Hi folks. I was away last week and my apologies for lack of posts so to get the new week and new month of to a good start, let’s fill up an Open Thread.
START THE WEEK OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- 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 - MarkyMark Dec 22, 14:22
Weekend 21st December 2024
“But they will be interviewed, asked if they are sorry and asked if they want to go on a prevent… - MarkyMark Dec 22, 14:20
Weekend 21st December 2024
“The Army is shrinking – but would Labour make it any bigger?” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c877yyy7n0xo As of April 2024, there were 75,325… - Emmanuel Goldstein Dec 22, 14:12
Weekend 21st December 2024
[url=https://postimg.cc/CdgBvQxR][img]https://i.postimg.cc/59HBtccS/IMG-0503.webp[/img][/url] - MarkyMark Dec 22, 14:12
Weekend 21st December 2024
[img]https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/04/23/22/12633506-0-image-a-66_1556054656706.jpg[/img]
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
On the Stephen Nolan show (R5) last night he had the “Bishop” in the “Red” corner (obviously a gentleman of the cloth with liberal left wing views) and in the “Blue” corner Gerry Hayes, a wishy washy supposedly ex Tory politician whose views were sometimes even further to the left than the Bishop. It was left to Stephen Nolan to try and bring some balance into the conversation and even though he tried his best he was shouted down by both contestants on all of the usual “Leftie” subjects.
All in all, an absolute waste of an hours airtime which further enhanced the notion of a biased bBC
The bBC, the propaganda mouth piece for Intolerant Islam.
How anti-Muslim sentiment hit one Australian
THE above puff piece is about how Muslims can only be victims in Australia. Yet the bBC leaves out these examples of Islamic victims in Australia from its puff piece. Gee I wonder why:
Australia shooting: Teen was ‘known terror suspect’
Members of Sydney’s Shia community fear IS beheading
and this which transpired just hours ago|:
ISIS Supporters In Sydney Are Suspects For Early Morning Shooting At Greenacre
Reprise from Weekend ‘Open Thread’-
INBBC puts ‘Australia’ back on the map with INBBC’s ‘Islamophobia’.
Until recently, ‘Australia’ was censored off Beeboids’ global online news pages as a separate entity. But ‘Australia’ is back for INBBC. And what does INBBC feature? News about British and other descents? No, it features the terrors of ‘Islamophobia’ for Australia’s nice Muslims. So the emphasis of the Beeboid reports (below) is not on the Islamic jihad threat of some Muslims towards non-Muslim ‘kafirs’, but on the apparent threat of the invented Islamic ‘Islamophobia’!
So, INBBC not only feeds us this propaganda:
“How anti-Muslim sentiment hit one Australian”
By Phil Mercer
BBC News, Sydney.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-29655443
But, apparent imam envoy, INBBC’s DONNISON, additionally has this echo chamber piece, to that of Beeboid MERCER’s (above) on ‘Islamophobia’ (which Donnison touts globally), on INBBC’s Radio 4 ‘From Our Own Correspondent’ (18 mins: 15 secs in)-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04mb159
Meanwhile, in Australia-
“Australian police issue nationwide terror warning to teachers”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/11/australian-police-issue-nationwide-terror-warning-to-teachers
The BBC reporter seems on a dedicated mission to denigrate Australia. Doesn’t change the fact that everyone, including me, who’s been there loves the place and the people. Why doesn’t the BBC report that with it’s ‘UKIP style’ immigration policy it welcomes people equally from all over the world who want to contribute. Or it has a Catholic, Conservative, Anglophile PM and more GDP per head than the UK, France or Germany.
and OZ has a very good record in accepting genuine refugees through proper UN procedures.
I’ve commented on this story before. The BBC pushes the line that most Muslims in Australia are ‘nice’, only a few are ‘bad’, so it is unfair to pick on this poor man. One could equally point out that most Muslims in Australia aren’t picked on so why make a story out of the exception?
It is the same line that they use for immigration issues, find an individual who has suffered abroad and, better still, suffered here to make the case for unrestricted immigration.
Of course most peoples around the world have no problem with the one immigrant in our village, club or company, however when we have a situation that every female newsreader is Asian, 40% of Birmingham city councillors are Asian and it seems like ever ‘white’ couple you pass in the street speaks some east European language aren’t we right to be concerned about the ‘many’ not the ‘one’?
For INBBC’s ‘Education & Family’ online news section to censor:-
“Hundreds of ‘Schools, Leadership Teams, and Teachers’ Converge on DUBAI for Common Core Curriculum Planning and Implementation”
– See more at: http://pamelageller.com/2014/11/common-core-dubai.html/#sthash.EK9EjYZn.dpuf
Will repaste my comment on the Manchester CSE report as had just put in on the Weekend thread.
I was surprised by all the reporting in the media (ALL the media not just the Beeb) about “men” grooming young girls. Download the report (Google “Real Voices”) and it doesnt make any mention of race/religion of the “men”. Given the concerns following Rotherham and Alexis Jay’s commendable report you think Coffey might want at the very least to add an appendix to her report to address this or to state that there is no connection.
As it is, Coffey’s report is fit only for the bin, but at least GMP can say they commissioned an independant report, learnt lesson and moved on.
To their eternal shame, and showing what a big part of the problem they ALL STILL ARE, the blinding facts are airbrushed away.
All the media is to blame along with the traitorous parliament
4 usages of the word ‘Pakistani’, 5 of ‘Asian’ in Ann Coffey’s report followed each and every time by … well … just read it for yourself, the crystal clear connection between Afghans, Pakistanis, Bangladeshi s etc, is simply ignored
http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/home/root/news-libertygb/6618-ann-coffey-s-report-on-muslim-grooming-gangs-doesn-t-use-the-word-muslim
I can t type any more, the parliament, the media are complicit
shame on them all.
I did listen to File on 4 last night and it was uniformly depressing.
The grooming and sexual expoitation of young Asian women was starkly depicted. The suggestion was that the community covered it up and the younger generation was worse at doing this.
One has to draw the obvious inference. Multiculturalism has utterly failed us all. This the programme did not do which I found odd.
The major victims of multicultural absurdities propagated by our liberal elite have been the South Asian women and their daughters. We all have suffered of course. as a society lacking harmony affects us all.
There is no meaningful integration between the Islamic South Asians and the indigenous .There never was and it was a lie to pretend that there would be other than in a limited way. They come from a completely different background which our elite permitted them to bring to Britain.
We will all suffer because of this and those responsible for allowing it to happen- the liberal elite- need to face up to it.
1st issue, “Asian” … “Pakistani heritage”, its not “south Asian”, erm … anything missing?.
2nd Issue, It is the same with … “grooming”
it is Islamic driven, racist, child gang rape, and racist violence, as was stated by one of the Muslim
parents, in that very program, he was told
“everybody does it, it doesn t matter, why you open your mouth”
You get that! , “everybody does it” …
yep! told openly, “in the Mosque” …
now you take from that what inference you will, but I know what I take from it.
3rd issue, “lacking harmony”?, I urge you to check how Islam fares with that one.
Heres the link.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04mctw3
I am getting in practice for the police state of 2015/16 .Like they did in the old USSR. Pravda(the BBC/Guardian) will be in charge.
I am glad you were able to read between the lines. Soon we will all have to.
Yes, I heard File on 4 and as you say it was deeply depressing. It was also something of a contrast to the Any Questions prog’ of a couple of days ago that presented us with the usual platitudes and assured us men from the Pakistani community were no more likely to indulge in acts of child rape than anyone else. As can be imagined this received a lot of support from the majority of white liberals that called in who, almost unanimously, told us that the problem was all down to men and power and had nothing whatever to do with race or religion. Phew, that’s a relief. There I was thinking we might have a problem, until I was “enlightened.”
Interestingly File on 4 seems to have completely destroyed that argument, particularly as it was Pakistani women who were confirming how endemic these vile abuses are in this community. If these molested girls spoke out the entire community ostracised them. One of them summed it up rather well when she told us that these Muslim immigrants had brought their entire culture and backward attitude towards women with them and the only thing to change from back home was their postcode.
God’s teeth, what hateful sins have successive generations of politicians inflicted on my people?
