The Telegraph tells us about Derek Bateman who left BBC Scotland last year…..
Derek Bateman was a long-standing BBC Scotland presenter who now, set up with his own blog, feels free to offer his view of England and Tory policies which presumably made him to toast of the BBC canteen in Glasgow. Here’s a taste of his sarcasm:
- Sorry for allowing your (English) policies to kill men in our biggest city in their mid-fifties – still it keeps pension costs down.
- Sorry you (England) have so many shaven-headed louts with pit bulls on crime-ridden estates and have created one of the least equal societies on earth.
- Sorry for thinking of you as stuck-up, effete, self-centred, unreliable t**ts when there is absolutely nothing in history to support such bigotry.
I can only assume Bateman suddenly had a look in the mirror and didn’t like what he found and decided to write a note to himself about being abusive:
‘I know this is a tiny proportion of public opinion but it does no harm to be reminded of just how airily ignorant and wilfully prejudiced some people are and how it can drive your desire to escape to create our new Scotland free from their contempt and hate.’
Ironically that is in fact his reply to the Telegraph’s article which mentioned him…as above….apparently the Telegraph’s article is ‘nauseating and dripping with racist poison’.
Mote/eye comes to mind.
Bateman is somewhat deluded and obviously blinded by his own prejudices continually referring to Scotland as a ‘colony’ of an imperial England….
‘……the confirmation of an historical truth, that Scotland is returning whence it came and that the game of empire is over. Rule Britannia.’
And all backed by the imperial propaganda of the ‘colonially-minded Telegraph.’
He needs to read some history books about the Union.
Whilst the BBC et al concentrate on ‘nasty, racist UKIP’ you have to ask why the SNP and its supporters get a free pass.
Bateman has left the BBC….and now spills the beans…….apparently the BBC is in thrall to Labour…..well jings…….though he himself has had his own pro SNP bias questioned…….
This might have been a give away on his own blog:
I’m a Scottish Nationalist
Bateman now hates the BBC….and like all good Nats he complains of their pro-union bias…now I’ve heard the coverage…and to me, from what I’ve heard, the bias is pro-independence…Salmond gets the benefit of the doubt and very often not just the last word but the only word in news bulletins.
But its interesting how so often a BBC employee will reveal all the dirty laundry only when they’ve left.
Here he is blasting the BBC’s close links to Labour last year……
The head of news and current affairs at BBC Scotland has been accused of acting at the behest of a special advisor to the Scottish Labour party who it is claimed regularly complained about the political content of BBC Scotland programmes.
According to a former BBC broadcaster Derek Bateman, BBC Chief John Boothman questioned the political output of radio broadcasts after receiving complaints from Paul Sinclair.
Sinclair, who is the special advisor to Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont, is said to have had a special relationship with Mr Boothman through both men’s links with the Labour party, and regularly contacted the BBC man directly to complain about political coverage.
Writing on his blog, Mr Bateman claimed that Boothman was “famous for his unrivalled network of contacts in the Labour movement.” adding that, “…Sinclair had a name for trying to interfere in BBC news decisions to influence output.”
Such attempts at interference were, according to Mr Bateman, something all parties tried to do. However, according to the former BBC presenter, Sinclair and Boothman developed an unhealthy relationship with the Labour advisor calling the shots.
He added: “But what I didn’t like about Sinclair-Boothman was the informal and insidious way it developed, so instead of old pals, it became almost one of master and servant.
“Sinclair seemed to assume the right to call the BBC head of news to account. It was going on right up to the final weeks before my departure.”
Another ‘Myth’ of Leftwingery at the BBC for Owen Jones to try and explain away I guess.
When this was raised earlier on the Open thread I commented:
Maybe you should have referenced the original article by Bateman instead of relying on some edited highlights!!
http://derekbateman.co.uk/2014/02/21/these-are-a-few-of-my-favourite-things/
Tom Gallagher’s knowledge of Scottish Politics also seems to be somewhat limited when he claims:
“When Thatcher was pursuing economic policies that pushed fragile heavy industrial firms on Clydeside towards insolvency, Scots had the option of voting for independence. But very few did (I being one of those few in 1983).” Until the forthcoming referendum those resident in Scotland have never had the opportunity to vote for independence and certainly not in the UK General Election of 1983 to which he refers.
