Here’s an on-time new thread for you all to KEEP detailing the bias!
FRIDAY OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- JohnC Nov 17, 01:11
Weekend 16th November 2024
Woman found dead in car boot named by police https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c39nwjygjgro ‘Harshita Brella, 24, from Corby, Northamptonshire, was found by officers… - pugnazious Nov 17, 00:10
Weekend 16th November 2024
https://x.com/darrengrimes_/status/1857550474548809985 - StewGreen Nov 17, 00:10
Weekend 16th November 2024
Laurence fox is tweeting barrister records saying Strmer is connected to the Southport killers father. precis “It turns out @Keir_Starmer,… - StewGreen Nov 16, 23:37
Weekend 16th November 2024
Lying is a normal part of pushing socialist revolution eg James O’Brien [img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GcgbWerWQAAraqw?format=jpg&name=small[/img] - StewGreen Nov 16, 22:38
Weekend 16th November 2024
@pugnazious did you get that the BBC reporter could have opened her report by saying she had had a pervert… - StewGreen Nov 16, 22:35
Weekend 16th November 2024
The Beeboid reporter seems to bury that the pervert has a Muslim name “He had an accent I didn’t recognise,… - Loobyloo Nov 16, 22:27
Weekend 16th November 2024
The Telegraph is odd – almost like it wants to wind up its readers – has done hit job articles…
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
The bBBC is trying to stir up a non-story about HS2, that some places will gain and others will lose.
D’oh! That’s the idea of re-balancing the economy. But to the dimwits at the bBBC it’s a conspiracy.
To the dimwits at the BBC, nothing the current government ever does will ever do any good for anyone.
For heavens’ sake, it’s about relativity – as they were told on the Today programme this morning – some places will do better than others because HS2 will give them better access to markets than they have had previously, but in a growing economy, which is the objective of putting in HS2 in the first place, everyone should benefit.
Quoting from the producers of the report the BBC has latched onto
“KPMG said its report clearly shows the benefits of HS2 for some regions and the negative impacts it might have on others.
A spokesman said: “Maps in the report show potential productivity gains would outweigh the potential losses and the benefits to the UK economy would be far greater than the negative impacts.
“Newsnight did not contact KPMG prior to its programme.
“If they had, we could have helped them understand how the underlying data is represented in the report we have produced.”
These four paragraphs say it all – the BBC latched onto SOME data in the report, but omitted to look at the big picture.
And how the hell, just looking at some of the figures, will Aberdeen be £220 million worse off than it is today because of HS2 ? Everybody is going to by-pass Aberdeen on the way to the oilfields by train ?
The BBC bleats if there is an economic divide between the North and the South, then bleats when somebody tries to solve that issue. Then bleats if it works or bleats if it doesn’t work.
Gordon Brown, Ed Balls and Ed Milliband, along with the rest of their Labour government, left this country in an absolute mess – but did the BBC bleat then ? Not a chance in hell.
It was Labour’s idea in the first place wasn’t it? Now that some Labour MPs have started to have second thoughts, the BBC has strangely started publishing more ‘anti’ stories. Funny that.
The story is not about the negative effects of HS2, it’s about the fact that the supporters of it kept those facts secret from everyone else. It’s only due to the heavy scrutiny that these and many other facts which are against HS2 have come to light.
yes unfortunately, as has been noted on these pages once or twice, the BBC is rather selective as to what it places this ‘heavy scrutiny’ on.
I don’t think the BBC has covered this story:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/437673/Council-killjoys-ban-taxi-driver-from-having-St-George-s-Cross-on-cab-for-discrimination
A taxi driver has been told she is being “derogatory and offensive to foreigners” for displaying stickers of the English flag with the words ‘local driver’ on her cab. There has been just one complaint – no doubt from a ‘foreign’ taxi driver – but if she refuses to remove them she will lose her license. You really couldn’t make this nonsense up. How far up his own fundament must this councillor’s head be to think this is even a sane let alone a fair decision? It’s this sort of idiotic mentality that, as much as anything else, turns people against immigration
As Beeboid Eleanor Oldroyd explains very clearly here at 1:49:23
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03dd3rx
‘The St George’s Flag was appropriated by the more….. right wing…. or the more extreme right wing….’
So you can jolly well forget all this St George’s nonesense.
