The last one’s overflowing so better have a new one of these…..
Open Thread Wednesday
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- atlas_shrugged May 2, 2024 at 11:43 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024Zeph it was the middle of winter and I was driving home on the A14 in the dark. Right in...
- atlas_shrugged May 2, 2024 at 11:19 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024When can we expect the wet police to pay this man a 5am visit, arrest and handcuff him in front...
- atlas_shrugged May 2, 2024 at 11:05 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024I have just listened to this so you didn't have to. It is unbearable, so only listen if you have...
- Jeff May 2, 2024 at 11:04 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024Another day, another humiliating migrant fiasco. If it's not the House of Lords or the devious civil servants putting a...
- Guest Who May 2, 2024 at 10:33 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024Sopes, Mason, Simpo… all of Labour… what has Trump got to do with anything? https://x.com/nickdixoncomic/status/1786112272047198459?s=6 ‘It’...
- G.W.F. May 2, 2024 at 9:52 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024I intended to vote and read the handful of election leaflets. They consisted of community this and community that and...
- StewGreen May 2, 2024 at 9:49 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024Campaign Against Antisemitism tweetHis caveated apology was a feeble attempt to mask his bigotry. Mr. Baptiste, known for Comedy Central...
- StewGreen May 2, 2024 at 9:43 pm on Midweek 1st May 2024GBnews topic now ..lefty comic not condemned, despite making a clear death threat https://twitter.com/joshxhowie/status/1785730810206679341
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
Article about the celebrity ‘moderate’ Muslims that BBC puts on amongst other programmes, ‘Sunday Morning’ Live most weeks. These self-appointed spokesman are allowed to twist the truth about Islam & are never challenged!!! http://chersonandmolschky.com/2013/11/18/real-muslim-moderates-stand-up/
Here’s another interesting article. This one’s about Jack Dromey, or the bbc’s lack of him. Great headline, too.
http://rantypantz.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/the-bbc-is-afraid-of-bbcs.html
Extensive feature on this morning’s Today on the report by the – quote – conservative leaning Centre for Social Justice on the level of personal debt in the UK. The presenter (Webb, I think it was), seemed staggered that it had reached the eye-watering total of £1.4 trillion.
Being the BBC, they had to pick on how the debt burden affected the 10% poorest in the country – which no doubt was in the report.
However, the more insidious sleight of hand came when comparing the debt level to what it was 10 years ago – again, probably what the report also contained but then comparisons often do use a 10-year time span. But of course, that takes us back to 2003 and the glorious ‘end of boom and bust’ era under former Iron Chancellor Brown. The comparison was then repeated in the following news bulletin (and probably ad nauseam after that, if past form is anything to go by).
The inference to the casual listener was that all this borrowing had got out of control under Cameron. But look at this graph:
http://alphanow.thomsonreuters.com/2013/04/chart-of-the-week-the-end-of-the-beginning-for-the-uk-consumer/#.UozcpbJFD3g
Household borrowing took off around 2001, about the same time as Crash Gordon turned on the public spending money taps, and continued to rise steeply until the recession hit, at which point it started to go down. So personal borrowing under Cameron is actually lower than it was at its peak under Brown, but the stratospheric rise all happened under Labour’s watch. Not that the BBC will tell you this, or ever did when Labour were in power.
The BBC – telling you the half of the story that will get Labour re-elected.
There is the cumulative debt in households where several members of a family have contracts for their mobile phones; and if they have Sky and a large television (of course in 2003 we could still buy an analogue TV for £50 or £60) plus large TV’s use more electricity (which the BBC never tells us) so all in all the cost of living has risen over the last ten years with very little to show for it.
This is actual borrowing, Deborah – mortgages, credit cards, overdrafts, personal loans. The unprecedented, astronomic rise from 2001 speaks for itself – Gordon’s debt-fuelled ‘boom’ driven by a very greedy ‘must have it now’ British public.
Even when the BBC admits there are problems with ObamaCare, they still hide the whole truth. Now they report the President’s new executive, extra-legal decision to allow people who qualify for the new ObamaCare subsidies to buy private health insurance off the exchange, directly from the insurance companies, and still get the subsidies. Once again this directly violates the Law of the Land! ™, but who cares? The BBC isn’t going to mention that. All you need to know is that the President is on top of it, doing His best to save us from something beyond His control.
This doesn’t actually fix anything, just kicks this particular can down the road for a while until the ObamaCare website is fixed. Then, of course, all will be well. The BBC is so sure of that they included a short video explaining His Health Care Plan For Us, sort of like how Jehovah’s Witnesses slip copies of The Watchtower in when handing out charity fliers. Explaining ObamaCare itself is irrelevant to this story (how many times have we complained the BBC left something out only to be told that it wasn’t relevant to the specific report itself?), but the BBC threw it in anyway to balance out the negative news.
Of course, the main thing the BBC doesn’t want you to know (to be fair, they probably don’t actually realize this themselves) is that, even if the website is up and running perfectly by the end of January (when the subsidy payments to insurance companies are scheduled to commence flowing), ObamaCare itself will still fail in the end. Why? Because way more people are signing up for Medicaid than for insurance plans. Yes, it’s from Bretibart, but they’re only quoting something from a real expert group that’s behind a paywall. Even the Left-wing LA Times slips in an admission while reporting that Washington State’s own exchange is working really well. “Most” signups have been for Medicaid.
We don’t even know how many of those few who have actually purchased and scheduled payment for individual health insurance are getting some kind of subsidy as well. This is going to get worse late next year when time catches up with the other cans He’s kicked down the road: the employer mandate, the main individual mandate. What do you think is going to happen when millions more are dropped from their employer-provided insurance plans? The majority of those will be lower-income hourly workers or middle-income people who will still qualify for some subsidy. More subsidies, more Medicaid.
The only way ObamaCare is going to work they were told it would is if so many people sign up to pay those higher premiums for those bloated plans (no basic, catastrophic-only plans allowed, single, middle-aged men must pay for birth-control pills, 60-year old women must pay for maternity care, etc.) that the government can subsidize all those other plans. Even the $750 billion taken from senior citizens on Medicare over the next few years won’t begin to cover this.
Quite simply, it’s not sustainable. It cannot work. The BBC won’t report that most signups are for Medicaid, and certainly won’t send one of the battalion of Beeboids in the US to investigate how many people who actually have signed up are getting some kind of subsidy, because that would be siding with the enemy. In fairness that may even be impossible because what was supposed to be the most transparent Administration in history is about as secretive and dishonest with these figures as it can be.
The statement that ObamaCare is ultimately unsustainable is not something easily dismissed as an ideological position from a Right-wing extremist who hates the President. It’s basic math. The same people who are usually so keen to harp on “sustainability” when it comes to energy production somehow can’t find that word in their dictionary when it comes to the real world of business and economics. This can’t pay for itself, but the BBC won’t see it or tell if you if they did.
We don’t even know how many of those few who have actually purchased and scheduled payment for individual health insurance are getting some kind of subsidy as well.
The payment part of the website is not even implemented. By their own admission, only 30-40% of the Obamacare website is completed and it only took 3 1/2 years and $600 millions so far.
And not to mention the website contract was awarded in a no-bid auction to a company where one of M.O. former classmate is CEO *and* big donor to Obamessiah campaign.
Adi, you’re quite right that the part of the system which will automate the subsidy payments to the insurance companies isn’t even done yet. BBC audiences wouldn’t know that, of course, as that information has been essentially censored. Can’t imagine why. I was just talking about the people who sign up for them. Aside from the payment schedule, we don’t actually know who is even going to get subsidies. Even though in this case we’re talking about partial subsidies aside from the full, free Medicaid. The problem is that, if they’re not paying full retail, they’re not properly funding the rest of it. The scheme was never meant to be largely funded by government subsidies, and actually I’m an idiot because I left out the even more most important black hole of this fiasco.