Enoch, you were right.
I also listened to File on 4 .
A sad indictment of what is happening in these medieval muslim enclaves described occasionally by the media in the most pejorative term they can muster as
‘conservative’.
A good report for once, though.
There was a documentary on BBC 4 about ABBA the other week, four white, blond, blue eyed people, that’s something you don’t see much on television nowadays, it’s a rarity.
And something you’ll be seeing less of in the Sweden of the near future.
If you wanted to take a sixty or so minute slice of Five Live to underline its core values you could do no better than 8.55 to 10 this morning.
Before the 9am news a man whose sons were/are fighting in Syria for the Al Nusra front was allowed several minutes to defend through crocodile tears their actions and laud the terror organisation. He went virtually unchallenged.
After the 9am news and sport the phone-in dealt with the real pressing issue of the day. Apparently. The poppy display at the Tower of London. Following on from a disgusting piece in the Guardian last week Five Live, keen to show Solidarity with their ideological mates piled in too.
The phone-in, selected every bit as much as the Question Time audience soon turned into assorted Guardian lefties using it to attack both the display and their real target: “right-wing politics”. Read “UKIP”.
Five Live needs to be investigated by the Culture, Media and Sport Committee. It is biased journalism of the worst kind.
I’m glad I didn’t hear that.
Still, the poppy display has proven so popular that the organisers have had to ask people not to come. The poppy haters are by no means representative of the British public.
And talking of poppy haters, we have news of a 15-year old poppy seller being burned with a blowtorch by a “black or Asian” man. Police are “keeping an open mind” about what motivated the attack.
Beyond parody.
I suspect the police ( the military wing of the government ) are busy filling in those PC effnik quota forms.
The Police are correct when they say they are keeping an open mind on this matter……if you look through a coppers ear, you can see daylight coming through from the other one…..bloody morons.
Oh, come on any reasonable person would keep an open mind!
After all, the perpetrator could have been Pakistani, Bangladeshi, North African or Palestinian Arab. You’ve got to keep an open mind on these things.
Regarding the poppy memorial there’s a great piece laying into Jonathan Arty Fart from the Guardian called Patriotism The essential Ingredient at:
http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/2014/11/patriotism-essential-virtue.html
Yes, pretty appalling program that left a bad taste in the mouth.
Ian Dunt was one of the guests. What an odious character. He worried that the poppy might be interpreted as some sort of sign of loyalty to Britain, and in his words we need to be “very very tough” on anyone promoting that idea. Typical left-wing fascist.
Plus of course, he was also concerned that the poppy might be offensive to immigrants.
None of this was challenged by the BBC presenter of course, presumably because she thought such opinions to be entirely reasonable.
what a Dunt and obviously a nutty as a fruitcake. Where do these people get their ideas?
Oops, that was in reply to leamas, about the 5 live prog at 9 this morning telling us how awful and racist the tower of london poppy memorial is.
The very thought of anyone wishing to show loyalty to Britain has the Guardian and BBC types wetting their knickers. Orwell pointed out years ago that British leftists are unique in their hatred towards their own country.
The Left truly are a rabble, ignorant and naive….so they think loyalty to one’s country is crass? Our country is all we, and they have…there is nowhere else. Yet they embrace and slaver over Islam….an Islam that if it took power, would demand loyalty to Islam and it.s leaders, would they give up their freedom to carp and moan to pray 5 times a day instead? I very much doubt it…….
,
what these lefty fascists do not understand, is that their appeasement of the vile supremacist ideology of Islam can only result in the complete and total destruction of all multiculturalism and cultural tolerance in Britain. Once it has been replaced by Sharia, there will be no tolerance of homosexuality, gender equality or of religious freedom.
UKIP are far more tolerant and diverse than the Islamic vultures that the left are appeasing.
‘Dunt’ think this was a mis-spell
I have complained directly to the BBC over this
Playing into the hands of our enemies
Even though this site is supposed to be about BBC bias and nothing else I suppose it is just about acceptable to attack politicians for their views and political records. However, in the weekend Open Thread there was a series of outrageous attacks on David Blunkett. These were based on his disability, which of course is blindness. This is completely out of order, and it made me ashamed to be a reader of this forum. It’s the sort of thing that our enemies will seize upon as evidence that we are all unthinking, uncivilised low life, no better than the BNP. After all, what’s the difference between outright racism and ‘disabilityism’? They are both forms of groundless discrimination, although I think discrimination against the disabled is by far the most hateful because after all no-one wants to be disabled. It’s a real bummer having a disability, but there’s nothing wrong with being black.
Just to remind you of this atrocious lapse, here’s a sample of the incoherent bilge:
“Blunket on ‘ When i was this…and that ‘ ‘ i could see then…see that…see the problems ‘…NO…no you couldn’t you scumbag, you are blind….you see and saw nothing…nothing….” The poster, one Robert Brown, is beneath contempt. What a horrible person he must be. Alarmingly though, the post got 15 likes! I guess those fifteen people habitually kick away a cripple’s crutches, treat deaf people as imbeciles, and steal flowers from the garden of the local hospice. Or maybe they clicked on ‘like’ in an unthinking way, since so much discrimination against the disabled is unthinking.
Most of us on this site are concerned about maintaining decent British values in the face of the deluge of leftist propaganda from the BBC and the encroachment of the immigrant hoards, which have very different values to our own. To criticise a man for his disability is to betray those values. In this country we, the indigenous people, have a culture of fair play and compassion. That culture is what sets us apart from the less enlightened areas of the world. It’s that culture, those values, which this site in its small way is trying to preserve.
Postings that play on a person’s serious disability are an utter disgrace to this site and to Britain. I do hope the original poster and those who ‘liked’ the post will think hard about the way they are degrading this site and exposing it to ridicule and to entirely valid criticism. Give a dog a bad name and all that. Apologies and recantations are in order I think?
I agree with your sentiment, but would add how trivial it would be for someone who was opposed to the general aims of this site to post false/fake postings and support them with multiple likes.
I think Blunkett’s achievements in being a blind Home Secretary were remarkable. He should be criticised of course, but you are right that attacks on his disability are out of order.
Wasn`t Fred`s post done with ,`Tongue firmly in Cheek` about Blunkett ?
Agreed – and if I can add my penn’orth…
We know the droids have a major issue with Islam and it is correct that this is highlighted.
However this site very often turns into a muslim hatefest free-for-all with posts unrelated to the BBC. A liveleak snuff video link with ‘here’s something the BBC would never show’ I’m afraid doesn’t hack it. I pagedown past these posts.
It makes it very difficult for a journalist to namecheck this site, though I know that plenty of them read it.
Agreed.
Personally, though, I’m all for allowing the hate mongers to ply their trade. By their words shall they be known, etc.
I’d just rather they did it some where else.
At risk of being seen to pander to and create a precedent for those who demand not only correct thoughts but being seen to overtly have them, I too would wish the robustness was kept focussed on lapses in accuracy, integrity and objectivity by the BBC and staff rather than distracting often OT ‘isms that just brings the Candymen out of their bunker.
But what to do if a free and open and independent forum?
Rough will be mixed in with smooth, inevitably. Many don’t but I agree with pah that it’s best to let the former exist, and be seen to lack support (if I don’t like it I simply skip past, as i am sure the majority do) or if any are so minded get engaged (though this is a gift to trolls seeking a snarl up – which also does raise the issue of false flags created with just such an aim).
But if there was a neat solution I think it would have been found by experts in social media modding by now.
Mightily funded ones have not succeeded. CiF is pretty much mocked for its lack of ‘F’ by now. BBC HYS’s noted for plugs getting pulled not so much for off colour language (which they can mod in a heartbeat) but things headed to areas the BBc doesn’t fancy them going. Pure censorship. Look at the last few BBC URLs featured where things have opened and closed within the day, often all inside working hours.
And in the spirit of two wrongs if nasty things mitigate against name-checking a site, then the BBC would have trouble even admitting it has anything to do with its own FaceBook pages at times.
I’m all for sincere pleas to behave by owners and posters, but when framed to expect standards impossible to meet without draconian pre-vetting, I do wonder what seeds may be being sown, especially by any not noted for many contributions on BBC failures, keener on all-inclusive demands for apologies from all and sundry.
