New thread. Now fill it up.
MIDWEEK OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- atlas_shrugged Nov 15, 12:58
Midweek 13th November 2024
Village Christmas Fair axed because of looney irrational council elf an safety conditions about terrorist attacks. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14085105/Small-village-Christmas-fair-Canned-terror-attack.html Wonder if my… - Lefty Wright Nov 15, 12:57
Midweek 13th November 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9kcQBVo5Kk Is this the copper who knocked on Allison Pearson’s Door on Sunday morning? - Solomon Grundy Nov 15, 12:50
Midweek 13th November 2024
George Osborne suggested this as chancellor in 2015. Since then, a number of LGPS’s have merged and it looks to… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 12:17
Midweek 13th November 2024
“You really couldn’t make this up. Just days before the 1,000 day anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, we have… - JohnC Nov 15, 12:09
Midweek 13th November 2024
I agree because the UN is too valuable as a ‘meeting place for all Nations’ which otherwise would not exist.… - JohnC Nov 15, 12:07
Midweek 13th November 2024
Have you EVER heard of a ‘hate crime’ from a woman or a BAME against a white male ?. Me… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 12:00
Midweek 13th November 2024
HATE CRIMES …. https://youtu.be/myjEoDypUD8?si=yyYfR8sFEAG0_Yu2&t=37 - Eddy Booth Nov 15, 11:55
Midweek 13th November 2024
“Tyson slaps Paul during final face-off” https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/boxing/articles/cly03n4r1keo [img]https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/ace/standard/800/cpsprodpb/5cae/live/a414d290-a2f5-11ef-b299-f9ebab4415b5.jpg.webp[/img] “Novice boxer Paul, 27, will take on 58-year-old Tyson at the AT&T… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 11:50
Midweek 13th November 2024
THE END …. IS SOON …. “Iran’s morality police, also known as the Guidance Patrol or Gasht-e Ershad, is a…
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
BBC World Service journalist Stephanie Hegarty:
Nice snanpshot of the BBC mindest there.
Some previous Hegarty tweets we’ve highlighted on this blog:
For a beeboid emotion takes the place of thought.
Liberalism + emotion = serious journalism.
Only kidding.
These are all their personal opinions, of course (as the BBC is wont to remind us), but it’s strange how we never see a Tweet supportive of anything or anybody that could even vaguely be called right wing.
‘There is something cuddly and teddy bear-ish about @drRouhani #Iran’
———————————————————
There is something pig-thick and lame-brained about @stephaniehegarty #dozybint
All faked – the take up of Obamacare – just 1.7% of the 48m uninsured Americans. Guess the people know what is good for them!
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/03/31/Obamacare-Real-Enrollment-Just-1-7-of-Uninsured-Covered
Hampstead HARRABIN, Beeboid politico on climate:
‘Don’t blame the migratory pollution from Africa to Britain, blame the local British polluters.’
Dusty Harrabin:- “The dust” [from Africa] “provides vital fertiliser for the ocean and even the Amazon forest.
“But in the UK it is combining with high levels of local air pollution to irritate people’s lungs.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26844425
A less political report than dusty old Harrabin’s:-
“Saharan red dust deposited on cars across the UK”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/saharan-dust-deposited-on-cars-across-the-uk-9226191.html
We must send a strongly worded protest letter to the government of Sahara and ask them to stop polluting Europe with their sand.
Well, if the Saharan Government increased the tax on sand, there would be less of it. It’s a no-brainer.
I remember working in a building 2 doors down from Broadcasting House in the 1960’s. One day, the whole area was coated in red dust from the Sahara. It was seen as either a bit of a nuisance, or a bit of a laugh. It’s been happening for millenia. But most of the Beeb’s young and ill educated researchers have the mind set that anything that happened before they were born is too ancient to be relevant.
The Saharan sand rain-fall happens fairly often. I can recall many instances of finding my car covered in sand. Big deal. Next.
Harrabin is taking the eco-loon line that this is all our pollution and nothing much to do with Saharan dust or anything else. Well looking at this Met Offfice graphic, the worst affected areas are Suffolk and Norfolk.
Who knew that local air pollution levels in Suffolk and Norfolk are so bad? Or does the graphic suggest that this is all coming in from the southeast, from France Holland and Belgium? Naturally 5 Live produced a man who said that we might get more of this in future, whatever its source, due to climate change.
Why does that happen? Graphic here:
http://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/forecasting/
At this time of year the countryside is not a great place to be if you are an asthmatic. Pollen and other irritants can be a major source of woe to the hard of breathing.
Add in African dust and it’s good night Vienna for some.
Sounds melodramatic but I’d bet deaths are up whilst this lasts.
Tell Alan Partridge to stop road testing Range Rovers.
“But in the UK it is combining with high levels of local air pollution to irritate people’s lungs.”
Which is ironic, as Harrabin combines with high levels of BBC bullshit to irritate my ears.
BBC-NUJ’s political commitment to Islamising Turkey’s entry into E.U inhibits the reporting of this:-
“Turkey and the new Jihad on Christian Armenians.
Years, decades, and centuries go by. Yet the same story, the same enmity –Turkish to Armenian, or more distilled yet, Muslim to Christian — lives on even if in different contexts and formats.”
By Raymond Ibrahim.
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4847/turkey_and_the_new_jihad_on_christian_armenians
Looking for some help from a previous thread about the BBC position on allowing those it called ‘climate change deniers’ on the air to challenge the lies and misused science of the warmists.
I’m aware of the 28 gate issue but I’m sure there was something were they stated that they would not allow those opposed to political consensus to air their views.
HELP !
“…I’m sure there was something were they stated that they would not allow those opposed to political consensus to air their views.”
As I recall it, the BBC invoked what they like to call ‘due impartiality’ when it comes to giving climate sceptics the right of reply on BBC channels.
‘Due impartiality’ is an interesting concept – particularly when employed the BBC Politburo. It basically translates as ‘we are only prepared to allow dissent as and when we think it appropriate’; a slippery way to avoid the charge of bias from a Corporation mandated under its Charter to provide ‘balance’ in its coverage of contentious issues. It can also claim it is giving some coverage to climate sceptic views, but only as much as it deems ‘due’ (which, as we all know, equates to practically none at all).
28-Gate saw the concept of ‘due impartiality’ written into the record – the BBC could then give lip-service to the notion of maintaining its legal duty to ‘balance’ without ever actually having to act upon it. The fact that nobody at the BBC seems at all bothered by this wilful bastardisation of its Charter responsibilities speaks volumes about just how deeply ingrained the leftist stonewalling of climate dissent at the BBC is.
This is how liberal totalitarianism works – in fact, it’s a near-perfect example of censorship by the back door; the kind of desperate (and despotic) tactic one might reasonably expect to find used by enemies of free speech and opinion throughout history. The fact we find the BBC – a publicly funded state broadcaster – prepared to employ such dirty practices is truly worrying, indeed.
The strangely Orwellian fact that is emerging is that we are unable to identify any causational climate scientists amongst the army of decision makers at the BBC.
So the decision makers at the BBC even censor causational Climate scientists from the decision to censor causational climate scientist from appearing on the BBC.
The turnover at Oxford is such that I only know one causational climate scientist at Oxford, who I know personally, and he no longer answers emails, but then he should be at the centre of debate on climate science.
So, obviously, what is happening is the the morons at the BBC have been abandoned by the most relevant climate scientists, and only the nutters are left supporting the BBC.
Try this:-
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2014/3/23/protecting-scientists.html
And:-
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/category/bbc
‘It’s astonishing that the chairman of the committee still hasn’t managed to grasp what the climate change debate is about, despite all the years he has occupied the role and despite all the support and advice he gets.’
Trouble is, I think he knows full well what it’s about i.e. nothing to do with debate and nothing to do with science either.
“Politburo,” comment. Excellently written. Well done Phill Ford.
I think this might be it, Thoughtful:
‘Why we should give the cold shoulder to a BBC Trust Review that argues the broadcaster should ignore global-warming ‘deniers’.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2018143/Steve-Jones-BBC-Trust-Review-global-warming-trusted.html
If it was recently, wasn’t it bbc Scotland that made such a statement?
Who was the the public-school voice on Today (Wednesday) this morning talking about aid in Afghanistan without interruption? Well I suppose the fact that he was able to speak meant he had to on the Left but it was no other that David Milliband. All trace of Estuary English has disappeared. Now was he on because of the cut in US aid or is he courting publicity for his next attempt to be leader of the Labour Party? Maybe the BBC are seeing the next election lost already?
When you have been based in America and needn’t “downmarket” your speech there, lest you be thought too much a toff, you revert to your ordinary speech patterns, as Older Brother seems to have done.
Septics dig a posh accent coming from an “Important” person anyway (well, except maybe from Pisspot Morgan, it seems, but it was the content in his case wot done ‘im in). None of this watered-down EastEnders business coming from them, thank you. That’s for tabloid-type celebrities, don’tcha know.
Perhaps he just couldn’t be arsed to put it on, just for a few moments of an interview for the folks back home.
If he was trying to do anything, it was that Older Brother was just reminding people “I’m still here.”
It appears that John Redwood MP shares our thoughts, and has written several blogs on the issue of the BBC and it’s left wing bias.
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/?s=bbc
He has good cause. The BBC only stopped showing film of him failing to sing the Welsh anthem when it was pointed out that they didn’t show the film of Gibbo picking his nose every time his name was mentioned.
Caught them bang to rights.
The yes, if I remember, they were still showing that redwood clip 15 years after the incident. It shows how deeply flawed the BBC is and how rotten their mindset; “let’s ignore what the Tories are actually saying, let’s just ridicule them instead”.
With an attitude like that underlying their editorial decisions there is no chance whatsoever of an unbiased coverage.