As Bateman said today on his own blog:
“I was girdin’ masel for a hurl at Gordon Brown with no little distaste I have to say since I can’t think of the sulking beast of Fife without a sense of dread and longing for a talent so wasted. So I was pleased enough to be side tracked by the latest attack on my good self in the mainstream media. The latest appears in…can you guess? Yes, the Daily Telegraph which not only omitted the context of my remarks but lifted them straight from Britain’s house magazine of doctrinaire bigotry, the Daily Express. ”
http://derekbateman.co.uk/2014/04/22/making-a-difference/
You would have thought that Professor Tom Gallagher would have at least referenced his sources to avoid claims of plagiarism against himself and the Telegraph.
Gallagher, who is Scottish himself, does provide his reference…. From the Scottish Express.
Bateman’s comments were in response to a Guardian article which was a humorous ‘apology’ for all the wrongs England has done to Scotland…Bateman said he was replying in kind but in fact his was the opposite of a humorous apology and instead gave us a ‘satirical’ racist rant against the English.
Sorry for thinking of you as stuck-up, effete, self-centred, unreliable tosspots when there is absolutely nothing in history to support such bigotry
As they say there’s many a true word said in jest…and you can bet Bateman’s ramblings were from the heart.
Is he just a little overwrought and unprepared to discuss things? I think he might be.
His reaction to the Telegraph piece was extraordinary and his claims that the comments below the article were ‘Scotophobic hate…brutal hate for an entire people that the BNP couldn’t better…..nauseating and dripping with racist poison from zealots and bigots.’ is plainly very far from the truth as a read of the comments would show.
Having actually read the comments, as always there are some with trenchant views but most are moderate and argued reasonably….and any nastiness from one side is balanced by similar from the other….strangely ignored by Bateman.
It is bizarre that Bateman can label such comments in that way and not so label his own responses as over the top, racist, nauseating zealotry………
‘I recommend you look at the outpouring of Scotophobic hate in the Telegraph unleashed by Nutty Professor Tom Gallagher. It is nauseating and dripping with racist poison which no doubt was his intention. He’s an expert apparently in sectarianism. By God, he is. For rebarbative, brutal hate for an entire people and their history you’d have to attend a BNP rally to better it. How proud the professor must be to see what his writings stir up, how gratified he must be that he can turn the zealots and the bigots on so easily. I doubt if even the American government propaganda machine is paying for this service. But what it does reveal is just how sick some of the opponents of self determination are and how ill-informed and self-obsessed about the country they claim to be proud of. If this is the Union you can keep it. I know this is a tiny proportion of public opinion but it does no harm to be reminded of just how airily ignorant and wilfully prejudiced some people are and how it can drive your desire to escape to create our new Scotland free from their contempt and hate.’
I’m not sure why you felt it sensible to re-post
I read it the first time and it seemed to me it reinforced the idea that Mr Bateman’s nationalism is rooted in hatred and resentment of the English
In fact the context offered by both you and he only emphasised that
If I can paraphrase his position it is this
‘I liked the guardian list all the time it rehearsed the crimes
of the English against the Scots (real or imagined with or without context) but was incensed when it said something that didn’t vilified the English. And so in response I posted a list of anti English (not as he would latter say anti English establishment) insults
His claim that he doesn’t hate the English lacked only the phrase ‘some of my best Friends…’
“Whilst the BBC et al concentrate on ‘nasty, racist UKIP’ you have to ask why the SNP and its supporters get a free pass.”
Alan, as you assert that “……… I’ve heard the coverage…and to me, from what I’ve heard, the bias is pro-independence…Salmond gets the benefit of the doubt and very often not just the last word but the only word in news bulletins” perhaps you can expand on which SNP policies you consider to be “nasty” and “racist”.
If you had any knowledge of Scottish politics you would be aware that some of the SNP MSP’s are in fact English born and that the pro-independence movement is a very broad church many of whom are not SNP supporters.
Certainly is a ‘broad church’ with the BBC on the SNP’s side.
And policies? We’re talking about the SNP’s rhetoric, Salmond’s in particular, that bases the case for independence on drumming up an anti-English feeling, that Scotland shouldn’t be ruled by the bullying, colonialist, arrogant English.
