Here you go – this is an Alex Salmond approved Open Thread! The floor is yours…
START THE WEEK OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Fedup2 Dec 22, 15:17
Weekend 21st December 2024
Rachel from accounts says Farage will be no good at the numbers – she speaks from a position of authority… - pugnazious Dec 22, 15:15
Weekend 21st December 2024
Europe is committing cultural suicide as it imports people who hate us and don’t have the same values and beliefs… - Lucy Pevensey Dec 22, 15:04
Weekend 21st December 2024
Less than 5000 signatures to go for the election petition to hit 3 million. 🙂 - tomo Dec 22, 15:00
Weekend 21st December 2024
Provincial councils are murdering retail… £5.34 per hour to park in York. https://www.gbnews.com/lifestyle/cars/york-parking-charges-local-council-costs-public-transport-north-england - tomo Dec 22, 14:55
Weekend 21st December 2024
BBC to feature similar / same screen health warning in 2025? Starmer’s media team look like they need similar…. [img]https://i.ibb.co/3sc2J86/chrome-h-DA9-Pj2h-Pw.png[/img]… - Fedup2 Dec 22, 14:55
Weekend 21st December 2024
The state broadcaster -BBC news going after the state religion as usual – nice soft target .. don’t hear so… - pugnazious Dec 22, 14:52
Weekend 21st December 2024
Labour reminds me of the Monty Python hole in road sketch when they tell us how awful life was under… - moggiemoo Dec 22, 14:42
Weekend 21st December 2024
Yup, just hang it from a window frame with bungee cords. - pugnazious Dec 22, 14:42
Weekend 21st December 2024
Change churches into mosques and bishops into imams and that’ll calm them down…appeasement, surrender and colonisation is the order of… - MarkyMark Dec 22, 14:27
Weekend 21st December 2024
“When at work I change my CV… ” A Day In The Life Of Rachel Reeves https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e2kqJID2Ac
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
Contacting the BBC trust.
I have a problem with the BBC complaints department, the complaint has gone to the trust and been fired back to the complaints department.
Imagine my surprise therefore to find that there is no way to contact the BBC Trust except by hard copy in writing !
Even at the beginning of the last century they had the telephone, and in this one Email has become the most prevalent method of communication.
Not stuck in the last century the BBC trust is stuck two centuries ago!
The worst part is that when you dial the BBC trust you are directed to the same BBC complaints department you are wishing to complain about !
It has led me to question whether the BBC actually has an independent complaints department or whether it simply uses the same old BBC one which regurgitates the same pap you are complaining about in the first place !
I’m beginning to suspect they’d rather you didn’t complain.
Where on earth did you get that idea from?
Hard copy in writing is good . If you send it recorded delivery they cannot fob you off saying that they didn’t receive it or that it went to the wrong department!!! Keep going – Good luck ! Contact your local MP to back you up if you think the procedure is delaying you getting an answer within a reasonable time frame.
Hard copy for some things is good, but when all you want to do is chase a response then it’s not quite so convenient !
Making themselves incommunicado, and then using the BBC complaints department as their telephone contact centre doesn’t seem right. Surely the Trust is supposed to be separate and overseeing the BBC, not a kind of extension of it?
‘Surely the Trust is supposed to be separate and overseeing the BBC, not a kind of extension of it?’
Like ‘should’, ‘supposed’ takes on a whole new life once passed through those unique BBC guidelines.
I put in a specific complaint to the local news re their one sided handling of Gaza ie found a Palestinian girl who had organised a demo that was supported by about 10 people. And just for double measure local news covered it both before and after the event .There are Israelis living in this area and people with family living in Israel but did local news bother asking how the Hamas rockets affected the families of local people? But the complaint was obviously forwarded to BBC HQ for I received a generic reply that did not relate to local one sided reporting. I expect the BBBC would claim that it was pro Israeli down on Devon so their reporters had got it about right.
This was typical too of the BBC Complaints procedure over 10 years ago. You just have to keep going and be persistent, you can get results and you’ve made the BBC spend their money in trying to justify their lies . It can take a whole year to get a ruling against the BBC. It is the publicity afterwards that is more important really and we didn’t know how to go about that effectively . We didn’t have biasedbbc than!!! See http://netanyalynette.blogspot.co.il/2012/07/1-road-to-armeggeddon-sat-7th-june-2003.html
http://netanyalynette.blogspot.co.il/2012/07/road-to-armaggedon-resonses.html
http://netanyalynette.blogspot.co.il/2012/07/appeal-to-governors-road-to-armegeddon-3.html
Except you haven’t.
The BBC don’t spend their money “trying to justify their lies”, they spend ours.
But spending our or their money on answering the same complaints may make them think twice about putting programmes out that generate these complaints . It would be really effective if more people understood this and complained and took their complaints further up the BBC complaints procedure .
‘the BBC spend their money in trying to justify their lies . It can take a whole year to get a ruling’
—
Maybe Mr. Salmond could take a leaf out of the BBC CECUTT book when a Robbo gets on his high horse about answering questions?
Drag it out interminably (oh, he did), go on the defensive (oh, he did), attack the questioner rather than answer properly (oh, he did) and, for good measure with no resolution pull the plug muttering about saving public wastes of time sand money, with a nice ‘purposes of’ lid on any explanation.
As the BBC does ALL THE TIME, a spokesperson says.
‘a Palestinian girl who had organised a demo that was supported by about 10 people’
—
Was that wee girl from BBC Scotland there with her QuickShot when grabbing a crafty fag between meetings?
Doubtless a clever mode to hand that could get that number up to 1,000 before you can *sigh*
‘when you dial the BBC trust you are directed to the same BBC complaints department you are wishing to complain about’
Like George Orwell, I suspect Douglas Adams was inspired by the BBC too.
Yes, the BBc investigates the complaint about the BBc and in my case always finds the BBc to be correct. What could be more fair?
Letter to complaints department . Letter to DG . Letter to the Editor in Chief of the relevant news section . Say in letters you have also written to above relevant peeps
Can be same letter . But gets 3 BBC depts filling up admin on complaints and paper chasing .Also may affect their statistic data department records on logging complaints :-).
The BBC Trust have sent me emails from bbctrust@citizenspace.com … might be worth a try.
For INBBC to report?:
The Islamisation of England, continued-
“CHILDREN NOW MORE LIKELY TO BE MUSLIM THAN CHRISTIAN IN SOME BRITISH CITIES”
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/15/Children-in-Some-British-Cities-More-Likely-to-be-Muslim-than-Christian
David – Please tell me that your Twitter account has been hacked! 🙂 LOL!
Clearly it’s not a good thing when powerful populist entities react to being posed awkward questions with aggressive bluster and distraction.
One might have imagined the BBC would grasp this better than most. Maybe they are just not used to them not doing it? Quaint the BBC now moans about fairness too.
As to the answer with gusto (aka ‘rebuke’ – since when can a reporter rebuke those not happy with them?)… looks more like him saying ‘did not… stoppit’. Fair do’s if correct.
‘..report on an encounter with Alex Salmond, in which he said a question he put to the First Minister was not answered – prompting angry Nationalists to insist it was.’
Surely not, by now, too hard or beyond any media on this issue to clear up? I clicked that link, and it looks like it will take the rest of the day wading through stuff to actually find out as no one seems able to nail it down, either because they don’t want to or it doesn’t exist. I know proving a negative is tricky, but by now surely someone trustworthy in the MSM can call it without everyone having to wade through transcripts?
As an aside…
‘Depending on who you believe’
Given a lot of reporting ‘talent’ was around at the time, in 2014 I find it sadly typical that a crowd estimate can vary by a factor of 5.
As Laura says… *sigh* Not a good sign as I recall when that little number gets broken out here too. Guessing the irony of her timing resulting in the ‘best bits’ to suit the BBC narrative escaped her? The Lawther supportive tweet is plain daft, but highlights how other factors can be included or left out with ease to enhance narratives. The timing excuse only dragged out once challenged and looked/s lame.
This the problem when there is zero trust in objectivity or integrity.
Hope her head is OK.
Me too!