Two reports on ‘democratic socialists’ of France:-
1.) ‘Daily Mail’-
“François Hollande sparks anger in France after appointing his unelected former girlfriend a senior minister in his government”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2595041/Fran-ois-Hollande-sparks-anger-France-appointing-unelected-former-girlfriend-senior-minister-government.html#ixzz2xj89n6WG
2.) BBC-NUJ:-
“Hollande’s ex-partner Royal joins France’s new cabinet”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26851564
“UKIP Head Office bombarded by hate calls”
Can’t find reference to the above on the BBC news site, one would guess UAF are up to their old tricks again?
http://order-order.com/2014/04/02/ukips-phoney-war/
That would violate the Hatred Laws.
Unless the hatred is spewed in large quantities by “Hope not Hate”
or UAF
Same thing
Tonights TV – Farage v Clegg, fair debate or the usual bBC loaded audience?
not holding my breath, probably the usual bBC ambush.
Clegg has probably already been tipped off as to the content of tonight’s questions…..
Ahead of the debate, will the BBC be required to declare that they are recipients of EU funding?
Doesn’t el Cleggo get an EU pension?
And he still lost….badly!
Clegg pulls up a ten year old UKIP flier with a picture of an injun on it and cracks a silly line about Sitting Bull..
Farage points out in reply that immigration is costing you money in your wage packet.
Let’s face it, it ain’t hard to beat someone who’s line in debating is stuck in the sixth form.
No matter what happens Clegg is finished. Minds have been made up. Vote UKIP. It will wipe the smirke from the faces of the political and media elite.
What will they say .?
Don’t expect a fair fight. This is Dimbleby and the BBc after all. I can’t be bothered to even watch. Any other channel maybe but the BBC? Are you insane?
When Nick Griffin was elected it horrified the fascists, but they have reacted simply by attacking democracy and those who dared to vote for him. At the beginning they wailed that they were going to change, but became even worse!
If Farage wins, then it will just be people with ‘vile’ views, and not a rejection of their beliefs.
Yeah all the whitey`s on the east coast they totally ignored ,during a storm surge last December.The same day when some black bloke died ,somewhere way down in the Velt ! This is their revenge, on you Evil Bbc socialist bastards.You know ,the ones who pay, for your big homes in Hampstead . We know you read this site , to find out what us “White Scum” think of you .
How could it not be a fair debate, with that nice, impeccably impartial liberal Mr Dimblebly in charge?
I expect that every time Farage starts to speak, the BBC rent a mob will rant and rave with great fanatical anger.
Imagine Neville Chamberlain in a debate with ten Hitler clones in the room.
Heres a poll the BBC wont be using
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iv-drip/poll-nigel-farages-favourite-world-leader-is-putin-whos-yours-9226480.html
Lets hope the BBC’s attempt to belittle Farage backfires as badly as the Indies
Beyond the poll backfire, there is also some reaction to the honesty of the framing:
‘marwilk
I just noticed the mis-leading Headline after reading some of the comments.
When did Farage say Putin was his favourite world leader?
I thin he actually said he was the World Leader he most admired. Not as a person but as an operator….
Jeez, you’re worse than Clegg for mis-representing the truth & you are just showing the electorate what kind lies you are actually capable of.
Seems the Indy and the BBV are in lockstep… ‘professionally’.
Heres the latest comment from that Indy
black-ops peice
Ross Mitchell-Smith 11 minutes ago Vladmir Putin: 75%
Well this attempt at smearing Farage backfired rather spectacularly, didn’t it?
Didn’t though?
The audience has been selected by an impartial polling company, Yougov. Yes the same impartial polling company which is run by the husband of the EU High Representitive Ashton, and the same polling company which refuses to even list UKIP as an option in the selection list, (the person being polled must answer “Other” and then select UKIP on a second page), and even then, when the poll is counted, they apply a weighting to the result, based on the 2010 election result where UKIP secured only 3.1% share of the vote.
Both these things combined give UKIP a lower figure and Lib Dem a higher figure than is the case in reality.
Thanks for that Ken.
It will be an interesting acid test for Yougov then.
I would guess they are cut from the same wood as the BBC anyway, but here’s waiting…
You gov did ask me if I would complete a survey immediatly after the show. Lets see if it happens. I’m more than happy to voice my opinion and take the money Dave Towers has already had £100 out of them so far. join up sound off take the cash.
Farage won the poll by 69% and another poll by 68% It was an emphatic win for Farage.
I cannot believe that I am about to write what comes next… But… Well done BBC for a genuinely fair debate. Dimbleby was fair to both (as he probably holds both of them in the same level of contempt) But the debate itself was fair…
The result was an overwhelmingly clear win for Farage. I cannot see how anyone could have called it for Clegg at all. Farage stuck to the facts, answered every question fully and honestly and stuck to the actual details and aswered in a professional, humerous way. He carefully explained how little actual influence we have on world bodies, because we are asked to leave the room when trade deals are negotiated between the EU and the rest of the world. He explained how unlimited immigration has been great for the rich and well connected to create cheap Nannies and gardeners, but terrible for the poor, white underclass. He explained carefully his views on Putin and our establishments disgusting war-mongering which never improves the lives of those effected by it, He carefully explained how the EU has it’s own Army, Navy etc. And he demostrated a very positive, optimistic vision of Britain as a world leading trading nation again, freed from EU bureaucracy, trading and opening up to the whole world, free, prosperous and sucessful.
Clegg did not even attempt to answer the questions, but turned each question into an attempt to attack UKIP with known lies and attack Farage personally with known lies and far too often was reduced to endlessly repeating the same, already disproven lies, over and over and over. He was flustered and patronising at the same time and clearly had NO grasp of the actual subject matter at hand, hoping that his lies about UKIP (turning back the clock, isolation, Farage’s fantasies, Putin’s Pal etc) and What the EU is actually doing now (EU Army etc …(the list is too long))
I was expecting Farage to put up a good fight again, but I did not expect that ity would be so good, that Farage was reduced to scarbbling around for utterly delusional flights of fantasy that included accusing Farage of not believing in the moon landings, believing Elvis was still alive and believing that Obama is not American… All wildly delusional accusations, without a single shred of evidence whatsoever and it only served to powerfully and conclusively demonstrate that Clegg had, indeed, lost the plot. He flailed like a drowning man, constantly reaching for the reasuring safety of the same lies which kept dragging him under.
It was equally as laughable, as embarrasing. Here was the Deputy Prime Minister, in defence of “The Project” and the aim and direction and goals of everything the entire establishment have been forcing on us, for decades, and he could not even begin to defend it.
Clegg’s performance was so comically pathetic, that by about 5 minutes before the end of the debate, there was one shot of Clegg staring, with an expressionless face, empty, but then suddenly a slight recognition of what had happened over the last hour…
In that moment, it looked like he really was going to do the only thing left that could have saved him, and fake a heart attack. Yes, it really was that bad.
Even Farage had enough, and although determined not to stoop to Clegg’s personally insulting level, could not resist allowing one, well deserved, well aimed blow in calling Clegg a wilfull liar to his face.
Now when a man calls another man a liar to their face and then the accused turns away, unable to hold eye contact, THAT tells you clearly one thing.
Clegg was lying and knew all along that he was lying. It was a killer blow. Game, Set and Match to Farage.
So much for the incredibly one sided debate that Farage won overwhelmingly.
Now to the BBC’s coverage of it since.
They are wrapping themselves in the most discredited knots in trying their level best to play down the importance, resonance and success of Farages overwhelming win. Even saying such things as “There are no winners in this, because there is no vote tomorrow”
I mean REALLY?
They have totally exposed themselves as difinitively the ENEMY of the people and the next election will increasingly become the people vs the establishment.
The BBC are in the crosshairs, have no doubt.
Typo in the above…
“was expecting Farage to put up a good fight again, but I did not expect that ity would be so good, that Farage”
Should say “was expecting Farage to put up a good fight again, but I did not expect that it would be so good, that Clegg was reduced…”
Have you noticed the tendency for left wingers and warmists on TV to argue with their face. When their opponent is speaking the facial expressions of disbelief and contempt are shown to advantage by the camera. Sometimes they will find such a look in the audience. It gets annoying to me, it will probably happen tonight.
It happens in Question Time all the time with the addition of strategic audience camera positioning giving the impression that the debate is taking place in Karachi or some other far off place.
I wonder if the debate tonight is by the same team as QT with Comrade Gentchev editing? Either way I’m not holding my breath for a fair contest……..cue shots of highly disgusted immigrant audience members…..
The facial expressions and camera work always seem to have been pre-planned. Right winger on the panel will make a valid point and the screenshot will immediately switch to lefty audience member pulling faces, feigning shock or just angrily shaking head. The camera therefore must have been already aimed at that audience member – or they are editing in audience reactions to different points. I am sure the cameraman knows exactly where the Labour plants are sitting in the audience.
I think they have stock film of audience members which they use. I once saw HIGNFY audience member in the last series wearing an ‘ I SHOT JR’ T shirt, listening to an 8-track clutching a Betamax tape having driven in on a Sinclaire C5 complete with Squarial .
Only joking but I wouldn’t put it past them
On the Daily Politics, BBC 2 midday, the presenter Nick Ross did a piece in which he advocated abolishing the License Fee and making the BBC into a subscription service without any adverts. He argued that this would ‘set the BBC free’ and its income would increase
However, he said that he had been in discussion with senior BBC folks who were scared to death of this idea and were desperate to retain and increase the LF. He added that these BBC folks were convinced that if people had a choice they would not choose the BBC and so they wanted to retain the current poll tax ( his words) .
Surely their argument for retention is akin to a government saying that if people were given choice at an election they may not vote for the current government and so there won’t be any elections. This is the basic position of so many state funded organisation who fear competition.
I suppose that if the LF was abolished and replaced with subscription, the BBC may change its spots and stop its ceaseless support for big government and the left, and become more impartial and represent a wider set of views than it currently does, which of course would be most welcome. But I think that any change would be very slow in coming as there are so many committed lefties in the BBC.
Another issue I have with Ross’s proposal is that the sheer size of the BBC is an issue. Its just too big and hence anti competitive in just the same way as it accused Murdoch of being. So it would need to be broken up into smaller units.