And, afterall, as Tony Livesey points out at 1:51:32
‘Why do we have to label it…? Why do we have to identify it? We are English by.. by.. by… default’
Time to fly the standard of Harold last king of England. That will really upset the beeboids and the liberals.
It really is time it was raised again. Despite that Livesey there are very many of us whose ancestors must have stood that day or suffered the horror of the Norman victory. We owe them much not least the notion of England.
The Normans and the Anglo-Saxon came from the same stock, and in any case integrated with a much larger native population who ancestors had moved in from what is now South Western France after the last Ice Age. We have been living in a long era of global warming. Harold Godwinson was an usurper with even less of a claim to the English throne than William the Bastard.
Wild you are right insomuch as the Normans came from the same area of southern Scandinavia/northern Germany as the Angles ,and where indeed still closer to their shared Odenic cultural past ( At Hastings they still marched under the pagan battle flag ‘landwaster’)
But Godwinson’s claim to the bretwaldership is based not on male primo genesis ,a Norman construct , but on his ratification by the Witan
It seems probable that the entire Norman invaders could have fitted on a few Eurostars. An interesting thought today I fear given the current levels of immigration.
That said it remains true that the Norman invaders ushered in a tyrrany that was founded only on a conquest. A prosperous and settled nation was reduced to semi slavery and real poverty purely out of greed.
The Norman attitude has remained the guiding principle of our ruling class.
A conservative I might be but I am under no illusions as to the vicious nature and greed of many who say they share conservative views. This has always been a problem in England.
It’s strange to see the number of Norman Castles in West Wales, an area of UK where they never really succeeded (along with the Romans).
Talking with the locals, Sharia might have a problem as well.
The Norman castles were built in North Wales as a base to invade Ireland from. It is from this time that the Irish gained the reputation of being utterly stupid, something which survived until very recently when the fascist made it illegal.
‘ Talking with the locals, Sharia might have a problem as well.’
Dych chi’n gallu dweud hynny unwaith eto boi bach!
You are right the Normans were a new greedy and brutal ruling class, just as the Anglo-Saxons (and the later Vikings) were in their day, but (in the long run) the Normans gave the Country a kick up the arse, and once integrated they were a net gain.
Multiculturalism however is about opposing integration – like CND it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the Left are not only on the side of whoever is the enemy, they are salivating at the prospect of blood letting. It is noticeable that the Left’s interest shifts (from the USSR to China to Vietnam to Palestine to Islam) to whoever is doing the killing.
You are right that Godwinson’s claim to the bretwaldership was based on his military prowess, he lost, and William won (like Canute) by right of conquest. The Normans integrated and intermarried, but despite a (more or less) common culture it took several generations. The Northmen (Anglo-Saxon & Norman) however both accepted they had an inferior culture and were eager to become Western.
It is quite different with the Muslims who refuse to integrate. Their main talent seems to be resentment. A lot of Jews were good at business and science. A lot of the West Indians seem to be good at street culture and sport. Both have brought problems (one has spawned Communists and the other an urban drug and gun culture) but both have been a net gain.
I struggle to think of a single area of British life however that the Muslims enrich – how many great Muslim intellectuals? How many Muslims compete in the X-Factor? How many Muslims for that matter celebrating the jubilee of the Queen – plenty of West Indians and even some Jewish Communists. The dear old Labour Party the Queen Mother used to say.
If Muslims hate this Country so much they should go back to the Islamic Countries from which their parents sought to escape. That it is cultural not racial is demonstrated by how much the Indians (Hindi & Sikh) are flourishing in this Country – to the enrichment of all.
“brutal ruling class, just as the Anglo-Saxons (and the later Vikings) were in their day,”
That’s if you buy the old displacement theory as taught when I was at school (little archaeological evidence)
Or the BBC’s favourite ,ruling elite
(little historical evidence especially when compared to later Norman invasion)
I my self favour the replacement theory, for which there is some fragmentary evidence ,both historical and archaeological
Whatever the rights and wrongs of migration during Britain’s Dark Ages and the influence of the Normans after 1066, what cannot be denied or twisted by left wing multiculturalists is that the long standing occupants of these islands created a common culture, common laws and common values. That is entirely the opposite of multiculturalism which states that all cultures, values and beliefs have equal validity. In effect it is a recipe for social chaos. How can that be beneficial to an ordered society?