I agree with most of what you say and, in particular, about it being counterproductive. I very much doubt, however, that “those fifteen people habitually kick away a cripple’s crutches, treat deaf people as imbeciles, and steal flowers from the garden of the local hospice.” Blunkett is a politician and, as such, almost certainly has a very thick skin. People know this and single them out for abuse.
This is a protest site so it follows that it will be full of dissatisfied people, some of whom will get carried away in their anger. I’m not justifying it, but at the end of the day it’s just words, and too many people are easily offended, or claim to be.
Furthermore, I don’t agree that Blunket was being “discriminated against” here, because he was not being denied anything. IMO, deliberately confusing rudeness with discrimination is a recent device designed to encourage a greater sense of victimhood amongst favoured minorities and a consequence (very obvious in the The Guardian and the BBC) seems to be that it’s perfectly OK to be rude or, in some instances, downright vicious, against people who do not fall into one of these categories.
IMO, it was counterproductive and very rude, but not sinister. Sticks and stones etc.
“Blunkett is a politician and, as such, almost certainly has a very thick skin.” That’s beside the point. It doesn’t matter how he feels about it. It should be a matter of principle to behave decently. Otherwise why are we here? What are we defending?
The original poster adopts the tactics the BBC employ to encourage the audience to self- censor certain lines of thought ab initio. The word “swamp”, say, is used in connection with immigration. This is “racism” because there can be no reason other than moral turpitude, stupidity or some form of “panic” that clouds the judgment to think that mass immigration is anything other than an unalloyed good. Of course, it immediately follows that any “racist” will inevitably become a Nazi/Fascist and commit “genocide”. Some one was rude about Blunket’s blindness. This is “disabilityism “. A “disabilityist” must, of course, be well on the way to bombing the ophthalmology department at the local hospital or plotting the extermination of the mentally ill. However, when the adherents of Islam do in fact murder thousands, no one at the BBC will ever consider the possibility that the language of the Koran might have played a role.
If you believe Mein Kampf lead to the Holocaust, the Communist Manifesto lead to the Gulag, then I see no reason why you shouldn’t believe the Koran lead to 9/11.
Robert Brown here Stubber……actually, i am a rather nice guy, i do not attack cripples or the blind….but with Blunkett, i am savage…that man has had a part in the destruction of our national identity, embraced un-limited immigration, and now the results are evident in his own backyard, stupid man. Here is a man, so out of his depth as Home Secretary, that when news of a prison riot emerged, he ranted and screamed at his staff and ordered them to have them machine-gunned….would you like a blind surgeon operating on you?….a blind pilot flying you on holiday?….you get the picture?….i resent a blind man being in charge of the nations defence and security…perception is everything, and that includes sight….he was an un-mitigated disaster as Home Sec, period. His blindness, while regrettable should have been a bar to his appointment.
Fred wrote:
“Even though this site is supposed to be about BBC bias and nothing else I suppose it is just about acceptable to attack politicians for their views and political records. However, in the weekend Open Thread there was a series of outrageous attacks on David Blunkett. “
Good one and tell me what do you have to say when so called pillars of the left promote views that are unacceptable. Sweet fuck all. Blunket fucked about not only with the British people but also with a married woman. He was sacked twice and found work by his friends within the government 3 times. If you want to be in the Public eye then expect to get mud thrown at you. I mean the left have no problem attacking the tories (bBC and a play on words with a certain Mr Hunt) UKIP or even people who wear poppies.
Strange how I don’t see people complaining about those disparaging attacks.
Blunkett just wasn’t a very good Home Secretary, irrelevant of whether he was sighted or not. He is one that the BBC contact for a statement at the drop of a hat and they treat him as an elder statesman. He was not a Statesman and was perfectly capable of stealing tax payers money for paying for his mistress. He was remarkable how high up the greasy pole he managed to climb in spite of his disability but the man did not have the capabilities the position demanded (a bit like Brown, Miliband, Burnham , Harman and the rest of the dreadful Labour lot).
Some could claim he was promoted because of his disability, rather than in spite of it, purely for PC box ticking purposes.
Although, sadly, his incompetence as Home Secretary, his sleaze and utter all-round woefullness cannot be attributedsolely to his disability, as the vast majority of Labour ministers were just as bad.
Hope these comments put Mr Stubber in his place, or is he actually Dez?…..I had the misfortune to hear Blunkett speak many years ago, and he was violently disposed to people that questioned his points or judgement, to the level of calling them prats and jerks, his eyes rolling like a pinball machines searching for salvation from his ‘tormenters’…in reality, intelligent people seeking answers……the whole Labour Party is the same….scratch them all….and underneath is a fascist.
bbbc now reporting that cameroon’s latest stance on immigration into our beloved Country has hit the rails with that East german beauty Angela Merkel who is saying that the British attitude is moving us towards being slung out of the EU…………….
Well all I have to say is, when did the germans become responsible for British immigration policy…Or is that something else that Gordon Brown gave away?
Are we now being dictated to by Germany?………..I won’t have it.
‘The last little corporal that tried it came a cropper………We know how difficult it is for an army to cross the channel’.
So Mrs Merkel ‘Don’t threaten or dictate to us until you are marching up Whitehall…and even then we won’t listen.
Please see
Of course, all of this is reported passively by the bbbc who are so pro european union that they might as well have their studios in brussells
I wouldn’t trust second hand reports of what Merkel is meant to have said, which are then spun by the BBC as the most important story of the day, as being accurate or helpful.
The EU has rules. These rules are negotiable. Much else that’s said is foam and fluff.
The BBC is relying on Der Spiegel which can only refer to unnamed sources. So what is that worth? According to Der Spiegel however “.. significant restrictions on immigration from non-EU countries could hurt the UK’s economy. So Cameron is evidently considering rejecting the immigration of certain groups from within the EU’s 27 member states.”
So the question is, ‘Did UKIP write this article?’ 😉 As it takes it for granted that the UK benefits from non-EU migration but suffers from EU migration of ‘certain groups’. That is a neat encapsulation of UKIP immigration concerns.
(http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/merkel-fears-cameron-crossing-red-line-on-immigration-a-1000743.html)
Some are claiming that this is Cameron’s Thatcher moment, when he can stand up to Europe and come away with a great deal for the British people.
Unfortunately, the UK has significantly less power to stand up to the EU than ever before, thanks to so many vetos and powers being given away in the Lisbon Treaty.
Sadly, this means that the closest Cameron will ever come to a “Thatcher” moment is being handbagged by Merkel.
Why is the BBC coy about a number? Don’t they believe in precision?
The Washington Post states “A record low 44 percent of Americans report a favorable impression of him[Obama]” and that leads the article. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/11/02/on-eve-of-2014-election-obamas-image-matches-all-time-low/)
But the BBC can only bring itself to mutter “The question is how the president’s approval ratings – at their lowest ever – will impact how and whether people vote.” (para 86 of http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29576002) and “with President Barack Obama’s approval ratings pretty low” (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29485463)
So, no need for numbers then?
Would the BBC have reported record low approval ratings for GW Bush differently? Might that story have even made it to the US homepage on the BBC website?
‘Ann Maguire murder: Boy jailed for life’ screams a BBC headline.
Aren’t we allowed to know a little more ‘about the ‘boy’? Too young and the judge could not wear his wig?!
I really want to know if he is a……Anders Breivik kind of guy, you know what I mean, nudge nudge, wink wink, you know what I mean (BBC/ Huff post)!!
I think it’s simply a case of reporting restrictions on a child. I think the judge and all others involved in this sad case have recognised the evil in this person, who hopefully will never be freed.
It sounds as if he had psychological problems that should have been picked up by parents or teachers and dealt with. I’m not convinced that any fifteen year old can be beyond redemption, as the twenty year sentence clearly assumes. However, how could any judge pass a lighter sentence? It’s a tragedy.
Part of the overall decline of decency and discipline in the classroom. The multiculti leftards will be howling for this boy to be released in about 5 years.
No need.
Apparently ‘life’ actually means 20 years. So he could be out age 36.
I kid you not.