Salmond’s Blue Shirts give a taste of things to come. The message is, if you don’t want to face ‘a day of reckoning’ don’t cross the SNP.
While Salmond might screaming bias and bullying and be pedalling his paranoia around Scotland, in lieu of answering any important questions – there are plenty of examples of why these a false flags and the lefties in the BBC are beside themselves with the prospect of a socialist government up there (with the bonus of the destruction of the UK).
Take for example;
– Peston’s (the BBC loner) intervention into the debate. It was he arguably who set Robinson up with the disclosure that the Government has sent out a press release stating the RBS’ ‘market sensitive’ position before they had officially decided it – this was the story that wrong-footed Salmond at his ‘press conference’ attended by his goons. This, BTW, is Peston (and the BBC) who don’t under any circumstances disclose their sources. He, to this day, hasn’t told us who tipped him off / fed him the story enabling him to ‘hotfoot’ down to the studio with ‘market sensitive’ news about the Lloyds / HBOS merger. Presumably relations between Peston and Robinson remain icy.
Then there’s Marr inquisition of Salmond yesterday. A more pathetic example I have not seen. A chat, enabling Salmond to set out his vision for what happens after Thursday. Not challenged at all…except at the end, from the left, from a republican standpoint, about Salmond’s intention to retain the monarchy.
And that Schoolkid’s, Question Time style debate, last Thursday edited by BBCs former (?) Communist Nicolai Gentchev. I mentioned in the last thread the amazing absence of a question about the currency – as an update here’s something from a woman in Glasgow, who confirmed that her friend, a teacher, ‘had some students at the debate….a lot of students who indicated that they wanted to vote yes we’re then asked to sit on the no side because there was not enough no voters.’ Another schoolgirl, at the week-end described how they were being drowned out by the ‘yesers’ in the audience. So much for a balanced audience, but impact is everything. Viewers of Question Time will not be surprised.
To repeat; to the hard-left who have infiltrated the BBC, the BBC isn’t an end in itself, for them the BBC is a means to an end.
If it were not so serious an issue, it would be hysterically funny that the BBC will be the first victims of the new regime they will help to install.
How so?
But since his stroke is Marr capable of challenging anyone? I suspect his retention by the BBC is a thank you for his impeccable services past services rendered and his continued useful role as a puppet when they want to create an illusion of a serious interview.
One has to wonder what goes on inside the twisted minds of Islamic maggots.
“Father Shot 7-Year-Old Daughter Dead after Mother Rejected Islam”
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/15/Father-Shot-7-Year-Old-Daughter-Dead-after-Mother-Rejected-Islam
Needless to say the BBC have deliberately avoided any mention of this.
It’s rare to see any violent incident reported now that isn’t something to do with either Islam or Eastern European gangsters and yobs.
I absolutely, genuinely, had no idea that this little girl died because of a muslim fanatics obsession. That’s what you get if you watch and read news from the BBC. Why should we have to go to other news sources to discover the truth, whilst being forced to pay for a “news” organisation that rarely if ever gives us the whole story?
I shudder to think how I believed the BBC for most of my life, and discovered its true colours only with the arrival of the internet. It makes me reconsider everything I ever thought true.
Rotherham:
-BBC-NUJ doesn’t emphasise the Muslim sex gangs’ crimes against white girls, and the emotional, social and financial costs to British society.
Instead, BBC-NUJ follows its policy of denigration of the English Defence League (EDL) by emphasising the alleged police cost of that worthy demonstration.
Does BBC-NUJ headline the cost of demonstrations it politically favours, such as the costly occupations by greenies, Occupy, Stop the War types? No.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-29207140
-More Beeboid bias and hypocrisy. And of course it kept quiet on nature of the Muslim sex gangs’ violence against white English girls, and still does.
Compare ‘Sheffield Star’ report (inc 2 min video clip)-
“EDL supporters march through the streets of Rotherham”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-29207140
EDL:
“VILIFIED, THEN VINDICATED”
http://www.englishdefenceleague.org/vilified-then-vindicated/
I mean’t to say this at the time but now seems as good a time as any – how much did it cost to police the Pally/efnic demonstration outside that Izzy shop in Manchester? It went on for weeks (it might still be going on now for all I know) and yet I never heard the BBC/usual suspects complaining about the policing costs of that. The rule is this: we only complain about the policing costs when it’s a demonstration about something we disagree with.
The policing costs were due to the local rape gangs who enjoyed support of the local Labour Party. Without their actions or inactions the EDL would not have organized a demonstration
Just spotted this link on Guido’s site – not only do the BBC name the people charged, they also print their bloody addresses! It’s a bit different when it’s “men” isn’t it!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-29207140
“not only do the BBC name the people charged, they also print their bloody addresses!”
—
That is genuinely appalling.
Not so much the printing of the information (which I presume is legal in such cases), but the blatant double standards of detail.
Given this is pure fact I’d love to see them justify this in comparison with ‘reports’ when they go coy on context to the point of the story having zero news value or public information contribution at all. ‘Man does something’ hardly helps much.
However if what suddenly guided such in-depth editorial commitment gets challenged, what’s the betting that unlike with Nick Robinson’s right to hold power to account, the BBC uniquely gets OK with a bit of suppression of their own?
Apart from the big problem (according to the article) being the cost of people exercising their democratic right to protest, the publishing of addresses crosses the line, and could put those charged (not yet convicted) in real danger. The BBC are a disgrace and should be closed down immediately.
Publishing their addresses is outrageous. Anyone know the addresses of BBC news editors and presenters?
“The rule is this: we only complain… when it’s .. something we disagree with.”
BBC SOP on most things.
Lucky for them they control the same pitch and ball that allows such complaints through as they use ruthlessly to prevent any they don’t like seeing the light of day.
Not to mention the loss of sales to shops on King St.
Last night’s Look North report on the EDL demo also led on the cost of policing. They also mentioned the arrest of TWO people but refrained from saying if they were EDL supporters ( you just know by the omission that those arrested were probably rent-a-mob UAF supporters or one of their hangers on). The BBC also managed to find a butcher who complained he had “lost £5,000 in custom” thanks to the EDL. £5,000?!!! How many customers does a small non-halal butcher have in a day to earn five grand – especially in a high density Muslim area? I’d love to view the unedited footage and see how many small business owners the BBC interviewed before they found this malcontent. As usual the BBC showed plenty of footage of the many coppers on duty – the Beeb stated there were more plod than EDL on the demo, although there appeared to be more people attending than when the unions or leftie agitators organise a protest. They also referred to the EDL as “Far Right”. When do you ever hear the BBC describe Socialist Worker type demos as “Extreme Left”?
As usual the voiceover accompanying the visuals seemed to be reporting a different event even declining to say that the demo ended up outside Rotherham nick where a number of speakers made speeches to the crowd.
Obviously there was nothing the BBC could reasonably criticise about the behaviour of those on the demo so they tried to smear the EDL with wasting taxpayers’ money and police time. Strange that the cost of policing union organised, or student, or other left wing demos is NEVER mentioned.
I was listening to Radio 4 in the car yesterday afternoon and came across their obituary of Ian Paisley. I wonder if when that evil sod Gerry Adams dies he’ll get half an hour pointing out his divisiveness, his closeness to terrorists and his demagoguery. I mean, it would be only fair
If the Scots’ vote to go solo….will the blue have to come out of the Union flag? New design? Will the Scots’ in the British Army leave, those that voted for independence? If the Scots’ try to keep all the oil, blockading refineries and installations…will Cameron helicopter marines onto the rigs, into the refineries…will the Navy blockade the ports?….will border posts be installed…..think of any more ‘ifs’ people…..has Salmond thought this all through?,,,,,
Salmond made some none too subtle threats about big Oil backing the No campaign this week.
Has no one joined the dots and realised that he might actually nationalise the oil rigs. That’s his style and I for one would not be surprised.
The Union flag would have to change. Perhaps we could all be offered a Federation of states, each with its own parliament.
He needs money to nationalise the oil industry
Where is that coming from – Barnett?
“he might actually nationalise the oil rigs”
Good luck with that, Salmond. The only beneficiary would be the legal profession.
He’d have to borrow ships to enforce it.