If you want to solve a puzzle you need to understand the ideas that lie behind the code used in that puzzle.
BBC nationality descriptors are a bit of a moving target at present
We’ve got “British” “British of Somali Origin” “British Born” and just recently the slightly odd “British Citizen of Long Standing”
To be fair this was coined by the BBC to introduce on radio a race campaigner and lawyer – perhaps they asked him what description he wanted?
I’m now waiting with baited breath to see if The Official Labour Party are going to adopt the evolving system used by the BBC – their unofficial outliers.
I wonder what we will see from the next Official Labour Home Secretary Yvette Cooper in 2015?
Will official forms begin to use instead of “White” Tony Livesey’s new “English by Default” ?
On the front page tabs on the main website just now:
“Salmond: ‘Scotland’s time is now” & elsewhere
.
“Salmond: Independence ‘an act of self-belief'”
.
..and more. Y’know it’s funny but I don’t recall the BBC making the case so strongly for the other side any time recently – or ever…Must be my foaming-at-the-mouth imperialist prejudice etcetc.
Maybe someone should tip Auntie the wink that “Sayonara, Kilties !” means no more luvverly Labour governments south of the border ever again. …………..
Subsequent sample headlines:
“The human cost of North Sea Oil.”
“Salmond: my baby-eating past”
“Holding controversial referendum on anniversary of all-Caucasian Bannockburn an “offensive irrelevance” to ‘New’ Scots”.
“Badger population ‘under threat’ from voracious sporran demands by SNP activists”.
“……………… means no more luvverly Labour governments south of the border ever again. …………..”
Yet another myth that does not stand up to scrutiny!!
“Scottish MPs have NEVER turned what would have been a Conservative government into a Labour one, or indeed vice versa.
On only TWO occasions, the most recent of them being 38 years ago, (1964 and the second of the two 1974 elections), have Scottish MPs given Labour a majority they wouldn’t have had from England/Wales/NI alone. The majorities in question were incredibly fragile ones of four and three MPs respectively – the 1964 Labour government lasted barely 18 months, and the 1974 one had to be propped up by the Lib-Lab Pact through 1977-78 so in practice barely qualified as a majority. Without Scottish MPs but with Liberal support, Wilson would have had a majority of 12.
On ONE occasion (2010) the presence of Scottish MPs has deprived the Conservatives of an outright majority, although the Conservatives ended up in control of the government anyway in coalition with the Lib Dems.
Which means that for 62 of the last 67 years, Scottish MPs as an entity have had no practical influence over the composition of the UK government. From a high of 72 MPs in 1983, Scotland’s representation will by 2015 have decreased to 52, substantially reducing any future possibility of affecting a change.”
http://wingsoverscotland.com/why-labour-doesnt-need-scotland/
Are we really going to go through this again? That coracle was decisively torpedoed last time you tried to float it
Just like your Scottish banks aren’t Scottish that I see you’ve had out on the duck pond again today
Full marks for commitment though
I know, facts are just an inconvenience here.
And just a construct there
You’re dead right, Stewart. I for one torpedoed his claims about RBS being ruined by English banks and bankers, when in fact the whole sorry mess was of their own making.
As always with the Left, repeat a lie often enough and a) people will get tired of arguing with it and b) it then becomes the truth.
Everything faded into mist. The past was erased. The erasure was forgotten. The lie became the truth.
I don’t know how much BBC output in recent years has been dedicated to educating their audience to understand religions, but judging by the BBC attitude towards Christianity, or in fact, any religion except the deference to appease Muslims, I would venture to say ‘not very much’.
Certainly having a Muslim head the department in a predominantly Christian society indicates the priorities that the BBC are more interested in fulfilling. One must wonder just why a Muslim who is supposed to understand our society would accept such a position. Surely he would question the motive of the BBC putting him in such a position.
But they did, and he did, and judging by the lack of news to do with any programmes that put their head above the horizon, presumably this suited the BBC perfectly.
Now with an upcoming mini-series about pilgrimages, Aaqil Ahmed, the BBC ‘chosen one’, has given an interview with the Independent about it.
Without realising it, some statements he’s made have exposed his ‘alien’ mentality, even though he probably thought it would make him fit right in.