I suppose they have to make lots of room in prison for TV licence evaders.
“Russell Brand new book:
Radio 4 listeners angry at ‘shameless’ BBC promotion of Revolution”
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/russell-brand-new-book-radio-4-listeners-angry-at-shameless-bbc-promotion-of-revolution-9835793.html
Easily dismissed as an establishment stitch up by one of their right-win… oh.
Don’t quite know what to make of the Indy at times. It can even live up to its title (much to the ire of a few commenters, looking down).
Must say I have felt it was disinclined to follow the Grauniad path ever since they did that piece on Helen Boaden having an email address for complaints that she never checked. It seemed to offend their view on what holding to account means too.
Interesting piece, though:
Rebecca Stratford, programme editor, defended the decision to give Brand a platform because Revolution is “being discussed everywhere at the moment”. “He does seem to have the ear of a certain generation,” she said.
Interesting precedent, if hardly a surprise. If it is big on twitter it cannot be ignored by those whose lives revolve around it. Not sure it quite justifies blanket coverage by smitten ‘seems’ editors no matter what actual value it may really have to real life.
But golly, a Beeboid sticks her named head above the parapet! Quick… make smoke…
‘A BBC spokesperson added that the broadcaster is “always careful not to give undue prominence to individuals or organisations”.’
Phew, that was close.
Tell it often enough Aunty, tell it often enough. Anonymously, of course.
One day an actual reporter is going to track one of these mystery characters down and get them to back up their claims. Along with other ones they pull, this one has bells on. Even the Indy knows it.
Meh don’t worry.
In the same way that’ yoohoo everyone look at me me me’ lefties loved to be seen carrying 700 pages of Thomas Piketty’s drivel so said lefties will wet themselves over Brand’s 350 pages of drivel.
While not being able or willing to progress any further than 20 pages into either book.
“Discussed everywhere”? Seriously? Well, everyone at the BBC might be talking about it, but that’s not the same thing. Everyone else might start talking about if the BBC endlessly promotes it, but that just makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy. Anyone else noticed how the BBC has started promoting some of their presenters as “national treasures”? Such people as Clair Balding and Sandy Tosvig? How many people who never go near Radio 4 have even heard of Sandy Tosvig?
I have heard of her. Richie and Eddie slag her off in Bottom Live 2. Always gives me a giggle, that bit.
The BBC are running a series of ‘debates’ about devolution to the regions of England later this week. I expect that there will be little if any mention of EVEL, let alone an English Parliament. This is another example of the BBC supporting Labour’s manoeuvre to head off an English Parliament which would be much more Tory than the UK parliaments have been in the past 30 or 40 years.
Obviously we all know that the BBC much prefers Labour administrations to Tory ones, both for the guarantee of the LF under Labour, and because the majority of BBC staff leaning so much to the left that they are in danger of falling over.
But I also sense that there is something even more sinister than left leaning at work here. I believe that we are seeing the BBC displaying their collective contempt,even hatred, for England and the English. They look benignly at Scottish and Welsh nationalism and even warmly assisted the violent Irish version. But they regard anything that may be a faint stirring of English nationalism with horror and they are determined to stamp out any possibility of an English Parliament.
We can look forward to endless programmes extolling the virtues of regional devolution, but total silence about the unfair democratic deficit of the English with the current and proposed devolution settlements.
The BBC has not represented the British people for many years but they have attempted to bury England , almost to the point of cultural genocide.
One point everyone in the English regions should note is that if devolution does start down the road of allowing regions to levy tax then how long will it be before the London and the South start to ask why they should transfer so much of their tax to the impoverished regions. That would be a disaster for the North!
The advantage of the devolved regions for the lefties is that each area would have a large metropolitan area included. The metropolitan areas are generally under Labour controlled councils with voting numbers that would outweigh the more rural parts of any such region. Problem solved re. socialist control AND they can claim to have given the English devolution. What’s not to like for the bBC/Labour/Graudinistas?
No Scottish Labour MPs = No Labour
That could happen anyway.
I doubt it really will be that bad for Labour, but I can see a danger of Scottish politics becoming like Northern Ireland, where the choice is to vote for a separatist candidate or a pro-union one.
It’s not just an English Parliament that they hate, it is any notion of a united England.
They are following the EU’s plan to break up, rip apart, destroy merry England and slice her into 9 EU regions dictated to by Brussels. Notice how the EU’s plan has been conspicuous by its absense in this debate so far?
That is what labour and the BBC’s approach to EVEL has been all about so far. The English can only have Devolution IF we agree to have england destroyed, broken up, dismantled.
I support an English Parliament, for ONE single UNITED England. NEVER let the progressive liberal lefty traitors win. Our nation depends upon defending a UNITED England, now, more than ever.
Totally agree Ken. We need to have an English Parliament NOW! Same powers as Scotland, exactly.
We already have regional assemblies, they are called County Councils. Why didn’t they break up Scotland into five regions if regions are such a good idea? Obviously they support Scotland’s right to self-determination but their hatred of England and the English is to try to smash up our country.
The Evil Mark Easton was down in Cornwall , shit stirring the locals today ,about an `Independent Cornwall`,saying it wasn`t part of England or should be in a SW `region` etc. Well neither is he ,& immediate deportation to West Africa would be very agreeable . I also see the SNP would support the Millipeed, in govt. for a Marxist takeover, to Rule England. That means an English uprising in my books .
I would favour English inependence from the United Kingdom.
That way we ditch the money-scrounging benefits-playing celtic fringe and we’re automatically out of the EU from the second independence starts no questions asked or penalties applied.
Presumably the BRITISH Broadcasting Corporation would also have to stop opperating in England.
What’s not to like?
I am a very proud Welshman but I am also very proud to be British. All this devolution and regional division is breaking this country apart. It will give us more and more bureaucracy, more and more money wasted by pen pushers. Britain is a small nation. Change the idiots that govern us, not the United Kingdom.
The Evil Easton is now `Down Your Way` in Wales , shit stirring about English regional Devolution . That Evil Entity is a Cupid Stunt ,& his reports are total lies .
I heard a BBC news report about devolution which did refer to an English Parliament.
It was a long report looking at various different kinds of regional devolution. The only reference to an English parliament was one line which said, “There is no public call for an English parliament”
EVERYTHING else the BBC has been pushing has been towards a default position that the only form of English devolution is regionalisation of one sort or another. That the only way to devolve power to England from the UK parliament, is first to destroy England, rip England apart into smaller regions and then devolve power to those.
The agenda is so blatant now, as to not be even remotely funny. we are seeing OUR “Merry England” ripped apart and destroyed before our eyes, and it is obvious why. Every referendum on regionalisation returns a firm rejection of it, so the establishment is proceeding anyway. Why? Because the EU demands it!
the UK Must be broken into 12 regions. Ulster, Scotland, Wales and 9 other regions. This is what the BBC is pursuing, and they are fuelling the fires of Scottish Nationalism, to stoke Nationalism in England, BUT only offering regionalisation… And to this end, they are fuelling regional division within England. Within the North West, fueling dissent between Liverpool and Manchester. Lancashire and Cumbria, Town vs City vs Countryside.
We must UNITE as English people in opposition to the overt destruction of England for the establishment’s masters in the EU.
One England. One Country. One People. One Parliament! England United!
The BBC must be very pleased with their undermining of the perfectly reasonable government initiative of telling us how are taxes are spent. They headline the topic in a neutral way
Osborne’s tax summary dismissed as propaganda by the TUC,
this appears to be mainly based on providing “Welfare” as 1 large number. Lefties claim that this will lead people to think it all goes on the unemployed – taxpayers are apparently too thick to be aware of the existence of the state pension etc.
The BBC/TUC line is amplified by “Business Correspondent” Joe Lynham.
The many comments on the BBC article shows that the BBC/TUC line has been duly swallowed by uptickers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29871522
BBC US online editor Daniel Nasaw is jumping ship to become the new managing editor of the Wall Street Journal’s Capital Journal:
One can only hope that the inevitable leftward swing at Captial Journal will be matched by a shift back to fewer agenda-driven narrative-fitting story choices at BBC US online. I fear it’s not worth holding one’s breath though.
this pathetic obsession with twitter from the facebook generation (and losers who haven’t grown up). If I have news to tell people I actually TELL them and don’t put it out there for 1000s of strangers to see
E.U Referendum Poll:-
Will Beeboids-
a.) report the following item online,
or
b.) censor the item, because it doesn’t like the result?