The group formerly known as ISIS !
I notice the BBC has decided to change the description it gives of the Islamic State in the Levant to the group calling itself the Islamic State.
Technically it’s difficult to argue with this because they are not a state in any recognised sense, but I believe the real reason is that they want to distance their favourite brown eyed boys from any criticism the implementation of their religion as laid out in their holy books might bring.
It must have taken them a while to work this out, but over the last few days there have been a lot of programs using this, so I expect it’s an edict from the top.
I have taken to referring to IS as the self-declared Islamic State.
‘So-called Islamic State’
i got to admit,even though alex salmond is a arch socalist loonie on a par with the labour party i am feeling a bit sorry for the way he is being treated by the politacal establishment.in essence,he is getting the nigel farage and ukip treament by the media and his politacal enemys in parliament,i have a hunch the yes vote is going to win,the politacal establishment just never learn there lessons,by demonising the snp and alex salmond the same way they tried to demonise nigel farage and ukip is just making them more popular and thats why i think salmond will lead the snp to victory come this friday.
Honestly readers,
I am afraid that I still keep getting the subliminal messages from the broadcasts of Al Beeb and Nick Robinson, that they are pushing for the “Yes Vote”.
This from Guido:
55
Its all Baw Bags says:
September 16, 2014 at 12:58 pm
As soon as the Jockaknees realise that midge farming is not as lucrative as expected and the Lucky Heather harvest fails, they will be crying in their porridge… Fuck em lets get that wall back up….
INBBC has joined the West’s political class in using propaganda against the truth to:
1.) censor naming the Islamic State as the Islamic State;
2.) censor Islamic ideology references of the Islamic State.
The latest example I heard was on INBBC TV ‘news’ channel at about 8: 20 pm, when a Muslim was given the air-waves to say, uncontested, just that.
BBC-NUJ: misreporting of SWEDEN’s political parties.
In its report of Sweden’s election results, BBC-NUJ’s political preference for Social Democrats party shows through.
BBC-NUJ describes the political party of the Sweden Democrats as “far-right,” because they oppose mass immigration. But, BBC- NUJ does NOT describe Social Democrats as ‘far-left’ because they support mass immigration.
BBC-NUJ’s pro-mass immigration political bias:-
“Sweden election: Social Democrats rule out far-right pact”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29195683
“In Sweden and the West, What Message Are We Muslims Sending?”
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4339/sweden-muslims
Don’t know why he is bothered. Sweden is doomed. Give it 20 years and it will be someplace else. A middle eastern land in the north of Europe.
With about as much of a civilised future.
Alex Salmond in second BBC bias row – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11097713/Alex-Salmond-in-second-BBC-bias-row.html
“I like these folk, but they don’t realise they’re biased. It is the unconscious bias which is the most extraordinary thing of all.”
He added: “I just think the Metropolitan BBC has found this whole thing extraordinarily difficult, to separate from their own view of the world from their view of reporting Scotland.”
I haven’t noticed a pro-No BBC bias, but I agree with the above quote.
Jeff
BBC article on sex in public:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29205198
Start reading it and it quickly becomes apparent that it is about *gay* sex in public. Undercurrent of gays should be allowed to have sex in public and prosecuting them for it is persecution.
I might have clicked report comment by accident. If so, please ignore it.
Why?
I recall accounts of cottaging in public toilets in Manchester, where the cops would peer under the cubicle doors to see how many feet were inside. Gays were able to outwit the cops by having one partner standing with plastic carrier bags over his feet, thus giving an appearance of just one person with his carrier bags full of shopping. Phasing out plastic carrier bags to combat climate change could be seen as homophobic .
Michael Gambon used to tell a good story that whenever he went into a public toilet in London he’d say in a loud voice “Right sergeant, get your notebook out”, then stand back to let the crowd rush past him getting out.
I used to stand on the toilet seat. Move along, nothing to see here
Woken from my slumbers this morning by Roger Harrabin reporting that “climate change is largely man-made” – sleepily calculated that in my opinion, neither he, nor mankind in general, has existed for 4.5 billion years.
Rolled over, in disbelief, and went back to sleep — that sleep only being disturbed by the odd “Yes”, and “No”, and “Scotland”…
‘Hell will freeze over before BBC eco-zealots broadcast the truth
When will the BBC report honestly on climate change? —
Scarcely a day goes by when the BBC doesn’t provide another little example of how happy it is to flout its statutory obligation to report on the world “accurately” and “impartially” by pushing its propagandist “party line” on anything to do with renewable energy or climate change.’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/11092517/Hell-will-freeze-over-before-BBC-eco-zealots-broadcast-the-truth.html
There was another example of their fantasy this afternoon on Costing The Earth. The programme was on the El Nino, but they had to add that CAGW was making it more extreme.
Wee Dougie Alexander MP (Labour) (No campaign) is busy on the BBC this morning telling it like it is: “We can have the best of both worlds”
Well, as long as we English are prepared to let you get away with it, you can.
Yesterday evening Panorama’s Allan Little (Stuart Little not available? – or is that because Walt Disney – sorry). The BBC presented the grandly titled Scotland Decides… or rather Scotland’s Decision. (postponed from 8th September – don’t ask me why).
Soft-spoken Little began by displaying his old war medals (Rwanda, Bosnia, Iraq and bar). Then it was back to the old homestead to explain for us bemused Licence Payers how we got to here. You won’t be surprised to hear it was because of Thatch. One of Little’s old University pals (a Labour man) was used as proxy for Little as he shifted from thinking the SNP just a small bunch of rather odd anti-English neds to – via the 1980s – becoming a Nat himself. Because Scotland is different. Got that? And they don’t like Thatcher. But that’s not me ‘ye ken, that’s what mah pal says!’ If that wasn’t code for BBC Scotland hearts and minds then I’m a Welshman!
Reinforced as the approved BBC line by the fact that the opposite union voice was a complete dinosaur of an old Labour guy.
Little mentioned Devolution and Holyrood but said not very much about Labour’s miscalculations and mismanagement.
Bias. And the quicker they try out their Scots-socialism with their own money, the better!
It’s not down to Maggie that we got where we are now, in my opinion. We got here because Labour deliberately stoked up grievances for party political purposes rather than address the economic problems of the time, which were that there simply wasn’t a market for what Scotland was producing.
And of course they were very ably supported in this by the BBC.
True. And the stuff it was producing wasn’t done very effectively. (A malaise not confined to Scotland, mind.)
The QE2 fiasco in the (pre Thatcher) 1960s always springs to mind because I had a lot of dealings with John Brown at Clydebank. Salmond likes to draw comparisons with Norway but Kvaerner, a (mostly) successful Norwegian company, is still in the shipbuilding business as far as I’m aware.
Ironically, Kvaerner got into financial difficulties when it bought Trafalgar House (which included the John Brown companies) and moved its HQ to the UK. John Brown did not bring about Kvaerner’s near downfall, however, shipbuilding having long since gone.
Just made a call to my local newspaper about the kidnapped hostage Alan Henning in the Middle East, asking whether anyone had thought to interview the Muslims who went with him to Syria.
I am told that they have indeed done that and that the Foreign Office have advised them not to talk about it, and also the family of Alan Henning.
It’s pretty obvious that talking to the media in the UK is not going to have any effect on the situation in Syria / Iraq so this must be entirely for the domestic audience, and the British government actively censoring news output in the UK.
I keep hearing that the Government can’t do much to help because they don’t know where he is. Which made me suspect they want the kidnappers to think that.
I suspect he has already been beheaded and ISIS are just waiting for the opportune moment to release the film (in the meantime using the threat to behead him to try and influence British policy)
9/11, 7/7, Mumbai. Boston, Lee Rigby, 2 US Journo beheadings, now UK aid worker, soon another? … Islamic wannabe mass murderers, going from England, Wales, France, Sweden, US and Canada?
Obama, Kerry, Camoron, Hammond, Brokenshire, Abbot BBC, Ch4 etc etc etc.
Apparently … only one thing is clear … none of it has anything to do with Islam?