He’s first made the observation that younger generations wouldn’t understand the humour in Monty Python’s Life of Brian, since they lack the understanding of content and context surrounding it. This is probably true, but after several years holding the position in what must be the most powerful medium to address that ignorance, just what does he believe he has done about it?
Though I link to the Daily Mail article about his views below, mainly because of the Life of Brian humour also contained in it, the specific ones I’m going to address are from the Independent.
Mr Ahmed said that a basic grasp of religious issues is necessary for the public to understand wider contemporary issues.
He said that religious understanding would help us understand things from why women chose to wear face coverings to what is happening in Syria.
But he added that he is not trying to impose religious knowledge on BBC audiences.
Except first there is no religious reason for women to wear face coverings, but we all know to which religion he’s referring. The same one that has to do with Syria.
Is he trying to justify the actions of militant Islam, because usually the ‘moderate Muslims’ constantly repeat the mantra that actions of these extremists are based on a misunderstanding of Islam – the religion of peace 🙄
So what should we understand?
The ‘piece de resistance’ is this:
Ahmed also claimed that a key reason that Islam is not the subject of more humorous discussion is that the life of the Prophet Muhammad is poorly understood by large sections of the British public. “How can anybody tell a joke about Muhammad when they don’t even know how to spell his name, let alone anything about his life? The day we have people standing up and telling detailed jokes about Muhammad and have the audience understanding that humour, then we will have come a long way in society and we will have a lot more religious literacy about a major world figure.”
So notice we are not talking about Life of Brian any more but onto Muhammed, and how it should be spelt.
Wikipedia tells us:
The name is transliterated as Mohammad (primarily in Iran and Afghanistan), Muhammad (in Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, and Malaysia), Muhammed (Arab World, primarily in North Africa), Mohamed, Mohammed and Mohamad (Arab World), Muhammad (Arab World), Muhammed, Muhamed (Bosnia and Herzegovina), Muhammed, Muhamed, Muhammet, or Muhamet (Turkey and Albania).
In Latin, it is Mahometus (hence Italian Maometto) and Μωάμεθ (Moameth) in Greek. In Catalan and in Spanish, it is Mahoma, in Portuguese, it is Maomé, and in Galician it is Mamede. In Polish it is Mahomet. In Russia, it is Мухаммад (Mukhammad), another common spelling is Магомед (Magomed). In Somali, it is Maxamed. In Senegal and in other West African nations, the variant is Mamadou. In Kazakh, the name is Мұхаммед (Mukhammed). In Chinese, it is written as 穆罕默德 (Mùhǎnmòdé).
As for humour, I just can’t think of anything that could be seen as humorous about a religious leader that marries a 9 year old, or a religion that tells us that Christians and Jews are descendent of pigs and apes, especially when that religion is from the same descendent – Abraham 🙄
But let’s assume some bright comedian could come up with something witty, does anybody remember what happened to the creator of the Mohammed (or is it Mukhammed) cartoons?
What a disingenuous moron this man is, but given the position the BBC have given him, could he be anything else?
‘If the Life of Brian was made today it would flop’: BBC boss says Britain has become a nation of religious illiterates who wouldn’t get the biblical jokes
“If ‘The life of Brian’ was made today it would flop”
Is that because no one is taught Latin anymore?
Oi, big nose, blessed are the cheesemakers!
Wow. So this muslim, head of religion at the BBC, claims that the reason that there aren’t more jokes about Mohammed is that PEOPLE CAN’T SPELL HIS NAME???!!!
Taqiyya alert!!
As ever, Google is your friend.
Search “penalty for insulting the prophet” turns up, as the first result, this question:
“I heard on a tape that whoever insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) should be executed even if he shows that he has repented. Should he be killed as a hadd punishment or because of kufr? If his repentance is sincere, will Allaah forgive him or will he go to Hell and his repentance will be of no avail?”
Which produces the following response:
“The scholars are unanimously agreed that a Muslim who insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) becomes a kaafir and an apostate who is to be executed. This consensus was narrated by more than one of the scholars, such as Imaam Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad, al-Khattaabi and others. Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/13-16 ”
It continues at some length, and concludes with:
“Insulting the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is one of the worst of forbidden actions, and it constitutes kufr and apostasy from Islam, according to scholarly consensus, whether done seriously or in jest. The one who does that is to be executed even if he repents and whether he is a Muslim or a kaafir. If he repents sincerely and regrets what he has done, this repentance will benefit him on the Day of Resurrection and Allaah will forgive him.”