“Immigration is key to Britons’ growing hostility to Europe.
For the first time in months a majority would vote to quit Europe
if a referendum were held now, YouGov has found.”
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/03/immigration-key-britons-growing-hostility-europe?
Note for ‘Guardian’ (and Beeboids):
-Britons are not increasingly hostile to ‘Europe’ over continuous and increasing
mass immigration, but to the institution of the EUROPEAN UNION.
Pneumatic reporting on this, at Al BBC – all the usual suspects
BBC – Grainard – RT
‘jihadist’ re-education scheme
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29870724
Aid pledge for returning UK jihadists with ‘good intentions’
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague
Government-prepared-to-assist-some-jihadists-returning
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11204191/William-Hague-Government-prepared-to-assist-some-jihadists-returning-from-Syria.html
UK ready to help returning jihadists who have ‘good intentions’
http://rt.com/uk/201799-hague-assist-jihadists-syria/
Thanks so very much, clueless traitorous Toryboy
W Vague
Suicidally Naive Britannia Update : –
William Hague said that some will –
“just need help because they will have been through an extremely traumatic period” while fighting overseas.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/11/uk-to-aid-jihadis-returning-from-islamic-state-if-they-have-good-intentions
Radio 4 PM moves to justify Harriet Harman’s gaff of wearing sweat-shop T-shirt, ‘some say’ under direction from Labour’s PR department.
We do get pro and anti sweat-shop speakers but ‘I have learned’ that had David Cameron, or heaven forbid, Nigel Farrage, been so insensitive the flak would have been all one way, (plus, of course, follow-ups on News Quiz, HIGNFY or Mock the Week).
[NB: Comments enclosed in single-quotes are as per BBC News Style Guide and are NOT attributable to any one.]
Not sure if this has been shared yet, but worth any repeat:
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2014/10/31/political-neutrality-at-the-bbc.html
The BBC and its don’t do anything stupid staff do seem to have a fatal fascination with twitter, and Mr. Marshall clearly has planned to follow in Jasmine’s giant footprints stomping over any hint of impartiality from those in control of scripts and knobs, etc.
The first comment puts it rather well:
‘The BBC has a big impartiality problem with twitter. This twerp’s twitter handle says he is deputy editor at BBC Earth, so people subscribe to his tweets because of his job. But then he says all views are my own not the BBCs! So we know his private views which are associated with this twerps job at a taxpayer funded public corporation. How on Earth (pun intended) can this be squared with the BBC’s impartiality.’
All covered under ‘unique’, explanations their little editorial secret to keep.
Meanwhile, in other news…
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2014/11/3/bbc-coverage-of-sceptics.html
posted on guido by fish.
You may think it’s utter corruption; but apparently it’s just the droids putting things in *context* for us.
Ah bless.
—————————————————-
BBC ‘expert’ Ian Watson last night put all of this into perspective on Five Live. Commenting on Weird Ed’s woes he eulogised, dismissing the lowest ever rating, saying that;
‘he wouldn’t want to over emphasise it…it’s only one poll…it’s only by one point that he sits lower than Clegg (i.e. lower than a snake’s belly)…it’s within the margin of error…remember the ‘yes’ campaign went ahead in the polls and lost.’
On the perception of Miliband that the poll gives to the electors, Watson said, well we (The BBC) have to that put in in context for them.
Fuck me! Bias or what. It sounds that Labour’s people at the BBC (that’s all of the fuckers) are starting to get desperate.
There was only one poll that gave the SNP victory in the devolution campaign, and BBC Scotland gave that maximum coverage
In the spirit of balance, to solidify the BBC’s notion that they must be getting things right if no one thinks they have a professional bone in their rotting corpse…
http://medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=779:a-match-made-in-heaven-president-obama-and-the-bbc-s-john-simpson&catid=52:alerts-2014&Itemid=245
Now I have had my issues with ML, but most of what they share seems mostly factual quote of the great man himself, about which the reader is merely invited to assess the level of impartiality and professional rigour.
Somewhere Mark Mardell just had a moment, mind.
That’s an interesting take from the left about BBC bias. What it illustrates is that there is indeed a recognisable BBC line on Obama (as on a lot of other issues). In law, the BBC has no business having a “line” on anything, particularly when it comes to a simple recitation and relay of the facts.
Accordingly, to adapt a favourite BBC response, if even lefties like ML are unhappy with the quality of the basic reportage element of the BBC’s journalism then, generally speaking, the BBC is “getting it about wrong”.
Nevertheless, one should be careful about using evidence from oufits like ML. After all my enemy’s enemy is not necessarily my friend. I imagine that ML would be even more unhappy if the BBC were to start broadcasting facts which contradict the warmist creed. As you write you (and I, for that matter) have issues with ML and its line on the global warming scam mirrors that of the BBC. Moreover, nominating and quoting Chomsky as its chosen “informed commentator” fatally damages any case that ML’s political opinions should be taken seriously.
Much of the meat of ML’s complaint is that Simpson did not mention “global warming” or Obama’s “failure” to return the US to the Stone Age in his 6 years (so far) in power. Mind you, to be fair to Obama, it’s not for want of ambition. However, a sceptical Senate and, more to the point, a sceptical public on the one hand and, on the other, Obama’s combination of laziness and preference to play golf have blunted his efforts here.
Points and cautions taken, and well.
I am aware of ML’s stances and abilities, which is why I include them in my surfing to keep abreast of input from all angles.
This one I was mostly interested in because of the factual quotes that do rather show a less than impartial start point to one of the BBC’s top reporter’s views.
I have no truck with the BBC ‘we must be doing something right’ weasel anyway, but here it simply does not apply.
ML can go off on one about climate failures committed and not properly reported to their heart’s content; I simply look at what Mr. S has to say about Pres. O and am disappointed if not surprised that such a shill has just been given an all you can eat contract to ‘roam’ with stuff like this.
That was the reason for the share.
(It was also an ML story that the Indy picked up on to expose Hugs’ email to nowhere boast, and while they may well be a thorn from another side, I was still interested in the fact that the BBC’s (then?) head of complaints knew she did not have to take any seriously).
Not BBC bias perhaps, but here’s a puzzling one. Any clues?
What a strange report just now on Channel 4 News.
Their senior reporter, Alex Thompson, was telling us about Will Cornick, the 16-year-old school boy who murdered his teacher in Leeds.
Several times he mentioned that the authorities, e.g. police, council, school, were behaving very strangely. All refused to answer any questions about the case. It was all very unusual and very odd, he said.
Always quite liked Thompson, he’s a tough old school reporter. For him to say such things he must know something about the background to this case that we are not being told, but which is very newsworthy. For some reason he cant report it, but he drops lots of hints.
I’m well attuned the ways of the modern media. Too often they will side with authorities when there are embarrassing or “awkward” details. They gloss over, or simply lie by omission. We see it all the time with the BBC’s reporting on so many matters. But you can iften tell when its fishy.
So why the ‘strange behaviour’ from the authorities? Any ideas? Or am I reading too much into it?
I don’t think you are. Watching last night’s News at Ten, Mrs D and I both agreed there was something we weren’t being told.
Will Cornick was, apparently, being bullied. Wonder if the identity of the bullies is what is being suppressed for some reason? I have an idea what that reason might be, but it is pure speculation on my part.
Sorry, accidently reported my own comment when I Tried to edit it.
I simply wanted to add that the most obvious reason for any possible obfuscation on the part of the authorities would be good, old-fashioned a**e-covering. “Don’t blame us”.
watch this from Thompson for yourself
http://www.channel4.com/news/catch-up/display/playlistref/031114/clipid/031114_4ON_MAGUIRE_03
4mins 30
Thanks, I’ve just watched it. So the reporter cam right out and said it was “very odd” that the authorities refused to discuss the case after the conclusion opf the court case.
Interesting…
I hadn’t seen that. Interesting indeed. I wonder what’s being covered up.