Ladies and gentlemen I believe the fix is in, so expect much MUCH more of the same … real soon, (shakes head)
http://www.asianimage.co.uk/news/11475088.Aid_worker_murder__nothing_to_do_with_Islam_/
The brutal murder of British aid worker David Haines has “nothing to do with Islam”, the Immigration Minister has said.
Cameron on Islamic State’s claim to be Islamic: “Nonsense, Islam is a religion of peace”
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/14/No-change-as-Cameron-stays-course-against-ISIS
“His voice breaking with emotion, Haines read out a passage from the Koran saying: ‘Since good and evil cannot be equal, repel thou evil with something that is better.’” That’s Qur’an 41:34.
Mr Haines did NOT quote this passage:
“When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks ……..
” That’s Qur’an 47:4.
UK: Beheaded aid worker’s brother says Islam “not to blame”
http://news.yahoo.com/murdered-aid-workers-brother-says-islam-not-blame-224124536.html
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/09/uk-beheaded-aid-workers-brother-says-islam-not-to-blame
“So many non-Muslim authorities in the West who see clearly and easily that what the Islamic State does has nothing to do with Islam?
: Barack Obama, John Kerry, David Cameron, Philip Hammond, Tony Abbott, James Brokenshire and so very many others — now including James Brokenshire. Why do so many young Muslims from the West, including hundreds from Britain, misunderstand what these non-Muslims understand so well?
Can James Brokenshire perhaps take a trip to Mosul and explain to the Islamic State how they’re misunderstanding the Religion of Peace? – “Aid worker murder ‘nothing to do with Islam,’” AsianImage”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/09/uk-immigration-minister-beheading-of-aid-worker-nothing-to-do-with-islam
“9/11, 7/7, Mumbai. Boston, Lee Rigby, 2 US Journo beheadings, now UK aid worker, soon another? … Islamic wannabe mass murderers, going from England, Wales, France, Sweden, US and Canada?”
Just a string of coincidences, you racist.
Spot your favourite politician/beeboid here! (University of Oxford PPE Degrees).
Wanna see how to airbrush history – even if it’s just the last 30 years?
Harrabin on climate change – http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-15874560
Personally, I think he’s a dangerous, deluded, manipulative, bare-face liar. I know that’s putting a positive spin on his character, but basically, I think I got it just about right.
Uniquely!
More government disinformation:
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/more-radicalised-youngsters-greater-manchester-7776421
“Travelling to Syria is a life-changing decision in terms of what happens out there, but also when you come back we’re going to be interested in you, because you will be a threat if you have been trained by IS and motivated by them.
“You could be held hostage, you could be kidnapped, they could consider you a spy.”
Except that to the best of my knowledge IS has not done this to any foreign Jihadi, male or female.
If he had wanted to be honest he could have talked about the chances of being shot during a fire fight, or killed in a bombing raid, but then that would have amounted to martyrdom which is what they want !
Aren’t a few radicalised Brits who don’t like what they were doing and wanted to come home in trouble with ISIS now?
Oh what a surprise…………https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/509798485768826880
And who handed them that perfect picture moment snark on a plate?: the ‘only had time to capture a moment that suited between meetings’ BBC’s Scottish *sigh* Snapper.
If you have a reputation for ‘editorial selectivity’, it’s hard to argue when it blows back in your face and gets used to taunt (bit like popping over the parapet to mock petitions whilst staying well clear of more significant things all around).
LBC: A caller talking about the resignation of Shaun Wright, said it was forced by the permanent protest of the EDL outside police HQ. This was causing problems to the local businesses. So where is the news on the bBC about the protest; none. This is yet another example of the permanent editing or should I say filtering of news.
Things get deliberately suppressed: what the BNP did now replaced with the EDL. What certain ethnic groups are up to, FGM pickpocketing and child molestation. What plans gov have in place but keep quiet. Examples of which are the ‘on the run letters’; the social housing reserved for immigrants and the abandoning of border controls.
What to know what is going on? Then make sure you do a lot more than listen to the bBC.
Only today came across another example of a line I am sure is going on; that being keep the racial unrest suppressed and below the radar. In questions to Boris, a member complained that the police had missed a trick in not using the racial additive in a prosecution; when the people at a demonstration using racial terms were only done for ‘causing a disturbance’. From my knowledge the CPS govern the charge that is brought to court. Was it them who possibly turned down the racial element that doubles the tariff. I believe the CPS has form in the area and are also part of the establishment to ‘keep a lid on the racial powder keg’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-29220535
South Yorkshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright resigns over the Rotherham child abuse scandal. .. and?
should have weeks ago … … next.
he should be going to jail not choosing when! to resign?
… and those at that time, in charge of scrutiny of children s services
in Rotherham council? … and those from the council denying any problem? with links to taxi firms, relations on drug pushing/buying charges etc, direct links to the … “community”?
looks like the smokescreen, has worked?
BBC-NUJ still goes lightly on the role of the Labour Party Rotherham Council, re-political cover up of the Muslim sex gang violence against white girls.
Beeboids still seem more politically concerned with criticising the EDL , which, to its credit, has highlighted this gruesome issue for some time.
“Multiculturalism is to blame for the Rotherham child sex abuse scandal.
“Political correctness is a vile, perverted ideology which is wrecking our society and ruining the lives of the innocent.”
By Leo McKinstry.
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/504104/Leo-McKinstry-Multiculturalism-to-blame-for-Rotherham-abuse
Now….lets see the thorough investigation of all police officers involved at the time, drag them out of retirement if they are in it, get to the bottom of this, sack and prosecute the lot if needed, they are still doing it, police van, 6 dumb cops, arrested a victim who called them when she saw her attacker….arrested the girl!!!!! Have the cops been bought off by these Paki scum? We should know….
Yes indeed Robert Brown, and no disappearing into retirement with bags full of incriminating evidence. And even if they are dead, bring it all out, like they should do with Saville
Will be interesting to see whether and how the BBC might report on this case – which, I’m sure, has nothing to do with anything.
http://metro.co.uk/2014/09/15/train-sex-attacker-rumbled-after-teenage-victim-secretly-took-his-photo-4869496/
‘The 18-year-old was indecently touched by Raja Hussain, from Rotherham, while she was on a train to Sheffield.’
The ” delusional beliefs” he was allegedly suffering from would be islam i suppose
Up date from change.org
Victory! Shaun Wright Resigns
Mike Rouse
Petition organiser
Sep 16, 2014
South Yorkshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright has finally resigned over the Rotherham child abuse scandal. For coverage of this story please see the website…
Read more
I was just listening to You and Yours on Radio 4 whilst cooking (I should have had on Classic FM which is much more relaxing). It was all about a woman’s right to have IVF treatment on the NHS. They did have on one man who is on the commissioning board of an NHS area who explained that they have to consider what else money could be spent on eg cancer care, other end of life conditions, etc etc. But you could hear the incredulity of Winifred Robinson and whoever her side kick was that most of the emails that had come into the programme were against it. I am not surprised at their surprise as they had spent virtually the whole programme speaking sympathetically to the women who had called in – although from the way the conversations went I guess most calls had been arranged beforehand. Why is it that BBC programme makers with their left wing attitudes never understand that money is limited. And every single woman who phoned in who had failed to have a baby was sure that if only they had had IVF on the NHS they would have a baby in their arms. (According to the NHS website for women under 35, the success rate is 35% and the figure rapidly drops after that.) And the woman who was successful with IVF would much rather have her son than receive cancer treatment in old age (what a surprise).
And the woman who was successful with IVF would much rather have her son than receive cancer treatment in old age (what a surprise).
————————————————————————–
Yes, though another cancer sufferer might appreciate the money.
I note the latest BBC Films production ‘Pride’ is about a group of gay and lesbian activists who supported the 1984 miners strike, a another opportunity from a different angle to kick Thatcher ?
LBGT and anti Thatcher, the question has to be why has it taken the BBC so long to make the film?
Heavily promoted by the BBC themselves on last nights Radio 2 Drivetime.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfilms/film/pride
Wonderful. The (subsidised) British film industry can always be relied upon to lift your spirits.
People will be queuing up around the world to watch this.