And the issue isn’t Salmond’s rabble rousing per se, which he is guilty of doing as well as any 1930’s dictator, but the BBC’s reaction, or lack of reaction to it.
Far from condemning him as they would UKIP, they embrace him and give him plenty of airtime.
That’s the point.
As for English born MSP’s, curious the SNP denounces the Eton educated Cameron…clue in name perhaps…“My father’s side of the family by being Camerons are predominantly Scottish. On my mother’s side of the family, her mother was a Llewellyn, so Welsh. I’m a real mixture of Scottish, Welsh and English.”
….never mind Blair and Brown, the last two Prime Ministers…remember them?
Scotland dominated and ruled over by the English? Don’t really think so.
Barnett Formula? Scottish MPs voting on English laws?
As for ‘colonialism’…the Empire was half built by Scottish soldiers and engineers….the army would collapse even today without its Celtic NCOs whipping it into shape.
“And the issue isn’t Salmond’s rabble rousing per se, which he is guilty of doing as well as any 1930’s dictator, but the BBC’s reaction, or lack of reaction to it.” – That is a pretty serious accusation to make . Can you back it up with facts?
Cameron and Blair are Scottish – does that mean Churchill was Scottish as he once represented Dundee as an MP!!
Scotland dominated and ruled over by the English? – with less than 10% of the seats in the UK parliament we are hardly equals.
“Barnett Formula? Scottish MPs voting on English laws?” – Independence will solve both these issues.
“As for ‘colonialism’…the Empire was half built by Scottish soldiers and engineers….the army would collapse even today without its Celtic NCOs whipping it into shape. ” – but after the latest review they won’t be doing it at Scottish bases!!
You presumably don’t listen to the BBC judging by many of your comments proclaiming they aren’t biased. If you did you would have heard the torrent of bombastic rhetoric flowing across the airwaves from Scotland’s own wee Mussolini as he railed against rule by the ‘English’ overlords…his comments broadcast after being told he couldn’t have the poond and would have to apply to join the EU were classics of their kind.
Evidence?
Many, many people comment on his and the SNP’s language….many of them Scots themselves…
Alex Salmond is exploiting Scotland’s reservoir of anti-Englishness. Don’t be surprised if it overflows
The SNP need this reservoir of anti-Englishness to power their secessionist agenda….And they fuel it too. Just yesterday a parliamentary aide to Alex Salmond was accused of “political racism” for calling non-SNP Scottish politicians “anti-Scottish”.
“At a time when Scottish police figures are showing record racist attacks against ‘white Britons’, politicians are warning about anti-English rhetoric ‘creeping’ into Scottish society, and leading voices of our parochial chatteratti are railing against artistic colleagues from down south as ‘colonists,’
Even the Guardian isn’t impressed by your party’s rhetoric:
‘The long game may simply be an SNP core vote strategy, designed not to persuade but to maximise the anti-English, anti-British, anti-Tory, anti-neoliberal vote that the nationalists have successfully corralled in the past – and await another day.’
Or the Economist:
Start with hypocrisy. For Mr Salmond to act dismayed by anti-English grumbling requires a degree of political chutzpah bordering on performance art. He is the man who once accused Margaret Thatcher of imposing a “government of occupation” on Scots, and referred to the British government’s taxation of oil revenues from Scottish waters as probably “the greatest act of international larceny since the Spanish stole the Inca gold”.
As late as 1999, according to his biographer David Torrance, Mr Salmond told the BBC that Britishness had been claimed as an identity by thugs and racists, while Englishness was an “aristocratic, almost medieval concept”.
Or, gor blimey, the BBC, in the shape of Andrew Marr:
BBC presenter attacks ‘toxic anti-English’ SNP
BBC Presenter Andrew Marr has caused anger after claiming anti-English sentiment is “entrenched” in the SNP and warning it may become toxic.
Marr, who was born in Glasgow but is now based in London, made the claims whilst in Edinburgh to promote an updated version of his own book – The Battle For Scotland.
In December last year, BBC Scotland presenter Kaye Adams (pictured) accused the SNP of presiding over “a rise of anti-English sentiment in Scotland; up fifty per cent apparently over the last seven years.”
