I had the misfortune to tune in to the BBC Radio 4 Saturday live programme, presented by Aasmah Mir and Richard Coles this morning. Here is a flavour of the discussion..
“Sir Professor Geoff Palmer came to Britain from Jamaica aged 14. Described as educationally sub-normal is he now an expert in cereals and Professor Emeritus of brewing at Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh. He was the first black Professor in Scotland and is a prominent anti-racism campaigner.
We meet the former class mates who campaigned for a fairer deal for asylum seekers in the city (based on the case of a Kosova Roma Gypsy)…”
Get the drift? It’s all about fighting whitey’s racism and intolerance.
Roma “asylum seekers”? Which delusional planet are these people on? Have they seen these feral scum defecating in parks, begging, rummaging in bins, and heaps of rubbish strewn everywhere? Asylum?
Student left wing politics as cookery. Take a largely unused brain, stir with half-baked Marxism, throw in a few good causes (Palestine, Islam, Roma, Climate Change, racism) add privileged background, bingo, a dash of inverted snobbery, perfect to serve at a BBC champagne socialist dinner party.
Roma “asylum seekers”? Which delusional planet are these people on?
Maybe the one where the schoolgirls saw a friend in trouble, and wanted to help. And their issue was less about the causes of the asylum claim, but the treatment of children when those claims by their parents were rejected.
But I suppose that those girls’ experience, and willingness to stand up for what they believe in, is far less important than the fact-free propaganda spouted on blogs by people hiding behind pseudonyms. Never mind, though – the contents of your post may have no basis in fact, it may use incendiary and inaccurate language, but it’s racist enough for David Vance not to delete it! Go you!
Any Glasgow kid standing up strongly for an intolerant sectarian football team’s antics wouldn’t get much praise I am guessing.
Anyway, standing up for what you believe in is fine isn’t it Scott, as long as you believe in it too. The alternate is intolerant fascism isn’t it, I mean when people are unwise enough to believe strongly in things that you don’t approve of….
The left love training their future cadre of leaders into ‘standing up for what they (the left) believe in’. Add an orchestrated media campaign too and you have case study in Frankfurt School agitprop.
Mind you you are right about LC ‘s fact free rant
Depends which “intolerant sectarian team” you’re on about
Currently, one Glasgow team has taken to twitter, because a team member has been made team Captain for a friendly game today. He is being libelled as a child killer. His crime? He’s an Israeli-Jew. Will the MSM report on the online abuse? Will they hell!
Of course, it is the other team that is perpetually tarred with the sectarian brush. Problem is, they aren’t in bed with the liberal left
How many Roma do you think can write or speak English? Most of the ones inhabiting the parks where I am, not in London as it happens, are Bosnian, other from Czechoslovakia. A large clan have just been deported, not given “asylum”, leaving a trail of destruction.
Offer up your home for these “asylum seekers” and show what a true liberal you are.
Or not, the hypocrite we know you to be, your conscience funded always by other people’s money.
Scott allow me to enlighten you as to the left wing liberal position on this.
It is basically a question of why should a dishonest person be allowed to jump the immigration queue and take the place of someone honest?
Nice though some people are, there are a lot of nice people in the world, and even Labour can’t let all of them in.
Asylum seekers who have made a fraudulent claim should not be allowed to take a place of someone who is more honest.
Are you suggesting that we allow someone who has engaged in criminal activity, to stay while someone who is honest together with their family is denied that right because of someone elses criminality?
Are you suggesting that we allow someone who has engaged in criminal activity, to stay while someone who is honest together with their family is denied that right because of someone elses criminality?
I did not say that at all. It’s not relevant to the point at all. It is, however, a straw man that’s easier to argue against by someone who’s more thoughtful in name than in deed.
But you go on conning yourself that you’re right, if you like. It’s the done thing around here: be a pompous arse, fabricate opposing views, act like that doesn’t make you a loser. Bless.
scott, maybe you can answer the question in this link for us. thanks
http://www.eurogamer.net/forum/thread/226465
Look what adolescent troll the cat dragged in.
lol @ the troll calling me a troll
so u prefer cats to hamsters then?
Scott I merely informed you of the view and policies of the Labour party. If you think that they are ‘pompous’, or fabricated then fine, but then the truth and reality always has been a difficult concept for those on the lunatic fringe.
I happen to know that I’m right because I worked in immigration, perhaps you’d tell us where your area of expertise lies? because it certainly isn’t here!
Scott I merely informed you of the view and policies of the Labour party.
No, you were asking if I was supporting an argument that was not part of my original point. Constructing a straw man, so that you had something to rant and rave against.
