Here you go folks, a new Open thread for you to complete!
FRIDAY OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Fedup2 Nov 21, 12:42
Midweek 20th November 2024
When a swamp trougher pops off i often wonder what his constituents thought of him – I know he comes… - atlas_shrugged Nov 21, 12:22
Midweek 20th November 2024
I have no idea about what the Tate brothers have done or not done but the fact that they wind-up… - MarkyMark Nov 21, 11:59
Midweek 20th November 2024
FREE JABS FOR BARRY “500K From Chinese Spy” Gardiner. Gardiner, Barry 20/11/2008 Astrazeneca Dinner 12 Astor Suite https://mpsallowances.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/hocallowances/allowances-by-mp/Functions%20and%20Events.pdf Gardiner, Barry… - MarkyMark Nov 21, 11:55
Midweek 20th November 2024
200 people – no wonder people keep voting for them … FREE MEALS….. https://mpsallowances.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/hocallowances/allowances-by-mp/Functions%20and%20Events.pdf Abbott, Diane 03/10/2008 London Schools/Black Child… - MarkyMark Nov 21, 11:54
Midweek 20th November 2024
Entered the House of Lords on 8 July 2010 Previously MP for Kingston upon Hull East until 12 April 2010… - andyjsnape Nov 21, 11:51
Midweek 20th November 2024
bbc seem to love this Labour party/government Has Labour promised the bbc no review into the tele tax and an… - MarkyMark Nov 21, 11:43
Midweek 20th November 2024
“Covid put intense pressure on NHS but it did not collapse, Hancock tells inquiry” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cm2mpg1ljrdt [img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E4ttvGCXoAEdopM.jpg:large[/img] [img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F28rEHOXwAAyvaz.jpg:small[/img] Matt Hancock paid… - MarkyMark Nov 21, 11:41
Midweek 20th November 2024
[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMNoCzwX0AQBDdY.jpg:small[/img] - MarkyMark Nov 21, 11:40
Midweek 20th November 2024
V good. [img]https://www.worldofbooks.com/cdn/shop/files/1399807447.jpg?v=1718329871&width=493[/img]
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
How will the BBC report on this? piece of news?
a) Met office attacks Cameron – Good BUT
b) Met office denies storms due to global warming – Bad.
At least we can use the results to improve our BBC top trumps game.
The BBC were overjoyed to report that Cameron had blamed climate change for the floods and storms. Yet when the Met Office stated categorically that these recent storms and flooding were NOT in any way linked to “climate change” the BBC were strangely silent about it. Certainly if they have reported it, it was not with anywhere near the prominence of their original report of Cameron saying such a thing.
And then the Now Show decide that the Met Office don’t know what they’re talking about, and it’s obviously a case that they just aren’t left wing enough to see the truth.
a) Met office attacks Cameron
“The air in my head will lift me into the clouds so that I can fly away with my dreams”
David Cameron
Proof that an upper-class twit can become Prime Minister, but only if his potential is maximised, and the proof is that only Eton can do that.
b) Met office denies storms due to global warming.
Either this is because there is proof that it is caused by Global Cooling, or that there is no proof either way for either the Sun or Carbon Dioxide.
“Booker: floods, treaties and other matters ”
http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=84618
“MPs oppose BBC plans to commercialise World Service”
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2014/01/10/mps-oppose-bbc-plans-commercialise-world-service?
commercialise ALL of the bBC, and don’t forget to sell or lease off all the digital equipment we have been forced to pay billions for over the years. Maybe that way we can get some of our money back.
Have you listened to ‘World Service’, or as they claim ‘The World’s Radio Station’, recently?
If you think Radio 1,2 & 4 are bad then you should tune in and listen.
It’s dire.
Don’t exclude R3. It has been so dumbed down it makes Classic FM sound highbrow at times.
The World Service has long ceased to be the BBC reporting to the world about our lives in the UK, and is now one-way traffic in the other direction. We (or they) get to hear of all the ills in the ex-colonial countries, caused as you can imagine… by Britain.
Use it to cure insomnia but take care what you will absorb while asleep.
Jeremy Paxman believes the World Service should be how the BBC spreads influence. A more damning statement will be hard to find.
I have been in so many places in the world where the BBC World service may be one of only two English-language channels available. I watch the other one.
BBC World Service seems to have what BBC UK would love to have – un-tramelled, wall-to-wall, completely one-sided, single-view broadcasting, with panels almost exclusively comprised of ‘experts’ so utterly ‘on-message’, left-wing, anti-Conservative, anti-UK, anti-christian, anti-semitic, EU-loving, Islam-excusing, and IPCC-addicted’ that QT editors must wet themselves silly when they consider just what they could have one day.
“Use it cure insomnia” – yes exactly right but I just wish there were some alternatives to the BBC to try and fall to sleep to.
For talk radio TalkSport used to put on some political debate programmes but for a couple of years now it’s only about sport. No other commercial station seems to offer an alternative from the lefty viewpoint.
So to cure my insomnia I mainly listen to podcasts now because whenever I switch on the World Service there’s invariably an African woman (with crying baby in background) being interviewed, about some recent horrendous massacre which is somehow the Americans fault.
BBC World Service already takes advertisements, usually for country tourism and airlines (high rates?) and much of it’s reporting such as Middle East Business News is essentially free advertising. Isn’t that commercial enough?
What business wouldn’t love the BBC business model. UK receives funding from public and then cheaoly sells programmes/news to World Service which sells them at a profit.
“BBC misleads public every day on scale of cuts, fumes Cameron:
Give listeners accurate figures, says PM in on-air rant.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2536782/BBC-misleads-public-day-scale-cuts-fumes-Cameron-Give-listeners-accurate-figures-says-PM-air-rant.html#ixzz2pzM659xq
Good to see that BBC Radio Merseyside has the same high standards of impartiality as the rest of the BBC network.
BBC Radio Merseyside presenter, Roger Phillips:
“We get call after call after call from people saying you and your Cabinet are just so out of touch it’s untrue, you need to come up here and spend a week up here, work in a foodbank, find out what’s really, really going on at grassroots level and then you will understand why we feel perhaps we are being treated unfairly.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-is-so-out-of-touch-its-untrue-says-bbc-radio-merseyside-presenter-roger-phillips-9050075.html
Are foodbanks a charity or, more likely, a protest movement?
What really annoys me, is how labour and the BBC both bang on about foodbanks, and both over-dramatise the fat, smoking, tattooed, tanned, manicured, drunken overpaid people who attend them, having a choice of eating or heating, due to state created poverty.
Yet at the same time, the labour party believe such people, who earn too little to pay any income tax at all, are still wealthy enough to have 10% of their entire income stolen from them by a future labour government in income tax.
BBC’s Look North just this moment has led with a story about a school pupils in Handsworth, Sheffield bringing items for the local foodbank after “hearing” about a schoolkid complaining about having had nothing to eat over the weekend. Reading between the lines it’s obviously a campaign by Sheffield’s Labour council to push the Party’s agenda on foodbanks. Presenter Harry Gration even had someone from The Trussel Trust and gave him a sympathetic hearing. No mention that the trust’s part time chief executive, Nigel Mould, is a Labour Party member and donor who pays himself £150,000 per year. No mention that the trust canvasses local churches and charge them £15,000 apiece to franchise foodbanks as long as the trust’s logos are prominently displayed. It also gives the trust the excuse to describe itself as a “church run” foodbank agency, thereby giving it a legitimacy it shouldn’t really have.
Expenses trougher and Labour MP Clive Betts and some Labour councillor who is currently leader of the council were also given free rein to push Labour’s foodbank agenda. Betts in particular related a sob story – woth no corroboration – about local kids asking teachers not to have a uniform free day because their school gear was the only clothing they had to wear! Unbelievable!!
It was basically a Labour Party broadcast
I saw that “report” myself Andy and nearly choked on my (non food bank) coffee. It had to be the most manufactured piece of journalism I have seen in a long long time. I had to laugh though at the filmed shot of all the kids in a line passing tins of baked beans from one to the other. What was all that about ?
Incidentally whenever Look North does a report on any other charity the reporter usually gives contact details out at the end for anyone who wants to donate or otherwise help them. How come that is never the case with “food banks” ? What if I am worried about my local chavs starving to death who would I donate the Pot Noodles to ? Its almost at though none of it is real.
1327 – true what you say about food banks. The only time I have ever come into contact with one was a collecting point outside a large Tesco one weekend. I have no idea where they operate from in my area.
Pat I have yet to see such a collection taking place outside a supermarket in my area. Even more oddly my sister who works for the Citizens Advice has never been told of a “Food Bank” in the area and would have no idea how to pass on a client to one.
Yet the other month Look North had an item about a “Food Bank” in this area. My guess is that most only exist long enough to get some TV coverage and do a little Tory bashing.
If you read the Trussell Trust annual report on the ‘roll-out’ of their operation it reads like a Starbucks annual report.
Says Law ll – offer free food and they will come.
Tells us absolutely nothing about the state of the economy.
Meanwhile in Lidl or Tesco I suppose sausage, mashed potatoes and beans for three probably costs about the price of three fags in cothoflivingcrithith Bri’in.
Two fags if you replace the sausages with chicken – takes a bit more *work* though.
nobody ever died of beans on toast.
i have to disagree. You wouldnt believe how bad i am at cooking
Cooking tip: put the bread in the toaster, not the beans.
and the beans go in the kettle?
They could, but it’s better to use the hob.
Put them in a pan first, or it gets messy.
Alternatively, put them on the toast cold and use a blowtorch.
So, David, which Little Chef do you work in?
And for God’s sake NEVER do what a friend of mine did when we were kids – he put an unopened can of beans in the oven, switched it on, and left it to heat up ! Some time later – BIG BANG – rushed into kitchen to find out what had happened, to find closed oven, then opened it to find empty can in oven (with big hole in the side), and then noticed pretty, pink-coloured embossed wallpaper on opposite wall.
His Mum was definitely not pleased !