The vast, and I mean seriously vast as in almost everyone, majority of people who are supposed to sign up on the exchanges were meant to pay enough to cover most of the costs of all the extra care insurance companies are now required to provide as part of the scheme. That’s the whole point of the individual mandate and the double-edged bludgeon of the employer mandate which includes significantly lowering the bar for defining “full time”, as well as making these bloated plans mandatory (which reminds me: I’ll have to pay extra to cover my breast pumps) and placing even more restrictions on where and how insurance companies could sell their products. It’s only fair that genetic “lottery winners” pay more (you know the drill: “it’s only fair, etc.”), and all that. If the vast majority instead are already or have now been forced to join the dependency class, there simply isn’t enough money coming into the system to cover them. The taxpayer-funded subsidies cover whatever the buyers don’t have to pay, which, as I’ve warned all along, will just add an enormous amount to government expenditure. But there are supposed to be tens of millions of paying
suckersblessed people who will need to pay more to cover the rest of it.Shut down and recreate the individual market under complete government control, and casually make sure you get the unintended consequence of employers dumping many more millions of people off their group plans and onto the exchanges, and in the fantasy land of one of those team exercises you did in high school economics class you’ll get something that can work. Unfortunately, that’s not the reality. Now it looks like we’ll have a couple million at least signing up for Medicaid now, and who knows how many for subsidies, and hardly any paying full retail for quite some time. Since the employer mandate and now, somehow, all those policies that just got cancelled will be restored and the ones about to be cancelled won’t be, just on the power of His Word (since the insurance companies have already shut down their system for it and nobody seems to be sure how it’s going to work yet), those millions of people won’t have to pay extra on the exchanges to cover the new mandatory costs for a year at least. So the whole thing is deep in a hole before it even starts.
Like we used to say about the inevitable unsustainability of the extra-Keynesian borrowing-and-spending binges both our governments (not to mention high-profile titled editors at the BBC) kept recommending, I could explain this to a child with a few bottle caps and a circle drawn in the dirt.
None of this matters to the BBC, however, as it’s not relevant to the ideology behind ObamaCare, which is all that really interests them.
David – why don’t you start your own blog. I am very interested in the BBC / America angle and it is frustrating that your comments and insights get lost in the noise of Alan’s posts.
Why does “Colditz” bother to post under different names? If he sticks to one name may I suggest “Failed Journalist” or “Nothing to Say”? Now that “Nicked Emus” no longer posts here you could use that name, after all you are the same person.
….. and then there’s these staunch groups of Obamacare supporters, who were all for the programme until recently – the unions. Whoops – they’re now in full reverse, screaming at the Democratic government that it shouldn’t actually apply to them, and that, like so many other close groups of Obama supporters, they should be exempted from the provisions of Obamacare and retain their previous policies…. warts and all. Gosh – what might have happened if everyone were to be given that choice ?
But the real implications of this plan have still to come…for instance, the insurance policies provided to employees by employers, because when their existing plans are closed next year, there is going to be a huge wake-up call as policy prices spiral and corporations bale out of providing the ever-more-costly service.
And then there’s the demographic time-bomb. Most of those piling into Obamacare are those who have had no insurance in the past, and the elderly, whose healthcare costs are spiralling as the population ages – and who will be delighted to see their costs being subsidised by others. So who are going to pay ? Will it be the young and healthy who will impoverish themselves by buying extremely expensive healthcare insurance ? Or will they just say ‘stuff it’ and only pay when they start to get ill (paying a minor fine if found out)…or will it be the group in the middle who WILL (contrary to Mr Obama’s promise that everyone would get better healthcare insurance for lower premiums) have to pay shed-loads more than they have previously, to sustain the expenditure ? It sure won’t be the insurance companies who have been offered bribes to ensure they play along with Obama, and will not lose out on their business profits for doing so.
To paraphrase Mrs Thatcher, it always turns out that Socialists eventually run out of other people’s money.
….. and then there’s these staunch groups of Obamacare supporters, who were all for the programme until recently – the unions. Whoops – they’re now in full reverse, screaming at the Democratic government that it shouldn’t actually apply to them, and that, like so many other close groups of Obama supporters, they should be exempted from the provisions of Obamacare and retain their previous policies…. warts and all. Gosh – what might have happened if everyone were to be given that choice ?
But the real implications of this plan have still to come…for instance, the insurance policies provided to employees by employers, because when their existing plans are closed next year, there is going to be a huge wake-up call as policy prices spiral and corporations bale out of providing the ever-more-costly service.
And then there’s the demographic time-bomb. Most of those piling into Obamacare are those who have had no insurance in the past, and the elderly, whose healthcare costs are spiralling as the population ages – and who will be delighted to see their costs being subsidised by others. So who are going to pay ? Will it be the young and healthy who will impoverish themselves by buying extremely expensive healthcare insurance ? Or will they just say ‘stuff it’ and only pay when they start to get ill (paying a minor fine if found out)…or will it be the group in the middle who WILL (contrary to Mr Obama’s promise that everyone would get better healthcare insurance for lower premiums) have to pay shed-loads more than they have previously, to sustain the expenditure ? It sure won’t be the insurance companies who have been offered bribes to ensure they play along with Obama, and will not lose out on their business profits for doing so.
To paraphrase Mrs Thatcher, it always happens that Socialists eventually run out of other people’s money.
Apologies for duplication. I’m posting via a very weak link, and believed the first posting had failed….
Who killed JFK?
Lee Harvey Oswald?
The mafia?
Fidel Castro?
Well, according to the BBC, conservatives in Dallas may be to blame!
McCauly notes that his own grandparents were conservative Dallas extremists with a fixation on “liberalism, gender equity, gays”. They considered Kennedy an “enemy of the state”. Their vitriol created a toxic political environment in the city, he writes, that has left Dallas residents feeling a “collective culpability” for the president’s death.
From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-25008028
You couldn’t make it up…
Jeff
It’s not really the BBC thinking that. It’s the dopey editor of this new “Echo Chambers” feature seeing a chance to discuss the idea that Right-wing extremism was and still is so dangerous in general. You can see why the piece caught his eye. There was a fuss about it in the media echo chamber, so it’s newsworthy.
Plus there was an opportunity to plug a couple more up-coming BBC broadcasts about JFK’s assassination.
“It’s not really the BBC thinking that.”
David, watch last night’s BBC Newsnight if you can.
“Lincoln, JFK and Obama: What links the US presidents?”
“BBC Newsnight’s Allan Little looks back at two defining moments for the US and asks what history can tell us about the divided country President Obama presides over today.”
Maybe all three will come to the same reason for departure from office.
Dopey never in doubt, but unless this is an escalation of the twitter ‘views not of the people I have plastered as my employers all over this page’ weasel, I’d have to say this rather ‘suggests’ a BBC involvement, and beyond their usual ODoS implausible denyitanyway…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-25008028
One presumes the new editor on this new beat is part of their cutbacks to extend the 8,000 flower bed to a nice round 10,000 ‘reporters’?
Top comment:
‘what McAuley writes about Dallas being a city of hate is pure fiction’
What else would inspire a BBC Editor?
“Kennedy rides open top for a laugh in notorious Republican hate city” just doesn’t sound believable.
I draw your attention to my post on the thread entitled “The Marksman on the Grassy Knoll” on this site.This refers to a documentary on Channel 5 last week which quite convincingly posited the theory that Kennedy was killed by one of the CIA bodyguards in the following car. The car carried an AR15 assault rifle, ready cocked and with the safety catch off. When the bodyguard heard Oswald’s rifle shots he jumped out of the car and accidentally fired the weapon which had hollow point ammunition which exploded in Kennedy’s head which is shown in the famous Zapruder film.
Well it could happen in theory – but the chances are pretty small.
No I don’t know about you but if I were to jump out of a car then it would probably be sideways so the rifle would either be pointing at the crowd or in line with the edge of the motorcade – in neither case could it point at someone actually IN the motorcade.
They DID show what was described as the only still picture in existence of the agent standing with the ar15 in his hand, pointing forward toward Kennedy’s car, but admittedly slightly pointing upward, at around 30 degrees?
There is so much misinformation possible these days it’s difficult to know what to believe. The provenance of the pic wasn’t explored.
I feel if this had happened some of the dozens of eye witnesses who were only feet away would have seen it. Not all of them, but at least one surely? I don’t buy it.
The film mentioned a number of witnesses at the Warren Commission enquiry who stated they definitely smelled gunsmoke as the vehicle went past them. One local politician was emphatic that he could smell gunshot residue at that location. The film showed that they could only have noticed such a smell if a gun had been fired close to them at ground level. The programme even named the CIA operative who was seen holding the AR15 in the photograph.
Someone also did a ballistics check on a model of Kennedy’s injured skull to show the trajectory of the bullet.