If you are a producer or director who is not capable of making a film of interest to anyone beyond friends and family I really can’t see why Droid Broadcasting and the National Lottery are there using other people’s money to fund your hobby.
It’s not that Lottery-funded films bomb at the box-office, it’s that far too many of them don’t even get shown in a building *with* a box office.
It’s the basic problem with ‘progressive’ politics.
People who are responsible for spending other people’s money just piss it up the wall.
Exactly. Furthermore, any film that people want to see has economies of scale – it can be shown in 1000 cinemas at a time and distributed by DVD.
I don’t see any reason why a film industry can’t exist on a purely commercial basis.
National Lottery funded (clear links to Labour in the past who also helped fund Stonewall the political gay activities group), so no surprise IF the BBC was involved in its promotion as it has two of it’s pet subjects being anti Thatcher and pervert promotions.
Project title Organisation name Award Fund Type Date
Pride Calamity Films £50,000.00 Film Fund Production 2014-04-16
Pride Calamity Films £1,000,000.00 Film Fund Production 2013-08-07
http://www.bfi.org.uk/film-industry/funding-awards
Saudi Arabian police burst into a private house and arrest 27 people. Their crime? Holding a Christian service and having ………….Bibles!!!!
“Saudi Arabia Arrests 27 Christians at a Private Home”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/09/15/Saudi-Arabia-Arrests-27-Christians-at-a-Private-Home
Needless to say, yet again, not one word from the “world’s flagship news provider”, the BBC.
It is clear to all that the BBC are now censoring news that they deem too sensitive for the masses or might upset the cosy muslim applecart.
A national treasure? No, a national disgrace.
There are rarely any negative stories about Saudi Arabia in the media, even though it is a very repressive regime that still has the death penalty for homosexuality.
Probably something to do with the fact that they are the world’s biggest oil exporter, and could bring the West to its knees within days just by turning off the taps…
That gets you a lot of influence and leverage in global affairs…
Oil? I doubt it. Since when has the BBC cared about the British economy? They might even welcome an oil boycott as a means to reduce carbon.
It’s the BBC economy that worries it. My understanding is that stations in the Arab countries buy the most expensive (and therefore most profitable) BBC news packages. The BBC doesn’t want to offend a valuable customer.
True: ‘ THE BBC relocation to Salford Quay Manchester means that the BBC is renting it’s luxury HQ premises from a private sector developer called PEELS (75%) and the remainder (25%) from Saudi Arabia (which are both UK tax exempt). In addition the fact that the landlord is one Labour entrepreneur and the other Saudi Arabian investor (both being UK tax exiled) sets the future tone of the future BBC as a ‘privately’ funded interest group.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2462151/BBCs-24m-Salford-relocation-difficult-justify-say-MPs.html‘
In the past the Saudi’s seemed to be the only moslems the bourgeois fauxcialists would criticise ( Friends with royals and the Bushes and all that) but your right even they seem to be coming in for the kid glove treatment in recent times.But like deegee below I don’t think that has anything to do with oil.
Perhaps they were not real Christians, and the Saudi police were not real moslems and the law applied was not real sharia
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/sep/15/smith-review-sexual-abuse-bbc-jimmy-savile-stuart-hall?CMP=ema_546
‘A BBC spokesman said: “We note the review’s statement and understand the reasons for it.’
Interesting no one from senior management, HR or any other pertinent role was asked or prepared to go on record, if unsurprising given..
‘..the review is expected to provoke further negative media coverage and awkward questions for the BBC about how Savile was able to get away with sexually abusing children over such a long period while working for the corporation’
Maybe some parents could ask Alec Salmond to pop down to ask those awkward questions of the BBC for them?
The BBC could hardly get on the old redaction, exemption, ‘our little secret’, ‘purposes of’ banwagon so soon after getting on their high horse over holding power to account elsewhere… could they?
Note the whitewash beginning :
“….a culture of ignorance which protected him.” – no complicity then, just pure ignorance. The man was surrounded by “the finest” newshounds and journalists in the world and no-one noticed as he raped hundreds of underage girls. They are having a laugh!
Not too funny for a fair few, mind.
The passive sharing of guilt and fobbing things off on a ‘culture’ rather than folk in charge is a classic weasel now by the BBC and FOBs (Friends Of..).
All neatly acknowledges ‘things happen/ed’ with a hint of contrition, but zero interest in nailing those clearly complicit up to their well-paid eyebrows.
I never would have believed that Nick Robinson would ever write something I would totally agree with – if you enjoy this site, you should read this article.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9606384/Nick-Robinson-Winston-Churchills-bitter-battle-with-the-BBC.html
Some good quotes :
“The way Churchill was handled is a powerful warning of the dangers of the BBC believing it is being balanced by excluding the voices of those who do not represent conventional wisdom.”
“Churchill was heard only rarely on the BBC. He spoke on just 10 occasions in 10 years, and two of these were appeals for charitable causes.”
“Churchill complained that he had been very badly treated… and that he was always muzzled by the BBC. The producer was called Guy Burgess. The man who would become his country’s most famous traitor tried to reassure the man who would become its saviour that the BBC was not biased.”
“Not for the last time, the BBC was being punished by a prime minister who could not and would not forget how they had mistreated him two decades earlier. Not for the first time Churchill was to be proved right and Reith completely wrong.”
“The producer was called Guy Burgess. The man who would become his country’s most famous traitor ”
Its in their DNA I guess
The ruling elite has always made a habit of treachery. At heart they despise us . Excessive education has killed their better natures and their sympathy with their fellow citizens.
When things get tough then this same elite comes wailing and screaming for us to help . It will always be the same.
Plus ca change:
‘Revealed: How Cambridge spy Guy Burgess claimed BBC expenses to live life of luxury during the war’…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1207311/How-Cambridge-spy-Guy-Burgess-claimed-BBC-expenses-live-life-luxury-war.html
Interesting how the personal views of a market rate talent at the top obliterated any chance of objectivity or integrity in serving the public.
Seems very little has changed.
I wonder if Mr. Robinson reads his own words on how the BBC routinely decides what gets heard or seen, and what does not, on no more than petty whim or agenda, and asks himself just who the heck this outfit is really serving?
Or if there is a Churchill in waiting whose memory of how the corporation performs now is sharp, and long.
http://www.theecologist.org/blogs_and_comments/commentators/2557652/the_bbc_friends_of_the_earth_and_nuclear_power.html
Such a piece may at first blush look like the perfect tick in the ‘must be balanced’ other box the BBC likes to check to show it gets things about right.
But it really isn’t, and they should be getting more and more worried as they are clearly knocking a lot offside who full well know the power of pulling their licence fee DDs.
The FOE being simply the latest acronym whose membership can easily be motivated to just say no.
It doesn’t matter which side of any political or ‘ism divide they may lie, if they’re off they’re off and that’s it.
To now the BBC could shrug and rely on its reputation to keep the core loyal, as clearly keeping all the people happy all the time is impossible.
But that reputation is in tatters, and as folk want to hear what they want to hear, if the BBC doesn’t bend (and it can’t any more than if often does), it is stuffed.
And when it comes to integrity, it really doesn’t do itself favours at all. From Newsnight being a Guardian bail-out club to the first thing you read here:
‘Is it possible that the BBC Trust’s links to EdF have effects down the ranks of the organisation and permeate the minds of journalists without a word being spoken – a silent, almost subconscious influence?
The Trust can say all it likes about having “no control over editorial content” – but it does not need control. Trust members also adjudicate editorial complaints so one could question the time and effort in complaining about Harrabin’s article.
Regardless of any possible influence on any journalists it is remakable that BBC Trust members can receive money from such corporate interests – and even advise them on how to use the UK media to clinch one of the biggest multi-billion pound deals in British history.
As with the facile ‘leave their politics at the door’ attempt by endless BBC market rates, the corporation continually wallows in massive conflicts of interest.
And it doesn’t matter how ethical or professional these conflicted folk may (that’s a big ‘may’) be, we’re in an era of dirty deeds done dirt cheap and when trust is low and transparency as opaque as the BBC can exempt it, no amount of telling the opposite often enough by Lord Hall Hall and merry band of brothers and sisters is going to change perceptions based on too many failures, factually recorded, too often.