Maybe I read it all wrong, but I thought that Alex Thomson was being the ultimate arrogant prick that the BBC tend to appoint as hacks at the closing of such trials as this.
What the hell could the head, the police the school governors or the priest possibly add to the trial summary and the verdict/sentence?
The lad was a nutjob, end of…a Robert Sartin twenty five years on.
No “authority” need account to Alex Thomson or his beard…Jon Snow…for what ended the life of Ann McGuire…due process has been done, seen to be done…and will last up `til the time that Mansfield, Stafford-Smith, Robertson, Peirce or Khan, Shiner or Christian decide that he needs springing…and Savile gets a pardon from the PIE munchers of New Labour within a few years.
No-much as I loath the authorities at such time-the arrogance of the media and its reflex sobbing and breast beating is even worse.
Who votes for Snow or Thomson, Dimbleby or Wark…these people are the very spawm of Stan that masquerade as judges or Prosecution Counsel…
What got my antennae twitching was the complete lack of explanation for motive. Usually where no motive has been found there is something along the lines that police have been unable to determine the motive, but there wasn’t even that. It was just left up in the air. But perhaps I’m reading too much into it.
I have been licence free for three years and don’t watch the BBC at home but, watching tv at my girlfriends house this weekend. First we had Dr Who, where one of the lead characters is an ex British soldier, guess what this week we are shown that he apparently shot dead an unarmed Afghan teenager. Of course, next week they may show him to be a Taleban bomber, but I doubt it.
Then we get to this week’s Casualty. There’s a competition to see who can sell most red poppies (treated as a joke of course); at one point a character runs past and knocks a tray of poppies in the air. THen we get another character who wants a white “peace” poppy. (No mention that white poppy is something promoted by the hard left CND etc); final scene shows white poppy being placed beside a patient who died; typical BBC, red poppy bad, white poppy good!
The white poppy, isn’t that so ’30s? And what ever became of CND after the Soviet Empire collapsed?
They infested the Environmental movement along with all the other business and industry hating communists.
The white poppy is like the white feather. A sign of cowardice.
Well Lady Ashton for one did quite well for herself after her time in CND.
and they have made the Master a woman….only caught the end of it thankfully but I couldn’t believe that. Plus the obvious PC stuff going on with Clara in the show watched by millions of children
For BBC-NUJ:
Ed WEST’s second edition of his book on mass immigration and ‘multiculturalism’:
” The Diversity Illusion ”
-is out 5 Nov.
‘Look inside’ for excerpts of book here:-
This person claiming to be from tv licensing and celebrating a supposed catch with taking photos through windows . Also claiming to record ip addresses for follow up license check ups . For real or not ?
@toffee192 on twitter
Certainly a deeply unpleasant character, to the point of being a caricature.
However what would a photograph prove? Not that the person was watching live TV. Could easily be a DVD or recording.
Why there are no Left Wing comedians…
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/03/ukip-comedians-nigel-farage-leftie-comedians
There you have it.
You couldn’t make it up. Because they’ve made it up already. Can the lkeft-wing television “comedians” be prosecuted for breaking the Trades Description Act?
Stand-up ‘comedy’ may well be a preserve of the left but there are plenty of talented wits around who are to the right. What about an HIGNIFY with (say) Rod Liddle in the chair, Pat Condell on one team and James Delingpole on the other? The regulars could be left on just to see them squirm.
Delingpole and Condell on the HIGNFY panel? I would pay good money on pay-per-view to see that episode. For even more hillarity, put Viscount Monckton on, and really see the usual lefty libtards heads explode when confronted with things such as verifiable, scientific facts… often for the first time in their lives.
It would be interesting but the left establishment and in particular the BBc will fight to prevent the serious right being given a voice.
I would like to see Daniel Greenfield ,Mark Steyn and their worst nightmare Geert Wilders allowed to defend Western civilisation and Europe. It will never happen because the liberal left is running very scared now.
You wouldn’t see them squirm. Remember who controls the edit suite.
Russell, now Frankie, turning serious and turning to the … Guardian to pitch their political wares. How long before Ian Katz seduces the hilarious Mr. Boyle onto Newsnight and the irony circle closes?
The BBC establishment is liberal left. We all know this. The Guardian likewise. Farage will never ever be given a break because this bunch of idiots is afraid of him. The more they attack him the better. UKIP is not a party of the rich as Boyle seemes to suggest but the party of the ordinary people of old England and at last they are speaking out. I meet them everywhere. All ages and from the poor to the rich. They speak their minds in private and they do not hold back. Farage knows who we are and is speaking for us. Men like Boyle have no idea. Long may this continue this cluelessness amongst the liberal left.
They are fighting the 60s war against the old establishment. Like all generals this is the wrong war for now they are the establishment and at war with old England. They will not win and they cannot win.
The BBC and the liberal-left alliance (including many witless Tories) have promoted ,for ideological reasons, first the mass immigration from the countries of the old Commonwealth ,followed by the uncontrolled tide of ‘EU’ citizens (meaning anyone who ever went to the EU apparently).
London (as well as other large cities, to a lesser degree) has been turned into a kind of Hong Kong .
This has suited the Common Purpose politicians ,with their corporatist and federalist intentions.
Unfortunately for them , they forgot to ask the English people and Old England has woken up and decided to make its voice heard.
In my definition of ‘Old England’ , as an old Londoner ,with roots going back hundreds of years in that city, I include many proud and patriotic English Londoners ,who historically regarded each area of London as their own village.
All power to UKIP and may our ‘leaders’ be dealt with appropriately for their betrayal of the English people.
The Scotish of a national socialist bent have been given free reign in the English media for years. This has given them a strange affliction of believing that they represent some sort of Majority. They represent barely a couple of million people. The English outnumber them massively. We SHOULD find our voice, and that voice is UKIP!
Just read it.
Cripes, Frankie really taking himself seriously now.
Also… nearly 2,800 comments.
Now i can sort of see the point if it has a Disqus ‘Best’ option, but as you can have the first or last dozen or scroll through only, what kind of loon would, or has the time?
He asked, rhetorically.
Why is that all BBC comedians are lefties?
A non-leftist comic tries hard but gets a frosty reception
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-29886175
I believe that it is a prerequisite.
For INBBC:-
Reporting Hamas, Egypt, and Israel-
“Egypt’s War on Terrorism: World’s Double Standards”
by Khaled Abu Toameh.
[Excerpt]
“Egypt’s crackdown in Sinai once again exposes the double standards of the international community toward the war on terrorism. While it is fine for Egypt to demolish hundreds of houses and forcibly transfer thousands of people in the name of the war on terrorism, Israel is not allowed to fire back at those who launch rockets and missiles at its civilians.
“The Egyptians have finally realized that the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip has become one of the region’s main exporters of terrorism.”
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4839/egypt-terrorism-double-standards
I doubt they just ‘realised’.
Simply the tolerance of indulgence wore out as things strayed into home turf too.
BBC please note; this can happen.
Here is a letter from yesterday’s Telegraph which lays bare the man-made global warming myth.
Given the simplicity of its argument – one we’ve seen repeated countless times on this website – isn’t it amazing that the BBC haven’t pursued it with some vigour in their interviews with ‘mainstream’ scientists and the Met Office?
‘ For me, the key phrase in Emily Gosden’s article (“UN climate change report to warn of ‘severe, pervasive’ effects of global warming”) was “if the computer model projections are right”.
Science is founded on two pillars, theory and data. If the data does not support the theory, then the theory is wrong.
In 2007 the Met Office published its model prediction for the decade up to 2014. It predicted an increase in temperature of 0.3C with 95 per cent confidence limits of 0.2C. This means that they were 95 per cent confident that the temperature increase will be somewhere between 0.1C and 0.5C. According to recent Met Office data, average global temperature decreased very slightly during this decade (0.01C).
In any other branch of science, if the data fell outside the 95 per cent confidence limits, the theory would be rejected, or at least require substantial modification.’
This, from Wattsupwiththat, is a very good read by John Coleman.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/04/john-coleman-fires-back-on-the-ipcc-synthesis-report/
‘The IPCC did not say exactly what such a world would look like but it would likely require a massive shift to renewable sources to power homes, cars and industries combined with new technologies to suck greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.’