Worryingly the Tory minister on the show said he thought that the current arrangements were fine. The Tories must have a death wish. Here was a proposal, no matter how imperfect , that may force the BBC into a less biased stance and the Tory minister didn’t speak in favour of it. Can’t they recognise their biggest enemy and the biggest obstacle to a free and democratic UK being able to elect the type of government the people want, whatever colour that may be , is the BBC. I do despair of them!
either the tories genuinely fear the BBC in the same way that labour used to fear “The Sun” newspaper, or they are part of an establishment conspiracy to impose the same EU, PC, Climate extremist, multi-culti agenda upon all of us. I cannot think of any other reason for the tories to support a tax-funded corporatist state broadcaster that hates them and is dedicated to ensuring that the tories lose the election.
The Tories are part of The Establishment – just like the BBC. The Establishment hates and fears the masses. They are scared to death of any threat to their favoured status quo.
The beeboids, like so many of the metropolitan Left, are ‘disdainful’ of a Tory party that no longer really exists – some pinstriped phantom. I suppose it gives them a raison-d’etre. Perhaps it’s all part of the game, the illusion of ‘choice’: the wicked Tories, benevolent Labour etc. They really don’t like people realising that the 2 main parties have much in common, a common purpose, indeed. Hell, somebody might start doing something really radical.
As Eric says, they are all part of the Establishment, with their roles to play, & it’s business as usual. How much more Left-liberal can Cameron go? In favour of the EU, gay marriage, mass immigration, coddling & excusing Islam, a lenient judiciary, etc. Strewth, after a few hours in the piercing parlours of Camden market, Cameron could slot in next to Evan Davis on the Today programme…
It was always thus
Everyone I know feels this way but this is not reflected at all in the mainstream media…………….
http://order-order.com/2014/04/02/indys-farage-bashing-backfires/
Check out my post above its now running at 70% in agreement with Farage
Sorry Stewart……..
Don’t be ,You posted first (in this thread) Its a great story and shouldn’t go unnoticed.
This morning the Telegraph published an despicable attack on Nigel by Malcolm Rifkind – so no credibility there. Looking at the comments on the Telegraph website it reads like a UKIP convention.
I have to confess that this did raise a smile at the clear discomfiture this will cause the Indy in its Operation Clarke County homage, but have to put my hands up that our Vlad being a go-to guy politically is a concern. The best I can concede is that in a world of spineless weasels unfit to walk the halls of true statespeople of the past, it is clear ‘the public’ in a bunch of countries are fed up to the back teeth with focus group shapeshifters whose opinions are whatever the liberal media tells them to be, and just want to be liked. So a single-minded flag-waver who gives a flying MiG for what folk think of him could seem attractive when feelings of patriotism and national identity are being sold down the river by postal vote-buying weasels daily.
Speaking of the calibre of ‘leadership’ Vlad is up against..
http://order-order.com/2014/04/02/удача-nigel/
That could be seen as a merry jape, but also is rather sinister.
How the heck did it get there?
This is the centre of EU governance, yet some wag can leave such things at whim before scuttling away?
The precedent now set will be interesting.
Voting slips on Rumpy Pumpy of the good Baronesses desks?
White feathers?
A small Tom Cruise satchel under Frau Merkel’s bunker table (hoping it is as thick as her predecessor’s)?
What?
Inevitably the Today programme had to cover the surreal proclamation by whatever government committee it was that the BBC shouldn’t be giving equal time to ‘climate sceptics’.
Tried to avoid it but happened to wander into the kitchen at the point where He Who Is Prone To Temper Tantrums When Interviewing Tories was clarifying the current situation with some spittle-flecked warmist and it went along the lines of ‘So a scientist who is putting the case for climate change is only given the same time as a sceptic who is not a scientist’.
Thus, in the impartial world of the BBC which gives too much time to ‘climate sceptics’, those sceptics can never be scientists – a line they always take, no doubt because it’s what their 28gate Guide On How To Cover Climate Science tells them to do.
Enough. I took a very sharp exit before the fridge door got a good kicking.
So, in it’s charter commitment to ‘educate and inform’, how come the BBC never challenges the idea that science should now decided by consensus? What example does it set to our aspiring young scientists?
I wasn’t aware they gave any time at all to sceptics of Mann-made global warming.
Is no time at all too much then? How exactly do you go about giving negative amounts of time for someone to put a counter argument? Perhaps a 1984 style 2 Minutes of Hate then?
There are thousands of sceptical scientists for them to interview. I’ve never heard nor seen a one on the Beeb. Ever.
They appear on BBC Parliament. The BBC morons dare not censor the content of BBC Parliament.
The worlds top Atmospheric Physicist, Richard Lindzen appeared a few weeks ago, uncensored, and even the two parliamentarian scientists and so called sceptics Graham Stringer and Peter Lilly are able to pose questions uncensored by the BBC.
Should be interesting as the next logical step is for this ‘climate change’ committee of MPs to censor sceptical views in Parliamentary debate.
I was impressed with James Delingpole ‘Climate change’ faux debate on BBC radio 5 *(March 2012). Thanks to a link from someone on this site – it really put the BBC to shame. Delingpole knew his stuff and shafted the BBC in this memorable interview…
The MP in question was Andrew Miller, the chairman of the Science & Technology Committee. His point seemed to be that as the science is settled and we are all guilty, the BBC committed an act of scandalum magnatum by having the temerity to invite Lord Lawson on to discuss climate change. The BBC was duly chastened and promised it would not happen again. And you pay £145.50 for this shit.
Surely Millar’s point was that Yeo and Gummer have a humanitarian duty to get rich – and stuff the rest of us.
Yeo?..Gummer?
Add to that the likes of Rifkind, Dorrell and Lamont….boy did Thatcher leave the Tories with a bigger crop of crocks that Fergie left for Moyes!
When a Rifkind or a Gummer is a Tory Elder Statesman-you just KNOW the game is up for the Tories!
Droidnews interviewed a Professor of Renewable Technology from a West Albanian poly (ipso facto on the payroll of Big Green) who was allowed to wax lyrical about the UK having Europe’s ‘greatest wind energy resource’ (achieved by having successive brain-dead governments prepared to piss away ridiculous amounts of our money but there you go.)
Followed by an interview with the Chief Exec of the all-but-bankrupt UK Coal.
If you were waiting for a droid to join the dots – yer still waiting.
Shoots of Sanity at the BBC? Jeremy Vine has on the usual doom and gloom merchant telling us that our pollution meter is likely to hit 10 on a scale of ten.
A puzzled Vine asks where China would fit in on that scale. “Oh, they are ten times worse!”. Vine hints that ‘our’ scale might not then really be fit for purpose. This, of course, is denied by the ‘expert’, (how else do you scare the people?).
A female doctor tells us that fortunately our carbon emissions are down, (exported to China?) but it is still a pollution problem. Carbon emissions is usually code for carbon dioxide, which isn’t an irritant, (except to the warmists) so is she talking about carbon particulates from diesel?
Following the advice of ‘experts’ our politicians have given us tax incentives to ‘go diesel’ and after years of dithering on energy policy and encouraging ‘green’ windpower we are burning more diesel than ever to fill the gaps in the wind.
Later on Vine caught out a Welsh minister, (sorry beeb, ‘Wales’ minister, you do love your noun adjectives don’t you!), trying to treat e-cigarettes as the real thing despite having no evidence of harm.
Hope spring eternal.
JimS wrote:
A female doctor tells us that fortunately our carbon emissions are down, (exported to China?)
It never fails to amaze me how the left who loved to point out just how greedy in power use the US was (and its CO2 emissions) have remained silent on China when it took Number 1 spot in that field.
It also never fails to amaze me with all the different ways the left find in which to tax us all in which to hand over to third world countries remember this:
Action urged on ships’ carbon emissions
It believes the UK should be responsible for half of all the emissions associated with ships entering or leaving national ports – the other half being borne by whichever countries lie at the other end of the journeys. Having crunched the numbers, the committee concludes that the UK’s share is 12-16 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (MtCO2) per year.
Get that, the Greens wanted us to pay tax on ships which come to the UK.
Rufus Hound on Steve Wright on Wednesday afternoon. Can I detect a higher profile on the BBC since he claimed that David Cameron wanted all our kids to die and him standing in the elections for MEPs?
He also only mentions Labour and the Tory’s as his opponents, one glaring omission there….
Quite why the BBC gave him a platform I don’t know. Recently Farage was on the Steve Wright show, but he was only allowed to talk about himself and chose his ‘fav’ track – it was made clear that politics were a no go….
“Rufus Hound” was invented to make Marcus Brigstocke look funny. Doesn’t work.
Or since it transpired that he ‘minimises his tax liability’
while pontificating on how much the state should spend.
He’s right home in the ‘cathedral’ with all the other hypocrites
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26843600
This has to be one of the most disgustingly biased shorts I think I’ve ever seen. One sided with various sobbing women, there is no response by the other side of the story. Reading between the lines it would appear that those detained are detained for good reason.
The other interesting bias is the fact the Obama has been responsible for far higher returns than any other president, but his name is never mentioned in a short which is massively biased against the policy.
Watch it and weep because it’s almost certainly going on here.
bBC news: Advert for the Clegg – Farage bun fight. Then on the rolling tickertape stream at the bottom is a long list of pro EU support. Nice of the bBC not to take sides.
I see ‘Call me Dave’ contacted the homosexual couple that got married over the weekend (in Islington, of course) to congratulate them on their marriage………………He didn’t contact and and congratulate me when I got married. Why not? …………..Is there a bias issue here or is it an equal opportunities issue that I have before me………
Oh no, perhaps he had already met the wife….looool !!
Perhaps the bbbc may advise me
Oh ducky! One gay marriage is now worth 10 of your hetero efforts!
“BBC sends 272 staff (or 20+ footie teams) to cover Brazil World Cup”
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/bbc-sends-272-staff-or-20-footie-teams-to-cover-brazil-world-cup.1396455831?