I did that with a Treacle Steam Pudding. Whilst it was *steaming* I got busy with my girlfriend. We both forgot all about it until it went off. Drilled a hole through her caravan roof.
So, Oldbloke, the earth truly moved for her?
My dad once cooked kippers in the toaster – he said they were delicious. Proved expensive though as the toaster then had to be replaced.
and a tin opener,dangerous equipment in the wrong hands…..
Don’t worry – The Domestic Appliance Safety Forum will soon be along to conduct a “Survey” or “Research” about the perils of tin openers which will come to the predictable conclusion that tin openers are a menace and that more government funding is necessary to Raise Awareness.
Phone the BBC and one of our salaried rent-seekers will be invited onto Today or 5Live to explain this serious social issue in a sympathetic and challenge-free interview masquerading as News
” . . . your Cabinet are just so out of touch it’s untrue, you need to come up here and spend a week up here, work in a foodbank, find out what’s really, really going on . . . . ”
Or better still, why don’t these people who profess about these things go and see what life is like in a ‘truly’ impoverish country, were they don’t even have clean water, let a lone enough food to eat.
Poverty is relative. But some people in this world are truly at rock bottom. But you will not find them on a BBC Radio phone in. Too busy looking for the next morsel to eat.
This morning on “Today”, a piece about housing, specifically the construction of anti-flood measures in the shape of pools, ponds and catchment lagoons to channel away surface water, so that it may “seep into the ground”. Harrabin, of course, doesn’t fail to mention, in his earlier piece, that these ponds will help to cool the areas during heatwaves, of which we are going to experience a lot more…
…later on, Evan Davis interviews a couple of greenies (although one is, apparently, less a greenie, more a professor from Reading University, on-board with the AGW myth, surprise, surprise…) about whether the climate change religion is less in the public eye these days. Both speak of “climate change sceptics” (What are they? Everyone is aware that the climate changes – it’s the cause which is in dispute), and the idea that the scientists predicting global warming are, of course, correct in their fantasies, and that a warmer climate will mean enhanced rainfall (as I understand it, a cooling climate is likely to produce more adverse weather) – of course, no mention of the fact that the globe isn’t warming catastrophically at all, as predicted by these “scientists”. So one interviewer, and two “balancing” interviewees, who are all really on the same side.
So that’s the daily homage to AGW, then – the pension fund remains intact.
The BBC. They think we are a stupid as they are.
It’s All Gone Wrong.
The Greenies concerned were Mark Lynas “a British author, journalist and environmental activist who focuses on climate change” and Professor Rowan Sutton who, judging from his profile, very much needs the gravy train to continue.
So, a nice balanced duo to discuss why climate change is less in the public eye. Obviously never occured to them to balance it with someone who might say we hear less because it’s increasingly recognised as bo**ocks. As you say, the possibility that rises in temperature might have little to do with mankind was not considered – indeed I’m sure Evan said the evidence of human cause was not in doubt.
Amazing no, how little the meaning of a sentence changes if whenever you see the word ‘activist’ you replace it with the words ‘fucking nuisance’ or the words ‘shouty woohoo everybody look at me me me woohoo’.
Wonder if BBc will be covering this to back up the high work ethic high skill image of migrant workers they are trying to present us. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2536881/After-one-day-washing-cars-migrant-quits-Workers-say-Romanian-met-Keith-Vaz-Heathrow-vanished.html
I’d vanish if I thought I was being stalked by Keith Vaz.
Turns out that the first one off the plane, the one whose hand Vaz shook, has a criminal record back home for beating his then girlfriend. Brilliant.
Had the severe misfortune to hear Evan Davis on this morning’s Today programme (R4) inviting a couple of his safely ‘on-message’ CAGW warmist friends to comment on the subject of how climate sceptics insist on spoiling all the fun for those aboard the CAGW gravy train, all the time, by insisting that climate scientists actually back up their increasingly alarmist pro-CAGW hyperbole with some, you know, actual science, and all that.
Evan, of course, was suitably outraged that climate sceptics still dare to question The Holy Consensus – speaking with that usual sneering, dismissive, patronising tone he always reserves for anyone who doesn’t follow the agreed narrative on topics close to his (and his Politburo’s) chest.
His invited chums naturally both agreed with him that those pesky climate sceptics, by continually insisting on actual science as opposed to the kind of politically-targeted spin and agit-prop climate alarmism that they and their friends in low places are usually content to dispense to the masses, sceptics are simply ruining the fun for everyone else.
In the end, all three on this morning’s programme agreeably agreed (among themselves, if nobody else) that all the recent flooding we’ve been seeing here in the UK is almost certainly the fault of CAGW, even if none of the science backs such an assertion up, and even if the Holy Church of the Consensus, the IPCC itself, can only summon a vague, ‘medium confidence’ that CAGW has anything at all to with so-called ‘extreme weather events’.
The BBC, in a nutshell.
And during the discussion on the Today one of those interviewed referred to the ‘Rural Torys’ as the sceptics, rather gave away his politics, I thought.
It’s more than bias. The bias is just one of the many tools the BBC uses to undermine democracy. They are happy, even gleeful, to quote a Vice President of the EU this morning who says that our government is using a lot of “rhetoric” against immigration that will undermine Britain economically. They happily take the side of an unelected (probably, well most of them are) EU bureaucrat against our elected government.
This is what our British Broadcasting Corporation does best. It does it 24 hours a day, 7 days a week 52 weeks of the year, on dozens of radio channels and on all of its TV channels, it undermines democracy and it doesn’t take much of a stretch of imagination to work out why does it? The BBC is an organisation run just like the mafia, by coercion, by fear, you will pay us or face imprisonment. If you or I ran a business with that modus operandi we would be doing time at Her Majesty’s Pleasure faster than you can say “why don’t we see re-runs of Top of the Pops with Uncle Jimmy anymore?”.
The fact is, if the BBC encouraged democracy it would go out of business the very next day after we were given a vote on; a) Do you wish to keep paying £145 a year for the BBC, or b) should it get its funding from subscription and, or advertising?
And what is worse our Selfie loving Global Warming believer of a PM just lets it go on without a care in the world. The nasty creeping totalitarianism of this country, Europe and now America, under the greatest socialist (Barmy Barry, for the avoidance of doubt) the U.S. has ever known grinds on unrelentingly and all we rebels have to keep us sane and let off a bit of steam is a few blogs like this one.
Never mind we always have Albaman Sneer to amuse us now and again.
The speech by Lord Mandelson was heard in a respectful silence by Evan Davis, but it might of course have also been ‘brotherly love’, if you remember an earlier and very tender exchange between the two of them.
As well as enabling the special pleading of the warmists on Today this morning, Evan gave EU sceptics a kicking a few minutes earlier. He refused to allow Michael Dobbs to respond uninterrupted in the “interview” concerning the debate in the Lords today re an in/out EU referendum in 2017. In his 2 minutes of glory Dobbs had to ask at least twice for Evan to allow him to finish a sentence.
Evan followed this up by giving Mandelson a 5 minute free ride to abuse EU sceptics and lie in the sacred cause of preserving Mandelson’s EU pension. Evan failed (as usual) to pose the obvious point that were a referendum in the offing surely the UK government (any UK government BTW) would be in a stronger position to renegotiate any contentious issues with the EU. In other words we heard yet another demonstration of the BBC’s bias compounded by journalistic incompetence.
I switched on the radio just as Mandy was speaking. Funny thing was I was first listening to the timbre of the voice and thought it was Michael Howard. Then started to listen to what was being said and realised that I had no idea who was conducting the interview because the speaker was being given free reign, right up to the point when he was allowed a plug for the Millipede and no difficult off topic question that the BBC is so fond of.
After the grilling of Dobbs, it seems to me that Evan just (metaphorically) turned to Mandelson, asked him to rubbish any idea of a referendum (or of the “little people” having any say in their future), then went off to the BBC canteen for a cup of coffee while Mandy did the honours and returned just in time to wind up the item. It was a party political broadcast on behalf of Labour and the EU Commission.
The glaring omissions from these interviews:
1. The emasculation of our Parliament under the EU. We have surrendered something like 65% of our law-making to an unelected socialist fat cat bureaucracy.
2. The catastrophic Euro experiment and the on-going poverty, death and misery inflicted on the people of the failed Euro economies because the sacred Euro – once seen as the shortest route to political union – has to be protected at any cost.
3. The Human Rights Act, abuse of which by immigrant criminals, terrorists, UK left-wing activist lawyers, UK left-wing judges and the European Court speaks for itself.
As ever, the BBC frames the debate on its own leftist terms.
(Apologies, my first entry into the site and I initially attached it in the wrong place!)
The speech by Lord Mandelson was heard in a respectful, even reverential silence by Evan Davis, but it might of course have also been ‘brotherly love’, if you remember an earlier and very tender exchange between the two of them.
INBBC’s political sleight of hand on Islamic jihad Al Shabab:*
of course, INBBC immediately distorts the truth by wrongly terming Al Shabab ‘militants*’ not jihadists which is what they are-
“In prison with al-Shabab: What drives Somali militants?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-24379013
Although the above INBBC piece was written 3 months ago, it still serves as INBBC’s main source on Al Shabab ideology.
INBBC’s source of all ‘truth’ on Al Shabab comes from what INBBC’s Will ROSS misleadingly describes as a ‘human rights’ organisation in Africa, and from one Al-Amin Kamathi, in particular, whom Ross only describes as a “Kenyan human rights lawyer”.
A fact which INBBC’s Mr Ross does not make clear is that Mr Kamathi is a Muslim and head the organisation called The Muslim Human Rights Forum!
So, the whole article which Ross sets up for Kamathi is a piece of Islamic apologetics!
“Somalia: Al Shabab bans Internet — those who don’t comply ‘will be dealt with in accordance with Islamic law.'”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/01/somalia-al-shabab-bans-internet—-those-who-dont-comply-will-be-dealt-with-in-accordance-with-islam.html
In yet another instance of BBC bias, the survey of the UK press on Today this morning ignored the two screaming headlines on the front page of the Times (a well-known national newspaper with a circulation well in excess of the Guardian) concerning high Muslim birth rates in Britain and the special protection to be provided by the police to the jury in the Duggan inquest.