I think they know what ‘such a world would look like’ – Armageddon.
The BBC doesn’t do science any more.
INBBC’s inadequate and Muslim-biased ‘reporting’ on its Middle East online ‘news’ pages.
Currently, INBBC’s ‘Middle East’ reporting gives priority to Libya (that ‘Middle East country?) – with large sections given over to INBBC Persian, and to its Arabic service- which is largely sourced by Middle East Muslims and aimed at Middle East Muslim audiences, but this propaganda is paid for by British licencepayers!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/middle_east/
In yesterday’s Today programme John Humphrys was interviewing Peter Carey, eminent (leftie) Australian author. Apropos of nothing, Humphrys slipped inj a question : “Rupert Murdoch – has he been a force for good or evil?”
Evil ??? Force for ill, maybe, in some people’s eyes, but the very word evil indicates the BBC mindset about Murdoch.
They never use the word evil about real evil – ISIS, Hamas, and I would add public servants who let thousands of young children stay in the trap of sexual slavery – as well as the evil perpetrators.
I’ve never really gone for the ‘enemy of my enemy’ line of thought and in Murdoch’s case it really would be a deal with the devil.
The man is, without doubt, not on the side of the angels and is vehemently anti-English and has openly said that he wanted to damage the English in any way he could. He has succeeded in that to some extent too.
No, Murdoch may not be evil incarnate but he is definitely a very naughty boy.
I don’t agree. Murdoch has a deep disdain for the English establishment – but that does not mean he hates the Brits.
His battle year after year against the print unions and the huge risks he took over Wapping were the salvation of a varied British press. Noone else had the guts to do it. And on satellite TV, if he had not bet his whole empire on launching Sky (using a Luxembourg licence because the UK had blocked him) we would have had BSB – which was an utter failure, lost tens of millions after just a year.
Sky gave the viewers real choices for sport and films. One result is that the UK Premier League has some of the best footballers in the world. There are problems about the crowding out of home talent – but on many fronts Murdoch has been a force for good for Britain.
I believe he just wants to sell papers, advertising and satellite subscriptions. i.e Make money. I don’t think he gives a rats ass about the politics.
I didn’t say he hated the ‘Brits’ – just the English. There’s a difference 😉 though I’m not sure furriners make that distinction.
He is certainly anti-establishment, here at least, but only because they stood in his way. His main motivation is profit, which is fair enough, but he also wants an Australian Republic and to achieve that he has done his utmost to wreck what he sees as English institutions and culture. By pointing out flaws and breaking up royal marriages he hoped to put the Australian public against the Establishment. There were no other benefits to British society by those revelations. In that respect he is little different to the BBC.
Sure his battle against the unions was a win for the rest of us but he would not have done it if it hadn’t been a major win for him. But it was not Murdoch who kicked the feet out from under the print unions it was Eddie Shah. The Wapping Dispute was three or four years later and benefitted from the precedent of Shah’s win. Plus the behaviour of Scargill and his thugs on the picket line primed the public against the unions in general. Either way it didn’t lead to a change in the type of newspapers we have, they are the same but now fewer in number and of a lot less worth.
I agree with you about Sky but then, thanks to the BBC and the Guardian’s lies, NI does not own a majority stake in BSkyB. I doubt the availability of films that are already available on DVD, often months before they get to Sky, is that much of a draw. More sport is good for those who like sport and I imagine there are a lot of people who like the idea that the terrestrial channels have much less sport than they used to have. Not that great for those who like sport and don’t/can’t afford Sky Sports tho’.
So, all in all Murdoch remains one of the bad guys. Just because some of us have benefitted slightly from his success does not change that one iota.
Murdoch’s disdain for the English establishment started when he was a student at Oxford – long before he went into business.
Yes, Eddie Shah was great – but he lost. Murdoch won against the unions, crucified them.
I don’t see Murdoch as rabidly anti England. If he was, he would not promote people like Kelvin McKenzie, Trevor Kavanagh – and Andrew Neil.
Murdoch is no saint. He has been a brilliant and brave businessman – it would take him about a fortnight to sort out the BBC ! Try reading William Shawcross’s biography of him – warts and all.
And – Murdoch may have expressed Republican views in the past, that is from the Australian angle where it can be respectable to argue for the end of HM Queen being Head of State(let alone bloody Charles) – but I don’t see the Sun or the Times stable or Sky news being anything like as wet on patriotism as the likes of the BBC.
Clever, clever Murdoch, taking advantage of Blair’s hunger for positive PR and spin, even managed a back gate key for regular Downing Street ‘Murdoch spouts’ to ensure his powerful view was included at the very top table where National decisions are made.
Such influence he hoped to continue by passing on the inheritance to Rebecca and Andy, whilst he concentrated on bigger fortunes in the States.
It might still be happening had not Labour decided it was ok for them to have the SUN on side, but not for the ‘nasty party’ and that spoilsport Leveson finally hammered the nails into that coffin lid!
No matter how “evil” you think Murdoch is he’s not in the same league as the BBC.
Murdoch, McKenzie, Kavanagh and Neill, don’t sound like very English names to me.
Wll Beeboids ask:
‘SOROS: has he been a source for good or evil?’
Or do billionaire financers of leftist political causes get an automatic pass?
“…Or do billionaire financers of leftist political causes get an automatic pass?”
I think you answered your own question.
INBBC reports this under ‘Cambridge,’ and under ‘Middle East’-
“Libyan cadets sent home early after Cambridge sex assaults”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-29882117
Will INBBC now campaign for these Libyans to become asylum seekers?
TWAO – Libyan soldiers being sent back home and – guess what – the bBC mentioned political asylum
Watch this space
“BRITAIN ENDS LIBYAN ARMY TRAINING AFTER SEX ASSAULTS”
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/11/04/Britain-ends-Libyan-army-training-after-sex-assaults
Who will Beeboids blame for this?
Baker resigns.
Two contrasting reports:-
1,)
‘Daily Mail’-
“Lib Dem minister Norman Baker quits Home Office but ‘shock’ resignation has been planned for MONTHS and timed to cause maximum damage to Theresa May”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2819616/Liberal-Democrat-minister-Norman-Baker-resigns-role-Home-Office-plans-liberalise-drug-laws-rejected.html#ixzz3I6RQaaEL
2.)
Beeboids’ pro-Lib Dems report:-
“Norman Baker quits as Home Office minister”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29891132
Speaking of contrasts…
http://order-order.com/2014/11/04/royal-society-for-the-prevention-of-accidents-slam-sadiq-khan/
Senior Labour types, cars, mobiles and the law seem to have more than a few problems, more than a few times.
One is sure HIGNFY, MTW, etc will be alllllll over this.
In the spirit of story evolution, I concede this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29897933
That’s tucked away on DP and the website.
Time will tell where else on the BBC estate it crops up such that the public gets to hear of it as they do other straying efforts in Westminster.
Depends on one’s view of the resonance it really has, but if shock and impact was the intention, even empathetic areas of twitter seem to have reacted with a resounding ‘meh’.
Full flounce seems not to be what it was once.
Hence how excited Nic Robbo gets, or tries to drum up, will be interesting. Let’s have a look…
Is time catching up with the longest-serving Home Secretary for more than 50 years? Theresa suddenly doesn’t look so Teflon.
Questions (that way it doesn’t look partisan) are being asked .
This is fun in complement…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11207563/Was-Norman-Baker-an-inside-job.html
With the wonk mockery dial up to 11 already, the BBC is going to look pretty silly trying to take this too seriously.
‘It’s because he wants to try and save his seat, and jam with his band. But he can’t admit that. And his party can’t admit that. They have to keep up the fiction that they have been kidnapped and press-ganged into government against their will.’
But knowing Aunty, they may still try.
Great interview with the guy who founded the Weather Channel in the US 30 years ago. Bottom line – Warmism propaganda, and “scientific consensus” are non-scientific codswallop with a political slant :
http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/02/former-weather-channel-ceo-hits-cnn-over-global-warming-climate-denier-label/
A little luncheon surf review…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/radio-becomes-tv.html?
