a hijab” tendency!
Suppose theres no chance of the CIA etc getting hold of Beeboid mobiles out there is there…suspect they`d make helpful reading!
if you think what lord haw haw was executed for, his “jarmany calling” broadcasts were fuck all compared to what al beeb broadcasts.
broadcasting enemy propaganda should mean death
-Same way the the politically embedded Islamic Al Jazeera carried interviews with Bin Laden, which INBBC had agreement to pick up?
Today’s laugh-out-loud moment: Robert Peston wondering at the lack of intellectual and ideological diversity in top central banking jobs. I can think of another very large state institution that has a similarly severe deficit.
Also, it’s apparently a good thing that these women are taking over important central banks, because vaginas.
About time we picked up on the following from the BBCs weasel words Bureau.
1…”people will no doubt be saying-as on the wish to return to killing badgers as offered by way of “news” on radio 4 this morning.
WHICH people will be saying?…aren`t they up yet?…and are you happy to do their advocating for them?
And local radio is just as bad…same soundbites throughout their output this morning…co-ordinated blizzard of the anti-cull points of view.
2. Number of interruptions/minute…witness Hugh Grants maniacal rants on Today this morning…and Sarah Montague purring at all he says.
Compare and contrast with Emily Maitless and her disgraceful hollering down of a Mail journailst on Newsnight.
About time we nailed those weasel words-the conflation of news(what has happened) with opinion(what we hope will happen come the Glorious Day!)…and we got out our stopwatches to quantify % interruptions-worst offenders and the target for them.
As if we don`t already know-but when the likes of Harrabin are your “quants”…safe to say that they`re shit scared of science and it`ll clobber them in their “balanced” pretences.
Researching a cinch…and as easy a degree as you`ll get!
Apparently Lord Deben and Greg Barker believe that the BBC give too much airtime to “Climate Change Sceptics”.
Are they talking about the same BBC that interests us, I wonder?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10367061/BBC-gives-too-much-weight-to-climate-sceptics-minister-claims.html
and
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10366387/Science-in-favour-of-climate-change-akin-to-evidence-linking-smoking-to-cancer.html#comment-1076130676
Why not invite them round for a cup of tea and a slice of cake, as well?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
Where do the BBC get their sources?
‘Where do the BBC get their sources….
… who can say?’
The BBC didn`t sound THAT happy when their own survey told them that the so-called “cuts” have improved those selfsame services(Today this morning).
Except for the state of the roads and the potholes therein..and possibly the care for the elderly.
Still-the BBC gave all due credit to those councils that have prevented us all from suffering the consequences of the Tories.
And-although they don`t give a damn about the old(that`s what euthanasia is for)…you can expect a run of stories now about shock absorbers having crises, and the threat to the national suspension spring industry due to the savage heartless Rory assault on the car.
Herbie or Chitty Chitty Bang Bang to head up the Todays campaign to save the cars from being culled/needing shock replacement operations?
Oh those poor roads…let`s hope the Botox industry regulations will apply to cosmetic infills and implants for those roads under the Tory lash of indifference!
Over to you ,You and Yours…and no Clarkson, remember?
Rory?..Tory?…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technology/micwright/100011010/new-technology-at-the-bbc-means-it-now-has-an-excuse-to-kill-the-wretched-licence-fee/
—
Yes, of course it does.
Oddly, a few in the comments seem a smidge dubious that the BBC really wants to get separated from a constant, guaranteed, untouchable, uniquely-compelled flow of unaccountable billions of pounds each year to keep Mark Byford’s pension topped up and the market rate floor in multiples of £300k signing fees. Or doubles in the case of Mr. Yentob (ask Jennifer Saunders).
Maybe they need telling it’s all settled!
Mark Byford or Mark Byword ?
As in, “A Byword for … … ” [fill in the blanks to your taste]
I am all for interactivity and free speech, but the BBC’s headlong rush to substitute reporting with a FaceBook #prasnews punt thrown open to the most aggressive commenting bloc really makes me fear for the future of sensible news and debate.
Seems the Russians are claiming the Greenpeace vessel bearing only peaceful protestors going about their lawful business had a few dodgy spliffs aboard.
May be true. May be BS.
At this stage, who the heck knows?
However, the first dozen comments have screeched ‘plant’ before Stuart Hughes can say ‘what coordinated campaign’.
It’s all… utterly polarised, and hence pointless.
But I also note that it takes a very brave poster to creep into the maw of righteous anger staked out by those who seem either poised or tipped off to get their oar in first.
And one can only wonder where the vox pops will be gleaned from later for the broadcast news edit.
More evidence that the BBC hates Christians
BBC journalist faced discrimination ‘because he was Coptic Christian’
A BBC Arabic journalist was passed over for promotion because he was a Coptic Christian, an employment tribunal heard
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10367284/BBC-journalist-faced-discrimination-because-he-was-Coptic-Christian.html
Mr Couri said that Mr Shehata was denied the job because he had weaknesses in his editorial judgment and his Arabic language ability, not because he was a Christian.
Any bets on what those “weaknesses in his editorial judgment” entailed?
It’s also notable that rather more overt, and well-publicised, ‘weaknesses’ on the part of BBC staff in matters of editorial judgement have seen other staff’s careers actually flourish, if perhaps with the odd, paid, side-step.