In fairness, one of the reasons the jury might have needed special protection would be the way the BBC has sided with the Duggan
gangstersfamily.Perhaps they’re feeling guilty?
Guilty? “Guilty” is for the “little people”. Please realise that the BBC always “gets it about right” (™ BBC Complaints Section; ™ BBC Trust) and rarely has anything to apologise for (unless it’s offending one of its pet religious or gender-/sex-obsessed minorities).
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/salford-council-slashes-sponsorship-bbc-6493171
I’m absolutely astonished by this story that Salford council agreed to ‘bribe’ the BBC to move to Salford, with over £20 Million of rate payers money over 8 years. Only now the government cuts have begun to bite they are unable to fund this massive waste of money which should have never been spent.
A rational person might think that the payments had been stopped, but in fact they have simply been spread over a longer period.
Why is one taxpayer funded organisation taking money from another, with a much smaller income, and in this case taking money away from the vulnerable who desperately need this money to fund services?
There’s something here deeply deeply wrong, but then it’s a Labour council hading money over to a Labour propaganda machine!
Now I understand why the Bbc Northwest News is banging on about the cuts in Salford. Funny how they omitted their own bribe in those reports.
‘Spread over a longer period’
Ah yes cf Mad Gordon MacRuin.
I get the spend in MY budget, but it’s the next twenty years of Chancellors (aka us) that have to pay for it.
Very interesting: swap the names BBC and Salford Council for ‘Conservative Party’ and any private company (probably an evil hedge fund business) respectively and you have enraged headlines, lefty interviews etc everyday on every BBC radio and news channel for a month.
Here’s a good example of subtle or understated propaganda BBC style (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25652991). The article is entitled “The rise of the young non-drinkers”, ostensibly about the rising numbers of young people who do not consume alcohol. Sounds encouraging, right? After all, we don’t want our streets full of drunken teenagers, do we? But right from the start, something is not quite right. The photo to illustrate the article is a blurry picture of three people who are not – how shall we say? – traditional white British. The article is from the openly racist “BBC Asian network”. The reasons why there is a decline in alcohol usage are ostensibly explored, but half-way through the real agenda is revealed: “Demographic trends also appear to have contributed. Britons from a Muslim background are less likely to drink for religious and cultural reasons, and Muslims now make up 8% of the population under 16 in England and Wales – up from 5% in 2001.” Read between the lines and what they are saying is how much better things would be if the country was full of teetotal, sober Muslim teenagers, or indeed if alcohol wasn’t available at all (except to champagne-swilling socialists and BBC executives, of course). Watch out for more of this technique, in which something good or desirable comes wrapped up in a package to promote a wider agenda.
“Britons from a Muslim background are less likely to drink for religious and cultural reasons”
This is true, as so far as I know the only religion to ban alcohol is Islam!
Doesn’t stop them though, the religion of picking & choosing which bits you decide to fanatically follow, and there are many reports of pissed up Muslims driving, and even one of a pilot for Pakistan Air caught over the limit at Leeds Bradford airport. His statement was that he’s drunk a whole bottle of whisky the night before!
“This is true, as so far as I know the only religion to ban alcohol is Islam!”
Many Methodists (and similar nonconformists) don’t drink.
Not into stoning in a big way, as far as I’m aware.
And when they do drink and commit vicious, violent crimes, it’s not the poor loves fault “because they weren’t used to drinking because they’re muslims” and, therefore, they shouldn’t be punished like the rest of us.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2070562/Muslim-girl-gang-kicked-Rhea-Page-head-yelling-kill-white-slag-FREED.html
‘Britons from a Muslim background are less likely to drink for religious and cultural reasons’
Lucky they popped in that caveat, as there can be exceptions:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8937856/Muslim-women-not-used-to-drinking-walk-free-after-attack-on-woman.html
Not to mention excuses and exemptions in complement.
Or, in the case of the BBC piece, no mention of much that doesn’t suit.
‘Despite these trends, alcohol abuse remains a problem among the young’
Lucky for some, they can get a pass if they do.
Think that’s bad? Take a look at this!
8 times over the limit and still not banned because apparently alcohol affects different ethnic groups differently!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537268/Asian-motorist-let.html
Have the BBC found time to mention this, anywhere, yet?
UKIP gains Haverhill East from the Tories in yesterday’s local council by election.
UKIP 54.0%
Lab 24.5%
C 16.0%
L Dem 5.5%
Thanks for that Old Goat. It is sad when you have to wait to hear good news on a blog. Albeit a wonderful blog like this.
Anyway Old Goat, where does one find a TV News channel that carries such good news, or indeed any real news? My TV seems to have blanket coverage this last few days of a footy chap that has “come out”. This may be of interest to media folks with a leaning (or should I say bent) in that direction but to the lady wife and I such a topic is not helping us get a good night’s sleep. I had thought Sky was better but they seem to be infested now with the sofa gossip mongers of the chattering classes. It must be gay for some I suppose.
Is there not somewhere out there, someone with common sense view of the world (and a large pot of cash) who could start a TV channel telling the truth with relevant news? Mind you I suppose there was such a fellow once, a Mr Murdoch, but he had his teeth pulled out quite violently by the BBC and the other nasty trolls of the hive mentality because some of his folks listened to some unprotected mobile phone messages.
So, I pose my last questions for the day, then I must get on with a little DIY.
1) What has caused more harm to vulnerable children in Britain; the BBC paedophiles or the News of the World’s people listening to Charlotte Church’s and High Grant’s messages?
2) How many BBC executives are currently on trial for the BBC’s folks paedophile activities versus how many NOTW executives are on trial for listening to tittle tattle?
Some time ago an honest politician with some common sense said, “we must be mad, literally mad”. He was right wasn’t he?
You could try Russia Today, which is far less biased than the awful BBC. Failing that, look for the more popular blogs in the press (like James Delingpole and Christopher Booker in the Daily Telegraph) where they tell it like it REALLY is.
Many thanks. I googled Haverhill and found this:
a href=”http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/politics/haverhill_two_landslide_victories_for_ukip_in_by_elections_1_3198571″>Haverhill: Two landslide victories for UKIP in by-elections
(Link didn’t work, but you get the idea.)
http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/politics/haverhill_two_landslide_victories_for_ukip_in_by_elections_1_3198571
Does this one work?
Although very very encouraging results, there is a fly in the ointment.
Turnout in both elections was only 16.4% Even an ardent UKIP supporter such as myself cannot get too excited by a result like that with such a low turnout.
EU elections often have a low turnout. Something to note this EU election year.
thanks for that Old Goat, ive mentioned it on Rod Liddles article at the spectator were he says UKIP slipping down in the polls
http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9110421/rod-liddle-once-again-the-spectre-of-enoch-powell-shuts-down-debate-on-immigration/
BBC presenter Nicky Campbell was rather keen on someone’s Tweet he read earlier…
Nicky Campbell @NickyAACampbell 2h
@JamieJones77 nice tweet earlier
I wonder which JamieJones77 Tweet he means…?
JamieJones77 @JamieJones77 2h
@NickyAACampbell Benefit Street fails to provide sny context. ie GLOBAL ECONOMIC COLLAPSE and an Ideological Government.
Ideological Government eh? What next we wonder… ideological BBC …. ideological BBC presenters? God forbid.
Oh by the way Jamie, if you are wondering ‘should I stay or should I go’ – get your coat mate!
Always makes me laugh that – (pretrendy) lefties howling when the Tories do something ‘only for idealogical reasons’.
Well yes, we not allowed to have ‘ideas’ then.
You could easily run a blog based solely on the bias of Five Live’s non-sport output. It is pernicious and all-pervading. The phone-in is a disgrace, and the alleged amateur bathroom accessory photographer Nolan is, if anything, worse still.
If anything they seem to have upped the ante since they all returned to the Fortress of Platitude from their agreeable country piles out in the sticks.
It’s high time a government minister with a bit of gumption – should one exist – mention it on-air.
The Campbell snobbery remark was aimed at John Terry’s new house, which has nine bedrooms apparently. “Does it have a library?” smirked Nicky, leading me to wonder if he might have said the same thing if a black player had bought such a property? I felt probably not, because he would have filtered it through his “white privilege”, or whatever this weeks trendy buzz phrase may be.
Nicky Campbell does adore his Lefty flavoured Twitter.
Like a good Lefty he is careful to be seen to sneer at millionaires
James Minta @St4rpower 4h
Listening to Nicky Campbell sneering at working class people on @Radio5live – a pretty unedifying way to start the day.
Nicky Campbell @NickyAACampbell 3h
@St4rpower @Radio5live no. millionaires. and we made a joke about snobbery. have a grea wekeend
Never mind what might just happen to be Nicky Campbewll’s own bank account – he sneers at millionaires and makes jokes about snobbery!
Right on, Man. Raise the Red Flag!
He’s probably a millionaire already – so why sneer at himself?
‘He’s probably a millionaire already – so why sneer at himself?’
Quite. But of course this is Twitter and he’s on the BBC so he has to be seen to have all the correct thoughts.
‘all the correct thoughts’
Interesting he doesn’t have the usual disclaimers in case he strays, but then he doesn’t mention for whom he works as a TV and radio presenter, whilst promoting it frequently.
Still, for any who may feel he and his programme are as bent as nine bob notes based on topics chosen, guests invited, texts read out and edits made, in true BBC ‘it is because we say it is’ style:
‘We work hard to reflect all arguments and opinions’
Maybe ‘work’ a bit harder then, mate.
My favourite tweet from Gameshow was when he gave a ‘shoutout’ to @davidmiliband along the lines of,
‘Hi, David, Gameshow here, I’ve lost your email addy, need to talk, can you follow me so I can PM you’.
Thinly veiled ‘Yoohoo everybody Dave Miliband, great guy and great mate of mine’.
Wanker.
In fact not just a ‘wanker’ but a ‘wanker’s wanker’.