You know, I think that the muslim head of religious affairs at the BBC KNOWS that there is a body of scholarly islamic opinion that holds that taking the piss out of islam, and in particular, mohammed, is just about the most serious offence that exists in islam, and is punishable by death. And, if he does know this, he must therefore be a lying bastard when he says that the reason that there are no jokes about mohammed is because we can’t spell his name.
As you can see from the Wikipedia excerpt I provided, it’s pretty impossible not to be able to spell Moh’s name right.
Maybe his ridiculous claim is what passes for Muslim humour 🙄
Have you heard the one about 2 Muslim women trying on burquas in Harrods?
One asks the other – “Does my bomb look big in this?”
Perhaps the bBBC could get one of their many Islamic experts to explain why it is forbidden for anyone to make a drawing of Mohammed, or to use that name for a Teddy Bear, but almost compulsory for them to give the name to several of their sons.
You have no idea how relieved I was that they banned anybody calling me Mohammed 😉
Roger Harrabin’s shameless one-sided coverage of the ‘climate change’ debate has been covered superbly, and in some depth, by Alan in recent months.
However one of Harrabin’s recent claims during the BBC’s ‘discussions’ on the IPCC’s latest report was, to me, more outrageous than most – and that takes some doing: he claimed that he couldn’t find a single sceptical scientist working in the UK. So I thought I’d put this to the test, using only my own very rudimentary ‘investigative journalism’ skills (no match for the ‘world class’ BBC, I’ll admit).
Lo and behold, within less than two minutes I came up with:
Professor Philip Stott
Philip Stott is Professor Emeritus of Biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, and a former editor of the Journal of Biogeography.
…who is on the Academic Advisory Council over at the Global Warming Policy Foundation, one of the more -shall we say – prominent sceptic organisations that the BBC are more than familiar with.
This is what Prof Stott has to say on the subject:
‘As I have said, over and over again, the fundamental point has always been this: climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically-selected factor (CO2), is as misguided as it gets’.
http://www.climatedepot.com/2011/06/29/attention-climate-depot-offers-skeptical-political-candidates-free-soundbite-answer-regarding-manmade-global-warming/
and
‘….the global warming myth harks back to a lost Golden Age of climate stability, or, to employ a more modern term, climate ‘sustainability’. Sadly, the idea of a sustainable climate is an oxymoron. The fact that we have rediscovered climate change at the turn of the Millennium tells us more about ourselves, and about our devices and desires, than about climate. Opponents of global warming are often snidely referred to as ‘climate change deniers’; precisely the opposite is true. Those who question the myth of global warming are passionate believers in climate change – it is the global warmers who deny that climate change is the norm……..
…….Climate change has to be broken down into three questions: ‘Is climate changing and in what direction?’ ‘Are humans influencing climate change, and to what degree?’ And: ‘Are humans able to manage climate change predictably by adjusting one or two factors out of the thousands involved?’ The most fundamental question is: ‘Can humans manipulate climate predictably?’ Or, more scientifically: ‘Will cutting carbon dioxide emissions at the margin produce a linear, predictable change in climate?’ The answer is ‘No’. In so complex a coupled, non-linear, chaotic system as climate, not doing something at the margins is as unpredictable as doing something. This is the cautious science; the rest is dogma’.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Stott
And just for good measure, there’s this:
‘More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims – Challenge UN IPCC & Gore.’
http://www.climatedepot.com/2010/12/08/special-report-more-than-1000-international-scientists-dissent-over-manmade-global-warming-claims-challenge-un-ipcc-gore-2/
But I’ll leave you and your researchers to find the UK names in there.
So there you go, Roger – easy, you see. So what’s your excuse – being lazy, were you, or just peddling the usual pile of steaming, lying shite you, the BBC and your eco-28gate mates arrogantly pass off as scientific journalism?
Harrabin and friends are simply not interested in facts, nor rationality. Their world view is based on how they wish things to be, not on how they are. No amount of reasoned argument or factual evidence will ever perusade them otherwise as they are emotionally incapable of reason. It’s not because they are intellectually deficient, it’s simply the way their brains are wired. As Trotsky succintly said: Ignore the truth!
Came here looking for bbc bias, found nothing but a right wing wank-fest.
Instead of a left wing wank-fest?