It/s a common tactic on Biased BBC. Small minded people go on the attack, but choose to put words in the mouths of those they go after to make life easy for themselves. And then believe that in doing so they’re not demeaning themselves.
Hilarious, really, the lengths some people will go to to make David Vance look like the sane one around here.
Scott dear chap, the only person I see ranting and raving is you. Others are trying to engage in rational debate with you. Bless their optimism.
Oh, cool beard dude!
Non of your posts have ant basis in fact Scott me old fruit, but we still have to put up with their tedious regularity.
Non of your posts have ant basis in fact Scott
Well, my description of the Glasgow Girls’ aims in the post you have replied to was factual, for a start.
But you don’t really care about the truth, do you? Very few people on Biased BBC do, it seems. That doesn’t stop people flinging stones from inside some very fragile glass houses though, it seems…
ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Even the BBC!! disagrees with you on this.
World Service, Assignment, 2nd Feb 2013.
In recent years a “substantial” number of Roma have entered Britain. Large numbers of Roma
children are being taken into care because of
parental neglected.
To hear even the mildest criticism of “our wonderful multicultural Britain” from the BBC
at two o’clock in the morning led me at first to think I had been dreaming. Even white working
class people were allowed to describe the negative impact of a large number of Roma appearing in their neighbourhood. Usually, this would be explained away as a “misperception “.
Anyone with any sophistication knows that immmigration is always an unalloyed good.
The only one’s who could be ESN are then two bBC presenters in thinking that someone who is ESN can become a Professor.
And then there’s that pesky meta-context: guy comes to this country as a child, apparently educationally sub-normal, but manages to work his way up to being a prominent academic.
What a great country, right? Isn’t that a Great British success story right there?
But no: you know the BBC would never take that line. Britain gives a guy a chance to excel beyond his wildest dreams, but he’s still a victim and we still suck. He don’t get no respect, except for the whole ‘professor’ thing.
If the BBC is going to keep pumping out this crap, shouldn’t they at least be made to give some kind of metric for all this, some point at which a guy won’t be a victim, say if he’s bought to this country as zombie but works his way up to be a billionaire software magnate and PM could we actually say he got the best of the deal for once?
The BBC’s idea of a non-racist is somebody who is happy to let anyone and everyone into the country, regardless of what they do or do not contribute and regardless of the impact their collective cultures have on the British way of life.
Have you noticed that all these people in such discussions have never had a proper job. They’ve spent their lives spouting tripe for a living and have come to believe that they are productive members of society. I believe there are only four categories of people in society; namely, wealth creators, wealth facilitators, people who provide luxury goods and services, that come the crunch we can do without and parasites. The people who really count lie in the first two categories and are usually too busy with producing things that people want, to have time to spout anti-male hate-speech, anti-Christian bigotry and anti-white racism. The people who infest the bbc and similar institutions are of course in the fourth category.
…are usually too busy with producing things that people want, to have time to spout anti-male hate-speech, anti-Christian bigotry and anti-white racism
And yet there are documented instances of people in your “categories” who have produced anti-women, anti-ethinc minority, anti-gay, anti-Muslim hate speech.
Is being that sort of bigot less time-consuming, I wonder? Or is your premise faulty in the first place?
Scott, make of this what you will : I can’t be bothered responding to you.
It’s true, being a bigot is less time consuming. But your ‘bigot’ to me means being discerning, discriminating. On the basis of finding out what’s generally true about the world. And anyone who calls me racist, sexist, homophobic – well I am happy to be those labels but those taunts have no force any more. Leftist idiot ideas will be found out eventually.
“And yet there are documented instances of people in your “categories” who have produced anti-women, anti-ethinc minority, anti-gay, anti-Muslim hate speech.”
Hate speech? A made up word by the fascist left. Even the truth is now counted ‘hate’. And who is the judge of what is and what is not ‘hate speech’? Well the fascists of course! and what is said by one person is hate speech, when said by another is not !
Welcome to double think !
Hate speech? A made up word by the fascist left.
And yet you didn’t bat an eyelid when “john in cheshire” used that term in exactly the same way. Funny that.
But then, any excuse to castigate “the left”, eh. Funny how so many Biased BBC commenters know how everybody who expresses an opinion different to their own can be summed up as one homogenous group, isn’t it?
Why, it’s almost as if they have no conception of the real world, so make one up that’s so ridiculously simple that they have a slim chance of being able to understand it…
Scott go back pre Bliar and there isn’t even a concept of ‘hate speech’.
I can’t say I know nor care what ‘john in Cheshire’ wrote, but I can stand by my post as being wholly accurate.