Yet another BBC presenter who uses his “personal” Twitter account as a tool for his show, completely blurring the line between personal and his BBC job. The whole social media is a joke.
Worth repeating.
I cannot see how the BBC’s high command (inc. Hugs ‘please try not to make us look stupid and me powerless’ Boaden) can in any way, shape or form think that staff running ‘personal’ accounts in this way does not reflect on their employers if littering posts with who they work for, soliciting audience exchange on this basis or promoting or provoking at whim.
With, or without daft legal weasels.
They hole the corporation’s credibility every time they stray, which they do… a lot.
Which is why no other organisation would allow any staff to think about doing the same with such weak controls or censure or discipline.
Most ironically, because the first set of vultures to swoop would be from the ranks of… the BBC.
The BBC are so incredibly, vomit inducingly hypocritical.
The lead on the website is the Met police apologising for “plebdgate” (when the rest of the media have changed it long ago to “plodgate”)
It is right for the Met police to apologise for lying and conspiracy to have a Government minister sacked.
So, my question for the BBC is, when the hell are YOU BBC going to apologise for leading on that original story for a week, and in unquestioningly taking the Police union’s side and relentlessly using every spokesperson you could find, in labour, the lib-dems, the police, the courts and everywhere else, to attack that minister and apply intolerable pressure, when HE was telling the truth all along!
When are YOU BBC going to apologise to him and to your viewers for misleading them too?
‘Biased BBC blog’ (Sept 2012);-
“You Say Pleb, I Say Plod, Let’s Draw A Line Under It And Call The Whole Ballything Orff.”
‘when the hell are YOU BBC going to apologise for leading on that original story for a week’.
A week????
More like six months.
And credit Channel 4 for actually doing some old fashioned investigative reporting to expose plodgate, not just rely on leaks and briefings from those with an axe to grind.
So great to have found this blog.
My husband is one of the many who accept without question the BBC’s supposed “impartiality”. He’s an intelligent man but doesn’t “think” that much about things… he’s more interested in sport and gardening. The BBC is his source of news and he can’t see any problem. Sadly (as far as I’m concerned), there are many, many others like him.
But even he was forced to admit last night that the QT coverage of the Duggan affair was far from representative of public opinion. He had earlier told me about how all his work colleagues thought Duggan was, basically, a scumbag who had it coming. BBC treated his shooting like the massacre of a saint.
QT moved on to discussing the “racism” of those who saw the incoming influx of Romanians and Bulgarians as being in any way undesirable – and, in any case, mistaken given that the entire populations of those countries didn’t actually decamp here on 1st January. I turned off at that point.
I finally got my husband to acknowledge that QT is pretty biased to the left – the extreme left in many instances. “But that’s just one programme” he protested. So I “offered” to spend the next week pointing out instance of BBC bias to him to see whether he will change his mind about the so-called “impartiality”.
He has agreed to go along with this.
I am reasonably confident that I will be able to convince him. However, quite a lot of his world view is influenced by the BBC already so what I see as “bias” may not seem that way to him. This is probably true of many BBC presenters… they may go through the motions of presenting a “balanced argument”, but their own personal prejudices shine through whether or not this is the intention.
Isitme? No, it most certainly isn’t…
We are ALL up against the “BBC-can-do-no-wrong” blanket that shrouds so many people, who either don’t have the nous, or the interest (or both…) to question anything they’re told by this corrupt organisation. The rot set in several years ago, but I suppose if you are a liberal sort of person, or one who is gullible enough to swallow claptrap just because it comes from the BBC, then there is little hope.
The BBC outstayed its welcome long ago, when it began to develop its agenda, largely based upon the mycelium of common purpose, as it spread its threads throughout the world. Lord Reith would turn in his grave.
I’ve had it up to here with folk who, when the BBC prattle on about, for example, man-made global warming, and when we try and put them straight, look aghast and proclaim that because they heard it on the news, or this or that programme, it must be gospel.
Little wonder the youth of today are growing up ignoramuses – they (like everyone else, these days, without an enquiring mind) are spoonfed drivel by the broadcasters, and accept it all as incontrovertible truth.
I fell out with a family member over New Year and the BBC’s presentation on the arrival of the first Romgarians.
My brother-in-law, an extremely intelligent chap, just retired from a well paid and responsible job refused to see the bias in the reporting and this led on to other aspects of the BBC with my sister chipping in, noticing the bias on the Jeremy Vine show (Radio 2 being her main staple).
This led to further words between them and an early departure for the OH & I.
I’ve experienced the same with other friends, and not wishing to enter the realms of conspiracy, but I’m seriously beginning to wonder if there is some sort of NLP going on in large organisations (Common Purpose has been touched on above) its almost that they’re scared when the subject of immigration comes up, often resulting in aggressive debate.
Thankfully Mrs Geoff is on my wavelength, but that took a lot of persuasion, now she points out things I have missed.
Many people in large organisations, and most everyone in executive or management positions, will have been compelled to attend “diversity training”.
So yes, your NLP is woven into the fabric of the public AND private sector.
Excesses like QT aside, the BBC is quite skilled in its careful choice of words, its use of interviewees, the almost subliminal messages in its dramas, its choice of villains etc. All this is aimed at people like your husband who they know will not delve too deeply.
However, I think people are gradually waking up. My wife used to be like your husband (she has the excuse of being from the other side of the pond) but commented a short while ago that an alien would assume that the UK is only 33% white.
Keep at it.
QT had a segment discussing the racism behind concerns about the new wave of immigrant, did they? So much for Nick Robinson’s “truth” and momentary attempt to show that just crying “racism!” damages the national dialogue on the issue. We knew it was ultimately a charade, that they allowed Robinson a little freedom on his leash only so they could claim they were balanced after all, but I didn’t think it would be over so quickly and the BBC would be back to business as usual within the week.
Oh, right, it’s produced by a “third party” company who meticulously select the audience to reflect the local political demographics based on some whimsical interpretation of a random set of polls. Never mind that they deliberately select the questions based on the BBC’s news agenda of the day instead of allowing the public to decide, and Dimbleby directs the whole thing, stepping on people when it suits.
First of all, welcome, IsItme?
As one door caresses an exiting tirade, it is always nice to see a smiling new face enter.
‘He has agreed to go along with this.
I am reasonably confident that I will be able to convince him.’
At least he is open to the possibility. I wish you well in shining a light where he may not have thought there was anything to see. You never know, as eyes widen he may see more on his own account, which is the best way it can be and why the BBC and its supporters seem to be getting more worried each day.
Though not a science, medical, political or military bone in her body, my wife now asks me to confirm anything in these areas she hears from the media (not just the BBC) that demands blind acceptance, and in a few URLs I can usually help her understand why she was wise to be cautious.
Thank you so much for the kind welcome.
I didn’t bother actually watching “The Truth About Immigration”. Nick Robinson was on R5L earlier in the week, promoting the programme. Yet what did he say? That the economic benefits of immigration are clear and that any costs are “merely” social ones and that most immigration is from the EU so we can’t do anything about it, anyway.
House of Lords, Select Committe of Economic Affairs: “we have found no evidence for the argument, made by the Government, business and many others, that net immigration (…) generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population.”
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/82/8203.htm
The year to June 2013 saw 242k new immigrants from non-EU countries, compared with183k EU citizens. Source:ONS
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/migration1/migration-statistics-quarterly-report/november-2013/msqr.html
So much for the so-called “truth”. Didn’t bother watching the programme for that very reason. But how many people would watch it and, not unreasonably, assume that the information given was correct?
All this even after the BBC admitted “getting it wrong” on this particular topic.
‘The year to June 2013 saw 242k new immigrants from non-EU countries, compared with183k EU citizens.’
Exactly. The BBC are shamelessly toeing the Labour line on immigration by restricting the debate to EU citizens. Google ‘Labour’, ‘immigration’ and ‘we got it wrong’ and you’ll find the confession applies only to it’s ‘erroneous’ (ha!) estimates of Eastern European immigration in 2004 – no mention of the massive spike in immigrant numbers from Africa and the Indian sub-continent from 1998 to the present day which Blair and chums engineered ‘to rub the Right’s nose in diversity’.
An even more important aspect is what they don’t mention.
The BBC selectively reveal “news” that fits their view of the World, carefully failing to mention anything that does not fit. This means that intelligent people have to gain news from multiple sources to get a balanced view of this news.
The BBC is a Marxist Socialist propaganda machine that use the well known drip-drip method.
Notice when items involving caring professions is mentioned then we have images of people other than Caucasians carefully placed in background. One of the favourites when talking about elderly care is the Black hand gently holding the hand of a White elderly woman. This is the stuff of psychological warfare and is carefully thought through and strategically planned. These are not accidents.
Sir Andrew Green, ‘Migrationwatch’-:
” The sorry story of the BBC and immigration.”
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2014/01/sir-andrew-green-of-migrationwatch-the-sorry-story-of-the-bbc-and-immigration.html?
Sadly, he ends by gunning for OFCOM as the replacement oversight mechanism, which is frankly barking in its present form and with its present leadership.
However, he did at least start with a clear factual point…
‘Nick Robinson, the BBC’s Political Editor, told the media that the senior management of the BBC deliberately suppressed discussion on immigration in the early 2000s for fear of an extremely negative public reaction. If true, this would be an astonishing indictment of a publicly funded body that is supposedly committed to impartiality.’
Whatever else, post Pollard, PAC, etc, we again have some pretty top totem figures from the most trusted (so they tell us) media monopoly in some serious finger pointing at each other on matters of fact.
Is Nick Robinson right?
If so, who in senior management deliberately suppressed what, please?
I stopped reading after he said this:
“Hugs” Boaden may have been sane enough to realize that their commitment to diversity didn’t actually mean censoring all news of non-whites doing anything wrong, but balance and impartiality? What a joke. The only traditional BBC value she upheld was the Birt mission to “explain”. And look how that’s worked out.
I was going to read the whole thing and then wonder if I should send him my own take on Robinson’s clever set of smokescreens, but I’m not sure he’d bother reading it, and anyone who praises “Hugs” Boaden like that needs to be better informed.