Is this the best you can do? To compare Alex Salmond to Mussolini is crass, abhorrent and borderline libelous. The comparison devalues your argument and discredits both yourself and this blog. As for your “evidence”:
* An article from the MUSIC pages of the Telegraph from January 2012!!
* A Guardian comment column from February which says re the currency union that “Osborne and the others have been making serious arguments in the past few days.” Yep, serious arguements which have now been discredited by his colleagues.
* The Economist – a pro-union magazine which was roundly berated for it’s “Skintland” cover.
* An article (relating to the BBC) from August 2013 BBC which opens with; “Presenter Andrew Marr has caused anger after claiming anti-English sentiment is “entrenched” in the SNP and warning it may become toxic.”
In summary, a pretty abject fail.
It’s Wednesday, it’s 9 o’clock and he’s off. Going to be a loooong day.
“borderline libelous”
But, which side of the border?
If the side one suspects, that makes it not.
Placing accusations of libel up there with those of racism being scattered around like confetti.
Telling it often enough does not have the same effect it used to.
“discredits both yourself and this blog”
How’s the latter bit work? Think popping a pointless weasel like BBC staff do will resolve things?
“In summary, a pretty abject fail.”
Pity you don’t have the confidence to let your argument stand or fall on its merits, without presuming to act as assessor and auto-summarist.
I’m still waiting for an answer to why you believe your belief and that of BBC staff is the final say on all things, but when others have another view you announce it’s a trait to deride.
You are no more than an attrition-deploying contrarian and hypocrite. And your blanket thread bombing is likely having the same effect on fence-sitters as the BBC’s purely tribal attempts at trying to skew democratic process.
Ps: for what it’s worth I don’t hold with the unnecessarily rude responses your diatribes can frustrate into provoking, as they are also self-defeating. But it is interesting in whose company you too are happy to travel mutely in this regard.
“* A Guardian comment column from February which says re the currency union that “Osborne and the others have been making serious arguments in the past few days.” Yep, serious arguements which have now been discredited by his colleagues”
Which colleagues are those? A single anonymous minister allegedly, perhaps? Set against the publicly expressed views of Cameron, Clegg, Milliband and Carney?
‘“As for ‘colonialism’…the Empire was half built by Scottish soldiers and engineers….the army would collapse even today without its Celtic NCOs whipping it into shape. ” – but after the latest review they won’t be doing it at Scottish bases!!’
Ah, the tired old myths.
Where would ‘Scottish’ regiments have been in WW2 without tens of thousands of lads from the North of England?
And where were your ‘Scottish engineers’ when the Forth Bridge was being built, eh?
Can’t wait for you to stand on your own two feet without your English nanny – you know, the one you came crawling to last time around.
with less than 10% of the seats in the UK parliament we are hardly equals.
Scotland population 5,295,000
UK population 63,705,000
Scottish % is 8%
Scottish number of seats is 59
UK number of seats is 650
% number of Scottish seats is 9%. A democratic surplus of 1%.
So, depending on your point of view Scots are either over or almost equally represented in the UK Parliament.
Number of English MPs is 533 and population of England is 56,100,000. So the English form 88% of the UK and English MPs form 82% of the MPs in Parliament. A democratic deficit of 6%.
The English democratic deficit is 6 times that of Scotland’s.
Still want to argue you are hard done by in Parliament?
Ah Scotland, that unique country where everyone holds the same hard-line left-wing views! Where xenophobia is unknown, where the Rumanian and Muslim are welcome as brothers! In fact the only people who aren’t welcome are our actual brothers and cousins if they aren’t signed up to the SNP fantasy.
The fantasy where Scots will be friends of everyone, part of the Celtic and Scandinavian arc. The reality is that arguably it is the ‘Scots’ in Ireland that are the basis of the ‘Irish Problem’ and the links with Scandinavia are non-existent, except to the part of Scotland that sees itself as more remote from Edinburgh than from London.
Welcome to the new Scotland, the Scotland that can re-invent its past. The Scotland that can disown its patriots of historical renown, dismissed as ‘English’ colonialists. The Scotland that can make common cause with French separatists in Quebec, whilst ignoring the contribution to Canada’s Banks and Railways made by Quebec Scots. Rather like erstwhile presenter of Radio 2’s Folk Show, Mike Harding, famous ‘Yorkshireman’ while he took the English Shilling but latterly Republican Irishman with a hatred of all things ‘English’ and the Irish contribution to Quebec too it seems.