You had to have seen the whole programme to see the whole evidence for the hypothesis. I thought it was more convincing than some others I’ve seen. AND it is more possible, seeing how the Security Services have behaved since then, to believe in the “cock-up” theory than a convoluted conspiracy between the Mafia, Castro and the CIA that some have elaborated.
I did see the programme, but was not convinced. It is true that several witnesses smelled gunsmoke, which might be explained by a grassy knoll shooter. However, no-one seemed to have seen or heard an AR15 going off just a few feet from them, and I think they would have if it had happened.
However, the AR15 story is of interest in relation to a witness called Ed Hoffman, a deaf man who viewed the assassination from the railroad overpass. He claimed that he saw a man come down from behind the grassy knoll with a package which he put in the trunk of a car in the large car park, and drove off. His story was largely discounted, because he also said he saw a Secret Service agent in the back up car with a machine gun. For a long time, the Secret Service tried to deny they had any such gun, but as you say, a photograph has emerged of the AR15 in the back up car. I don’t see why Ed Hoffman should have been telling the truth about one thing and not the other, and he is one of several people who saw suspicious activity around the grassy knoll that day.
PS The author of the piece recently tweeted (@awzurcher):
Not sure I would have picked Dallas as the place to send an embattled Democratic president in November.
Does he actually believe that the fact that Dallas was a conservative town 50 years ago had anything to do with the fact that JFK was shot there???
Jeff
He’s probably being facetious, but I guess you’re right that he’s rather sympathetic to the idea, and certainly seems to have bought into the darker fears espoused by the angry grad student. The BBC sure has a knack for putting people like this in editorial positions.
“You couldn’t make it up…”
The BBC is so far to the Left a documentary about how people are nostalgic for life in the German Democratic Republic is only a matter of time.
Correction, they have already done that, I mean just how peachy and vibrant – such good healthcare – life is in Cuba.
No, they have already done that, I mean how life is in North Korea is bracingly uncorrupted by the West and consumerism.
Nope, they have not (as yet) sought to write a love letter to North Korea. Nope, they have not (as yet) sought to defend Kim Jung-un. So what do the BBC do? Describe it as a Far Right regime of course!
You may think that North Korea is a Totalitarian Stalinist Communist State, and that it was a supporter of the Communist Left – Lee Harvey Oswald – who assassinated President Kennedy.
But you would of course be wrong, the BBC patiently explains, it was the Far Right, because everything on the Left that even the the Leftists at the BBC cannot excuse is called Far Right.
It is how these sick in the head Stalinists get up in the morning.
Perhaps they could do a programme about a life of freedom and plenty in the Socialist run Venezuela…………Damn, their President Maduro has just signed an enabling act making him a dictator. The BBC don’t seem to want to mention that little story.
Funny how socialist states always end up as dictatorships.
Joy unconfined on BBC 24 as another 2 “activists” from Greenpeace are released on bail in Russia. Unfortunately for the neutral status of journalists on these jaunts, the ticker tape identified Kieron Bryen as an activist. Oh dear – bit of a freudian slip there. Then Kieron’s brother Russell was interviewed. He asserted (unchallenged) that the Greenpeace protest was “peaceful” and further asserted that being banged up for a potential 7 years for a “peaceful” protest was “crazy”.
In enviro-world anything goes: even the boarding of a Russian platform in Russian (or Exclusive Economic Zone) waters is OK because Greenpeace claims it was “peaceful”. BTW AFAIAA Greenpeace has not claimed that the boarding in and of itself (ie boarding a platform without permission in Russian or international waters) was actually legal although its website puts up a lot of legal flim-flam
Whatever, you can be sure that Greenpeace won’t mess with the Russians again – well not in Russia anyway – whether or not all its activists are released. There’s a lesson here for our rulers in dealing with the scum of the “envirowarrior” class (and other “activist” organisations eg animal rights nutters, UAF, Occupy etc) but I doubt that such a lesson will be learned.
There’s a difference in that Putin doesn’t have the BBC to deal with. If it were tried here, the BBC, using its broadcast news monopoly, would ensure the story was never off the radar and would give sympathetic interviews to the activists’ relatives.
Are you kidding? Greenpeace has been stupid about the Russians almost since they started. Russia getting a little serious with Greenpeace activists was old news 30 years ago. They still haven’t learned, and won’t as long as the media keeps lauding them for it.
Indeed – but I don’t think they’ll do anything much further in Russia. Demos outside the Russian Embassy in London or Paris is one thing: an occupation of Gazprom offices in Moscow/St Petersburg is quite another.
Mind you, Greenpeace has access to a supply of useful idiots who might be prepared to spend years inside a Russian prison for the greater glory of this piece of excreta much like Hamas/Hezbollah has a stream of volunteers willing to blow themselves up for the chance to spend eternity with 72 virgins.
Ooh…ooh…can I nominate Paul McCartney?
Mary Had a Little lamb, My Love, Give Russia back to the Russians…
A year pretending to be Johnny Cash might give him a decent song…and, if he DOES do the honourable thing-there`ll be laods of Jo Whiley?Radio 2 suckups who`d surely join him.
Give peace a chance…oh, wait…thats Yoko`s isn`t it?
And here`s a piece of Pauls poetry
Sadness isn`t sadness
It`s happiness
But in a black jacket
Put that in your vodka bottle Chekhov!
And a duet with Pussy Riot to be released before Christmas too!
Greenpeace’s useful idiots appear to be well connected – hence FCO making vaguely threatening noises to the Russkies.
Lefty Bullingdon-types can always rely on their mumsies to get them out of twouble.
I wonder where his next job will be?
Thikki Campell interviewing Vince ‘Sod Off Grandpa’ Cable about the Chrystal Methodist.
‘Zanoapersiltrajee’ – I think (Is that not a personal tragedy) followed by…
‘buwobouyoomncompashn’ – I think (But what about human compassion.)
Anyone remember Gameshow simpering into his mouchoir when Andrew Mitchell was brought low?nomeneither. But then Mitchell’s not one of Labour’s rent-boy-using, drug-guzzling High Priests.
On another tack – the son of Pat Finucane, a ‘Human Rights Lawyer’ and murdered victim of loyalists, was on.
If yer think ‘Human Rights Lawyer’ is a (vile) creature of our own age – nah – this was a code the BBC used to use as a synonym for… ‘A lawyer who specialises in defending IRA terrorists in court.
The leopard never changes its spots.
Jack Dromy in a bit of trouble. Have a check on Guido.
Guido scoops the BBC yet again.
Amazing, no, how good he can be with none of our money, compared with how utterly shit DroidNews™ is with £3.5 billion of our money a year.
He knocks them into a cocked-hat day in, day out.
A big gay black cocked-hat at that 😉
I’m surprised Dromey has a son on board the Labour gravy train. I thought wifey H Harperson had crushed the b*ll*cks out of him years ago.
They don’t practice what they preach!
Silly person 🙂
A very telling comment from English Passport on facebook:
“TIME TO COMPARE!!!!!
STEPHEN LAWRENCE, news headlines for 20 years, his parents become millionaires,music concerts to remember him, has a building that includes a gallery and TV studio named after him at Greenwich University. Has the Stephen Lawrence charitable trust, has the Stephen Lawrence Centre, the Stephen Lawrence Education Standard, his mother given a seat in the House of Lords.
LEE RIGBY, the trial started yesterday….Media silence!…”
It could turn out to be a rum trial. Lots of unanswered questions, starting with the charge of a conspiracy to murder police officers before the killing of Lee Rigby. Where was the surveillance on the day of the killing? Why were the cops so late? Evidence from security wallahs from behind a screen? I would assume the BBC are deep in consultation with Cameron at this moment. Got to protect the security folk and the muslims and watch out for threats to community relations. Bias alert should be classified as red.
When will they make their claim to have been tortured at the behest of MI5 and will will have to release them rather than expose the security apparatus and pay them gazillions in compensation (Not to mention Phil Shiner’s fees in preventing this appalling miscarriage of justice)
Why doesn’t someone separate Phil Shiners mouth from the rest of him – metaphorically speaking. The most worthless human rights lawyer come dump and he still runs rings around the totally useless Theresa May.
With the trial due to re-open today the BBC is silent, but just to remind people that our soldiers are the bad guys is a report on innocent people being killed by the army
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24987465
Drip drip drip all morning…anti British Forces propaganda AGAIN. Oh and as a change lets report on Bearded Savage Nutjobs who are fighting abroad for Islam…..lets hear again what he had to say….WHY FFS…propaganda broadcasting. Traitorous SCUM.