Yes, there was that too.
Hugs’ record with quite a lot of things impartial is rather at odds with her frequent protestations otherwise (some may say, too much).
Funny she’s still embedded at the hight table still, though.
Not quite sure why these tentative BBC critics always feel that they may be spared in a quick ‘ahem’ Aunty’s way if they temper it with a suck-up as well, but all these things do is make them look weak as their card gets marked anyway.
I wonder if he’s been expedited?
I’ve got a lot of time for Sir Andrew but it should always be remembered that the vast majority of his career was spent in the civil service – the FCO as it happens (hence his traditionally arabist enthusiasms in respect of non-immigration related foreign policy). Accordingly, his suggested cure for the disease which is the BBC Trust is an institutional one, its replacement by OFCOM (after all, we wouldn’t want the political class to lose control, would we?). It would go against all Sir Andrew’s training and career to propose the best non-institutional solution to the BBC problem ie the abolition of the licence fee. Simultaneously with the abolition of the licence tax the BBC’s portion of news and current affairs broadcasting in the UK should be restricted to less than 20% of the UK market (as against the present, what, 70-80%): withdrawing from mock-local broadcasting would be a start.
The biggest “sweet nothing” is this website.
Now before some idiot accuses me of being a random troll who has wandered in from the guardian website, I have made many anti-bbc posts to this site under my usual nom de plume but as this is my last post to this pointless site then I will write anonymously.
My point is, this site is for talkers not do-ers. People who will vote UKIP or Conservative in 2015 and then scurry back to their home when labour wins the next election. You will be back here whining for another 5 years of do-nothing.
labour has the media sewn up. It has the police sewn up. Even the Army Rumour Service forum has soldiers bleating the latest leftist propaganda. You can all forget trying to change opinion with enemies like these.
This talking shop is a waste of time. The streets are where future battles will be fought and not on this website.
This website has too many arguments running simultaneously and the majority of them pointless. Climate change and sugar, who gives a fuck?
islam and smashing the leftist media stanglehold, those are the only two subjects that should be discussed here. And how you are physically going to put an end to both.
Off you go, onto the streets, then – suitably tooled up, and masked to protect your anonymity…
You are clearly an angry young(?) person. Good luck.
We’ll take you on.
I’ll start, and Pounce can finish what’s left.
Anon?
Not exactly sticking YOUR neck out, are you?
“as this is my last post to this pointless site then I will write anonymously.”
If it’s your last post why would you bother hiding your name?
Off you go to your violence, Anon. If you think getting violent against blacks and Muslims is going to do anything about the Left-wing stranglehold on the BBC and the media, you’re fooling yourself. What are you really going to do about it with your silly threats of physical violence? Nothing, of course. And you clearly don’t care about the purpose of this website, and possibly never have. So I agree this site is a waste of your time. It’s good that you’ve realized your true purpose and that it’s time for you to leave.
Anon, if you really want to ‘smash the leftist media stranglehold’ as you say, then I’d suggest that far from being ‘pointless’, perhaps a close examination of how the ‘climate debate’ (clue: there is no ‘climate debate’ on the BBC) might be a very good place to start.
You could begin with an examination of the role the UN and the EU have played in creating not just a social and political atmosphere in which it has now become tantamount to heresy to publicly question the ‘climate consensus’, but also of how both those very political organisations (with public money) have set about infiltrating every strata of public and political life with their CAGW agenda, aided at every turn by useful idiots at the BBC, amongst many others.
This is why the subject is very important and why it is discussed so often on the pages of this blog. Because it is a clear, identifiable area in which the BBC can be seen, unquestionably, to be not just biased but also hell-bent on enforcing the CAGW agenda, even in the face of science which is increasingly at odds with its message. How it does this is worthy of an extended essay in and of itself.
By all means feel free to dismiss as ‘pointless’ the many examples of bias in the BBC’s climate change ‘reporting’ we regularly record here; perhaps Agenda 21 doesn’t worry you (though perhaps it should), perhaps you’re happy for the BBC to continue its practice of what it deftly terms ‘due impartiality’ (an invention which, to climate sceptics, translates as no impartiality whatsoever, but aggressive censorship).
Perhaps we’ll never change the firmly-entrenched bias at the BBC – but in many ways that isn’t the point. This blog serves as useful reminder that there are other voices, other opinions, which are never heard in anything other than the most patronising, sneeringly dismissive tones on the BBC, if at all.
For that alone, we win.
You can see why he gets disparaged
http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/home/root/news-libertygb/6226-the-truth-is-not-hate-speech-donate-to-tim-burton-s-defence-fund
http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/home/root/news-libertygb/6218-liberty-gb-radio-host-charged-with-hate-crime
‘They’ seem to hold all the cards , but as I have said before change often comes by ways unthought-of
anon, please take it easy. The war is about 10 years away. Be patient, its coming. And when it does come, im going to set up a GYMPY up at the front doors of the BBC and set the fire alarms off, so when they all come running out, i can zap ’em all. i just hope i control my rate of fire so i dont bend the barrel
i joking of course!
i’ll make sure i have plenty of spare barrels
Yes it is a talking shop….BUT…remember the days when you could chew the cud with a fellow drinker over a pint and a fag…putting the world to right…made you feel better and at least you went home feeling you had got something off your chest and had a conversation with someone that at least agreed with your opinion. You went home kissed the wife…had Sunday dinner, fell asleep. I can’t remember a bit of Sunday afternoon agro, maybe a little shout at the tele when The Big Match was on.
My point is we need sites and forums where you don’t feel your the only one out there that has a beef with the way things are going in this country. As the Pub is now boarded up as the beer was to pricey and the fag ban ment it was no longer the pub I loved its left for me to post with a cheeky little number in one hand (£3.99 LIDL) and as many fags as I want to puff. Putting the world to right…you betcha! Happy New Year everyone and here’s to a Biased 2014…..they won’t let us down….will they?
Why not start your own blog, then? Or go to A Tangled Web? That’s really the forum for expressing your opinion, full stop. This is called Biased BBC for a reason, which has been hijacked and largely forgotten over the last few years.
David, I think the majority of the comments still relate to BBC bias, and we really do need you to keep us informed of what is happening in the US which we know we don’t get from the £3 billion funded BBC.
Some if not all comments do branch off and comments do become a hotch potch of general opinion it the nature of things. It might start out as a discussion on observed or heard (especially R5 Live) BBC Bias BUT the nature of things is to share thoughts on what was hidden and how we feel about it, as regular reader of this blog I can understand when threads are hijacked and go so off piste it resembles the quite unfunny “Guido Fawkes” page (sad wags and oddballs). We all know the score.
I promise that my New Years resolution will be to only post BBC Bias.
Happy now?
http://youtu.be/8nxo0fS2VMM
Didn’t work for the EDL !
I think the EDL had far more influence than the liberal inquisition like to admit
The state clearly thought so
http://www.englishdefenceleague.org/my-persecution-as-told-by-tommy-robinson/
Well was it worth it?
Anon, I understand your frustration. I’d recommend you certainly take a break from reading this blog. I don’t think you’ll get far on the streets though, that’s where the government would like to see the opponents of Islamism driven.
Trust me, if you start physically attacking Muslims the BBC will be the first on the scene to report you and present a sordid backstory to your life. It will reinforce their belief that the immigration issue is really about racism emanating from white people (I assume you are white).
Heads up Anon (if your still there this might interest you
http://t.co/uJA5X1CMh1
I understand your frustration. Perhaps this will end with bloodshed and this may come from an unexpected quarter; perhaps from rank and file squadies.
In the meantime ordinary people watching this extraordinary output will wake up and ask questions themselves. Like me and the most recent scribe Isitme. They pass the good news to others and so on. On this blog you learn about things you never knew existed. It may be slow but it is progressive and at some point some point a Big Hitter is going to join in. Already there are rumblings amongst the Conservative factions in this country.
What is becoming apparent to many people is the depth of penetration throughout the civil service the left’s influence runs. This week’s revelations of Police corruption will wake more than a few people up.
Tiger OC talking about rank and file squaddies what ever happened to the story about a serving soldier being arrested in connection with explosives? That story disappeared faster than a pie on my plate.
There were actually 2 of them. Saw a report on Sky some weeks ago where they connected them to the attacks on mosques and muslim community centres in that area. As far as I know there is blanket black out because of upcoming trial.
INBBC: enthusiastic to quote J. Straw, Labour MP for Blackburn (Muslim population over 27%), that a delegation of politicians to the Islamic Republic of Iran was “very well received”.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25679329
The other Islamic Republic of Iran:-
‘Jihadwatch’:-
http://www.jihadwatch.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/br0nc0s/managed-mt/mt-srch.cgi?search=iran&IncludeBlogs=1&limit=20
On Pamela Geller’s revised site:-
“Head of Iranian Nuclear Energy Salehi:
We Are Working on New Generations of Centrifuges”
Read more: http://pamelageller.com/head-of-iranian-nuclear-energy-salehi-we-are-working-on-new-generations-of-centrifuges/#ixzz2q0V9LP5w
Did Iran carry on their executions of gays, opposing political types from their Greens of 2009( as opposed to OUR Greens, whose rebellions cost them nothing), whilst our StrawMan mused about the niqab being worn on his more salubrious part of Blackburn?
What did he say when he saw his first niqab there?…or was the acid burned covering “culturally appropriate” when seen in situ at the Teheran Four Seasons?
Worragull!…no wonder he`s carried the handbags of both Barbara Castle and Condi Rice!
The very man that Islam fears no doubt,which is why MPs sent him yonder…I`m guessing Bercow/Burqa may not have come back with that wife of his, had HE been sent up the Esfahan sewer pipes to tell us it all smells of teatree.
Via Beeboids:- apartheid will live in Britain:-
“’12 Years a Slave’ director Steve McQueen is working on a drama about the lives of black Britons for the BBC.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-25680447
Of course, ’12 Years a Slave’ is a film about black slaves in history, not white slaves in history.