As for the final words of the above report, can we guess the political message which is likely to accompany it?:-
“…including a documentary about David Beckham travelling to the Amazon rainforest.”
Yet again the biased BBC has been pushing the (non) case of the 19 year old Mauritian student. This is despite the fact that her claim for asylum on the grounds of an abusive relative, even if such a man exists does not engage the UKs treaty obligations.
But you don’t need to hear that! Anyone who wants to come here should be allowed to stay! We had the blubbing family and the simpering teacher, who made the vague assurance that she would stand as guarantor which she couldn’t afford to do! No counter arguments were put, as usual, and no questions like why UK tax payers who have generously given this girl a further education should be forced to spend even more just so she can take her exams here, which she can sit in Mauritius anyway!
They should have asked the teacher if she was prepared to accommodate and feed the girl, plus paid the school fees and exam entry coming to something like £10Km then we might have seen the true nature of her compassion, which like all things on the left consists of one catch all – spending other people money!
Good point well made. As I said this story was run on breakfast last week. The thrust of the debate, well it wasn’t a debate because there was no one with a counter view, was she was good at maths. If you recall that woman who auditioned for the X-factor from Rhodesoa, the BBc ran a similar campaign. One sided reporting at the time I complained about any lack of balance I was told that they didn’t have time to cover all points of view. In fact I think I ,may complain and see what the Jack
anory is this time. Watch this space.
You might this then:
http://the-eyeontheworld.blogspot.co.uk/
Appologies if you feel it is a bit of self promotion, but i want people to know that some of us don’t want this woman (and her family here)
Complaint made asking them to explain why we are getting one side of this story. Let’s see what happens next my first complaint for some time.
18:22 the bbc have started already. Stories about what Farage said about chemical weapons in Syria and now USAF deploys F-15 to Russian borders. AN INCREASE OF Russian WARPLANES APPEARING ON RADAR. Must just be how these stories developed not deliberately just before the Farage/Clegg debate after Farage has made favourable comments about Putin.
A female ‘journalist’, can’t remember her name, reviewing the newspapers, along with Stig Abell on SKY news last night, said that Nigel Farage sweats a lot !!
They’re getting desperate.
http://order-order.com/2014/04/02/nick-ross-archaic-bbc-licence-fee-will-become-redundant/
Another off reservation venture.
One can only presume the BBC is going to ensure that whoever replaces Lucy (on 1/4 pay to match the market rate) pops in one of those EU-style riders that ties pension to making nice, as these alumni are not parroting the corporate line too well.
7. Concerned Viewer says:
April 2, 2014 at 1:59 pm
I see the BBC got their response in early:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-26546570
Clearly seeking a licence fee through general taxation.
Speaking of market rate revolving doors…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/comber.html
‘Should, perchance, anyone working for BBC News in London be interested…
What are the odds?
Is a B&W licence still obtainable now that all bBC channels are only available in the UK through digital means?
A splendid couple of days for those who know what the BBC are up to.
1 Len McClusky threatens labour that Unite won`t give them any more money unless they get in line with his unions lefty worldview.
Didn`t hear any critique of this by the BBC at all.
2. The FN in France make sweeping gains throughout what remains of a once-great country…the Lefties and Greens splattered, Hoolande sacks his PM and sends for the Godawful Segolene Royal( recycled lefty woman who briefly was Womans Hour gusset damper in 2007)
3. Migration Watch report telling us that immigration levels are proceeding fast and at exponentially-dangerous levels…and they have a decent record on calling it all accurately.
So what do the BBC give us?
1. Stop giving us science about Global warming-it upsets the BBC and those Wavey Davey hysterics who spout their Green lies uninterrupted.
2. There`s a dust from the Sahara that is clogging up the axles of the nations disability scoooters so they can`t work-or even get down to the chippie or Lottery kiosk.
3. And all the rest of their crap. Welsh e-ciggies c/o the Celtic nutjobs of Labour Wales and SNP Scotland?
No blame attached to penny pinching SNP/Labour Councils in Edinburgh re the collapse of that “modesty wall” then….has Salmond had angry “parents contacted by YouGov” at his doorstep yet?
”And all the rest of their crap. Welsh e-ciggies c/o the Celtic nutjobs of Labour Wales and SNP Scotland?”
The SNP wants a guardian appointed by the state for every child, how very Orwellian .
The SNP also wants every dog micro chipped, the next step it’ll be humans.
http://www.infowars.com/scotland-every-child-to-have-state-guardian-from-birth/
American TV news presenter ” Children don’t belong to parents, they belong to everyone, the whole community !!! ”
That’s fucking scary
MSNBC
A leftist media outlet in line with the BBC no doubt, but without the telly tax….
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/123113-684745-even-black-children-victimized-in-media-hatred-of-republicans.htm
Remember following that story on PJTV
It was so low an attack on Romney, even by leftist standards, that she was forced to apologise on air – complete with crocodile tears.
Harriett Harman and Jack Dromey will be pleased
I KNEW I’d seen that face before!
Judge whatever she says in that video by the yardstick of her sense of political theatre (*cough* “batshit loony” *cough*):
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/07/22/msnbc-host-wears-tampon-earrings-to-prove-a-point-or-something-n1646126
Beeboids’ World Service broadcasting empire wins the Lottery?!
“British advertising body ISBA welcomes advertising on BBC World Service and hits back at critics”
-(as you would do, if you were in the advertising business).
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2014/04/02/british-advertising-body-isba-welcomes-advertising-bbc-world-service-and-hits-back?
– Not publicised by Beeboids, from this week, the BBC licence fee, paid for by British taxpayers, now goes to directly funding the global corporation’s broadcasting output of programmes made for the rest of the world’s population.
Not only this, but Beeboids’ World Service broadcasting empire (which includes INBBC Arabic TV) is to get the freedom to incorporate commercial advertising in its broadcasting, and, of course, use those revenues!
Of course, we licence-paying British chumps, are asked to believe that although Beeboids will receive commercial advertising revenue, that will not, (they say with straight faces), affect broadcasting output! So, e.g., if when Arab Middle East oil money is spent on advertising relating to Beeboid programmes, we are asked to believe that this will not lead to even greater Beeboid self-censoring of criticism of Arab regimes than now. Ha.
End the public subsidies to Beeboids. End the licence fee.
Errrrrr except that it was reported on the Today program and there was a post on the previous thread by yours truly !
The advertising is a great step forward as it provides a basis to prove that it works as a source of funding in place of the television tax.
http://www.blastocyst.org.uk/arts/should-know-better/a-deckchair-up-their-nose-spitting-image-at-30/
A few goodies (Ian Hislop’s objectivity not doing too well).
I did pause at this one too:
‘“will always fear being mocked, it’s in their DNA.”
To reflect on when, and what first saw the nickname ‘Hugs’ arise.
Oh dear look likes Clegg is going down in flames even with the BBcs help.
Just watching the BBC’s Clegg and Farage debate. The BBC have used one of the oldest tricks in the book to give Clegg the edge: they’ve given him the louder MIC. The audience is obviously biased to the Left and Dimbleby heckled Farage more than Clegg.
Just sitting here having to listen to that slimy, upper-class Mother’s boy Clegg is nauseating.
I just had to stop watching the ‘great debate’, being unable to stomach any more of Clegg’s half-truths and blatant lies. The man has no shame. It seems impossible to argue with someone who brazenly just lies. It is also very noticeable that Clegg always interrupts Nigel Farage, never allowing him to complete an argument – and Dimbleby does nothing to stop him.
Anyway the Guardian website shows that Farage won the debate handsomely.
Link to that have been unable to find by general search ?
But BBC live news reporting You Gove poll
27% Clegg
68% Farage
5% dont know
To be honest, I thought the debate was fair, Farage wiped the floor with Clegg on just about every subject covered, most of the latest polls have farage in the high 60’s and Clegg around 30, I dunno how the bBC spin machine will handle it, post -debate, but I thought it gave both a fair shake and the best man has now won 2 times in a row. I worry about Old Dimbles however, he didn’t look well at all.
A few BBC prolls say that clegg won,what planet are they on.
Clegg was beaten to a pulp,Dimbledum tried very hard to goad Nigel but he didn’t bat an eyelid.Nigel got the most response from the audience.
Check this
Demos @Demos
Follow
STAT: only 60 tweets of 14,000 sent so far have backed Clegg in #EuropeDebate finds @Demos/@IpsosMORI analysis – 8,781 against him
7:20 PM – 2 Apr 2014
20 Retweets 4 favorites
Even the BBC must have some sense of how disconnected they are
I also thought the debate was fair and well handled by the BBC and I’ve made a compliment (not a complaint this time!) to that effect.
I agree that Clegg was poor and came across as arrogant and petulant. I’d be embarassed to see a school debating society accuse each other of believing that Elvis wasn’t dead etc. And the idea that Farage is a Putin supporter is ridiculous. Farage is just is closer to the mainstream view which can be summed up as ‘no more foreign wars’.
Or maybe Clegg is also a supporter of Putin? “In an interview with the Guardian, the deputy prime minister acknowledged that Russia had a “very pronounced imprint” on the peninsula, a sign of how Britain and the rest of the EU acknowledge that Moscow will play a central role in determining the constitutional future of Crimea.” (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/07/nick-clegg-crimea-deal-vladimir-putin-kgb-mentality).
Did I read that correctly – The Guardian? Blimey!
this is it
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2014/apr/02/farage-v-clegg-the-debate-for-europe-politics-live-blog
Hope it links OK
Just been on FaceBook, and winced at what seemed like a less than subtle attempt by the BBC’s finest to milk some kind of story still out of the ill-fated flight MH370 to justify lurking around the area.
Yes… about themselves!
BBC World News
added 21 new photos to the album Behind the Scenes: BBC’s MH370 Coverage.
11 hrs ·
Living the story: Go behind the scenes with our BBC teams as they report live from Perth to bring you the latest news coverage on MH370 search operations.
Pictures courtesy of the BBC team in Perth
Seems it then went further pear-shaped:
BBC World News Hi everyone. Although it was certainly not our intention to be disrespectful, we understand some of the posted pictures may have given the wrong impression, so we’ve removed them. Apologies.