Yet strangely no mention of the allegations by some that certain Sinn Fein ministers have blood on their hands or the fact that we the British mugs (sorry I mean taxpayers) pay them a pension of sorts. I believe I read somewhere that it is the equivalent of a certain pay grade in the civil service. Either way it totally sucks. As I have mentioned before I am amazed that any working class young Briton would want to sign up to the armed forces considering how mu7ch the establishment (BBC included) hate them.
Lord Pearson said there is a threat from Islam extremists. Fair enough. Now look at the photo of him used by the BBC on its BBC News Website. Don’t tell me the picture editor chose a picture of him looking anything else than demonic.
No flowers
The BBC never miss an opportunity to attack the 1980s and by association Mrs T and free enterprise
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-25025120
‘The wider and brighter ties sold in Tie Rack reflected the progression of the 1980s, where everybody wanted – or were told they wanted – to get rich. It went like this: How do you get rich? You get a job in the City. And how do you get a job in the City? You buy a TIE!’
‘….even if you were a lowly insurance salesman in Prestatyn or a junior office clerk in Keighley.’
‘But whatever today’s go-getters want to go get, it’s not neckwear. When even Conservative prime ministers go open-necked, you know that a small sartorial legacy of 1980s Britain has gone for good.’
‘No flowers.’
No flowers?
You see if you happen to be ‘a lowly insurance salesman in Prestatyn or a junior office clerk in Keighley’ the BBC has utter contempt for you. Why can’t everyone be a Lefty-liberal Guardianista neck-tie shunning Oxbridge arts grad BBC lover?
Even the so-called Tory PM has caved in. No flowers.
By the way, are the BBC telling us the tie was invented in 1979?
‘And how do you get a job in the City? You buy a TIE!’….you know that a small sartorial legacy of 1980s Britain has gone for good.’
You get weary of wondering what planet the BBC have been on for the past 100 years. If you wanted any office job since, oh, God knows – Victorian times? – you needed a suit and tie. Unlike today’s BBC reporters, of course (their sloppy dress code mirroring their sloppy journalism).
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/noticed.html
‘Now when is someone going to tell us how BBC World News is doing in the States ?’
One presumes, brilliantly in competition, unfettered there by the constraints of unique funding, and able to appeal on the power of professional integrity?
Or is it all #FoIexempted there too?
I believe BBC World news is a commercial operation and therefore wouldnt be liable to FOI requests.
OT, as he has now left for Ch4 (and, it appears, other shores), but one can only wonder what is the BBC’s ex-Anger & Protests Editor on track of in guise of Culture & Digital (any more than he did at the BBC with Economics)?:
SnowmailOur lead story tonight is too hush-hush for me to be able to reveal to you, but you won’t be disappointed. It comes to us from our Culture and Digital Editor Paul Mason in the United States.
As commented on, on Guido’s. Post no 34
http://order-order.com/2013/11/20/prime-mentalist-flips-out-at-whips-for-being-made-to-work/#comments
So Cameron lays into Miliband at PMQs and shows the country what an ineffective wannabe the Labour leaders is, the picture of defeat and embarrassment on Miliband’s face was a picture.
Does the BBC report of PMQs reflect Miliband’s inadequacy? Does it ****. No, the BBC wingmen, whose job it is to protect their leader offer a distraction in the form of Cameron’s response to Michael Meacher.
If they wanted to take this line (and report it properly -some hope), they may well come to the same conclusion as Cameron, when they consider Meacher’s ludicrous assertion on inward investment.
The 6 O Clock news worries about the effect on Co-Op staff and shares if Cameron goes all beastly on the Bank.
It alleges(in the Flowers sense) that it`s a contrivance to pin a tail on poor Edward…SO unfair…political opportunism an` all.
And no mention of Camerons decent joke about this being the first time Miliband has NOT called for a public enquiry!
Zees eez not funny…poor Ed the Statesman has been debagged by the toffs.
The BBC and Guardian seemed to lose their funnybones once they`d run out of laughing gas after Maggies death.
Despicable-but they`re digging up a Commie corpse and call it a cause…see what I did there?
Not funny either-we`re paying for Labours lies and tripe as blended by the Godawful BBC.
Charles Moore in the Spectator gets it about right:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/11/why-the-paul-flowers-story-reflects-very-badly-on-the-media/
“If you look at Robert Peston’s BBC blog on the subject, for instance, there is a lot of ‘I am told’ and ‘according to the Manchester Evening News’.
Is there no one in the BBC’s enormous staff who could have done a bit of work years ago on the Revd Mr Flowers? Isn’t it even more extraordinary that the media did not pick up Mr Flowers’s ignorant testimony earlier this month to the Treasury Select Committee until it was drawn to their attention on Sunday after he was exposed by the Mail on Sunday for buying illegal drugs? It seems truer than ever that the only way to ensure no one notices you is to say something publicly within the Palace of Westminster.”
Moore is assuming that neither Peston nor anyone at the BBC knew all about this the whole time and are just now discovering it. I’m not so naive.
Preston gets all his reports via his Jewish connections in the city (I am not anti-semitic just stating a fact). I think that the co-op was not in his network
You may not think of that as an anti-Semitic comment Frederick- well I do. And you know that under the laws brought in by the last Labour government if I perceive it as racist – it is racist.
A good example of BBC bias by manipulation on 6 o’clock News. They reported and aired David Cameron at PMQ’s berating Milliband regarding association, with the drug taking, homosexual former Chairman of the Co-op Bank and the donations and funding from that Bank. They then played Milliband supposedly replying with a tirade about donors to the Conservative.
The reality was Milliband’s outburst came first and Cameron’s was in reply.
Lets face it the BBC just cannot be truthful.
You might have added that in all debate it is far better to go second so you can rebut the opponents without them having a chance to reply and people will remember the second speech more than the first.
Propaganda 101 – see the teaching course daily online
“The reality was Milliband’s outburst came first and Cameron’s was in reply”
—-
Oh, dear, the BBC twiddling the dials to make the edit more narrative friendly… Unique or not?
Maybe the Queen may have a view… Or Susan Watts? Or…
Whatever it is, when you play with the order, it ceases to be ‘news’.
I saw that last night and to be honest I thought they gave both sides a fair crack of the whip.
I was referring to BBC radio 4 News.
Amazingly this exchange was omitted from ‘Yesterday in Parliament’.
Re the BBC’s coverage of the Royal Marine atrocity murder of a peace loving Taliban.
There are 5 unarguable reasons for clemency in the case of sergeant A’s plight you’ll never hear about from the Beeb. in: “War Is Hell”.
If you have any doubt about how deserving he is of mercy check it out at:
http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/#!/2013/11/war-is-murder.html
It’s a funny old business war.
If the Apache gunner had rattled off another hundred or so rounds at the wounded terry taleban no-one would have battled an eyelid*; if one of our rifleman had popped him from seventy yards no-one would have batted an eyelid; but four feet away seems to be verboten.
On balance I’d rather Marine A had kept his pistol holstered, but for his sake, not the Taleban’s.
*unless of course the film ended up on Wikileaks, at which stage the dim left would have cranked the dial up to MAXIMUM HOWL.
By the way – anybody remember the campaign in America done by posting crap news organisation links with bad text directed at certain websites. Google used the text in the links to try and understand what the website was all about.
Just thinking . . . A few hundred or thousand such links could be embarrassing.
Anyone able to tell me why BBC has control of Parliament and Democracy Live coverage? The morning Yesterday in Parliament is very carefully edited and many camera angles in all Commons coverage are chosen to Labour’s advantage. Surely all the TV news broadcasters could take coverage in rotation?
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmadmin/14/1403.htm
‘The choice of shot to be broadcast therefore lies not with the broadcasters but with the House itself. The BBC, ITV and others use the shot provided to them.’
Example of a good Answer in AQA examination
“Wind power is a renewable source of energy which will never be used up whereas fossil fuels are non-renewable. When we eventually run out of fossil fuels we will need something to replace them. There are no waste gases from wind turbines so they do not pollute the atmosphere like fossil fuels. However they do make a noise which some people living near to them object to. Also unless you live in a windy place they will not work all the time as they don’t generate electricity when the wind is not blowing.
I think wind turbines are a good idea as global warming from burning coal is an increasing problem and needs to be stopped.”