Of course, Radio 5’s leftist film propagandist, Kermode seems to like this stuff.
Other reviewers can see through it:-
“New Movie, Same Old Skin Game”
by Steve Sailer.
http://takimag.com/article/new_movie_same_old_skin_game_steve_sailer/print#ixzz2q16BtrAT
[Excerpt from review]:-
“The message behind the ongoing enshrinement of the rather amateurish ’12 Years a Slave’ is that the cultural whippings of white folk for the sins of their great-great-great-great-grandfathers will continue until morale improves.”
http://takimag.com/article/new_movie_same_old_skin_game_steve_sailer/print#ixzz2q17jpCBw
Will INBBC ask its Muslim Head of Religion, Aaqil AHMED to commission a film, to be written by a white screenwriter, on the story of white English boy,Thomas Pellow, enslaved by rich African Muslims in the 18th century?
The basis of the screenplay is here, in this book:-
‘White Gold’ by Giles Milton.
I don’t think its just ‘leftist film propagandists'(s) who think slavery was a bad idea, or who rate the film.
Kermode – is he the superannuated Teddy Boy with a “degree” in horror comics?
Maybe he’d like to make a film on modern slavery?
is it only me that thinks that this 12 years a slave film has had an extraordinary presence on the BBC?
How about a film depicting the abduction of the entire population of a few towns and villages in Iceland in 1627 by Moroccan pirates, their lives in bondage and the ransom of a few of them by the King of Denmark. A tiny number got home
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Abductions
Or how about the life of Gudridur Simonardottir
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gu%C3%B0r%C3%AD%C3%B0ur_S%C3%ADmonard%C3%B3ttir
That would make a cracking Oscar winning film about abduction, slavery etc.
Will the BBC and the Left apologise for their disgusting treatment of Mitchell?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25682652
Despicable lies and propaganda from the Left ruined a man’s career.
Not mentioned by the bBBC is the police union (so-called ‘Federation’) campaign against this government, which is probably the real reason for their lying against Andrew Mitchell.
al Beeba and the Police Federation are both campaigning against the government. Fortunately in Channel 4 we had a news organisation which actually did some investigation.
Nobody in the press and especially the BBC has addressed the question of why Mitchell thought he could go through the main gate and the police thought he couldn’t.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha…The BBC apologise? Personally I would settle for them just agreeing to be impartial.
The BBC has put up a completely pointless “bespoke” video report and accompanying article about the latest disastrous jobs and unemployment reality comes out.
The BBC sent one of the battalion of journalists they have working in the US to film an unemployed woman talking and driving around during her job search. We heard a repeat of the same basic information we hear about once a month that long term unemployment is bad because those people won’t be spending enough money to help the economy. We also got a clip of some policy wonk woman being interviewed on some BBC News programme saying much the same thing. Nothing at all edifying as to why this new report is so bad. Nothing about why all the forecasts keep getting it as wrong as the Met Office and global warming. It’s just a rehash of bullet points we can all practically recite by heart at this point.
The text linking to it from the main US & Canada page describes the numbers as a “surprise”, as “analysts” expected a much higher new jobs number, and a BBC World Service economics maven says the numbers are surprising and “at odds” with signs that the economy is recovering.
Nobody living in the real world is surprised, and nobody living in the real world thinks the economy is actually recovering. The only people who think that are those who are doing well in our crony capitalist system: Wall St. and the big corporations who are in tight with the government. Everybody else is suffering. The Dow goes up, stocks go up, and analysts say this means things are improving, but it’s a chimera.
Anybody who noticed that last weekend’s Green Bay Packers game still had thousands of unsold seats the day before a big playoff game will have understood that reality is different from what the media and wealthy analysts tell us.
But that’s BBC journalism for you these days on most things that aren’t sexy or about ideological enemies. Boilerplate, by the numbers, unenlightening stuff that’s been done a hundred times. They won’t be going into why it’s so bad, because that might make somebody question The Obamessiah’s economic plans, or think maybe all this endless cycle of zero interest rates and borrowing and spending isn’t the solution our betters have insisted it is. So instead we get tedious, predictable pablum because they have to churn something out.
And David, it is exactly the sort of comments from you that we don’t get from the National Broadcaster and helps me understand what is happening in other parts of the world.
I don’t disagree with your observations about the US economy, however this is broader than just a BBC issue – as far as I know, no-one in the mainstream media even in the US has really investigated deeply the reality behind the QE fuelled stock-market driven economic ‘boom’. At this point in time, its only alternative blogging sites on the internet that offer a true picture of whats going on (e.g. Zerohedge).
I’m also loathe to paint this as a White House led issue (much as I dislike the current incumbent) – the GOP is just as bad as the democrats when it comes to dealing with the real problems.
I do have an issue with the BBC blindly parroting the same line as used by the big US networks, but at this point in time I really don’t expect anything more from them; real journalism in the BBC died out long ago, and to expect them to offer unvarnished fact-based reporting (never mind intelligent analysis) is simply not going to happen.
Having said all that, yesterday’s jobs numbers made me chuckle; just minutes or seconds before the announcement – and pretty much across all the major networks – we had the various talking heads babble on about expectations of 200k+ jobs being added, and when the actual figure was reported it was met with dumbstruck astonishment and even shock in the majority of cases. Good times.
US diplomat to leave Delhi embassy amid Khobragade row – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-25690540
‘India had demanded an apology after Ms Khobragade, 39, was handcuffed and strip-searched following her arrest last month. It refused to waive her immunity.’
Erm, that’s because, as she was a consular official and not an embassy diplomat, she didn’t have any diplomatic immunity for India to waive…
This is shoddy, misleading journalism.
Jeff
End of Evan Davis’s interview with Jack Straw this morning:
‘Jack Straw – nice to talk to you’.
How cosy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQe8TYyvRrw…do racist attacks on white people get any more cowardly than this
White people are racist according to academia – http://www.sociologyinfocus.com/2012/01/09/got-whiteness-scholars-say-youre-racist/
Hence racism against white people is “anti-racism”
sorry “anti-racist”
White being racist.
That Sirus, is not racist, only white people can be racist.
Bad week for the liberal left then.
1. Only they give a damn about Mark Duggan and his “family”-and the rest of us in this country only see the nature of the Liberal Beast for what it is…epsecially when David Rathbones suicide doesn`t even make a side bar for the lefties.
2. The Akademic Stolichnaya ice breaker remains stuck in the deep Antarctic ice-with all the greenies, and hacks from the Left…academics and chicken lickens…all winched off onto helicopters. From countries that can least afford to indulge fat lefties, but risk the lives of their poorly-paid coolies so to do.
3. Hollande in France caught doing a Prescott…but it`s a chavvy glossy, so best not to read it please.
4. Vaz squeegie merchant of a pal,on the run after assaulting his girlfriend back home in the Balkans.
5. Mitchell was right, Miliband on tape with a false allegation and the BBC banged to rights as much as the Police Fed are.
2014 may be a good `un…but the BBC still on cruise control worrying about the icebergs feelings as it heads to its dooms.
Like to think this site is busily removing the life rafts…did anybody actually CHECK how many seals had to move home due to the Tory extra igloo tax of 1912.
I noticed that PM tonight had a segment on immigration and some poll survey. Some drivel abn
out the difference in generational attitudes..
What was interesting was that the poll and the discussion was entirely concentrated on the money. The economics of it. This is now becoming clear to me. The liberal media cannot argue the case for immigration other than on money terms. If it does it rises widening the debate to where it must really be. On the future of England as a nation and whether we are in the process of being colonised. The debate must ultimately be about us- the English- and whether we are to retain our very distinctive way of life and culture. The EU loathes us.
We have always been the real threat to the EU superstate. So I am not at all surprised by the way the debate is going. Control the debate control the outcome. Pure left wing facism.
They are bringing the lies into the world. Ignore them and refuse to engage.
If immigration really is so good for the economy, then why isn’t the EU opening its borders to people trying to come in from North Africa, the Middle East and Eastern Europe? It’s so blatantly hypocritical. The EU project wants to dismantle the European nation states which are the greatest threat to centralisation. It has no interest in helping poor countries outside the EU and no belief that immigration of poor people is an economic beneft. The usefulness of intra-European immigration is to dilute national identity and make the EU irreversible.
Flex me ole china, be careful what you wish for.
If the EU had hordes like that, before long they’d all br queuing at Calais for the next ferry over here!
The EU elite want immigration to destroy the European nation states which they see as the main obstacle to EU rule. That apart they have no wish to see immigration into the EU as it might destabilise their project. They do not really believe that mass immigration from poor countries to rich countries is good for the economy.
If they dont really believe mass immigration is good for the project, they are doing a damned good job of importing millions?
“…The liberal media cannot argue the case for immigration other than on money terms. If it does it risks widening the debate to where it must really be.
Yep, I’m starting to agree. The BBC isn’t interested in any real ‘debate’ about
immigrationmigration, since that might involve facing up to what the people of this country actually seem to want, so instead they prefer to continue in their increasingly out-of-touch attempts to ‘shape the debate’ the way they see fit.In the end the BBC will once again emerge looking as irrelevant and dogmatic as they already do regarding CAGW scares, if any of the recent polls on UK
immigrationmigration are anything to go by.Between the media making front page stories of the Muslim demographic (2-3 years after the census was made!?!) and the Griffin support of the Golden Dawn, I sense some sort of epic conspiracy.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/matthewgoodwin/2014/01/nick-griffin-supports-the-golden-dawn-in-athens-as-his-party-collapses/
Goodwin is a mong as well.
what a bbc 1 biased load of rubbish question time was last night,as usual the audience was packed out with all types of left wing student type activists and immigrants from all over the world who seemed to think that anybody on the panel like paul nuttal from ukip who was worried about immigration and the effect it has on are country should be shouted down as racist and bigoted,question time is just getting to be a boring left wing love in for the socalist workers party that pack out that shows audience every week.