Classy.
Strange that in all the sceptical coverage of ‘climate change’ we’re supposed to have heard on the BBC we’ve not yet come across this:
‘Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, the marine biologist who led the IPCC’s Ocean chapter, is a full-blown environmental activist. He recently wrote a politicized foreword to a WWF brochure, and has a long history of employment with both the WWF and Greenpeace…………
Hoegh-Guldberg’s close affiliation with organizations that raise hundreds of millions by scaring us witless isn’t a thing of the past. WWF Australia recently published a spiffy, 16-page brochure to mark yesterday’s Earth Hour. It’s titled Lights Out for the Reef. Hoegh-Guldberg’s photo and biographical sketch are one of the first things you see.’
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2014/03/30/the-wwf-activist-in-charge-at-the-ipcc/
A massive conflict of interest, one would have thought, which might just have grabbed the attention of even the least curious and least sceptical of investigative journalists let alone the world’s greatest (who apparently give too much airtime to the sceptical view), especially as this is the Climate Change bible we’re talking about?
Not a chance because, well, you just lie don’t you, BBC?
It’s climate science on the BBC with Roger, folks, but not as we know it.
I’m just looking at the BBC report about the Farage-Clegg debate:
So put the ad hominem near the top.
But when Clegg said these types of things, it was all too clear that he was indeed one of Ono Lennons Plastic People.
Not an ounce of real-life wit or humanity in this Eurodrones voice-dead from the neck up, and microchipped by Brussels.
That he leads a Party just ahead of Huhne tells you all you need to know about Brittains Eurobagman.
How reduced is politics when a Clegg-a Prescott, a Mandelson or a Harman actually get votes from members of the human race?
How will I ever tell the grandkids that Clegg squatted over a Parliament that once included Meadowcrofts and Pardoes?…hardly great-but not media cretins like Prescott or Clegg at least
Clearly the inquisitors had not bothered to check the results of of Independent report posted earlier on here today,or they would not have played that card.
So it did indeed back fire on them in the same way that it did on Indie.
There are actually two polls both showing very similar results. Again the main point is that not that many people watched the debate. Again these two are so polarised that neither would attract votes from the other.
From the polling site http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/
There were two immediate post-debate polls tonight, YouGov for the Sun and ICM for the Guardian (I think Opinium may be doing one too, but not being published until tomorrow). Both called it as a convincing win for Nigel Farage. YouGov had 68% saying Farage performed better, 27% Clegg, 5% don’t know; ICM had 69% saying Farage performed better, 31% saying Clegg.
Haven’t watched the Farage / Clegg debate, may watch it later on the iplayer. I’m dreading it because knowing the BBC they’ll stage it in a typical ‘British’ place like a mosque in Tower Hamlets or a black community centre in Hackney.
INBBC will its continuing political support for Muslim Brotherhood (MB) without concern, because Cameron’s empty investigation into the MB has already been infiltrated:-
“MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD FOUNDER’S GRANDSON ON UK GOVERNMENT RELIGIOUS TASKFORCE”
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/04/02/uk-govt-religion-taskforce-features-muslim-bros-grandson
“UK Foreign Office Hosts Meeting Including Jihad War Leader Tariq Ramadan.”
– See more at: http://pamelageller.com/2014/04/uk-foreign-office-hosts-meeting-including-jihad-war-leader-tariq-ramadan.html/#sthash.XEwgqm1N.dpuf
Everybody’s crying over on The Grauniad’s web forum, upset that they finally have to confront a very inconvenient truth: Nigel Farage just hammered little Nicky Clegg on national TV in the ‘EU debate’ on the BBC.
On the post-debate BBC coverage the first poll out of the gate from youGov suggested a 67% lead for Mr Farage – cue a lot of spluttering incomprehension from dumbfounded Beeboids unable to process the data. Disbelief then turned to staggered wailing as it was revealed that according to the youGov statistics up to a third of LibDems watching the debate thought Mr Farage won it, hands down.
Well done, Nigel! It was a great debate and one in which the man from UKIP laid out his points clearly and with resounding success. Onwards, to the May EU elections!
Farage totally caned Clegg in that. The Deputy Prime Minister – whatever that is – won’t be able to sit down for a week.
Clegg was an embarrassment – all slimy, coached performance, buzzwords, emotional hot-buttons – you name it, it was in there. They must think we’re stupid. He failed miserably with all that Putin schtick – pathetic. The worst of all was the repeating of the questioner’s name, like he was their best mate. That old classic. Do me a favour, stroll on etc.
And the best reason he could come up with for staying in was we would have our cell phone roaming costs reduced. Genius.
“CLEGG’S EX-LOBBYIST LINKS TO PUTIN ‘A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD’ SAYS LIB DEM SPOKESMAN”
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/04/01/Cleggs-private-partners-side-with-Putin-too
BBC Report on the debate.
The gloves came off in the battle between Nigel Farage and Nick Clegg as they went head-to-head in the second of their debates on Europe.
Mr Clegg mounted a strong attack on the UKIP leader, accusing him of living in a “fantasy world” and of believing in conspiracy theories.
Score : Clegg +1
Mr Farage accused the Lib Dem leader of “wilfully lying” to the British people.
Score 1-1
Instant polls said Mr Farage had won by a bigger margin than he did in their first debate last week.
Score 1-2
YouGov’s snap poll gives the debate to Mr Farage by 68% to 27% while a poll for the Guardian suggested 69% of people watching thought the UKIP man came out on top.
The BBC’s chief political correspondent Norman Smith said Mr Clegg was much more fired up than he had been last week, while Mr Farage had been more measured.
Score 2-2
The main flashpoint in the BBC debate was Mr Farage’s support for Vladimir Putin over Syria.
He accused the Lib Dem leader of being “hell bent” on getting involved in a war – but Mr Clegg accused him of trivialising the issue.
Score 3-3
Nigel Farage and Nick Clegg make their opening statements
Mr Clegg says Mr Farage’s views on Mr Putin are reminiscent of a “pub bar discussion” – and that the Russian leader could have brought the conflict in Syria to an end with “one phone call”.
Score 4-3
Poking fun at Mr Farage, the Lib Dem leader suggested the UKIP leader would claim next that “the moon landing never happened, Barack Obama is not American and Elvis is not dead”.
Score 5-3
Mr Farage said the British people have “had enough of getting involved in foreign wars”.
Score 5-4
He said he did not want Britain to be part of an “expansionist” EU foreign policy, claiming that the EU wants its own “army and navy”.
Score 5-5
Mr Clegg said this was a “dangerous fantasy that is simply not true”.
Score 6-5
Mr Clegg wants to remain in the EU – Mr Farage wants the UK to quit.
The pair traded verbal blows over the percentage of British laws that are made in Brussels, with Mr Clegg claiming it was only about 7%. He also said the European Commission only employed the same amount of staff as Derbyshire County Council.
Score 7-5
Mr Farage told the Lib Dem leader: “I said yes to these debates.
“I thought you would honestly make the pro-EU case. By saying 7% of our laws are made in Brussels, you are wilfully lying to the British people about the extent to which we have given control of our country and our democracy and I am really shocked and surprised you would do that”.
Opinion poll result
Score 7-6
Mr Clegg hit back, accusing the UKIP leader of “making things up to make a point”. They also clashed on trade policy, immigration and jobs.
Score 8-6
Mr Farage said being a member of the EU had benefited the rich but been a disaster for the white working class – saying the UK cannot hope to provide jobs when there is an “open door” to 485 million people.
Score 8-7
The Lib Dem leader suggests that Mr Farage “does not like modern Britain” and that, in contrast, he is very comfortable with it.
Score 9-7
Mr Clegg brandished a UKIP leaflet – featuring a picture of a Native American – which he said suggests that if the British people ignore immigration, they will “end up on a reservation”.
Score 10-7
Mr Clegg and Mr Farage both produced leaflets during the debate
Mr Farage said he did not “recognise” the leaflet and does not “endorse its sentiments”.
The pair went head-to-head in an hour-long debate on LBC radio last week, which was won by Mr Farage, according to an instant You/Gov poll, although some pundits felt Mr Clegg had the edge.
The two men drew straws to see who made their opening statement first – they flipped a pound coin last week.
Mr Farage began, saying, as he did last week, that the British people would not vote to join the EU if they were not already in it.
But also he made a direct attack on Mr Clegg, saying the EU was only backed by people like the deputy prime minister, “the career political class and their friends in big business”.
Score 10-8
Mr Clegg also got more personal in his opening statement than he did last week – saying Mr Farage’s arguments for quitting the EU were a “dangerous con”, telling the audience in the BBC’s radio theatre “if it sounds too good to be true, it is”.
Score 11-8
He also got the first soundbite in, saying that if the country left the EU it would become “A ‘Billy no mates Britain, a ‘Billy no jobs’ Britain.”
Score 12-8 – a massive victory for Clegg
And note how the BBC lead off with a Clegg positive and finish with a Clegg positive
Whatever the liberal elite says it is over. Been coming for a long while but welcome to the counter revolution.
Bye bye to the 68ers and their clones. Bye bye to the bodysnatcher elite. Stuff Common Purpose. Stuff the BBC. Just make sure everyone you know votes UKIP.
Oh and stuff the Cameron led Tories.
That man has destroyed the Tory party. Job done for the Common Purpose elite I suppose but it is going to backfire.
An old land like England is not so easily destroyed.
I look forward to the future.
I have encountered numerous May ’68er, superannuated hippies who all vote LibDem in my local residents association in north London. Unpleasant characters, pontificating from their £2m houses, with nothing but total disdain for ordinary people and their views.
I too, have renewed hope that the majority have had enough.
BBC rush email just in:
—–
Clegg v Farage EU debate
Staying part of EU will make Britain “richer, safer and stronger”, says Lib Dem’s Nick Clegg during EU debate
—–
Seems the BBC has decided who prevailed and should be quoted appropriately on the key issues.