In Theory 6 marks – shall we say 3?
A long time ago Harmless Sky ran a series on what was creeping into the curriculum. Often with questions that had answers designed more the please social engineers than anyone with a grasp of science.
What was shocking was the teachers who knew it, and were teaching kids on two tiers; one to pass the exams and another to get an education.
I’ve seen both my granddaughters pass through a climate change-ridden curriculum – it seeps into every subject, and I mean every subject.
And ‘climate change’ is just the tip of the iceberg (sorry for the pun) on lefty-liberal-eco-socialist agenda-setting in schools.
How feasible would it be to find out with reasonable certainty the political leanings of a large sample of BBC presenters, programme commissioners, etc? I’d love to see lists of Tory supporters and Labour supporters. Presumably the lists would be of different lengths.
Some indication of this was gleaned from Facebook in 2007.
I guess the contractors are invested in making sure the black President fails, right?
Kathleen Sebelius watches Obamacare website crash
The absence of snarky tweets from Beeboids is, shall we say, unsurprising. Imagine if this had happened to Sarah Palin.
This is not a wind up. Radio 4 The World Tonight is live from Guantanamo. What good does that do anyone? It’s an old story, which doesn’t need live coverage. But then, it’s a lot more comfortable and expenses friendly than covering detatinees in North Korea or Chechnya, or going to Kashmir or the Philippines. Expect ho hum coverage about topics we’re already wearily familiar with.
Gitmo again? What a coincidence that the Senate Dems are just now trying to ease the transfer rules (again)? That’s with the goal of helping the President fulfill His earliest failed promise about closing it. I’m not surprised the Beeboids decided to set the stage for a future laudatory report.
Link not working, but wherever will these students (“Taliban” in Farsi) go when they are released?
Sorry, missed out the close quotes. Link works now.
David’s link above didn’t work for me so here it is again http://news.yahoo.com/senate-weighs-guantanamo-prisons-fate-175238887.html
‘The absence of snarky tweets from Beeboids is, shall we say, unsurprising’
—-
Massive twittosphere brain freeze across North London when the reality poo hits the narrative fan… again… is hardly news.
Literally… as now, with the BBC without twitter can no longer be news.
Yes they headed up with Guantanamo and full weepy crap about force feeding…and lobbed in another of Snowdons cherry bombs on a long slow fuse.
This gift just keeps on giving to the BBC, via the “widely reported story in the media”.
In other words it`ll be tomorrows Guardian lead story-and nobody else gives a flying monkeys.
Still-in Beebworld job done…no Unite, no Falkirk, no Flowers, no Co-Op, no Miliband dragged aound the Commons like the Tony the Toothless Tiger that he is…skinned, trussed and ready for Islam to walk all over.
Oh-and no Savile either…
Norman Smith reporting live from Westminster on BBC News in their 5 o’clock bulletin earlier, was implying that the Conservatives’ demand for a public inquiry into the Cooperative Bank (‘Crystal Methodist’) affair was purely political.
As our Dave stated in today’s PM’s question time, Labour are always calling for inquiries into everything that goes wrong in the banking sector – except this one!
Yep, Norman Smith. Openly Labour in my book.
Will Beeboids be able to join up the dots and see how both the development of-
1.)
fuel cell technology –
“Toyota eyes fuel cell car by 2015”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25023673
and
2.)
-oil and gas technology (inc fracking) in the West,
“U.S. Is Overtaking Russia as Largest Oil-and-Gas Producer”
http://moneyjihad.wordpress.com/2013/10/14/back-on-top-u-s-worlds-biggest-energy-producer/
– can reduce the political and economic power of the Arab and Islamic world?
Beeboids don’t want any British government to continue to play the dhimmi towards global Islamic financial interests, do they?
“The United Kingdom’s Capitulation to Shariah Continues
Apace in the Financial World”
http://www.shariahfinancewatch.org/blog/2013/10/30/the-united-kingdoms-capitulation-to-shariah-continues-apace-in-the-financial-world/
Went to the theatre the other night to see “The Duck House” with Ben Miller etc., about the Expenses scandal of 2009. I wasn’t too bothered expecting it to be an attack on the Conservatives (90% at least). After all, this is what I have come to expect from political “satire” on the BBC.
Oh, how wonderfully wrong I was. It was hilarious almost all the way through. The cast were excellent. ALL parties were lampooned in equal measure. The writers have previously written for Mock the Week and HIGNFY. It shows that the Left can be just as much a target as the right if written cleverly. I would recommend it to anyone who likes a great laugh. I would watch it again no problem.
Makes you think that the problem is the commissioning editors who decide which comedians and material get broadcast.
I can’t be the only person who gave up on HIGNFY and The Now Show years ago.
Glad to hear it.
His mate Alexander Armstrong is a good cove politically too.
Along with Harry and Paul…think we`ve got a few funnies who aren`t f***in lefty luvvies.
Just listened to a Radio 4 “play” called “Holding on to You” “commissioned by “with Children in Need about child grooming and subsequent exploitation by multiple men. Set in Yorkshire, the girl is 14.
But the villain who does the grooming is “Jay”. Sounds white, and the actor has an English name.
This was supposed to be with a social message – presumably a message of warning, with contact details for social advice afterwards. But how is it a proper warning if it does not portray where the constant threat of grooming and exploitation has come from – the Pakistani community ?
The BBC lying yet again, or the Children in Need charity – or both ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03hmt7l/Children_in_Need_Holding_On_to_You_Omnibus/
Well it is usually men in the North of England, so at least they got that right.
Paxman on Newsnight just described Norther Ireland’s troubles as ‘a war’ … funny that, I thought it was terrorism.
‘War’ is the phrase preferred by the terrorists and their sympathisers.
Precisely. They’ve taken on the language of the IRA, all that guff about being at war with the British government.
Conflict…troubles…so many words.
Bound to mean something with them, and that Guardian Rule Book of theirs.
Imagine those poor souls butchered by Gerry and the Peacmakers to be referred to as magically enhanced or spirited away to niceness.
Words matter-which is why the BBC go to such trouble to slime and slither with their half-truths and lies.
The IRA called it a war, but insisted on the full protection of the civil courts when things weren’t going their way.
Oh dear. In an echo of an earlier story about the murderers of a pizza delivery man, it looks like the Parisian gunman is now not as white as he first appeared
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25027595
“French authorities have named a man taken into custody on suspicion of carrying out recent gun attacks in Paris as Abdelhakim Dekhar”
And to think that just a short while earlier
“Images of the man – white, aged 35 to 45, about 1.75m tall (5ft 8in), with stubble and greying hair – have been found on CCTV and issued by police. ”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24997693
Reminds me, whatever happened about this ‘man’? The one on the coach with the bomb alert
http://www.itv.com/news/london/story/2013-09-06/incident-closes-dartford-crossing/
And what about the men charrged with the murder of a family by arson in Leicester http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/leicester-house-fire-man-22-2359413
Is it prejudicial to a fair trial to know the identities of these people?
So who watch the Newsnight Jihad special with Paxman tonight.
They interviewed on Skype a so called Charity worker from Portsmouth who is now carrying out jihad for Allah. He was allowed to inform the unwashed that Allah states that carrying out jihad is a must under Islam, he denied that he had seen anybody killing innocent people. He was allowed to opine that he would kill any western Armies who came to help because they haven’t helped yet and they had caused lots of Islamic suffering in the past. In answer to the question if he presented a threat to the Uk, he said well he didn’t as he wasn’t coming back. and then the bBC allowed his brother living in the Uk to fully endorse him
We then moved to the studio where Paxman sporting a very Islamic looking beard ask the question that during the 30s white people who went off to fight in Spain weren’t treated as badly as these peace loving Muslims are, if anything they were treated as…Heroes.. If you get the chance watch it, its an eye opener into how just ingrained the bBC has become with Islamic terrorism.
The thought that people in the Thirties who went off to fight in Spanish Civil War (either for the Fascists or for the Stalinists) were not “heroes” evidently did not cross Paxman’s mind.
The thing about Paxman and his ilk is if ever he was murdered by followers of the peaceful religion, you would expect as his head was being sawn off , he would be apologising to his murderers.
When in real fact he would be shitting himself and screaming out that he too was a Muslim.
(Like a certain Frank Gardner) in which to live just that little longer,.