The make up of the QT audience is comical. I’m watching it now, and reckon there’s literally 1 or 2 UKIP supporters and over 60 Labour supporters. The Labour guy can get applause just for opening his mouth,
‘left wing student type activists and immigrants from all over the world ‘
How do you know this? How can you tell someone’s politics, occupation, or immigration status from looking at them?
Politics – easy. Just see who on the panel gets the Pavlovian cheer for trotting out a cliche.
Immigrants – hard to say. The only audience member to identify by nationality was the one who Dimbleby already seemed to know was Romanian, even though he sounded more British than me.
Err yes it is. Very often, obviously not in every case.
But then I had years of telling the Socalist worker brigade to f**k off when they insisted at turning up outside my old union’s conference.
Benefits Street – See what all the fuss is about: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKuWIjOJxek
You won’t get a programme like this from the fearless BBC…
Jeff
Owen Jones is not impressed: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/10/benefits-street-owen-jone_n_4573811.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
LOL!
You can also see it on http://www.channel4.com/programmes/benefits-street/4od
A real eye opener. I agree that the BBC would never make a programme like this, as it wouldn’t support their campaign against the government.
Never say never:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scheme_(TV_series)
Flicked through a copy of BBC History magazine in newsagents today. Naturally a long piece on St Mandela (blessed be he); four academics discuss is Mandela the best person who ever lived? Could Mandela be called a terrorist? Naturally all four are strongly pro-Mandela, who excuse his every action. No attempt at any balance.
Just watched an old Doctor Who series 1 episode which must have been written by someone with considerable insight at the BBC perhaps.
It concerns a broadcaster transmitting several channels from a space station including news. all of which are manipulated to keep the population thinking just what the stations owners want them to.
The owner happens to be a malign slug like creature with sharp teeth which resides in the ceiling of the top floor.
Could it possibly have been a writer giving a coded parallel to the BBC ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Long_Game
Clearly Russell T Davies meant the slug creature to be seen as Rupert Murdoch. The idea that he and the BBC are actually the ones trying to brain wash the earths population (via the world service?) would not occur to them. Like the inquisitors of old, they see it as guiding the flock.
“Could it possibly have been a writer giving a coded parallel to the BBC ? “
Since the writer was Russell T Davies: not a ruddy hope. More likely an oh-so-subtle-and-original dig at Rupe The Rotter And His Media Empire of Doom.
Actually for ‘more likely’ read: a cast iron racing certainty with the sort of odds you’d get on Barcelona beating the 5th Orpington Brownies 2nd XI.
owen jones reminds me of a young ed milliband,a future leader of the labour for sure
Such a horrible thought I couldn’t possibly hit the ‘like’ button
labour party
‘Telegraph’ (£):-
“Are you putting Europe’s case well enough, ‘biased’ BBC asks Mandelson.
“EU referendum described as ‘waste of time’ and ‘charade’ on Radio 4 while Mandelson asked: Are you making Europe’s case well enough?”
By Matthew Holehouse.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/10565026/Are-you-putting-Europes-case-well-enough-biased-BBC-asks-Mandelson.html
Yep, the Evan Davis interview with Mandelson was appallingly biased. We were also treated to a typical ‘right on’ thought for the day by Giles ‘occupy’ Fraser about how terrible it must be to be a gay footballer blah de blah de blah. Who apart from lefty media tossers gives two damns about this?
Talking about the Police, it will be pretty clear which side INBBC is on here:-
“Truth is Never ‘Hate Crime’! Help Tim Burton’s Defence!”
http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/home/root/news-libertygb/6226-the-truth-is-not-hate-speech-donate-to-tim-burton-s-defence-fund
Another instance where your rights as Englishmen have been taken from you bit by bit, encouraged by your own official national broadcaster. There’s an example of how that can turn out in the end, but I can’t think of it just now. It’s on the tip of my tongue…..
the self hating white marxist owen jones is one the bbc again,now hes on the stephen nolan show slagging off the police
Owen Jones was on this morning’s Five Live phone-in too. Defending criminals.
That little prat is on that show too much. His frequency of appearance is sufficient enough evidence, alone, of BBC bias.
I just wish someone would put him out of our misery.
Why not move him into Benefits St for a month-his records, his alternative pals from Canal St?
I`d watch it!
And we`d know he wasn`t being groomed by the BBC…the Savile Suite still exist so I understand…or is it a Hall these days?
The trial that is our very own OJ.
He really is quite pervasive. The BBC’s logistical skills in getting him from one studio to the next seamlessly is perversely impressive.
It’s almost like they don’t have too many to call on to speak for the nation the way they want, and are stretching the little tike a bit overthin to cope.
How on Earth can the BBC put this nonsense as the top story on their crappy website? It’s pure lies and hot air from the party that has destroyed school standards by dumbing down, enforcing equality of outcome and removing discipline to focus on the rights of little spoiled brats.
Labour are spinning out endless and ludicrous lies and yet the BBC is headlining this as if it were original thinking from the socialist scum.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25686208
Anyone who votes for Liebour is either a traitor, thick or demented.
“Anyone who votes for Liebour is either a traitor, thick or demented.”
Or all 3 ?
What lays behind this plan is the means of ensuring that Unions are given the enshrined ability to control who is and who is not employed as a teacher.
“How on Earth can the BBC put this nonsense as the top story on their crappy website?”
—
It’s what they call an ‘editorial decision’. There’s probably a guideline on it too, somewhere.
Interestingly, as they shriek about trust and transparency with others, and claim it for themselves, try and get to what guides such choices in the secretive way they have, and you’ll soon slap up against #foiexempted
Uniquely.
And the Today programme at 8 am had Evan Davis saying ‘Labour is planning to have teachers apply for a license…..’ and it was only once we got the newsreader following that the caveat of ‘if they win the next general election’ was added.
Will it cost £145.50 as well, be utterly poisonous and resented…like Evan himself?
Or will it be a dog one-given the slavering nature of “teachers” in their willingness to praise Duggan, dole out condoms and vote Labour Green or Liberal…think it`ll be this kind.
Teachers do this stuff for fun…the Guardian and TES ordain it, their “unions” require it and they-not being the sharpest of graduate intakes-just do the rest.
Time to replace them…that Mums Army Of TAs are cheaper and usually can spell,add up, give out worksheets, and cry if stressed.
And that is all any teacher post 1997 has ever needed to do-except smile when Jim Knight or Stephen Byers clears reception with an all purpose CRB check stiff`kit.
BBC BIAS ROW AS EVAN DAVIS SAYS REFERENDUM PROMISE IS ‘STUPID’
BBC presenter Evan Davis suggested it would be ‘stupid’ for Labour to promise a referendum
The BBC was accused of ‘unbelievable bias’ over Europe yesterday after a presenter branded a referendum a ‘charade’ and suggested it would be ‘stupid’ to give the public a say.
Radio 4 broadcaster Evan Davis was accused of repeatedly interrupting Tory Lord Dobbs on the Today show but let Labour’s Lord Mandelson twice speak for almost two minutes.
Mr Davis also predicted a Labour victory in 2015 that made a Bill over the referendum pointless.
Downing Street complained, but the BBC last night said it was ‘satisfied’ its coverage was fair and balanced.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537029/We-let-people-decide-Mandelson-warns-against-LOTTERY-giving-voters-say-leaving-European-Union.html?utm_content=buffer708b9&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Plus la change, plus la meme chose
Police Community Support Officer charged with rape (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25694956 ). No comment necessary.
Ah, all that enrichment once again huh?
WAS HE MUSLIM?
Albeeba breakfast is currently using an interview with Brian Paddick, to conflate the two entirely separate issues of the Duggan shooting, and Plodgate. The obvious inference being, well, if you can’t trust the police in Plodgate…how can you…..etc etc etc,…..you see where that seed is supposed to grow?
Treacherous scum all the way.
As things calmed a bit midweek due to weather stopping play, I’d rather hoped the MSM had taken the moment for sober reflection on the difference between reporting and agenda-driven incitement.
Apparently not, as the sun shines on a good day for some anger & protest (down, Mason). The BBC’s producer class off books moblys must be texting a storm tweeting this one up.
Even the Graun is at it. Interestingly, their readership seems to be ranging from unimpressed to livid too.
This may not have been the smartest cause for the student union Wolfie’s to have alighted upon to célèbre this time.
I note they are still pushing the Labour policy of licencing schoolteachers every few years.
What concerns me is that this could be used to remove those teachers preaching dangerous right-wing thoughts to the kids – or even being a member of UKIP. Remove their licences and they are out of a job.
However Labour have obviously told the BBC that this is a major policy announcement.
Oh, have no doubt about it, the plan here is that only left leaning, agenda following lefties can possibly get a licence. The removal of a licence threat would ensure the teachers had to toe the commie/vibrancy/enrichment/diversity line.
This was the second item on the Ten O’Clock News last night (following an update on St Duggan), a five minute ‘analysis’. Was this really the second most important event in the world yesterday?
This Tristram Hunt!
Wouldn`t be a privileged toff who doesn`t get it would he?
I just never met any Tristrams on any school registers…just saw one on George and Mildred(and he went to private school too, as I recall).
I mean-if we WAS a toff-then how the hell can he dare to speak on comps and things schooly..not when adopted, comprehensive oik Gove is the Tory Education spokesman?
Over to you, Hannah Richardson, Kim Catchisides or whever all those BBC “education correspondents” are…do we listed to Toff Tristram or not?
AND-didn`t HE dare to teach kids in Stoke, but lacking any teacher status at all?…wouldn`t that be hypocrisy, and only giving the comp kids substandard MPs when they need qualified teachers?
Or is it private schools with all those unqualified staff that are tristrams intentions-after all they get far better results at far lower cost that do the comps?
Oh waith-that`s why the Left hate them so…unforgiven, never to be forgotten…bit like the Mummy Returning…Margaret Thatcher was right, so are the private schools.
Campbell, Millar…Abbott, Hunt(T) where will the BBC roll on this one?…then pretend it`s not deliberate cot-death for the nations kids?
Ed’s really thought through that *quote* policy.
Can’t even decide how many years – best run with ‘a few’ til after the election eh.