The BBC clearly takes lines when they should not, and these days takes so many that often they cross, or trip them up.
I sometimes think that the BBC’s regional news programmes are worse than its national news for bias and political correctness. Tonight’s Look North broadcast an item about the brother of ex-boxer Naseem Hamed hiring the chapel in Sheffield’s Burngreave cemetery for use as a gymnasium for aspiring local boxers. The item showed Asian or Arabic looking young men training in the cemetery and jogging through the gravestones. Of course the presenters and the reporter thought this was wonderful and something to be proud of. Am I being an old grouch in thinking having young Asians treating the cemetery as a jogging track somewhat disrespectful? Would the BBC think it wonderful for a white run boxing club using a Muslim cemetery as its training ground? Somehow I doubt it.No doubt they would show Muslims queueing up to show how offended they are. We’d probably have images of Muslims gathering at the Town Hall announcing their grievances. But as this cemetery contains the graves of mostly white Christians the BBC thinks this “wonderful”.
End of rant!!!
At long last.
A British politician publicly says exactly my thoughts, (and I know a lot of others too)!
Cannot find this on BBC though:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26270866
Baldy even looked like an ex-member of the stasi
Expansionist EU with its soft social benefits and wet liberal policies puts us in direct confrontation with Russia and its satellites. Made worse in that the Ukraine is the Bread basket of Russia with close political and cultural ties. I’m with Nigel 100% on this, this is Russian territory and we should beware conflict. Of course the EU will rely on NATO and our dwindling troops to make up the numbers. Bloody foolish as we lack any capacity or will to wage war on a far greater power when we have such minions in Europe with no battle skill set.
It did appear this morning on the BBC ” parliament” programme I could not believe it!
Farage right again…..vote UKIP…..look at our ‘leaders’, cowering and dodging and bribing the scots with more of our money…..scum.
This not long ago on twitter:
—
@BBCAllegra: Just watching Ed Miliband media / campaign hurly burly from early today as we edit package. He handles it well. Grinning ear to ear.
—
What would one do without the BBC editing their package to see Ed Miliband handling things well?
This was not the impression I have garnered from other reports. Unsure rictus grinning in the face of a poorly thought-through cluster-FUBAR photo op counts as ‘well’.
Guess the edit can make anything possible.
@MrHarryCole: Ghost of Gordon past: “You’re making statements now, not asking questions Mr Dimbleby”. When Salmond got shirty, everyone freaked out…
—
It was a different time.
Anyway, for the BBC just asking questions is so last week.
Going well, then?
Salmond’s not right in the head.
‘We’ll get currency union because the Guardian said an un-named Tory minister said the government would negotiate about it.’
Barking.
Let’s face it, if you’ve got a vote and you rely on the State (ie the English taxpayer) for your income from now til the day you die – ie the majority of Scottish adults – you are utterly crazy to vote Yes..
Tonight’s Dimbleby interviews with Brown and El Presidente Salmondo were an utter biased disgrace; Bumblebee heckled Brown’s every syllable but gave Fatty bum complete free reign to spurt his unadulterated drivel; no questioning of Salmond’s ridiculous claims to keep the pound (with Salmond ludicrously stating that it’s in England’s interests – what arrogance!) and the spurious assertions that Scotland will be a valued member of the EU; not to mention Dimblebum’s failure to confront Salmond’s dismissal of the legion of businesses bemoaning the consequences of independence. The man cannot answer basic questions on how this pathetic lefty utopia will be costed, but Dimblebore just grovelled in the most loathsome obsequiousness. It was so amateurish.
The BBC have not only been instrumental in securing a surge for the SNP rabble through bias left-wing reporting that is favourable to the SNP’s socialist ideology, they’ve YET AGAIN, let the highly tolerant and welcoming people of England down in the most unforgivable manner. The BBC should be disbanded as it is no longer capable of even pretending to be impartial. It’s a disgrace to the English people who are, with some cruel irony, coerced into funding it.
Also, I see it is still petrified of offending its Muslim masters by censoring all mention of the foul part a certain ethnic and religious section of the community in the Rotherham scandal played; instead of Crimewatch perhaps we need a ‘Rotherham’ Watch’?
So I’m left with a choice between Alex Salmond or Gordon Brown?
We’re clearly f*cked. Utterly and completely.
The always unpalatable non-choices afforded by our ‘politics of the least bad’ system have indeed managed to again click down a notch.
There was an unusual game of “Victimhood Top Trumps” to be heard on ‘Woman’s Hour’ today (Radio 4, for 11 minutes up to 10:45).
Jane Garvey and two guests (J. Hancock and C. Marsden) were discussing anal and oral sex, after a study of 130 British 16-18 year olds had revealed a “climate of coercion” surrounding these subjects. JG was keen to push the ‘women as victims’ line all the way through. Points made included that girls were experiencing pain, boys were blaming them for not being more relaxed about it, boys wanted oral sex but were less keen to give it themselves, girls were worrying about their ‘performance’ and body form, boys were not always enjoying it but bragging about it to score ‘lad points’.
The guests were not bad and JH surprised JG when he said that the influence of porn was overstated, as youngsters were critical users of the media and could tell fantasy porn from reality. CM thought the possible ‘mental damage’ from non-consensual anal sex was more serious than the risks of STI where no condom was used; JG said the former was rape. CM thought that talking about anal sex in schools as part of sex education “might end up normalizing it”.
Totally absent from the discussion was any mention of female or male gay couples, who would probably experience some of the same problems. Gay females might equally well worry about their bodies (e.g. waist size, genital hair and shape) and the issue of consent by both partners to try things that one was more keen to do. Similarly, gay males might be victims of a partner who went too far e.g. with penetration, though this would be of less interest to ‘Woman’s Hour’ if you take the title literally.
It might seem strange to some that the BBC, which has done so much to normalize homosexuality, managed to omit it from this discussion. I think the “women as victims of male sexuality” theme trumped everything else, this time, so for once the gays were overlooked.
If porn is of so little influence why is the ‘shaven haven’ so popular these days if not because of porn?
However the media need to take a good hard look at themselves on this, especially on TV, before they try to burn a witch.
Take GoT for example, virtually every sex act performed on that show is ‘doggy style’, IIRC. Spartacus, Gods of the Arena is pretty much all soft porn and not much of it is ‘missionary’. Not anal sex of course but you can hardly blame lads from getting the wrong idea.
Whether this is harmful at all is a moot point.
Rotherham.
The people of Rotherham should never vote for Labour Party again.
Here’s a ‘rogues’ gallery’ from BBC-NUJ report on who’s who in relation to their responsibilities in dealing with the Rotherham Muslim sex gangs’ crimes.
BBC-NUJ cannot avoid using the word “Labour” five times.
“Rotherham abuse scandal: Who was in charge?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-28964072
The case of Joyce THACKER, listed here, should lead to her immediate dismissal over the treatment of the UKIP foster parents, in addition to her gross failings of children.
The culprits use of ‘politically correct’ ideology to excuse their irresponsibility to young people is inadmissable. This socially very damaging ideology, which is a default political ideology with many Beeboids, must be opposed and rejected. But it won’t be.
Of course, as Beeboids may care to investigate, the following is inclined to happen when public authorities come under scrutiny:-
“Rotherham council staff ‘seized files and wiped computers to cover up scale of child sex grooming.'”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2737234/The-childrens-chief-clinging-115-000-job-despite-mounting-evidence-complacency-period-child-abuse.html#ixzz3DWBUPHgq
Child Care homes in general are in the hands of the state. Barnardo’s, the children’s charity, warned that one in three victims of child sexual exploitation is male (so the gay lobby is naturally allowed to adopt male children under Cameron). Under Blair and Brown it was OK to look the other way when it was a Labour council. Rotherham and Bradford I suppose make up the other two thirds of sexual exploitation in care homes. Lets not forget the extent of liberalised debasement demonstrated by the likes of the BBC either over the past twenty years. Unnamed (as yet) Politicians and certain celebrities take advantage of boys whilst Pakistani men rape girls whilst in the care of ‘the state’.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11057321/Childrens-charity-warns-of-hidden-toll-of-boys-exploited-for-sex.html
This horror has not been half reveald yet
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/11469501.Two_thirds_of_West_Yorkshire_Police_child_sex_investigations_are_in_Bradford/
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/reassure-public-on-sex-abuse-council-boss-told-1-6838833
Apart from the word MUSLIM there are two other words that seem to go together with these child rape revelations, namely LABOUR and POLICE .