I occasionally post things here others don’t agree with, but they don’t normally call me as ‘one homogenous group’. In fact if you look at the first post on the Weekend thread you’ll find it out of line with most views & there are responses for & against, thus proving your point to be wrong.
I dislike bias – I actually dislike it from either side, and there are times I wholly disagree with Camerons government, but this is about the BBC and it’s very difficult to show a rounded view when you’re faced with a monster which is fully biased to the left. Even if they began to broadcast the odd program biased to the right I couldn’t criticise it because it wouldn’t make up for all the bias the other way.
You on the left accuse people of being ‘judgemental’ and applying ‘stereotypes’, however you are doing just the same.
I can’t say I know nor care what ‘john in Cheshire’ wrote
Here’s a clue: scroll up.
You on the left accuse people of being ‘judgemental’ and applying ‘stereotypes’, however you are doing just the same.
Well at least you admit that you apply stereotypes all the time – while including such an example in the same sentence. If only it didn’t come across as an “it’s okay when I do it” piece of sanctimonious hypcorisy, eh.
Yes, there are varieties of opinion on Biased BBC. But those who object the most loudly when I talk in general terms about the prevailing tone on this website are the ones who seem incapable of recognising variety of opinion elsewhere. It’s okay to talk about “the left”, “the gays”, Muslims, ethnic minorites – or any other group that the poster is desperate to look down upon. But when someone suggests that they are themselves part of a common group, based not upon prejudiced presumption but on the evidence of the drivel they post day in day out on this site, boy do they start whining.
Biased BBC: you don’t have to be a whining, sanctimonious, bigoted hypocrite to post here, but you’ll never be accepted until you are.
Ignore the whining troll
Scott go back pre Bliar and there isn’t even a concept of ‘hate speech’.
As you’re so keen on facts, how soon after Tony Blair’s election do you think this piece of wording came?
Any guesses?
In fact it was included in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted by the UN in the mid 1960s and fully signed up to by the UK.
Is that factual enough for you?
thats not domestic legislation is it you idiot, its an international treaty, i’ll give you a free hamster if you can provide an example of that being used in an english court
but thoughtful is right, hate crimes only came about because of the undemocratic labour party, in particular, they came about because of nick griffin being cleared by a jury of saying islam is a cruel and wicked faith, so labour said “lets change the law”
thank god for the house of lords watering down that disgraceful legislation, no wonder lefties want it scrapped
thats not domestic legislation is it you idiot, its an international treaty
Congratulations, “just sayin'” – you found some goalposts, and you moved them. Thoughtful had said that the concept of hate speech had not existed pre-Blair, and I provided an example to counteract that argument. It was you who chose to narrow the topic down to UK legislation so that you could award yourself a little victory.
Hooray for you.
but scott you major ignoranus, hate crimes didnt becaome an offence until the Labour got into power, it was one of the first things they did
For England, Wales, and Scotland, the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 makes hateful behaviour towards a victim based on the victim’s membership (or presumed membership) in a racial group or a religious group
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime#United_Kingdom
I notice you omit Northern Ireland. The Public Order (Northern Ireland) Order 1987 predates the period you’re so insistent on talking about. Is that why you left it out?
Scott, you’re a left wing extremist who defends BBC output. Everything you post here supports the contention that the BBC has a left wing bias.
Its nice though that you feel so threatened by this site that you feel the need to dedicate so much time to self-defeating posts.
Keep up the good work!
Scott, you’re a left wing extremist
Really. Enjoying life in that little fantasy world, are we?
Its nice though that you feel so threatened by this site that you feel the need to dedicate so much time to self-defeating posts.
And back at you – the defensiveness of so many people who use threatening and insulting language in my direction, only for David Vance to do nothing, speaks volumes. What do you think it says to the outside world? How about: that Biased BBC is less concerned about journalistic bias than it is about perpetuating the beliefs of a few sad people – starting at Vance and Alan, and descending into the gutters where most of its commenters reside – who think that lies are okay, if they holds up the shaky foundations of their logic. That flinging abuse at others is alright, as long as nobody stands up to them.
And nobody – nobody – from within has got the guts to stand up and say that what Biased BBC’s most frequent posters say and do reflects atrociously on this site. Is it because you’re cowards, or because you just desperately want to belong with the cool kids, and will overlook their inability to behave decently?
Or is it just because you’re too stupid to realise that Biased BBC will never, ever gain any traction in the outside world if it continues to descend into the gutter?
Ignore the boring whining troll
Why, it’s almost as if they have no conception of the real world.
That is the most hilarious statement you have ever made. A fruitcake lefty who dedicates a good part of his life to commenting on this blog and you live in the real world.