Is he still giving out drugs near Brixton-in other words, letting others do it so he need not?
Paul Flowers, Paddick…drugs and alternative lifestyles, authorities, Labour/Liberal and sexuality?
Got to be an Erasmus grant for this one.
Glasgow 2014 : Up the duff ?
BBC are the foremost cheerleaders for all things Scottish/unpopular sports rolled together into big expensive events/women’s sports
So it’s put on a brave face time after this bombshell….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/athletics/25679960
“I am sorry I won’t be in Glasgow for the Commonwealth Games”
‘Jessica Ennis-Hill will miss the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow because she is pregnant.’
Gosh, who would have seen that coming?
‘The 2009 world champion…. got married in May 2013’
You do the math….
“My plans for 2014 have been completely turned upside down”
But surely there are precautions….?
“Without being demeaning to other major championships, if there was going to be a year when an athlete of her stature was going to miss, it would be a year when the Commonwealths and Europeans fall” (Former Great Britain 400m runner Katherine Merry)
I think she means – without being demeaning to the Commonwealth games? Or she doesn’t understand the meaning of the word demeaning? Or a missquote? or the BBC failed to proof read?
Oh dear, what a balls up.
“Is it possible to come back from Olympic gold as a heptathlete and go on to Rio… it throws a huge question over the continuation of a career as a heptathlete and that’s just being realistic.” (British 2010 Commonwealth heptathlon champion Louise Hazel)
Ah, some sense at last. Someone is being realistic in a BBC report.
Still all is not lost for our Jessica. She is a properly BBC annointed celeb now.
“Glasgow 2014 is proud to have Jessica as an inspiring ambassador for the Games and appreciate her continued support for the world-class festival of sport which Glasgow and Scotland will host this summer.” (David Grevemberg, chief executive of Glasgow 2014)
“The Glasgow 2014 team sent on their congratulations but it is difficult to view the news as anything other than a blow for them….. but after the news there will be no Jessica Ennis-Hill, fingers will be crossed in Glasgow that Usain Bolt and Mo Farah make an appearance.” (Chris McLaughlin Commonwealth Games reporter, BBC Sport)
Yep, you keep your fingers crossed son.
“I am sorry I won’t be in Glasgow for the Commonwealth Games”
… that makes two of us
I am NOT sorry that I won’t be there.
Heather Mills Macca for Sochi…NOW!
And then a quick sympathetic lap of honour..or a gentle jog…round the Glasgow track in the summer by way of our inclusive loving pro-disabled, pro women, anti domestic -violence attitude as Team GB.
By refusing to compete in this one race…and sending wee Heather out(aah bless!)…we`d show Sport not as the career-padding toxic false god to drugs, Longines etc…but as something that Heather pluckily does to rub Maccas face in his self-righteous elevations by the BBC.
Factual point – there won’t be a Team GB – we will have England, Wales, NI and Scotland teams all competing in the Commonwealth Games.
I sort of suspect Jess has been stringing her sponsors along.
Still Louise Hazel scores quite highly in The Cupcake Stakes – though I think I could put more points together in a heptathlon than she can. 🙁
Before setting off this morning, BBC 5live I had the misfortune to hear about problems in Africa because of CONTINUOUS? fighting between …….. Christians and Muslims? on at least 3 occasions
Is the Africa referenced, the same one where wholesale slaughter of Christians is ramping up?, has been reported
continuously by newscasters with a modicum of honesty?.
Where a genocide of Christians is a looming possibility?
SHAME on the BBC
Yes; INBBC ignores the historical evidence of the advance of violent Islamic imperialism in Africa over centuries, and instead INBBC opts for the lazy, propagandist, ‘sectarian’ designation of the violence and persecution.
Will INBBC commission a non-Muslim historian to do a series on this? Only kidding.
Channel 4 did/do the same.
Yards and reams of atrocities against Christians…Jews…well, it`s Arabs innit…springs sometimes are a bit bouncy or sharp..price worth paying, and anybody seen Salman lately?
Proves my point innit bruuv?
One “Christian response in the CAR, one “impression that the Christians feel that the Muslim President has rather skewered things against them”…and Krishnan,Cathy and Alex urge us all to forget Rigby, 9/11, Boston, Nairobi etc…it`s extreme religionists mate, Jesus nuts as toxic as Bin Laden and pals after all.
Voter Labour-shut down UKIP etc…”Clear the Streets”..to quote St Joseph Strummeri(Know Your Rights”).
And no f***in` EU Referendum eh?…and no asking Kinnock or Mandy, Prescott or Clarky, Hezza or Tony…what THEY get out of it all!
Maybe we need to sponsor a Biased BBC type to get to Davos-they`ll all be there and keen for our questions!
Beeboid anti-shale gas, Hampstead HARRABIN will be fuming at this:-
“Total to invest £30m in Britain’s shale gas hunt.
French energy giant expected to take 40pc stake in UK fracking licenses.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/10565189/Total-to-invest-30m-in-Britains-shale-gas-hunt.html
and Shell baled out of fracking in the UK (or didn’t bale in) because…
‘Do we want to be first in and be in the headlines every day in the UK’.
Well done DroidNews™ – another ‘victory’ for you.
And of course a defeat for the people of the UK (who pay your wages).
The killing of Yvonne Fletcher.
Will BBC-NUJ explore this?:-
“Did WPC Yvonne Fletcher die because union militants at GCHQ were asleep on the job?”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537510/Did-WPC-Yvonne-Fletcher-die-union-militants-GCHQ-asleep-job.html#ixzz2q5aX9Y5y
Er… No is your answer!
Let`s see how they triangulate Tristram and the NUT shall we?
Doe shit come in a bucket or in a pail?
YOU-the card carrying public sector pimps and leeches…and YOU, the Guardian reader,,,Have your say NOW.
Rest of yer…F`888 off and don`t watch Benefit Streeteither!
Or else Owen and Auntie Polly will go all sad, and hissy on yer!
Why does the BBC never mention religion among the Roma? That would make you assume that the Roma are Muslim, but I believe they are mostly Christian, so why doesn’t the BBC mention it? I don’t think it’s deliberate, but simply a BBC reflex that means it can never see Christians as victims, and so the BBC hive mind which sees the Roma as victims can’t hold that meme alongside the thought that they are Christian. If they were Muslim the al Beeba hive mind would be able to accommodate it and invoke islamophobia to explain concerns over Roma immigration. As they seem to be mainly Christian that doesn’t compute.
A number of years ago I had the pleasure of working among the gypsies in East Anglia and found that there was quite a Christian revival going on in their midst. It started on the near continent and spread north, west and east.
I understood that many of the Eastern European Roma were converted.
Good point.
The Roma are largely Christian I`d guess-certainly the “gypsy” communities I`ve met and even worked with in THIS country certainly were.
Maybe God is telling his useless, feckless Church and its “Team Churchy”…i.e the weak, spineless, pointless prelates of Radio 4 inductions…and their fellow travellers in the nicer pews…that they`re soon to be removed-for they refused to be improved!
Could give the scriptures-but who cares?
“Some people won`t be told you know, they have to learn the hard way”…Book of Costello, Psalm 1001(Tokyo Storm Warning”…although he does`nt write the Book EVERY day, despite his boastings!
Need another site don`t we?
The BBC is so ignorant of Christianity. Brilliantly exemplified when Justin Webb (I think) asked Jimmy Carter if Mandela could be compared to Jesus. Who thinks that Webb would have asked a Muslim if Mandela could be compared to Mohammed, even though Muslims don’t consider Mohammed the Son of God. To many journos in al Beeba Christianity (like the real Conservatism and Captialism) is a closed book not worth studying.
Mandela was a far superior human to Jesus. And he wasn’t even born of a virgin.
Why would they mention their religion? What’s the relevance?
Ask “Jesus sucks” he knows why
Romanians.
Will BBC-NUJ report this?:-
“HALF of all convicted pickpockets on the Tube are Romanian (and officials say the figures are the tip of the iceberg).”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537619/HALF-convicted-pickpockets-tube-Romanian-officials-say-figures-tip-iceberg.html#ixzz2q5bX6cFY
Poor iceberg!…bloody Bush and “climate massagings”.
Half of those convicted are from a single ethnic group? Time for the BBC to declare the police tactics and judicial system racist. If stop-and-frisk is racist because it disproportionately affects a certain ethnic group, so is this.
Taken from the Avaaz campaigning site & seemingly unreported
16 year-old Amina Filali, raped, beaten and forced to wed her rapist, killed herself — the only way she saw to escape the trap set for her by her rapist and Moroccan law. We’ve joined Moroccan activists, campaigning for years to repeal this provision, and now victory is within reach. This week, one last vote could make it happen.
Article 475 in Morocco’s penal code allows a rapist to avoid prosecution and a long prison sentence by marrying his victim if she is a minor. It’s any rape survivor’s worst nightmare, and for Amina, it came true. But now, after hundreds of thousands of us helped to push Parliament, a vote to repeal the provision is within our grasp. If it’s called, insiders say the repeal is certain to pass. We just need one final push to get it to the table.
Right now, there is almost no news coverage and no pressure on legislators to do the right thing. When our call is 1 million strong, we’ll place ads in the newspapers that MPs read and stand with Moroccan activists outside of Parliament with a sea of pink balloons representing the massive global response. Let’s honour Amina’s memory by ensuring her tragedy is never repeated. Click below to join now:
When Amina was brutally raped, her family reported it to officials in their town of Larache. Instead of prosecuting the rapist, the court allowed him the option of marrying his victim— and Amina’s family agreed to the proposal. After her suicide, Avaaz members stood with Amina’s heartbroken parents and Moroccan activists to deliver nearly 800.000 voices for reform, making international headlines. The government promised change but nothing happened — until now.
Article 475 isn’t the only challenge to women’s rights in Morocco, but has become a striking symbol of what’s wrong. The government has promised to pass comprehensive legislation to stop violence against women since 2006 and to strike down Article 475, but nothing changed while girls’ lives were destroyed.