Doesn’t the BBC / Guardian axis satisfy those cravings
for you already? If not can I suggest you join the SWP.
They seem to be experts on the kind of sordid adolescent self gratification you seem to be looking for.
Good luck with you search
Stewart
You just proved his point. You are a onanist.
Joe/dumb
Supporting your own posts via a pseudonym ? That really is masturbatory
OK, apart from the multiple examples of BBC bias in current columns, here is the main front page story in the Sunday Telegraph today, attacking the “consultants” report on benefit tourism and also the BBC’s slanted reporting on it :
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/10391338/Britains-anger-at-EC-opposition-to-restriction-on-migrant-benefits.html
and there is a very specific line-by-line attack on the lies delivered by Mark Easton :
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10391242/Analysis-Was-the-BBCs-reporting-of-migrant-issue-fair-and-balanced.html
Yes, Easton: the Beeboid statistical ‘spinner’.
Mass immigration, a specialty.
“Came here looking for bbc bias”
If you want BBC bias just turn on the BBC.
“a right wing wank-fest.”
You have not (and I suspect never will) got the hang of this free speech thing have you.
best to ignore the trolls.
Space here
….
……
………..
reserved for Joe, to say something about BBC bias.
It’ll take him a few years to fill the space between his ears, so don’t hold your breath.
I’m an American and I suspect that most Brits are somewhat upset with our near default and the government shut down but don’t really understand how it happened. I wrote a summary of the problem starting with how the Tea party was born in the white hot crucible of the over the top right wing lies about the Affordable Care Act. See it at http://brianebaxter.com/
Well, I read the first few hundred lines, clearly confirmed what I suspected, i.e. it is a document describing a left-wing trawl through mis-information, loaded with ad-hominem attacks, and pretty fact-free (well, ‘real’ facts were pretty notable by their absence) and so I decided I wouldn’t waste any more of my life reading it.
Anyone who recommends their own vanity viewpoint, by describing it as ‘… a summary of the problem starting with how the Tea party was born in the white hot crucible of the over the top right wing lies about the Affordable Care Act” pretty much gives away their own political bent.
And the writer is definitely in favour of a’politically bent’ Barack Obama government. Let’s just start and end with the introduction of the flagship ‘Affordable (????) Care Act’ – to paraphrase Mr Obama’s fragrant friend, Nancy Pelosi….. “If you want to know what’s in this Act, you have to vote for it first….”
Yeah, right, that’s democracy for you (left-wing Democrat style).
Thanks Richard I was going to read through it before I went to bed you saved me from a waste of time. I’ll watch an episode of trentovision on YouTube instead
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2467232/BBC-boss-says-Monty-Python-film-The-Life-Of-Brian-lost-modern-audiences-Britains-poor-religious-literacy.html
Aquil Ahmed eh! … from the man who can t get enough of lying about his own retarded ideology, to further its aims – doctoring multiple absurd documentaries, about it at our expense,
and attempting at every insidious opportunity to create that perceived “illiteracy”,
“According to the Independent, Mr Ahmed claimed that comedians don’t make more jokes about Islam because the religion is so poorly understand by large sections of the British public”
Correction it is understood only too well – don t the few times the viewers, (remember them) have actually been given the chance to let you know, in viewer votes Mr Ahmed? … jog your memory?
Doesn t that tell you anything eh! ?
Mumbai – Madrid … hilarious,
7/7 – 9/11 … be still my aching ribs,
Westgate – Kenya … tee hee
Murdering sleeping school children or
people coming out of church …. ha ha ha
FGM – Honour Killing hee hee
gang-raping children oh somebody stop me
etc etc etc etc.
The penchant for lying, cheating, genocidal fascism to achieve world domination directly from the “holy”? texts.
proclaiming a lying antisemitic mass murdering child rapist with a mental illness as an ultimate role model?.
I mean … laugh … I thought i d never start
mind you … that said
The BBC consistently trying to sanitize all of the above … there is something very funny about that
Oh and this from the man, who has turned one of the few faith based programmes left on Sunday TV, into an Islamic laughing stock … there s a joke in there somewhere
And you have smile at “Ottomans Europe Islamic Emperors”
irony obviously not one of his strong points
Really lets try that
Al-Lat Al-‘Uzzá and Manāt go into a bar…..
yep! and … “pigs might fly” 😀
oops!