Given other reports, this seems ‘selective’ at best.
The BBC genuinely surprised me in the debate. It was genuinely fair.
Clegg was thrashed and beyond being merely outed as a traitorous liar, like last week. He was rendered into an incomprehensible, driveling lunatic coming out with wild and delusional accusations of Farage believing in the non-moon landings and Elvis being alive.
He has never looked more out of touch or deranged.
It was not just a beating, It was cruel and unusual punishment. With 5 minutes left to go, it looked like he was seriously considering saving himself by faking a heart attack.
There is no way possible to spin this for Clegg. Any pathetic attempt to do so, merely reinforces how out of touch the establishment media are, and how it really is becoming an Establishment vs the People politics in the UK.
Right vs Left is irrelevant when the EU dictates what tories and labour are allowed to do anyway.
Clegg was destroyed tonight in a crushing victory for Farage and UKIP and the people of Britain.
Well done Farage and happy Birthday tomorrow…
Vote UKIP.
Ken – best comment I’ve seen so far on the debate. Couldn’t agree more.
‘ The BBC genuinely surprised me in the debate. It was genuinely fair’
They appear to realise their protection racket is under threat from changes to the legal penalties.
At the moment therefore they are walking on eggshells, treading oh so gently.
Attempting to be scrupulously fair.
Well I never had an invitation to the You gov poll. Just turned back to BBc Looks like selectively edited clips. The tory defence minister is now talking bollocks about getting reforms blah blah. Nothing about that referendum we sort of get promised from time to time. BBc still seem to chasing the Putin angle though what that has to do exactly with this debate I’m at a loss to see, although I do realise why it is being used. Although I’m no fan of Farage and have very little faith in him changing anything seems even BBc can’t hide Clegg got a kicking.
Just watching BBC 10 o clock news. It is trying its best to show Clegg in a good light.
Very biased. Downplaying the massively crushing victory of Farage.
Yougov have Farage winning by 68% LBC by 92%
Farage slaughtered, annihilated and utterly destroyed Clegg.
The debate itself was (surprisingly) handled very very fairly and well done Dimbleby.
The threat to their TV Tax has had an effect on the BBC – I hate to say this, the BBC audience was pretty neutral, in fact clapped more for Nigel than for Nick (probably 69-21 %) and Dangleberry was fairly fair too, although he started by trying to interrogate Nigel, someone must have spoken in his ear and he was pretty balanced.
But Dimbleby SHOULD have interrupted Clegg time and again and asked him to answer the question, he never actually answered one single question. He was pulled up once and asked to answer, and he avoided it again.
“The threat to their TV Tax has had an effect on the BBC”
More likely the inevitable comparison that will be made with LBC
I think Ken stated near the top of this thread that the audience selection was made by YouGov, which is food for thought.
Perhaps they should do QT?
69 -27%………….No doubt by tomorrow the bbbc will be calling it a close debate where Clegg just nicked it
The nation is ‘divided’ no doubt
This is the media organisation that called 100 to 1 outrage about the 10:10 video on the Graun’s own review page as opinion being ‘split’.
The BBC has long ceased to be anything other than a delusional propaganda tool that makes Comical Ali seem like Ed Murrow.
Surely you jest!! I just saw Nick Robinson explaining that Clegg won.
His theory is that Clegg has just 10% of UK votes, so if he got 21% then he has doubled his popularity!
Obviously forgetting that along party political lines, all Tory, LibDem and Labour votes should be for Clegg….
Makes you wonder, if Clegg got 69% and Farage got 21%, would Robinson be calling it a win for Farage?? Biased and crooked as always!
Maybe they are in denial.
Still, it reminded me of Henry Cooper’s comment about fighting Americans in the States – you have to knock the other guy out to get a draw.
Though perhaps with the BBC as referee you still lose.
69% is pretty much in line with the anti E.U. sentiment in this Country….
Forget Farage or Clegg, people are simply going with their anti E.U. ethics…
Which of course the BBC are horrified by.
Just watched Paxman on newsnight with fatty Finklestien and some sneering bourgeois fauxcialist adviser to labour party
Apparently it doesn’t matter ,nobody was watching any way, even the twiterverse is only an empty bubble
Its going to be a long night for Winston a the ministry .
John McTernan was the labour spin doctor ( professional liar ) he looked like an alcoholic, but then they all do.
”On 16 December 2013, on the Daily Politics show, when questioned about the rights of people to demand a referendum on leaving the European Union, McTernan said there shouldn’t be a referendum and “I don’t care if they [the people] want it, they want a lot of things but they can’t have them”.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McTernan
Yes I got that ‘we whats know best for you’ attitude , No wonder the Ministry were keen to have him on
He was also Julia Gillard’s spin doctor for a year up until her own party knifed her as she was unelectable. Good job there….
And the labour party/BBC still put their trust in his judgement?
No wonder their being called the loony left again
Watching Finklestien and McTernan on Newsnight last night, both of them sneeringly dismissive of Nigel Farage and UKIP following the second TV debate, I was reminded yet again just how out of touch both the Conservatives and Labour actually are. You carry on, fellas.
To paraphrase Morrissey: ‘The more you ignore us, the closer we get…’
Nick Clegg wanted to save innocent Syrian women and children, by bombing Syria !!! Sounds a bit Irish.
Pure Newspeak -hate is love , war is peace ect.
Perhaps you’re meaning double think? Something which todays lefties practice a great deal.
Newspeak was the reduction of the English language, but to the best of my knowledge it didn’t involve deception.
The Ministries were given names which meant the opposite of what they were there for, so the Ministry of Love was the secret police, and the Ministry of Peace was involved with war!
Your right (or is that wrong) 2X+sorry comrade
You’re right but the purpose of Newspeak is somewhat reminiscent of what our betters have inflicted on us…
Newspeak was a tool to limit freedom of thought and any concepts that posed a threat to the regime such as freedom, self-expression peace, etc. Any form of thought contrary to the party’s construct was classified as a “thoughtcrime.”
Try opposing the theory of Man Made Climate Change or unfettered immigration or supporting Israel rather than the Palestinians on campus, on the BBC or around a Hampstead dinner table…
Wasn’t ‘War is Peace’ one of the Party slogans? Been a while since I read it, mind you I get reminded everyday of its prescience by the BBC
I thought so ,doesn’t Winston see every day as he goes into work?
Like you its been a long time since I read it.
Winston Smith, the main character of Nineteen Eighty-Four, works at the Ministry of Truth.[1] It is an enormous pyramidal structure of glittering white concrete rising 300 metres into the air, containing over 3000 rooms above ground. On the outside wall are the three slogans of the Party: “WAR IS PEACE,” “FREEDOM IS SLAVERY,” “IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.”
The Ministry of truth or Minitrue in newspeak is the BBC !
The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history to change the facts to fit Party doctrine for propaganda effect. For example, if Big Brother makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate.
Sound horribly familiar?
At the risk of boring people who already knew this, George Orwell wrote 1984 in 1940, he worked at the BBC and thought it was a dangerous and hateful propaganda machine. The BBC was the full inspiration for his book, which is why they have wiped him from history as far as possible….
Don’t know if anyone caught the post debate coverage on the bBC with Mr Jane Hill but she was interviewing audience members, one of which asked a question. His explanation of his question and the answers given made no sense at all, when asked by Mr Hill who he would now vote for, he didn’t have a clue of their names, just stating ‘the one on the left’ Ms Hill of course put the words in his mouth and said by bBC default Clegg, he confusingly agreed…
This of course begs the question how did the bBC select the audience and questions asked? IMO the questions were pre selected and people chosen to ask them, remember this guy didn’t even know Cleggs or Farages names, so how the hell could he ask a relevant question?
Perhaps, when he said ‘the one on the left’, she instinctively and unthinkingly thought that he meant Clegg (it’s how a BBC person sees the world)…as opposed to the one standing on the left!
I saw that – his total lack of understanding was frightening, he didn’t know which candidate he supported, Nick or Nigel, so he said ‘The one on the left’. The interviewer said ‘You mean Nick?’ and he agreed with her!! (we know Nigel was on the left!)
A classic B-BBC moment – stupidity, dishonesty and fraud all in one.
”This of course begs the question how did the bBC select the audience.”
Like the Question Time audience, it’s a day outing for the Broadmoor patients.
Poor old Norman ‘but-Labour-say’ Smith.
Post the Farage demolition of Clegg he was charging excitedly around the ‘spin room’, camera in tow, desperately trying to salvage a little something to lift BBC pro-EU morale.
Pick a journalist, any journalist…. eeni meeni miini moh…. The Independent! Donald Macintyre!
http://www.independent.co.uk/biography/donald-macintyre
Norman : ‘Could Clegg have put the case for the EU better?’
Nice try. ‘Nil Points’ Norman
Beeboid Smith thinks he conceal his pro-E.U bias: but he can’t.
The bBC can say what it wants about the EU, I will be voting UKIP in future .
Following another school shooting at Fort Hood, BBC radio news reports all tell of a previous shooting there. Sometimes they tell us that the perpetrator was a Major Hassan, the BBC website even adds that Hassan has been sentenced to death. But the radio studiously avoids mentioning that Hassan was of the Allahu Ackbar variety (a glancing blow to that effect at the very foot of the website report), leaving the uninformed audience to assume Hassan was more US craziness of the Columbine/Sandy Hook variety.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-26863033
It’s what they do, they deceive by omission.
Bastards.
Albeeba breakfast appears to have arrived at an acceptance of the opinion polls on the great EU debate, although still saying that Nigel is a winner as far as the polls are concerned. That implies not as far as they are concerned.
However, they have now found their perfect line to follow.
Bring on Dhimmi David Cameron to say they were both wrong! Perfect, that 70% view that backed Farage are all WRONG,
I somehow have this feeling that the EU elections in May are going to be fascinating.
Oh they have found another line of attack:
Some chap from Scotland, to say that hearing these EXTREME views adds nothing to the debate in the Scots independence debate.
Well, who gives a shit.