Do us all a favour Scott go and get some psychiatric help, it will help with the delusions.
A fruitcake lefty who dedicates a good part of his life to commenting on this blog and you live in the real world.
Aw, bless. You haven’t got anything of genuine worth to offer, so you resort to cheap – but, unfortunately for you, ineffectual – jibes. Feel better, does it? Feel heady with power?
You poor man. You have my pity.
Scott, you waste your life trying to annoy people who hate you. You too have my pity.
I hope that most of us don’t hate Scott. I certainly don’t, I just pity him and his lack of any grasp on reality. Hate is something the left specialise in.
A mega ‘amen’ to that.
Scott is the mirror image of the BNP.
Nice to see you displaying your usual deep intellectual thought, Graeme. With appraisals like that, it’s little wonder David Vance thinks so highly of you.
The stupid masochistic troll craves attention, please ignore it
”Get the drift? It’s all about fighting whitey’s racism and intolerance.”
The bigger picture is they’re displacing and ethnic cleansing the indigenous inhabitants of this country. Stalin did it, China did it and now it’s Western Europe’s turn, the first nation to become a minority in their own country is Sweden in about 2030.
for all the commies who frequent this site, I’d suggest they read this :
http://dissectleft.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/ten-reasons-why-i-am-no-longer-leftist.html
and if after reading you still think you are a commie, then perhaps you should pay for a psychotherapist (you know, the atheist equivalent of the confessional).
Strange how Britain didn’t have any ‘waaycism’ for a couple of thousand years then the ‘effniks’ turned up, aided and abetted by their race hustler chums and all of a sudden we’re all waaycist !!
”Sir Professor Geoff Palmer came to Britain from Jamaica aged 14. Described as educationally sub-normal.”
You mean he’s a moron.
No, in the words of Buggs Bunny, he’s a maroon
i get a bit sick and tired of this black slave mentality that is still going on in england now with the likes of prof geoff palmer who still hang on to this hatred that whites are to blame for all the problems that the black community still suffer in there paranoid minds in 2014.when are black and asian people who are 10 times better off than me stop moaning and bleating about this country england which bends over backwards to make them welcome here and give a them a life that would be distant from these third world hovels where they immigrated from.
In Manchester in Brazenose square there is a statue of Abraham Lincoln. It’s there because of the support of the cotton workers during the civil war because they opposed slavery, and it led to the cotton famine, when many starved to death or suffered unimaginable hardship.
http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/from-the-archive-blog/2013/feb/04/lincoln-oscars-manchester-cotton-abraham
Even the Guardian recommended that the workers would be better supporting the navy breaking Lincolns blockade.
Funny how easily the promoters of black suffering conveniently forget the debt they have to those who laid down not only their own lives, but their families on their behalf.
When the Fascist left make their usual excuse for Muslims ‘they’re not all like that’ make sure they’re reminded when they use their usual blame on whites, ‘but we did’. Yes well I wasn’t alive then, but even then they weren’t all like that, after all what’s sauce for the goose!
E. Michael Jones discusses how Chicago was a Polish / Irish immigrant city, it was ethnically cleansed in the 1940s and 50s by liberal social engineers to a black city by importing blacks from the south.
” The Slaughter of Cities, why are we here ? because we’re not there !! ”
Slaughter of Cities book
” E. Michael Jones shows that Government sponsored “renewal” of American cities was not a program that failed by going sadly awry, but instead was a planned destruction of the ethnic neighborhoods that made up the human, residential heart of the cities.”
Seriously? An area where Catholics emigrate to, but refuse to integrate. Sounds like 21st Century West of Scotland.
Fast forward a couple of generations, then suddenly the powers that be decide another minority group should be moved in (unlike 21st Century West of Scotland)
If you move to another country, then learn to integrate. Their Country, their rules. Jones’ argument has all the aspects on Tamany Hall politics – Black folks still working in Cotton Fields? F**k off. In his opinion, so long as his religion rules, it’s all good. That is the Muslim argument, he refuses to see the difference
Do you feel better after that rant ?
i agree 100% with david brims and stuarts comments…..
A certain Troll on this site is always contrary and therefore just occasionally, and I mean only just occasionally, he (she :)) will have a point but it’s a bit like searching through a great big pile of shit to find a 5p coin.
I’ve seen lots of shit from Scott and Albaman but no coins as yet.
You are lucky. A programme came on when I was in my bath and couldn’t turn it off. A nest of “Luvvies” all shreiking with laughter at each others incomprehensible jokes, with one Harradan’ s memorable comment “As my current husband says … ” Where do they dredge these scrum up from? And why broadcast what they say / think when they have found them.