Mr Ahmed might still believe that horses do? … chortle
Another al bbc fave – Mehdi hasan
Now that’s Funny
Sky News: Inmates bullied into converting to Islam
bBBC News: nothing
And (for INBBC’s attention) in France:-
“Insight – France struggles to fight radical Islam in its jails”
(May, 2013).
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/05/07/uk-france-radicalisation-insight-idUKBRE9460OT20130507
It’s part of the Islamic imperative: DA’WAH.
BH did a self-congratulatory piece on its Moscow correspondents-50 years of truth to power yada, yada.
I liked the description of the first BBC stringer driving over in some wonderful car when ordinary Russians had no prospect of sharing the roads at that time…he wore a full length suede coat and RAF flying boots too-oh, how outre Jasper!
The piece mentioned that he met some Solzhenitsyn chappie, but that won`t compare to the thrill of meeting dearest Kim Philby…why would it?
Not a quote from Solzhenitsyn-not any mention of the courage, the Gulag books…now surely he had a book to promote-which would normally get him some billing would it not?
No mention of Charter 77…now if only we could get Pussy Riot to do a free gig for gay activists on an oil rig…THEN we`d have the only BBC story that counts.
The more the BBC trash Putin….the more I get to love his country…thanks BBC…turning ploughshares into swords by the day.
Funny how this is major news on Sky but not much in the way of coverage from the Islamic loving BBC…
http://news.sky.com/story/1156989/inmates-bullied-into-converting-to-islam
Sorry, I’ve just noticed this has already been commented on above.
Great news. Yet another awareness blog on BBC impartiality.
Not sure if this has been posted before – a projection of what the BBC programme schedule might look like in 30 years’ time :
http://www.snouts-in-the-trough.com/archives/4222
Brilliant!
I wonder why ‘The Now Show’ has never used it?
Then again….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/blogradio4/posts/Feedback-Should-the-BBC-always-be-impartial
.
I’ve made a polite but critical comment – it hasn’t appeared there yet
At least they asked though, even by asking, they may have opened a can of worms that had not occurred to them. And they are being torn a set of new ones.
Not, one suspects, a thread that will be forming a central role in Charter or Plurality reviews… well, if the BBC can help it.
Yes. And they did publish my comment after a little while (they seem to “moderate before publishing”)
I was sure I’d seen a post about the complaints from Muslims who had bought their medical degrees being unable to pass the UK medical exams which was terribly waycist but maybe not!
Anyway here is a video of a Muslim doctor with his non Muslim patient when he thinks no one is looking.
“Pensioner Guilty Of Raping Trafficked 10 year old Girl,”
Sky News, Oct 17
BBC? news no – England news no – Manchester news no
A pensioner who trafficked a deaf and mute girl into the UK, using her to milk the benefits system, has been found guilty of repeatedly raping her.
Ilyas Ashar, 84, sexually abused his vulnerable victim again and again, Manchester Minshull Street Crown Court heard.
Ilyas Ashar, 84, was found guilty of 13 counts of rape against the girl, who is now in her 20s, after she was kept at the home he shared with his wife Tallat in Eccles, Salford, and made to sleep in the “sparse, cold and damp” cellar.
strangely plenty of space for this though
frank Sidebottom statue unveiled
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-24601038
Come on Noggin get with the news! you’re days behind, and it was all over the Manchester and the BBC news !
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/guilty-ilyas-ashar-convicted-raping-6194610
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-18555028
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-24549955
Was there any connection though between this “slave keeping of a ten year old DEAF girl…FFS!-and the …er possible faith of this “British pensioner”, and his family(for want of a better word).
My guess is that he`s a Muslim-what`s yours?…and my implication is that he`s only doing what his Good Book tells him is fair enough.
Any mention of these possible lines of enquiry thoughtful?…or do we file it(yet again) as a British pensioner with possibly Asian blood or appearance?
What does the BBC and Guardian say?…for that is all that seems to matter these days
How is it relevant he’s a ‘pensioner’? Don’t we call people like this ‘paedophiles’ anymore?