If they vote to go, they’ll be OUT of the EU, and Spain will veto a re-entry.
Therefore, what the fuck has it got to do with the Scottish angle?
Thought it ironic that the SNP MEP chap (a white male) criticised the debate as being only ‘two white males’.
So, expect to hear the word ‘ extreme’ repeated all day.
Strange how many ‘extreme’ views seem to be held by 2/3rds of population
Yes, if 69% of the population is ‘extreme’ then isn’t ‘extreme’ the new ‘normal’ ?
I’ve been watching Breakfast since 08:10. Number 1 story is peasouper Jack The ripper smog, . Just running Clegg / Faarag, at @ 08:35, the opening sentence “Nick Clegg…” Then on to a clip of some bloke ? From the Scottish Nationalist Party stating it added nothing to the debate to Scotland. OK yea that really represented the debate didn’t it…..WTF???!!! No mention of who the winner was. Damage control in full swing. Oh and here’s another shock horror horror shock story to report on to draw away from Clegg / Farage. Ebola outbreak in Guinea. Despite the presenters best efforts including serious faces the expert kept insisting there was virtually no risk to the UK. So why run the story…answers on a postcard. Oh and shooting at Fort Hood they mention that there was a previous shooting y an Army Major but fail to mention a relevant fact about him..again answers on a postcard…
Well the SNP are right! It adds nothing to the debate because if Scotland goes independent, then they won’t be EU members anyway, and it’s unlikely that they will be allowed to join given the position of other states with secessionist regions.
Does this indicate an acceptance of reality from a Scottish party which seems to have considerable difficulty coming to terms with it?
Given Cleggs truly woeful performance in the debates, the knife must surely be hanging over him, and given the likelihood that his party will suffer significant losses at the European elections in May, is 12 months too close to change a leader before an election?
It probably is, unless it’s forced upon them by resignation, it is almost certain that 12 months is not long enough for a leader to make any difference to voting intention, so they would effectively lose two leaders when the new one also resigned.
So who will replace Clegg, and alas it’s likely it’s going to be another over privileged posh boy whose done PPE at Oxford.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/03/10/liberal-democrats-leadership-six_n_4933261.html
The fact that articles like this are being written illustrates the position Clegg is in.
bBC disappearing act: After the debate the news said Farage got the vote but the sound clip only contained Clegg – Farage not mentioned again. The pollution said to come from the EU, it seems Europe does not exist, only the EU mentioned. So bBC show their propaganda again just like if you have views they do not like, then ‘right wing’ is added to the phrase.
“Post-debate polls see Nigel trounce hapless Clegg in BBC debate”
http://www.ukip.org/post_debate_polls_see_nigel_trounce_hapless_clegg_in_bbc_debate?
Perhaps we should take some time to reflect on what might turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory.
Farage destroys Clegg in a manner that most of us expect to happen because we know the problems of the EU. But in destroying Clegg, where will his voters go to? Almost certainly not UKIP, and given most FibDems are not in the least impressed with leftie Dave, it’s likely they will end up voting for Labour, and that is possibly the worst thing possible!
FibDems are not natural Tories and many of their members disliked the coalition from the very start, whilst we might gloat at their self destruction, and the spotlight shone on their hopeless grasp of the issues, the smile will be wiped from our faces if the beneficiaries are the even worse Labour party.
Good point, you will always have the dyed in the wool party supporters who can see no further than party affiliations (those who would vote for red rosette on a donkey…) these are the types who have turned people away from politics – look at recent election turnouts.
IMO the difference with Farage is that is is connecting with those who haven’t voted for a long while (if ever?) and I have seen many many comments to that effect on Twitter etc. These seem to come from the younger end of the age scale. Farage was clever (and correct) last night in reaching out to the young Afro Caribbeans who do feel left out and 2nd place to more recent fast growing Asian and Eastern European communities.
Times are a changing and fast thanks to Mr F….
Historically UKIP has drawn its support from older, white males with less formal education. Historically they have been weak among the young and among women.
It is possible that the debates may affect that but so far there is no polling evidence to suggest that is the case.
But there is a long time to run and it will be interesting to see how these debates are reflected in the polling data.
Yes, UKIP are weak amongst Westminster, the MSM, commentators and people who hate Britain. They are strong with the young, the old, men and women, and all patriots.
69% support says it all really, so nice try!!
“Historically UKIP has drawn its support from older, white males with less formal education.”
More of that patrician class snobbery that trips so easily from the tongue of the bourgeois fauxcialist.
Strange how You could transpose UKIP with any movement that has the temerity to challenge any of the liberal orthodoxies and get that self same comment.
However my 21 year old daughter and many of her friends think otherwise.
My 21 and 18 year old sons are pure Thatcherite.
But they are not, and even Farage has said this.
“We are not doing as well with young people we’re not doing as well with women.” Farage attributed this to some of the party’s representatives making comments that were “repugnant to women”.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/03/31/ukip-nigel-farage-bnp_n_5062951.html
The 69% is a measure of how well did UKIP leader perform in that debate, not a measure of UKIP’s support. What will be very interesting is to see how those very clear victories translate into votes. The wind is behind him and filling his sails right now.
Remember that after the election debates Nick Clegg was riding high. Now look at him now. President Bush (41) had an 80% popularity rating after the first Gulf War. He lost the election.
Make no mistake. Farage did incredibly well and humiliated Clegg who looks even more of a busted-flush now. Whether Farage can translate this into votes, and broaden UKIP’s historic appeal we have to see.
Whatever the value of your analysis thoughtful, it will never be a reason for many to abandon UKIP. This kind if runs along the lines of ‘ a vote for UKIP will let in Labour.’
That scare tactic ceased to work years ago on me, and if that happens, it happens.
Whilst I agree another Labour Government would be a disaster, Cameron’s ideas are almost as bad.
I suspect that limp dumbs core vote will be in denial about the logic anyway, and may agree with Nick after all.
Bring on the Euros I say.
I don’t think I intimated that people would abandon UKIP, far from it, why would they after a sparkling performance by Farage.
The core FibDems will vote for them no matter what, however, it’s where the ones who leave will go, and it’s almost certain the only place is with Labour.
After that performance from Farage, the old party loyalties are not so strong as they once were. Patriotic Lib Dems who voted in 2010 for the only top three party offering a genuine in or out referendum, would have been impressed as the Yougov poll breakdown showed. A third of Lib Dem voters gave the debate to Farage, over a half of labour voters too. Farage’s connection with the white underclass and the energy policies will appeal to patriotic voters in labour, liberal democrat and none of the above (non voters)
I think Labour should be very worried after that performance. Lots of labour voters will be sharing links to that video, because it is hillarious to watch Clegg humiliated on his No 1 home turf subject. It really was clegg getting a mighty pasting in Clegg’s own front room! Beyond that, the actual UKIP message as protrayed by Farage in that debate, will appeal to a lot of disenfranchised labour voters.
That display by Farage will appeal to the forgotten white working class as alluded to in the debate.
It’s a funny old world.
When the white, forgotten working class moan about job loses, benefit cuts, bedroom tax (sic) the BBC can’t wait to stick a microphone under their bugle. Talk about “Thatcher” closing the pits down and eroding their communities the BBC are beside themselves with joy.
But when the same people complain about immigration taking their jobs and suppressing wages, eroding their communities, etc, or when they fail to show suitable appreciation of the PC, diversity friendly, multi cultural paradise bestowed on us by “progressive” politics and the EU sacred cow then they are dismissed as bigoted racists that cannot be trusted to vote the right way.
The progressive elite only like you if do what they want you to.
Expect a very interesting run up to the May elections. expect a lot of anti-UKIP stories and smears.
“I think Labour should be very worried after that performance”
Maybe they are
http://order-order.com/2014/04/04/ukip-attacking-scared-ed-u-turn/
It certainly looks that way
I agree with Peter Hitchens. A prerequisite to recovery in this country is the end of the Tory party. Cameron and his clique are not conservatives. They are typical liberal infected drones.
If UKIP let in Labour then so be it. We will then see what happens.
I tend to agree – the Conservatives are redundant; disaffected Tory supporters (like me) are gravitating to UKIP because ‘Call Me Dave’ and his chums are clearly liberal progressives in all but name (pro Green, pro EU, pro multiculturalism, etc., etc) and therefore utterly irrelevant at the next General Election for anyone looking to vote for real change.
UKIP presents voters – at last – with a chance of radical political change here in the UK (and the EU); the kind of change that none of the other established parties come even remotely close to offering (because they want things to stay exactly the same).
The lesson is that if voters really want to change things then a vote for UKIP is the only genuine choice at both the May EU elections and the next UK General Election.
At what point do ‘liberal progressives’ become ‘liberal reactionaries’? Because it’s their ideas which are now being implemented, and increasingly rejected by the people of the country.
The Tories under Thatcher were a party of meritocracy, where those who achieved would be rewarded, and those who tried were allowed to keep more of their hard earned income.
Under Lefty Dave they have abandoned all their principles for cultural Marxism and a horrible greed but only for those who already have money to be able to hold onto it.
For years in this country unearned income was looked down on as second class to earned money, but Cameron in his greed has turned that on it’s head. If he gets his way unearned and undeserved income will be as tax free as he can make it, and the rest of us will suffer as a result to pay for that.
Already we see tax rises on things like Stamp duty which has increase by 500% ! so if you’re an achiever who wants to buy a nice home the greedy Tories will slam you for it.
Council tax under both Tories & Liebour has more than doubled in 10 years, rents for social housing gone through the roof, and public transport subsidy continually reduced to the point that work no longer pays and it’s better to go on benefits.
Liebour call it a cost of living crisis, but really it’s a stealth tax crisis – all to fund tax cuts for the already wealthy.
Tory or Liebour, none of them has the interests of the working British people at heart.
Well actually the first requirement for the recovery of Britain is the destruction of Labour (and one might add their cheerleaders in the BBC). If that bunch ever get in power again the amount of damage they will do will make the measures necessary to rescue the country fairly brutal.