NO newsnight for Iplayer yet, but the bBC feel fit to report on how how there is only one god and his name (Hi, bBC, you wouldn’t stand for the CoE to say that?) is Allah.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25022097
‘where Paxman sporting a very Islamic looking beard ‘
Youre very funny……unintentionally of course.
Under Sharia law men have to shave their privates and grow the hair on their faces, as well as shaving their arses.
Women have to cover up and are forbidden to go near men.
In other words a gay death cult.
Here is Paxmuslim
I rest my case.
Not exactly definite proof … we can’t see his balls … thank God!
Of course not they are kept in a locked box in the DG.s office like all BBC staff’s balls !
When it comes to Islam paxmans balls all but disappear.
“Charity worker from Portsmouth who is now carrying out jihad for Allah”
—-
Any special dietary or raw cooking tips that could explain the BBC’s morale-boosting recruitment obsession…. again? Such coverage is all they have to live, then die for.
—-
“In answer to the question if he presented a threat to the Uk, he said well he didn’t as he wasn’t coming back”
—-
The logic of that one being further challenged, one presumes?
Meanwhile his brother now fully on the Haw Haw circuit within the UK, ably promoted by the nationally trusted 5th column propaganda monopoly.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2510790/French-police-hunting-Paris-gunman-arrest-man-strong-physical-resemblance-suspect.html….white shooter?? .they have just arrested abdul hakim dekhar for these shootings,remember the boston bombers,tried to blame it on whitey until they arrested muslims
That’s at least a hat-trick of wrong calls triggered by a very Leftie version of Tourettes – as they just can’t help themselves, can they? Boston, Marseilles and now Paris. In each case undisguised speculation from the BBC that a right-wing nutjob was most likely to blame.
Will they ever learn? Will they ferk.
This is the type of BBC Muslim-groveling report I hate the most… first off this vermin is about as British as a kangaroo, but even worse, I feel that the article has a disgusting air of sympathy for this vile piece of filth.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25022097
If these Muslim medieval fanatics go to Syria to undertake revolting jihad, then they should be stopped from ever re-entering the country (like they should’ve been in the first place). The sooner the left-wing daisy chain embroiderers realise that these scum are not British, the better.
“His exact location inside Syria is unclear. Newsnight managed to speak to him via an internet video call, with the help of his brother in the UK.”
I seriously hope the BBC and the brother (and rest of family) are being watched/questioned…
Meanwhile, the Foreign Office said it was looking into reports in the Times newspaper that four Britons had been killed in Syria in recent weeks while fighting against government forces.
Hooray…
In a statement, it said: “The UK has advised against all travel to Syria. Anyone who does travel is putting themselves in considerable danger.
As if it’s a holiday destination.
I wonder whether the BBC will be analysing this story anytime soon?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2510542/Britains-white-honour-killing-Teenager-brutally-murdered-Muslim-lover-exposing-relationship-family.html
Just saw this. Will never be spoken of and as scummy as that bloke is I am just shocked any white girl would get involved with a muslim bloke but I have known a lot of girls who get off on the “danger” of the taboo relationship which I have found is the reason behind a lot of these types of mixed race relationships
And before anyone starts accusing me of racism I am just stating a fact and it is also the reason why some women always go for the white “bad boys” as well
Spot on, their 2012 story makes no mention of the ‘religion of peace’ or honour killing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-18244660
panto dame in overdrive? … BBC 5live Nikki has “your call”
on green levy this morning … already ten minutes in
and only really heard from the green party/and the dame himself
expect “all the real scientists agree” the erm … “concensus”?
ya da ya da
Another possible ringer in “Mal”. He tells us that he was a Conservative Party member for 18 years, but has now left because he doesn’t like Cameron. So he liked the party under Hague, IDS and Howard, but Cameron is beyond the pale. Also, he liked Gordon Brown because he saved the world during the economic crisis. At the end, he tells us that he hasn’t left politics – he’s “gone home to Labour”.
Yep our Nicky loves the greenies
Julia Cambridge @juliacambridge1 51m
Nicky @NickyAACampbell yes jobs depend on our energy policies (Green Deal Eco) whats wrong with that? Feed in tariff cut wiped loads out
Nicky Campbell @NickyAACampbell 38m
@juliacambridge1 agreed
Where’s that famous BBC balance?
Nicky Campbell, a man on top of his brief? No, actually, a man on top of his PROPAGANDA.
‘Every job in Britain’s wind farm industry is effectively subsidised to the extent of £100,000 per year.’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/10122850/True-cost-of-Britains-wind-farm-industry-revealed.html
How do the BBC get away with peddling the big green lie? Because they can.
BBC advertising forthcoming Panorama:
“Britain’s secret TERROR force” [my emphasis] (programme concerns alleged shootings by alleged under cover army squads)
Whereas, only a few days ago, in relation to the recently mooted amnesty, the BBC described Irish terrorists as “paramilitaries”.
Hmm. So making “value judgements” about people who are plainly terrorists, be they Irish, muslim, Tamil, Basque or whatever is wrong, and is studiously avoided across all arms of the BBC. But making the same value judgement about the hated British army is perfectly acceptable.
Oh, and I won’t be holding my breath for a Panorama special on “Obamas terror drones”.
Wow what a scoop by Panorama, apparently a BBC ‘Flagship’ programme. Ware has obviously just bought and read the new out this week book called..
MRF Shadow Troop: The untold true story of top secret British military intelligence undercover operations in Belfast… by Simon Cursey
Such rigour, such research, worrascoop.
No doubt cf Doctor Who (ad nauseam) we will be getting ’50 Years Of Panorama’ in the coming years, and ’50 Years Of Anne Robinson’ and ‘Steve Wright The Big Show 50th Birthday’ and ‘Chris Evans At The Beeb 50 Years On’.
Not because there’s any demand from us for these ‘products’ – there ain’t much. But because the BBC believes it’s there for the BBC and not there for us.
Be honest I wish it wasn’t there for either.
and … no adverts for corrupt BBC “charridee” shenanigans, re comic relief … ow queer
a bit “rich” alert …
Trio jailed for Comic Relief fraud
BBC news – Trio guilty of £500k charity scam
“Three family members have been jailed for defrauding charities of more than £500,000 by applying for funding for spurious projects.
Among the groups which awarded them funds in good faith were the BBC’s Children in Need and Comic Relief
Kitumbula Mazambi, his wife Mapendo Kasiba, of London, and his brother Kyalemaninwa Mazambi, of Coventry, had been convicted of conspiracy to steal.
The three were found guilty at Isleworth Crown Court on 4 August”
During a seven-week trial at Isleworth Crown Court the jury heard how Kitumbula Mazambi (44) fled the Democratic Republic of Congo fearing persecution, before entering the United Kingdom as an asylum seeker in the mid-1990s.
Not ‘Britain’s secret anti-terror force’ then?
The trial of the 2 islamic scumbags who murdered lee rigby continues today after being adjourned on monday. Not that you would know from watching al beeb. Are their fellow traitors in the BBC going to continue the news black out?
Why dont they want us to know whats going on? What are the chances of al beeb producing a program that advocates the return of the death penalty for scum like these 2 jihadist murdering traitors. Nah, the beeb probably thinks they were just doing their islamic duty
to be honest I am thinking it is a general news blackout as it isn’t anywhere on the msm as they don’t want to the defence to use news coverage to get those two killers off.
Can’t criticise the bbc on this one if that is the case
yes you can criticise al beeb, the free newpapers have reported on the trial, thats how i knew the case was adjourned on monday. no wonder the government want to regulate them
The BBC were not quiet about the trial of the men accused of killing St Laurence and come to think of it they gave a load of publicity to the incident when one of the Jihadists had is tooth knocked out whilst being restrained by five guards who are now undergoing suspension and possible disciplinary charges. Oh yes. the news of their alleged ill treatment has been widely reported. But I suspect that Dave (this has nothing to do with Islam) has brought his pressure on the BBC and MSM to protect his fellow UAF members, Jihadists and bunglers in security.
I agree with that completely but I just think the msm have been told for all our sakes to shutup about this. All it would take is a newstory about the case and the defence will say it’s an unfair trial and then they will get off with new identities, houses etc. We all know how it works
The BBC – under the Today imprint – was doing its best for Labour this morning. The second item on the Radio 4 flagship news at 8:00 am (after the advertisement for the upcoming Panorama programme on the “British Army kills unarmed civilians in Northern Ireland” theme) was all about Miliband’s assertion that whatever happened in the Co-op was nothing to do with him or Labour.