As for his religion, that lack of it being mentioned tells you all you need to know unfortunately.
whoops! … 1 like
You probably need to be A. Media Professional to follow this in every detail, but a few things may still stand out for the layperson…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/maverick.html
Beyond the now apparent inevitable unique of another BBC tossed away world dominance effort (“Throw another 10,000 licence fees on the fire, Jeeves, I’m feeling a chill”), this is fun…
‘What would you call a new channel that will “target male audiences…”
Well, given the usual reaction to such things from most sisters within the BBC, and Graun, and even the women there too, I’d call such a defined channel ‘brave’. Though it may just be a punt to ‘balance’ the new LGBT Islamic Dating Game channel that can only be hosted by Saint Fry de Nombreuses Normes.
Or the ‘targeting’ may be more military in meaning, which these days seem a possible.
“To the staff paintballing range, Tulip!”
just watching country file as I usually do and looking out for the usual climate change mantra, but have just realised something…….has anyone else noticed ?
It’s HIDEOUSLY WHITE ! …..and it gets worse…..not a MUSLIM eco freak or farmer anywhere to be seen ! …more disgusting bias from our leading truth benders.
Strewth, I expect that they’re working on it.
Think of the market they are targetting and that will explain the content.
Kudos to the BBC. They’ve announced the death of the widow of Yugoslavian ‘dictator’ Tito. The word ‘dictator’ is going out of fashion, and often these days ‘President’ is preferred (e.g. Kazakhstan http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-15479889), while even North Korea has a ‘leader’ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-15479889). Be nice to see the word ‘dictator’ make a comeback, along with ‘terrorist’.
Don’t hold your breath for the BBC to use the T word for anything that happens overseas. It is de facto forbidden. The BBC guidelines pretend to leave it to discretion – but the T word (except in quotes of an overseas spokesman) has not been used for years,
Leftie sheep, the bloody lot of them. Not an ounce of integrity among all those hundreds/thousands of BBC “journalists”. If their grandmother was killed in an overseas atrocity – the culprits would still be “gunmen” or “militants”.
Maybe there should be a listing of all the BBC “journalists” and editors who adamantly refuse to use the T word.
its a bit like the government/regime thing when it suits them.
Will she make “Last Word” then this Friday?
I think so-shady, commie, did rather well out of crushing of the people…and a woman naturally.
Worth a listen if only to see who the BBC reckons is worth the obit…always weekend rebels, females, non-white English-drugs and Ginsberg era a bonus.
Start the Week with Stephanie Flanders, interviewing the academic Paul Collier on the negative aspects of immigration and his book Exodus: Immigration and Multiculturalism .
It finds yet again that Liebours mass immigration has caused trust to fall, generosity, and will ultimately lead to the impoverishment of the entire country.
The welfare state cannot continue when disparate people do not see a shared risk, why should they pay towards something which is never going to affect them?
Very worth a listen even if you can tell that guests were holding back to satisfy a PC agenda.
Am listening now,dancing around the head of a pin to avoid “racism” is always worth a listen.
FLANDERS (paraphrasing): ‘I don’t remember Immigration being a big issue in the 1997 election.’
-I’m sure she doesn’t; the Labour Party’s covert plan then for the colonisation of Britain via open-door mass immigration was off her political radar.
“At last we know the truth: Labour despises anyone who loves Britain, its values and its history.”
By MELANIE PHILLIPS.
(2010).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1253295/MELANIE-PHILLIPS-At-know-truth-Labour-despises-loves-Britain-values-history.html
‘I don’t remember Immigration being a big issue in the 1997 election.’
It’s been an issue much longer than that, just not in places that matter.
What actually happened in the 97 election was as soon as immigration was mentioned Liebour played the bullying race card to silence all opposition. The spineless fools which the Tory party had become were too frightened to fight back.
It all fell apart when Gordon Clown called Gillian Duffy a ‘bigoted woman’ for daring to question his immigration policy, and the Emperors nakedness was revealed.
Agree, although the dishonesty, hypocrisy and bullying had been going on for years on a local, but not generally national level, for years.
What BBC staff, especially at market rate level, don’t remember, choose to forget or simply decide to ignore being rather a major issue for a monopoly medium seeking to retain a reputation for transparency and trust whilst trying to ‘move on’ from Pollard, Rose & PAC inquiries that went badly, and facing Plurality and Charter Reviews that look like going about as well.
No wonder she’s off having been a key part of what the BBC called ‘reporting’, which was and remains propaganda backed by censorship.
When the greatest power is the one least held to account, the result is inevitable.