It would not surprise me in the least if it transpired that police officers accepted’ brown’ envelopes from muslims to look the other way…..
This just gets worse. It is a failure of a whole governing class and at a very basic level. The failure to protect the nation’s children is the evidence that we need to start to demand that this whole class of time servers faces dismissal and prosecution. How far up the feeding chain does it go?
Resignation is not enough. Dismissal is needed and if it takes Parliament to do it then so be it.
The elite will try to bury this and must not be allowed to do so.
What a state this country is in. Facing a possible break up after 300 years. Facing terrorist attacks . Facing a deteriorating quality of life in the cities and large towns.
Enough is enough.
The majority of the old English have lived quiet orderly lives raising their families and working hard. We do not deserve this and I have had enough as have so many of my countrymen.
If we had a real leader then we could change things. Hopefully cometh the hour cometh the man or woman.
It was more than bowing to political correctness – it was about making sure their multicultural vision for Britain was not damaged. Political Correctness is just one of the tools in their box through which they aim to achieve it through stifling debate.
And lose all of Northumbria as well?
In fact the best plan would be to annex the Borders (who naturally are the most Pro-Union Scots) and rebuild the Antonine wall. (we’d get a good percentage of Glasgow AND Edinburgh for our troubles.)
Far fetched? No! That is exactly what Putin did to The Crimea.
Time for Tory MPs to go to UKIP and unite this kingdom again and make this country Great again.
Because the Beeb is so conflicted over who to support their coverage of the Scottish referendum has been pretty even handed.
On the one hand Scotland winning independence means a truncated BBC but on the other there’s the fact of the BBC’s multiculturalism that favours any identity not British. Then there’s the obvious racism shown by someone flying the Union Jack. Really, they’ve been quite conflicted.
It’s also weird how the UK party leaders in Scotland campaigning for the union avoid displaying the Union Jack the very symbol of what they say they’re fighting for!
I guess it’s got something to do with their having spant their lives destroying all it stands for.
There’s an amusing post on the subject called “Where’s the Union Jack, Cameron” at:
http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/2014/09/wheres-union-jack-cameron.html
If Scotland goes then those of us old English who still care for the land need to adopt as our flag ( forget the Cameron/Milliband/Clegg axis of stupidity) the flag of Harold King of England.
A flag is a political statement and the battle standard of the old land is needed again.
It has been suppressed these last near 1000years.
It will help us remember who we are and from what stock we come. If the Scots and the Welsh can be proud of their past so can we.
Such a standard is the very antithesis of the multicutural liberal dream.
It will earn their wrath and that is a good thing. They have wrecked Britain and now must pay for it.
Which flag? the Fighting Man or the Dragon?
Plus there is no way either flag would be chosen as the people who won on 14/10/1066 are still in charge a thousand years later.
The Fighting Man it must be.We can incorporate the red and white of the wessex dragon by having a schematic version of the Cerne Abbas giant in white on a red roundel set in a white field, that would work wouldn’t it?
Oh and we can slew off the Norman yoke by voting UKIP
Great idea, adorned with the Latin for ‘Suck on this’.
The White Dragon is my choice. Make it our flag never the flag of the elite. That is the point. The standard of us old English and designed to offend liberal sensitivities. and that class that has always betrayed us and held us in contempt.
And while we are about it we should start to make that dreadful battlefield of 1066 our place of gathering. Where we remember and honour those who stood firm and fell that terrible day.
With you all the way there – except I’d go for a red dragon on a white flag which would be a nod to the Welsh who will still be art of the rUK. Red on white would be in keeping with both England and NI too.
Perhaps this would do?
I’ll try again!
Please do
BBC London tv news do little to prove that they are not simply a lefty junior common room notice board.
This morning the boys and girls are keen to remind us about this movie…
http://www.theguardian.com/film/video/2014/sep/16/riot-club-aristocracy-video-interview
‘…a drama about a hedonistic upper-class dining society not dissimilar to the Bullingdon Club, whose past members include David Cameron, George Osborne and Boris Johnson’
Unsurprisingly, the BBC’s take on this is, by and large, pretty much, in line with the Guardian.
Funny which films tend to take our unique broadcaster’s special fancy.
And…..David Dimbleby. But I guess there won’t be a left-leaning presenter from a treasured national broadcaster featuring anywhere.
But of course that was a different time.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culturenews/10083081/I-was-proud-to-wear-uniform-of-Bullingdon-Club-admits-David-Dimbleby.html
Did I not read that Ed Balls (back in his Nazi uniform days) was a member of a rival drinking club having been refused membership of the bullingdon ?.
Or was that another Labour toff , there are so many of them.
Our National Broadcaster is keen to promote this event
http://www.bbc.co.uk/showsandtours/shows/african_caribbean_comedy_11oct14
‘BBC Local Radio is holding this celebration of African-Caribbean talent’
Fair enough, but is there perhaps a political edge to this publicly funded effort?
Well, there was time when a comic was a comic was a comic – but as even a casual listener to BBC Radio 4 will know – and to quote Ben Elton : it’s all gone a bit political
Perhaps Licence Payers will enjoy the views – I mean the comic act – of Nabil Abdul Rashid ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabil_Abdul_Rashid
‘Mohamed Nasir Nabil Abdul Rashid ibn Suleman Obineche (born 3 September 1987) is an English comedian of Nigerian descent.’
Our Nabil on the subject of the Woolwich terror attack….
We’re paying for the BBC to promote him, what do we think?
Hmm, he looks rather familiar doesn’t he….
I hear on the Radio 4 Today program from some Scottish voter that the nation state is an irrelevance in this day & age, and harks back to the 16th century.
A comment which passes without comment or a request for further elaboration, and yet its a view of many nutters on the left.
The Nation state is far from irrelevant of course, but there’s no way the BBC will make people who hold these views as naive as they really are, because many of them hold the view themselves and can’t see anything wrong with it.
But if you take that point of view, McDonalds (not the food chain) will have nothing to do with Campbells due to the 1692 Glencoe Massacre……….all the various Clan and tribal splits would now become relevant?
Their anthem is Lennon’s ‘Imagine’.
And that’s about as far as they’ve got with the idea.
Wednesday’s Woman’s Hour ( I know what you’re saying – who listens to Woman’s Hour !!!! and now I know why)had this “Woman against fundamentalism” group on celebrating 25 years. Well, the three women interviewed managed to say nothing of any value but it was clear that the Israeli Jew was there to say something against Jewish fundamentalism and bring in anti Zionist views ..
Battle of Britain Day 15th Sept. came and went. Maybe the BBC covered it, but I missed it. Not as important as the anniversary of the riots over St Duggan.
As ever, the BBC on FaceBook excels with putting questions to the wisdom of crowd:
—
BBC World News
Why are migrants in #Australia struggling to find work? http://bbc.in/1wBRoBB
__
(link they provide is down for my browser)
The replies are interesting. There’s also one for students of hate site modding and getting folk who host such things shut down:
Muktar Abdi One of the Racist country is australia…… Abot is a zionist dog
22 likes and still up. Guess the BBC feels this is free speech worth cherishing?
I once applied to work in Oz. Didn’t get a visa. Didn’t get work. Visited and left.
Seems the BBC can’t quite get its head round such a notion.
Can’t think why.
“Why are migrants in #Australia struggling to find work? ”
Because their to busy doing other things maybe?
You know, I really can’t get the hang of this Bookface thingy. When I click on that link, all I get is a BBC page with two ‘x’es.
Bit like it’s blowing me a kiss or two. Well, it can eff off.
Oh, it’s a typeface clash?
I get those two X’s too. Assumed it was a glitch.
I thought there were a half dozen universal faces web designers had to use to ensure compatibility.