This was followed by Humphrys in IIRC an incest interview (or maybe with Jesse Norman) asserting that it was a bit much for Cameron to claim that the Co-op wreckage was all Labour’s fault (despite the Co-op being Labour in a Guy Fawkes mask, Labour’s indulgence generally concerning the Co-op, Labour being a favoured loan customer of the Co-op and the whole episode occurring under the regulatory regime set up by Labour.
The BBC killer “argument” that the Conservatives were just as culpable as Labour in this farrago was “revealed” at around 8:30 am when Humphrys announced to a shocked nation the outline of an exclusive from
the Guardian on pink paperthe Financial Times that Osborne (later amended to the Treasury through some anonymous civil servants) had begged Brussels not to be too hard on the Co-op in respect of the takeover of 600+ Lloyds branches.What Humphrys et al forgot to mention was the context of this plea: 1. the EU instructions for Lloyds (as a nationalised institution) to dispose of these branches sharpish and 2. the enormous difficulties the Treasury was having arranging the disposal. Accordingly, in that context, any old crapola (eg sale to the Co-op or to Poundland or the stitch-up that actually occurred) would have suited the Treasury in trying to comply with an order from Brussels.
It’s no wonder Labour is still ahead in the polls. As has been said before, as long as the BBC is onside, Labour can ignore the paper press (even the Sun) and brush off any revelations concerning its endemic corruption per Peter Oborne in the Telegraph this morning.
Yes, the BBC’s attempt to smear Osborne in the issue of Co-op governance was grotesque. Their idea of “balance”, when there is bad news for Labour, is to try to drum up equally bad news for the Tories. But mysteriously it doesn’t happen the other way round.
When the Today propagandists were doing their round-up of the papers just after 6.30, they reported the Guardian as saying that all 3 main parties were equally to blame for the Co-Op fiasco.
Then, when they came to report on it themselves later in the programme, blow me down if they weren’t saying the same! The BBC and the Guardian taking the same stance – amazing!
Indeed that was the meme on Newsnight last night with a new (to me) inept journalist breathlessly introducing a tape of George Osborne saying it would be good if the Co-op took over those Lloyds branches.
It had been so badly and rapidly stitched together that the Osborne tape started to repeat over ‘Breathy’ while the next interview with what seemed to be a city person whose name flashed up briefly over Osborne, never happened at all.
The new Newsnight seems to be broadcast from Labour HQ with a few artsy interludes like an interview last night with John Grisham concentrating on his innate racism.
“The new Newsnight seems to be broadcast from Labour HQ”
BBC Newsnight makes a Party Political Broadcast by the Labour Party look balanced.
‘It’s embarrassing for the Tories isn’t it? chimed Paxo. Not really, but the BBC will make damned sure that it will be.
‘We dug up a clip of George Osbourne from July last year …’ – yeah, I bet you fucking did, anything to dig Labour out of a hole.
Maybe they can do a bit more digging now they seem to have found their journalistic stripes. The EU is thatta way ->
I bet there’ll be some furious shredding of files and deleting of e-mails at Co-Op and Labour H.Q.s this week now that three investigations are under way.
It’s blatantly obvious Flowers was chosen as CEO of the Co-Op bank because he was a Labour partisan of the most extreme kind and would be guaranteed to continue loaning the Labour Party loadsamoney to keep them financially viable. What other reason would there have been to appoint someone with no banking experience to the top job?
According to the BBC (focusing mainly on “Osborne’s involvement”), it’s just “mutual mud slinging”, merely a “Westminster blame game”. Anytime soon they’ll find evidence that Cameron is just as ‘involved’ as Milliband because he once drew twenty quid out of a bloody Co-op Bank ATM.
Meanwhile, on a more serious and less partial news channel, Adam Boulton gave Ed Balls the appropriately rough ride the BBC wouldn’t dream of giving him..
And another one.
On BBC Breakfast this morning, re the Paris shooter, it is reported that the suspect was the “third man” in some infamous shooting from years ago. In the middle of the report, it is mentioned that this earlier shooting was carried out by a far left “Bonnie and Clyde” couple (it will be interesting to see if this “evolves” so as to remove “far left” from later reports). And that the current shooter had provided them with “idealogical motivation”.
OK, so though not stated expressly by the BBC, I am left to put 2 and 2 together from material in the middle of the report to reach the conclusion that the widely sought , er, white, shooter (Abdelhakim??) is a LEFT WING EXTREMIST.
Now, why is the BBC not headlining this as “Paris shooter is ‘left wing extremist'”. Because I think I’ve got some kind of vague recollection of a fairly recent shooting, maybe in Scandinavia somewhere, where the shooter’s politics featured fairly prominently…….
And here’s the BBC website report:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25027595
All very neutral.
It describes the 1994 shootings as “by a young couple with LINKS to ANARCHIST GROUPS” [my emphasis]. “Left wing” does appear in the report, but in a disembodied way such as to dissociate it from Dekhar and the “young couple with links to anarchist groups” Thus, we read:
“At his trial in 1998, Dekhar protested his innocence, claiming he had been recruited by the Algerian secret service to infiltrate the French far-left”
That’s your lot. The only mention of “far left” in the report.
So once again, we see that the BBC will headline idealogical motivation when it suits them (bandying about “far right” and “right wing extremist” – Brevik), but will obfuscate and provide cover for idealogical motivation when it might embarrass a philosophy that they support (as here, failing to highlight likely left wing or possible islamic motivations).
[replying to own comment!]
….and in a further, inspired, attempt to dissociate “Bonnie and Clyde” from the far left (having already described them merely as “a young couple [ah, sweet!] with links to [nothing concrete, then] anarchist groups [no political philosophy; definitely not left wing!]), the web report invites you to blame Hollywood [those stupid Americans, eh?]:
“Their story was compared to the controversial American film, Natural Born Killers.”
They weren’t far left extremists, you see. Merely corrupted by a stupid American film.
BBC Paris correspondent who wasn’t too sure about anything and sounding annoyed he had been got up so early , on radio, chose to call the whole matter ‘bizarre’. Not even good churnalism.
“BBC Paris correspondent who wasn’t too sure about anything and sounding annoyed he had been got up so early”
He probably commutes from London and does a report about once every six months.
Paris? Surely you mean paree!
Oh, sorry, forgot albeeba havent got round to that one yet, as in Mumbai.
Had a great laugh yesterday, bloke from India who now lives here, interviewed on the news, and kept saying Bombay, Bombay Bombay!
Oh sweet.
I met two Indian tourists. They said they came from Bombay.
just listening to 5 live. Currently broadcasting terrorist propaganda. Now a “british” man is threatening to attack Britain, because we didnt get involved in the war and join sides with al qaeda.
You cant win with these terrorists. if you help them and go to muslim lands, they want to kill us, and if you dont go to muslim lands and help them, they want to kill you
they have this traitors name, the least the government can do if cancel his passport. If he feels hard done to, if he was born in the UK, then he should go to a British embassy and appeal the decision
Imagine an episode of QT with the usual shit panel but the crowd made up of the majority of this blog.
Question is a joke just a load of lefty’s who like the sound of their own voices and some token right-wing person.
As an ex journo I’m struggling to work out why the Labour Party is being blamed for regulatory failures at the co-op bank— Gloria De Piero (@GloriaDePieroMP)
Is she really that stupid, makes you wonder given the last time she was in the news how she got the gig with the labour party (Lib Dems I could understand)
The Today programme(8a,m news bulletin) gave us all manner of sly and slanted bias against the Tories and Cameron…his “trying to lay the blame at the Labour Partys door”…his attempts to make political capital out of this poor, gay man of the cloth who is an addict seeking professional help now.
As for the sex offences on Council computers, the expenses, the being run out of Hampshire to a safer Labour sanctuary in Bradford, the meths, the gay rent boys, the plonking him onto a PRIMARY School Governing body by LABOUR Bradford Council….not a peep!
Gay, vulnerable man of the cloth now is he?…just as well he`s not a Catholic Priest who moved from Tory to UKIP eh?
The BBC-to quote pounce traitors in our midst…and digging a Savile-sized grave for themselves yet again ,and every day.
What is the point of the Today programme except to pay some dim journalists who are in love with the sound of their own voice wadges of taxpayers cash to parrot that mornings spin from the Labour Party. Sorry just answered my own question.