First things first. If UKIP can get first place in the European elections then that will be a mighty stride. If, as is stated, they are collecting votes from disaffected Labour voters this will not be impossible.
The next few weeks will be very interesting. And just watch how desperate the MSN/BBC will get at that prospect.
The problem is that EU elections are proportional rep, so if the poll figures pan out as they are reported then you will get a pro rata elections of representatives.
Not many people seem very interested in Europe, but I did find one recent poll which only gives UKIP 23% in third place behind the Tories on 24% and Liebour on 32% the fib dems came in at a very poor 11%
Having said that a poll from just a few days earlier showed UKIP in a much stronger position:
Liebour 28%
UKIP 26%
Tories 24%
Liberals 11%
After the debates I would expect that UKIPs position was further strengthened, the fib dems might well be wiped out on these figures.
I have not got any details, but briefly heard on the news in the East region ,can`t remember what day,that a euro poll had , Ukip , Tories , labour ,&lib dems in that order. So I hope the bottom 2 are eliminated .
You are right about “first things first”. For me it is key that the focus of all of us who hate the current liblabcon idiots must be on the Euro elections to get Farage and UKip to win the most seats. That is the one event that would finally bring it home to the entire establishment here and in Europe that their arrogant undemocratic utopia is blown and that their futures truly are then marked as uncertain and they are in epic uncharted waters. Beyond that, what will be will be, but boy will it feel good to us punters that we have given them a massive kick up the arse, the likes of which they are never going to forget for the rest of their lives.
After last nights result shouldn’t the slogan be ‘vote Tory get Labour’?
Perhaps loyal Tory voters might think about checking the ‘unite the right’ project if its still going
As for were Lib/Dem voters will go (what voters) well all those cat loving old spinsters that have been voting for them since paddy pants downs day will stay with them
As for the rest their more likely to go to the Greens than Labour.
Remember the BBC re muslim Trojan Horse” in Bham school system … its highlighted comment
“i don t believe it”? … well as i ve stated previously
believe it!
Depart for Education widens probe to include another 12 Birmingham schools
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2594119/Twelve-schools-investigated-amid-claims-hard-line-Muslims-trying-indoctrinate-pupils.html
Well Phil (nuthin to see) Mackie, has been ahem! …
apparently been all hot ticket on this story, for weeks?,(shakes head!) for the BBC
BBC
“‘TROJAN HORSE’ INVESTIGATION NOW WIDENED”
“Trojan horse’: MP calls for urgent action”
BBC has had access to Park View School in Birmingham, one of the schools being investigated over allegations that they are being run by hard liners
Well … he now turns up on 5Live s Panto Breakfast, to wax on about wahab and salafi, and orthodox religionists to the ever apologist N Campbell
…to the uninitiated, it would probably sweep straight past them eh!
Do all muslims not insistent on halal meat in schools with some muslim children?
Do all muslims not insist on “special accomodations” ?
how about “rights” that others don t have?
Never mind education … councils … local gov … No10 etc.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/article1393970.ece
http://schoolsimprovement.net/gove-broadens-inquiry-into-creeping-islam/
“Never mind education … councils … local gov … No10” etc.
…… tip of the iceberg
It’s stories like this which I’m sure leave everyone confused.
We are told we live in a multicultural country which is ‘vibrant’. We have to respect Muslim cultures, and not to do so is ‘Islamophobic’
Leftie Dave told us ‘It is mainstream Britain which needs to integrate with the Muslim way of life and not the other way round’
So when Muslims do what Muslim culture is all about, the fascists run around like headless chickens because the only explanation is that they haven’t got the first clue, and when they find out, they’re as outraged as the rest of us. The difference being that we make sure we do know what Islam is all about first and don’t don the socialist rose tinted glasses and the blinkers of ignorance.
It all reminds me of the unbelievably naive and stupid Liebour Minister Jim Fitzpatrick who walked out of a Muslim wedding because he & his wife were separated. He was so ignorant of what Islam was all about he didn’t even know the first & most basic things. But you can bet he used the bully words of ‘Waycism, and Islamophobia’ against anyone who disagreed with him.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1206296/Muslim-wedding-segregation-fury-Minister-wife-ordered-separate-rooms.html
This is what I believe has happened here. Total wilful blind ignorance of what Islam is about, but a hate filled passion to violently attack anyone who tells them so. The only way seems to be for them to be put in a position where it’s impossible for them to deny it.
I’m not sure where you read that Cameron said, ‘It is mainstream Britain which needs to integrate with the Muslim way of life and not the other way round’
I well remember this (link below) from Cameron, echoed by Merkel and also by Trevor Philips. The message was that multiculturalism had allowed people to live in ghettos and refuse to integrate into the host society.
I only remember it from newspapers though, this landmark speech didn’t get much of an airing on the BBC and what coverage they gave it was moderated by their concern that he was attacking immigrants.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cameron-my-war-on-multiculturalism-2205074.html
Try The Observer, 13 May 2007
“Many British Asians see a society that hardly inspires them to integrate. Indeed, they see aspects of modern Britain which are a threat to the values they hold dear. Not for the first time, I found myself thinking that it is mainstream Britain which needs to integrate more with the British Asian way of life, not the other way around.”
Thanks. Found it.
Context, though, is everything.
I used to buy into the “moderate Islam” meme too. Then I looked at what Islam is all about. The creation of an Islamic Caliphate by whatever means work, be it violent Jihad, or slow cultural integration, assimilation and domination via the tool of Taqiyya.
What Islam is all about is using the respectable cloak of “multiculturalism” to ingratiate itself into the host population, keep it’s own identity, while employing Taqiyya to lull the host into a false sense of security whilst the Islamic population increases to the extent that they become a majority, or at least a large enough minority to drop the pretence at “moderation” and impose a totalitarian Islamic Caliphate under Sharia law which would destroy “tolerant” multiculturalism and replace it with a totalitarian monoculture.
The more I see what is actually happening in regions of the UK with large Islamic populations, the more their plan is revealed. Infiltrate, grow then dominate and destroy the host. AKA the Islamic duty to kill convert or enslave non-believers.
As the Islamic population grows, it naturally forces them to reveal their despicable hand more and more. Which is good news. There can be no doubt as to what their intentions are.
‘ reveal their despicable hand more and more.’
Very very true, the problem is though, that as it happens otherwise intelligent, sensible, observant people go into denial, as their preconceptions of tolerance and human nature are proved to be illusory.
A classic example of that was Dhimmi David Cameron’s pronouncement after the murder of Lee Rigby, that the killers were betraying islam.
What a complete knob !
Idiots like him are aided and abetted by a media that has gone crazy too.
Our only hope here is that the Swedes commit national suicide very soon, so everyone can see just what the truth is.
Ken, try ‘ a Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam’ by Robert Spencer.
Apologies if you’ve already read it as part of your research.
It’s not the theory, or rationale that I consider, all that matters to me are the practical effects of that ideology wherever it lays down its filthy depraved way of life.
Just consider the way people live where there are Moslem majorities, and that will tell you all you wish to know about it.
“it is mainstream Britain which needs to integrate more with the British Asian way of life, not the other way around”
D. Cameron
(after stopping with a MUSLIM family)
That just about sums up Dhimmi fuckin Dave, what a total moron! And HE is supposed to LEAD us? FFS.
That kind of attitude just about ensures this country is going down the shitter.
My concern with the liberals’ acceptance of multiculturalism is that these are the same people who condemn colonialism. Colonialism was of its time; certainly no philanthropists would have built cities, roads, industries etc. and it was only the exploitation by European powers that achieved all this in Africa, Asia etc. in the nineteenth century. The administrators did not integrate with the natives and ultimately imposed a level of modernisation on the indigenous population that otherwise may have taken centuries to achieve. From a lofty moral standpoint they could argue that colonialism is wrong but then why is it right for a non-indigenous population to come to OUR country and try to impose their values on us? I assume that some immigrants came to us, attracted by our way of life and determined to integrate and contribute. Others came to take advantage of our civilised generosity and played us for fools. Alas, another section came with the intention of changing our society to reflect that of the countries they, ironically, fled from. It’s a shame that our State broadcaster welcomes and promotes all three of these groups equally. It’s only we poor natives that can do wrong
In the neighbourhood of my parents’ house one can often see couples pushing stolen supermarket trolleys or wheeled bath tubs adapted to carry ‘scrap’ metal around the streets on the prowl. The sort of scene one might expect to see in the ‘developing’ countries.
Meanwhile the legitimate scrap dealers are regulated to provide secure facilities, capture of run-off pollution and safe handling of toxic and/or heavy materials.
Some years ago a family friend with many, many years of industrial experience was surprised to hear a familiar sound from his apprentice days while walking down a residential street. Curiosity got the better of him so he walked down the passageway at the side of the house. There in a shed was a machine of 1920’s vintage banging out metal parts.
Neither of these operations were being carried out by the over-regulated indigenous population but our ‘vibrant’ new-Britons.
Clegg loves ‘modern’ Britain and accuses UKIP of longing for the ‘good old days’, however it is our new citizens, living their ‘diverse’ life-style that are taking us back to the 1800’s.
I agree with many of the posts re the way the BBC and others are doing their best to limit the damage of the complete destruction of Clegg by Farage last night.
The commentariat just don’t seem able to believe that the people overwhelmingly support Farage and not Clegg. So it will interesting to see what the next moves of the pundits are. Will they try further to suppress popular views as expressed by Europe by Farage and stamp out this outbreak of democracy? Or will they wake up and realise that the British people feel that none of the three main parties represent their views, not just on Europe, but a much wider range of issues.
Unless the main stream political parties change, the British people may well start up other populist democratic parties that better represent their views.
Perhaps the BBC may even realise that its views are not shared by the majority of the country and that it had better watch out, or it too may become a victim of this renegade democratic populism. Somehow I think it will carry on trying to convert us to its liberal left multiculturalist faith and so, hopefully, it will pay the price of not representing the democratic views of the people for the last 40 years.
An old message form America to the BBC …”You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. “