Surely the BBC is not artifying itself out of audience numbers on top of driving people away by being pants?
Try this.
Of course if they are ‘migrants’ then they could ‘migrate’ back out again!
Tx. I see old Muktar still on the podium.
28 likes now.
Pretty sure our hate monitors here are ringing the BBC furiously at this very moment.
Hope they share how they get on. maybe in 3 months’ time?
It does seem some speech is freer than others.
It’s not available now, apparently …
Just a guess but Muktar’s literacy skills might have let him down on the visa application.
More evidence of the hypocrisy and craven greed of the progressive left’s climate brigade:
Leonardo DiCaprio appointed UN climate change representative
16 September 2014 Last updated at 23:08 BST
The Hollywood actor, Leonardo DiCaprio, has been appointed as a United Nations representative on climate change.
The UN secretary general Ban ki Moon said the actor’s global stardom was the perfect match for the global challenge posed by climate change.
Mr DiCaprio’s first duty in his new role will be to address the opening of the climate summit later this month in New York.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29231194
If you’re a climate sceptic but not a climate expert you’re not allowed to have an opinion on CAGW and as far as the BBC is concerned you should not not be given the time of day, let alone access to the public broadcast airwaves to state your point of view.
On the other hand, if you’re a multimillionaire Hollywood actor with a left wing pro-CAGW agenda and pots of money to throw at The Cause not only will the UN throw open its doors to you, it will make you an official ‘climate representative’ so you can go around the world pontificating on a subject about which you know as much as the man sweeping the streets outside does.
But, you know, as they say: Money talks. The left wing fascisti at work. Endorsed by the BBC and common purpose trolls everywhere. Pass the champers!
Would this be the same Leonardo DiCaprio who flies around the globe in private jets?
I don’t know what he is moaning about – if we had had a bit more global warming a century ago, he wouldn’t have hit that bloody iceberg.
Bloody, hypocritical celebrities-cum-scientists. Their mantra is “Do as I say, not as I do”.
Is anyone actually going to this beanfeast in New York? I bet nowhere near as many as if it had been held in a more, er, “attractive” location.
The AGW lie is dead in the water, like the Titanic. It’s a shame he didn’t go down with it, and stayed there – oh, and preferably having taken the execrable George Clooney with him.
‘Climate change is real…..’
‘The world’s top climate scientists tell us….’
‘More and more extreme weather events are proof…’
‘The poorest nations are being hit the hardest….the richest nations must compensate…’
‘More investment in renewable energy….’
‘We must act now before it’s too late…..’
There you go, Leonardo, speech done – just fill in a few gaps. Look forward to reading more about the ‘sustainable’ lifestyle you’ve obviously adopted (how else could they choose you?).
Hells teeth, the BBC take forever to respond to a complaint about muslim apologists for Rotherham and no opposing views to the ‘we are the real victims’ mongers, one with a hijab and one with a beard. I’ve had enough now, so who should I join? EDF UKIP? England for the English, or really those who want to be genuinely English. Colour isn’t the issue.
Thanks for recently contacting the BBC. We aim to reply to complaints within 10 working days (around 2 weeks) and do so for most of them but cannot for all. The time taken depends on the nature of your complaint, how many others we are dealing with and can also be affected by practical issues such as whether a production team is available or away on location.
This is to let you know that we have referred your complaint to the relevant staff but that it may take longer than 10 working days to reply. We therefore ask you not to contact us further in the meantime. If it does prove necessary however, please use our webform, quoting any reference number we provided. This is an automatic email sent from an account which is not monitored so you cannot reply to this email address.
In order to use the licence fee efficiently we may not investigate every issue if it does not suggest a substantive breach of guidelines, or may send the same reply to everyone if others have complained about the same issue. You can read full details of our complaints procedures and how we consider the issues raised in feedback at http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/handle-complaint/. In the meantime we’d like to thank you for contacting us with your concerns. We appreciate your patience in awaiting a response.
Kind regards,
BBC Complaints.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints
Their “aim” to reply within 10 days appears to be about as accurate as their “aim” to be impartial.
Don’t let them fob you off with an automatic reply!!! Email your local MP and say something like this is- it is just not acceptable from a publically funded media organisation . It is perfectly reasonable that a reply from a person from the BBC is expected immediately and 10 days seems a more than adequate time in which to answer.
I have had enough too waiting for reply about Newsnight complaint I made, so I sent it also to the Media, Culture and Sport Committee (Day before they met about BBC): Look them up because we not allowed to publish email details here:
Still waiting for BBC reply:
Dear Members of CMS Committee
Re NEWSNIGHT COMPLAINT – JACK DROMEY INTERVIEW – PAKISTANI PEDOPHILE GANGS
Please see my complaint to BBC about Jack Dromey Interview on Newsnight I sent last week: (BBC Complaints – Case number CAS-2894728-9QRSRQ – 1 Sep 14)
Summary: Omission of facts
Full Complaint:
You interviewed Jack Dromey, Labour Shadow Minister about the report on Pakistani abuse of underage girls in Rotherham and the current Labour PCC not resigning.
You did not however report relevant facts of close involvement of ‘Pedophile’ alliances ‘conflict of interest’ of the interviewee and his wife, Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, who were both facilitators and giving succor to Pedophile Information Exchange when they themselves were involved with the National Council for Civil Liberties at senior levels many years ago.
One could not imagine Newsnight not taking the opportunity to raise this relevance had it been a Conservative interviewee. Indeed you managed to ‘out’ a non-pedophile Conservative ex-donor, (McAlpine) who you had to compensate for your error.
Why do you selectively do this, giving one the distinct impression you are omitting relevant facts for political reasons?
I have had enough too waiting for reply about Newsnight complaint I made, so I sent it also to the Media, Culture and Sport Committee (Day before they met about BBC): Google their emails -because you will get moderated trying to puhlish them here.
We need to bombard our MPs now as this is all too serious to leave to the BBC to indoctrinate us.
I am still awaiting BBC reply:
Dear Members of CMS Committee
Re NEWSNIGHT COMPLAINT – JACK DROMEY INTERVIEW – PAKISTANI PEDOPHILE GANGS
Please see my complaint to BBC about Jack Dromey Interview on Newsnight I sent last week: (BBC Complaints – Case number CAS-2894728-9QRSRQ – 1 Sep 14)
Summary: Omission of facts
Full Complaint:
You interviewed Jack Dromey, Labour Shadow Minister about the report on Pakistani abuse of underage girls in Rotherham and the current Labour PCC not resigning.
You did not however report relevant facts of close involvement of ‘Pedophile’ alliances ‘conflict of interest’ of the interviewee and his wife, Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, who were both facilitators and giving succor to Pedophile Information Exchange when they themselves were involved with the National Council for Civil Liberties at senior levels many years ago.
One could not imagine Newsnight not taking the opportunity to raise this relevance had it been a Conservative interviewee. Indeed you managed to ‘out’ a non-pedophile Conservative ex-donor, (McAlpine) who you had to compensate for your error.
Why do you selectively do this, giving one the distinct impression you are omitting relevant facts for political reasons?
An article in last Mondays Telegraph explored the backlash happening across europe (Holland, France and Germany + US). German version of UKip (AFD) wants France ‘out’ of the EU (that would be just desserts) and who could blame them. Holland is a disaster writ large as even the French Communists hate him. Le Pen is riding high in the French polls. In the US the Tea party is maintaining it’s momentum and influencing the next president. Meanwhile a state of secret war zones across Europe idealised by the left as ‘a religion of Peace’ (Cameron says he) whilst an Islamic army is already at the very gates of Europe). Bringing instability and war to any developed country around the world. That includes the UK with its left inspired multi-culti nonsense that never worked that divides the nation. Even Labour are a bit worried about their ‘image’ problem despite the BBC endorsement(s) and 24hr news propaganda that hides the scale of the problem.
The map of Europe is changing despite BBC and EU.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/10828567/EU-Elections-2014-the-rise-of-the-new-European-Right.html
Today the BBC acknowledges that the ‘militants’ who have attacked school in Nigeria are Islamic. When Dave has finished with the Scottish referendum he might point out that Boko Haram are not muslims.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-29244107