Is it right for Christians to do yoga?
The above is a bBC British news article about Yoga. and asks the question:
Does doing yoga make you a Hindu?
Reading the above would you think the article is about Christians losing their faith?
Want to guess which faith it is really about? Here’s a clue from the start of that article:
“Farida Hamza, a Muslim woman living in the US (pictured above), had been doing yoga for two or three years when she decided she wanted to teach it. “When I told my family and a few friends, they did not react positively,” she recalls. “They were very confused as to why I wanted to do it – that it might be going against Islam.”,/i>
And there’s more:
in Malaysia, where a 2008 fatwa – a religious ruling – resulted in a yoga ban in five states. In the capital Kuala Lumpur, the physical activity is permitted but chanting and meditation are forbidden. Clerics in the world’s most populous Islamic nation – Indonesia – make a similar distinction.
and there’s more at the end:
Born in India but raised in Oman, Hamza sees her path towards yoga as part of a plan drawn up by Allah. “I am grateful for the joy I felt when my hamstrings opened,” she says. “And my big toe stretch, or the first time I did a standing bow – it took me two years to do a standing bow.
“But I did it and that is Allah’s grace – he blessed me with that.
But to the Pro Islam bBC hindu are the worst enemy (look up hindu kush) but they can’t promote that message to the Non-Muslims in the UK, so they tweak it just a little. But funny enough for the bBCs World service the above is promoted under the following headline:
Yoga and Islam
The bBC, the traitors within our midst
Good spot Pounce,
Run that one past me again….
BBC News 24 a couple of days ago and a little segment they like to call Business News
Yes, they know economics is just so uncool, much less fun than politics and arts – but hey, they have to make an effort.
Anyway the news anchor probably requires a slash every now and again – so needs must…. the first piece seemed to be the headline item and was something to do with Europe.
I caught that much amid all the gold star and euro sign graphics that came tumbling across my screen. Well really I would like to help by saying I was a witness but all I remember was everything suddenly turned sky blue (or is that french blue?) and then there were all these stars.
Thank goodness it was over in a flash because I might have worried that the proposed fiscal budgets of half a dozen sovereign democratic nations had just been rejected by some or other unelected supranational body.
Perhaps the BBC will inform or educate?
But what’s this? Our BBC Business presenter has just this moment been handed a scrap of paper! Seems as thought the BBC is going to entertain. Suddenly we have a new ‘just in’ headline. Thank you, Justine!
You’ll never guess what…. Blockbuster Video has laid off their staff.
And there was me thinking that the tape had run out on them a couple of months back and we had already pressed eject on that story.
Don’t you blush BBC I-Player!
Come on, say the BBC, this is real people, real jobs and the news is so bad we just have to write it twice.
And at the end of the BBC Business News our BBC Business presenter would just like to reiterate – that’s x number of jobs gone.
On Last nights “World Tonight” the news reader told us that political reaction to an amnesty for all those who murdered during “The Troubles” in Northern Ireland was “unenthusiastic”.
The BBC had been rather keen on this though-led with it, made Larkins into a sleb for the day-so imagine the disappointment when the best you can find is Peter Hain to sing up for The Choir.
So then-less than 24 hours later-the 8am news headline today is about a “shoot to kill” type thing with soldiers….and before 1998 and Year Zero.
This though is vital news-completely contradicts the news editing agenda of yesterday-and is shoehorned in so Panorama gets a plug for later on.
If its Marine As and the like-MDF now as well-then these people need to be cleared of the high ground and offered as sacrifices to Gerry and to Anjem.
If however it`s Gerry or Anjem that benefit…well they`ll still have the high ground because those who opposed will now be in shallow graves for 30 years or so.
That moral ascendency and high ground seem not to be in the Koran…wonder why the BBC and its client managerial fools at the MOD claim it…it`s haram, I`d have thought!
So Year Zero for the butchers is 1998…but the Beeb get special tourist visas to go back and dig up…and if a few soldiers get put in danger( Woolwich or not)…well John Ware feels better for it…and the BBC can purr quietly on that high ground of theirs.
Landfill or open grave…for analogue tellies, radios and -please God-the f888in traitors and wasters at the BBC.
I like John Ware, and I expect his Panorama programme on special troops in Northern Ireland will be a pretty fair account of what was happening.
But the tone with which the BBC presents this is – “how terrible the British Army is”. We are expected to disapprove of such fierce measures against the IRA.
Once again, the BBC is out of step with most public opinion, I would guess. There were up to 20 bombs a day in NI and endless IRA killings. I reckon a lot of people would be thinking “Thank God someone had the sense to give proper rules of engagement to those soldiers, letting them take effective measures against the IRA. What brave soldiers – and what sensible commanders.”
The plain fact is that they did heavy damage to the murderous IRA – effectively forcing them to the negotiating table. Most sensible people would recognise this and applaud it. But not inside the BBC bubble.
But Sean Mallon-and the ubiquitous David McKittrick say otherwise on Martha and her second muffin of “The World at One”(the first was Ed Balls Brazening, Bulldozing and Confounding her over Paul Flowers-a Tory plant according to Ed ,in effect).
No-this MRF force clearly added thousand to the IRA cause by not taking that high ground that the IRA snipers enjoyed a turkey shoot at.
Mallon is an old SDLP trustie so would hardly say anything else…can the BBC talk to Richard Kemp or somebody similar?
Unless it shafts Hammond at the MOD re “Toricutz”..well, no!
Funny then that the IRA needed Blair to dig them out of their hole with Mo Mowlem and Mandelson then…and Islam draws the right conclusions from our capitulation to Gerry and Martin of `98.
No-the IRA won because New Labour rather liked the scary terrorists…like Alan Partridge in his thong dancing before the hoods and Armalites…THAT is the only picture you need for the craven thong-sniffing BBC.
Still-I see Marthas third muffin today was racism against Syrian refugees ,by the host Lebanese in a chic part of Beirut(trust our Beeb poppet to find it).
Apparently the Syrians are working for 1/3 of a natives wages in services and domestic jobs etc…AND are accused of bringing begging and a crime wave with them!
No…can`t begin to read across from that…they`re all brothers in arms aren`t they?…so no possible comment from the BBC here!
Muff off Marfa!
The BBC invariably side with our enemies – it what passes for their moral compass.
BBC reporting on negotiations with Iran last week seemed hopeful a deal would be done, releasing Iran from economic sanctions in return for virtually zilch, negligible restrictions on Iran’s moves towards nuclear weapons. A supine EEC and a totally wet Obama/Kerry combination looked about to sell the pass. It took the French of all people to block the deal, at least for the moment. The current BBC line is that the deal is just being delayed a bit.
We never get from the BBC how evil the Iranian regime is. And what a clear threat to any peace in the Middle East. Here’s the Supreme Ruler giving a pep talk to the lads who oppress the Iranian populace – raving lunacy that the BBC never reports :
http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/20/iranian-leader-nuclear-negotiations-merely-a-maneuver-to-reach-islamic-goal/
…and William Hague is up there with John Kerry and the EEC foreign affairs commissioner in their appeasing approach to Iran
Fudd John…Elmer Fudd.
Please show our FS a little respect.
Shows what the BBC think of the people who pay for it. Doctor who episode on iPlayer free for the whole world but charged at around £2.50 for people in the UK who pay for the whole rotten thing.
Just goes to show.
shouldnt profits made by the BBC, paid for by the British public, be given back to the British public via a yearly dividend?
one would think that the amount of money pumped into this organisation over the years, it would atually be making a profit for the telly tax payer by now.
They claim that it helps keep the cost of television tax down !
I wouldn’t mind, but the BBC seem to think these days they are in competition with Sky and ITV and are restricted to making shit progammes like SKY and ITV.
The way the BBC is funded they should be free to produce cutting edge material. Actually they are, but they just rather be lazy and not give newcomers the chance they deserve.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_9706000/9706773.stm
Utterly utterly unbelievable. Why aren’t questions being asked in Parliament, probably because it’s Cleggs city, but the family who sanctioned this have suffered no punishment at all.
The ever expanding Beeboid broadcasting empire:-
now, £23 million more on its Birmingham arm:-
“BBC Birmingham looks to a new digital future”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2013/bbc-birmingham-digital.html?
And, here is a list of BBC buildings around its global broadcasting empire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_BBC_properties