Funny how the intolerant ‘Yes’ campaign is seen as so ‘positive’ by the BBC isn’t it? I guess it is all part of ‘Marxism 101’ – if in doubt, smash it!
“The reality is that arguably it is the ‘Scots’ in Ireland that are the basis of the ‘Irish Problem’ ”
Because all Gerry and Marty want is peace. They were forced – FORCED – to use violence to achieve democracy (or at least, their definition of it)
Ironically, it could be argued a lot of Scotland’s perceived sectarian problems are created by Scots-born individuals who wish to reinvent themselves as plastic Irish
So will Salmond let the Shetlands and Western Isles have a referendum on independence or returning to Norwegian Sovereignty? I somehow doubt it.
Having been spouse to two Scottish wives (at different times) I can only conclude that Scottish culture and education system is disgracefully bigoted and racist against The English – ahem, to the advantage of the Labour Party. Now I wonder, how could that have come about? Forty Labour MPs in Westminster, hint hint.
“I can only conclude that Scottish culture and education system is disgracefully bigoted and racist against The English ”
I was educated in Scotland, as were my children and now my grandchildren – nothing I have seen confirms your view. In an effort to be helpful I have attached a link to the Scottish Curriculum – perhaps you can point out what aspects are “bigoted and racist against The English”.
http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/thecurriculum/
What specific aspects of our culture do you consider “bigoted and racist against The English “?
F*ck me – they allowed you to breed?
Still – it’s positive proof that even the lowest forms of life know bow to procreate.
Your parents must be so proud of you – now do you have anything to add to the debate?
Actually they are. They brought me up to be independent, both in thinking and lifestyle, not someone who has to accept BBC groupthink and leech off social benefits. Can you say the same?
My views on Scottish indendence? Let them have it, and the sooner the better. From the moment it’s allowed, stop any and all funding from the rest of the UK.
In fact, why are the Scots the only ones allowed to take part? I’m pretty sure that if the English were allowed to vote, it’d be an overwhelming ‘f*ck off, sweaty!’ conclusion – and there’ a community of beggars and winos that you’ll need to repatriate. And -as you’re fully aware, that’d mean you’ll lose your beloved BBC – they’ve already said as much.
While we’re at it, can we insist on a complete restoration of Hadrian’s wall, preferably with Checkpoint Charlie style border crossings.
So, Grandad, that’s my piont of view. I must admit, I expected a slightly more robust respone.
“I expected a slightly more robust response.” Here you go:
“From the moment it’s allowed, stop any and all funding from the rest of the UK.” – Yes, that is exactly what independence would mean. But it is not something will be “allowed” it is something the Scottish people will choose!!
“We would lose the BBC” – you mean like the Republic of Ireland have?
“Restore Hadrian’s Wall” – have you discussed that with the people of Cumbria and Northumberland.
“… not someone who has to accept BBC groupthink and leech off social benefits.” – Yet you obviously accept the “groupthink” that everyone north of the border is on benefits!!
“From the moment it’s allowed, stop any and all funding from the rest of the UK.”
That was supposed to say ‘from the moment it’s accepted’ – referring to the sweaties voting for it – but my autocorrect changed it. I couldn’t be bothered to add a correction (edit facilities Mr Vance????)
Your ever caring Auntie Beeb has already stated that you would lose it’s facilities as you would be a foreign country. Are you denying that? No more iPlayer for you, Mr McTavish..
We’d offer people from Northumberland and Cumbria asylum rather than let them live in the DMZ. Unfortunate casualties in the war if independence I’d say.
Lastly – “not someone who has to accept BBC groupthink and leech off social benefits.”. That one was just for you, not the general populace of Scotland.
“Ah Scotland, that unique country where everyone holds the same hard-line left-wing views! ” – an assertion not borne out by the 2011 Scottish Election results.
” In fact the only people who aren’t welcome are our actual brothers and cousins if they aren’t signed up to the SNP fantasy.” – a large proportion of those campaigning for independence are not members of, or associated to, the SNP.
“…….. it is the ‘Scots’ in Ireland that are the basis of the ‘Irish Problem’ ” – really. What evidence do you have to support this assertion?
“Welcome to the new Scotland………” – yes, you will be welcomed just as those who visit from all over the world are welcomed now!!
Albachild ” yes, you will be welcomed just as those who visit from all over the world are welcomed now!! ”
It seems a bit pointless to want Scotland to become independent to then turn it into a Third World slum, a Tower of Babel.
On the bright side; when the SNP fail in their bid to create a Socialist Republic of Scotland, will that mean Salmond and wee Jimmie Krankie will be out of a job?
Or, heaven forfend, should the SNP actually gain their split from the rest of the UK; mission accomplished, retirement immediate?
The impression that I get from the pro-independence bloggers is that they want a Scotland free of the ‘wicked Tories’ in England, there being no-one to the right of Marx living in Scotland. My point is that it is in fact a total travesty and an insult to any Scot with an ounce of enterprise.
I would have thought it would be obvious to anyone that the Scottish Independence Campaign was initiated by the SNP – the hint is in the name!
You must live a very sheltered life if you have never heard of the Ulster Scots. How do you think Ulster became a little island of Protestantism in Catholic Ireland?
Most countries welcome visitors, the New Scotland is open to anyone who hates England and will vote accordingly, while being hostile to the patriotic Scot who serves the wider Kingdom. There is an interesting parallel here with Quebec. The separatists were quite happy to import anyone from anywhere, as long as they spoke French. Too late they have realised that what they really wanted were white, catholic French-speakers . It is quite easy to be in favour of mass immigration if you have never experienced it. The view doesn’t look quite so rosy when you are the new minority.
”It is quite easy to be in favour of mass immigration if you have never experienced it. ”
The further away white liberals live from ethnic minorities the more foolish, ignorant and naive they are about their behaviour.
Derek Bateman is well known up here as a motor-mouthed prat of the highest order; no-one listens to him apart from Scottish lefties and nationalists. A massively self-opinionated Lefty with an inculcated hatred of the English who doesn’t even merit attention. Like most nationalists, the hatred is misguided, unfounded, irrational and immature but has been instilled in them (most likely by their parents) from an early age. Few intelligent people of sound mind come to nationalism at a mature age despite the propaganda that the SNP come out with.
Unfortunately, there is only one cure for the likes of a big mouth like Bateman: a thundering punch square on the hooter.
what the bbc and radio 5 live never ever talk about is the predudice and discrimination that the english ethnic minoritys suffer in the workplace and on the streets living up there in scotland,since the snps drive for scottish independance this anti english bigotary has been on the rise up there in scotland.who should you blame for all this,one man,alex salmond the leader of the snp who is sowing fear with the politics of hatred against the english in his quest to be the scottish new braveheart of politics,one example of anti english racism was the treament by snp supporters when nigel farage vistied scotland,do i care if scotland gets there freedom and independance,no,as long as the english minoritys get protection from racism and discrimination in the new scotland from the bigots and racists of the snp who try to divide communitys and turn them against each other.
“what the bbc and radio 5 live never ever talk about is the predudice and discrimination that the english ethnic minoritys suffer in the workplace and on the streets living up there in scotland”
Another unsubstantiated assertion from a “biased BBC” regular. Let’s have a little logical thinking here stuart:
* Tens of thousands of English people have migrated from England to Scotland with many taking an active role in national and local politics and in their communities. Some MSP’s in the Scottish Government are English.
* Thousands of English people spend part of, if not all, of their working days in Scotland (especially in the finance and energy sectors) working alongside Scottish colleagues. Many senior managers in the Scottish financial sector are English. The Chief Constable of Police Scotland is English.
* Thousands of English born students study in Scotland (despite the fact that they have to pay tuition fees). Many of these students upon graduation choose to live and work in Scotland.
* Tens, if not hundreds, of thousands from England choose to visit Scotland every year with many returning year after year.
I guess they do so because the country is rife with “anti english bigotary”, “racism and discrimination” and “hatred against the english”.
The protests against Farage were nothing to do with his being English and all to do with his policies which have little or no support in Scotland.
Like Alan above, you really need to step back from the rhetoric and provide objective evidence to support your claim that “the bigots and racists of the snp who try to divide communitys and turn them against each other. “
“Another unsubstantiated assertion from a “biased BBC” regular.”
Ignoring the merits or not, of the assertion, as this is a forum for discussing BBC activities, I have a simple question for you: do BBC staff, editors, or guests facilitated onto the airwaves never make unsubstantiated assertions?
Yes. Or no?
Do they step back from the rhetoric and provide objective evidence to support claims?
Yes? Or no?
I see you’re still out and about.
Two simple questions.
No time at all.
When you are ready….
“Sorry for allowing your (English) policies to kill men in our biggest city in their mid-fifties – still it keeps pension costs down.”
So it wasn’t the deep-fried Mars bars and kebabs then ?
Alan
The “BBC on the SNP’s side”: Forgive me, or not as the fancy takes you along the trajectory of your phantasmagorical projections, but “bwahaha”.
Utterly hilarious.
Suspect that in the “broad church” of your perceptions, the resultant cognitive dissonance has resulted in your blocking of the recent empirical study by Dr Robertson which evidences quite clearly the institutional anti-independence/anti-SNP bias of the pro-British state BBC “Jockland” whilst juggling mentalist balls as to whether the British Beeb, as a whole, is a rats’ nest of proto-Commie propagandists a la “Labour” Party, or a den of sleeper Neo-Lib-Con apologists for the Chicago School of boot-boy “free-marketeers” a la the current Westminster government coalition of opportunist social asset strippers.
In tribute to your mental agility and the Anglican tradition of broad Church compromise, it is both because it is British (whatever that means beyond its tottering imperialist and rapacious legacy).
However, and flights of your poetic fancy apart, it – this Reithian North British mausoleum and relic of faux impartiality that never was neutral in its reporting or broadcasting – cannot even remotely be considered as pro-SNP or pro-the-wider independence movement (unless you, too, have conducted an exhaustive scientific study of their output on this very topic which proves your hypothesis so. If you have, my apologies, and can you please cite it?).
Slightly OT but on the BBC, in general and specifically on its global coverage, my own personal opinion of it is that it is appallingly parochial and increasingly tawdry in its Anglo-centric assumptions and reporting slant. Parish pump, mythical cricket around the village green under the oak tree’s hanging bower of plasticised poetry and mawkish doggerel: The recent inflictions on the global public of cooing reporters fawning over “Wills” and Kate’s and Georgie’s “Royal” progress Down Under being an almost vomit inducing example of this British establishment bias.
I, for one, will be glad to kiss good bye to all that after a Scottish re-independence hard won in the face of the BBC’s “collusion” in it (a collusion of pro-British state unintended consequences).
Proof that Google Translate has a long way to go.
I have to agree that I don’t see BBC bias towards Scotland.
They’re not going to kill one of the golden geese of licence fee payers when they know they’re unlikely to be able to replace that income charging for programming.
They have an innate bias towards Fascist leftism, and so are going to be extremely sympathetic to Salmond’s views, but not if that means a Labour party perpetually in opposition.
When you begin to think what an independent Scotland would mean to the BBC then it doesn’t take much thinking to realise just how disadvantageous it would be for them. Although there might be individual correspondents who do express their support, overall the corporation does not.
“………….. but not if that means a Labour party perpetually in opposition.”
Strangely Tony Blair won all 3 elections with a majority in excess of the Scottish labour seats. That is an awful lot of votes from outside Scotland.
Just goes to show what a con man can do when he really, really tries.
Talking of which, good luck with that Salmond chappie, you’ll need it.
Oh, and next time you’re bankrupt (won’t be long), don’t come running back to nanny England.
An interesting thread with an obvious clear winner.
Well done Albaman for rising above the ad hominem and sometimes derogatory posts and presenting your views in a logical and respectful manner.
If the comments aimed against you are the best that this site can offer then there is little hope of them achieving anything.
“…an obvious clear winner”
If you say so. Hope that’s not just an opinion.
“…respectful manner”
Don’t hold with the ad homs against him, but you must be new or blind to his body of work.
“…there is little hope of them achieving anything”
Them?
And who might ‘us’ be?
You know this is the same with everything in life.
You’d think history showes us anything, but no.
Hate all you want but the world changes, and none of us have no control over it.
E.g., imagine Obama had any balls to put Putin to his place, but it seems like it’s never happening, welcome WW3.
A truly inspiring post, thanks!
Sarah http://phyto-renew350i.com/