Feel the transparency shine thro… well, one is sure it burns bright inside.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/how-many-bosses.html?
‘The BBC says it’s playing straight on cutting management numbers’
A review by Mandy Rice Davies follows.
And as if by magic…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/ch-ch-changes.html
He could always be asked what that means once his entourage returns from their West Coast Boys & Girls jolly, but experience suggests the old ‘purposes of’ shutters would soon clamp down.
Here is some news you will never see on the B-BBC – I wonder how many people even knew that 300 Libyan Army cadets were living in Cambridge?? Of course they represent a massive danger to the locals, who are not at all prepared for the kind of ‘fun’ these boys are into –
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Libyan-troops-charged-rape-young-man-Cambridge/story-24051252-detail/story.html
Search BBC Cambridgeshire and – for the moment – just above ‘Warning after dog falls into manhole’ you will find a report
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-29890669
Simply look under BBC England and you won’t see it.
Very surprisingly it was reported on Radio 2 4pm news!
One suspects that the national press will pick up this story and it will be a prominent national news item tomorrow.
Sometimes the BBC simply have to ‘go there’. You can usually tell when they are uncomfortable with a story, however.
Apparently it is the fault of the Ministry of Defence.
I bet the BBC play this one down :
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tower-hamlets-damning-government-report-hits-out-at-use-of-public-funds-lutfur-rahman-9837585.html
You never know.
But if they do venture to a mention, maybe best to check a cubicle garden member’s cousin isn’t work experiencing in maintenance and decides to trip over the power.
The Muslim mafia in full effect eh!
so …. what are they going to do?
lets face it,
apparently influencing voters inside and out the stations
apparently riotous behaviour,
apparently underhand Muslim favour for funds
… what are they going to do?
the IFE influence.
… what are they going to do?
its not exactly a secret is it?
The crooks in No10, better think of how to deal with the crooks in Tower Hamlets, and quick.
On the Radio 4 news from 6 p.m. this was reported … but with no mention of the party that runs Tower Hamlets Council.
Now, let me see … I don’t think it’s UKIP or Tory, though I’m sure they would have told us if it was, but then I could be wrong. Lib-Dem maybe? Oh well, whatever … ….
Hamas?
All the bBBC’s leftie principles are displayed in their current top ‘news’ story on TV. “The BBC has learned that people in rural Sierra Leone are having to build their own Ebola isolation centres.” The whole tone of the report is how terrible it is that people should actually be helping themselves, managing to do so without state intervention or indeed without foreign aid.
I, on the other hand, was very impressed that these poor people had the initiative and the skill to fend for themselves.
Maybe it’s because I’m not a libby-wibby but whenever I read…
‘on a gap year building a hut for schoolchildren’
I have to think,
‘that country’s got 75% adult unemployment can they not find a few effin locals to pick up a hammer.’
Now, all is revealed as the bBBC TV’s main ‘news’ item today is that a ‘British’ Ebola treatment centre has been opened in Sierra Leone, built with our money and appeal donations. Yesterday’s story of inventive Sierra Leoneans bypassing the system and fending for themselves was obviously just to soften us up for today’s launch of the state-run enterprise. I wonder if they took advice from Andy Burnham and mid-Staffordshire NHS, the experts in nationalised death hospitals.
Interesting that they gave this ‘news’ item nearly 10 minutes at the head of the 6 o’clock bBBC1 news, but nothing on their website!
Guess this slipped the BBC’s attention. Pro Palestinian supporters threw caustic chemicals into the face of a worker selling Kedem, Israeli cosmetics, in Glasgow yesterday.
Glasgow girl from Romania via Greece is helped by Edinburgh lass, (from Poland?) after being attacked by Arab supporters for selling Israeli cosmetics.
Isn’t ‘globalism’ enriching as we import the issues, victims, perpetrators and helpers!
Oh for the days when it was just Catholics versus Protestants!
Amazing! They can record this as a ‘race hate’ incident, but a young white guy attacked in a similar way and they haven’t got a clue as to the motive.
Ironic that it took place at the ‘St Enoch Centre’ …
Did I dream it or did I actually see a white English male reading the main News on Sunday?
Probably whited up
Well you certainly couldn’t have been watching BBC local London news because there are just no white faces there.
The Islamisation of England: Cornwall-
“Cornwall terror arrest: Hayle man held under Terrorism Act”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-29892952
‘Anyone fancy an Indian/a Bangladeshi?’ -No thanks.-
How on earth can ‘The man, a Bangladeshi national ‘ be described as a Hayle man?
Last place you had a coffee.
It will be interesting to see how the BBC deals with the big story currently on its front page.
Overtime should count in holiday pay
So far it seems to be largely along the lines of “How much more will I get?” with any concerns from business being met with an implication of “Well, they would say that, wouldn’t they?”.
As the story evolves, I wonder if they will stop to consider that actually, many businesses aren’t bottomless money pits and that if employees are going to get more, something will have to give. Such as Staff face sack after Picturehouse Cinemas agree to pay Ritzy workers London Living Wage?
stupid clueless lefties who are funded by taxpayers money not having a clue how things work. This ruling will lead to loads of people losing their jobs
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-29893809
“A Christian couple in Pakistan have been beaten to death by an angry crowd, after being accused of desecrating a Koran.
Police say their bodies were burned at the brick kiln where they worked in the town of Kot Radha Kishan in Punjab province”
“correspondents say even the mere accusation of blasphemy is enough to make someone a target for hardliners”
… “hardliners”? is that another one, to go along with “conservative”?
Now then BBC, is this … anything to do with Islam?
oh forgive me … “brick kiln”
possible “workplace violence”
For hardliners read misunderstanders.
Well, if this link is accurate, they didnt burn the bodies, they were burned alive.
http://pamelageller.com/2014/11/christian-couple-brutally-beaten-by-muslim-mob-then-burnt-alive-in-oven.html/
It would be nice to see some “Not-In-My-Name” demonstrations, or at least clear disassociation from this despicable savagery, by leading followers of the religion of peace in this country. One can only imagine the pure terror and pain those poor souls faced in their final moments as the Koran-crazed barbarians murdered them, purportedly for desecrating the ludicrous text on which their hate-filled ideology is based.
And how come the plight of Christians, or indeed the plight of minorities in many Muslim lands, never ever becomes a cause célèbre amongst progressive-leftist twits? Of course, they are too busy worrying about the largely, self-made victim hood of the Palestinians.
And there are hundreds of thousands of like minded folk right here. Celebrate!
European Union (and BBC-NUJ):
-are FOR free movement of workers, and of benefit claimants.
John Redwood-
“Benefits, immigration, and the EU.
“The original idea of free movement was the free movement of workers, not the free movement of benefit seekers. Britain is being ripped off and, this time, it’s partly our fault for being mugs.”
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/5330/benefits_immigration_and_the_eu
Good old John Redwood – just wish he and his colleagues did something about it – have commented myself below his Commentator article (Phil Hove):
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/5330/benefits_immigration_and_the_eu
I had the misfortune to catch 5Live news, drive or whatever it is now.
The Kick It Out, educational development manager 😀 … who laughably can t manage to inform the poor little spoilt millionaire
“victims” ? that people sometimes say or write things, that they may, or may not like, especially in football
is there no off switch?
a delete button?
For mere “normal” folk, we just … GET OVER IT!.
For any protected class, Whitehall shills, the House of Frauds
or millionaire footballers?
More tentacles of Big Brother, or should that be Big Society
On Sky top story (6pm news tuesday) Prince Charles calls for Muslim leaders to protest against attacks on Christians. BBC six o’clock news started with Africa and I could find nothing on BBC news website.
The “Defender of Faith” is seriously pissing in the wind if he thinks that’s going to happen. Go back to talking to your flowers Brian.
But, Rob in Cheshire, you forget one crucial letter – the letter ‘s’.
Prince Charles said he sees himself as “Defender of Faiths” (NB the plural ending).
So perhaps he help defend the RoP against the “disgusting Right-wing backlash” [sic].
He doesn’t want to be “Defender of the Faith” in case it offends the usual suspects.
bBC version of the news from London
Tower Hamlets Council ‘culture of cronyism’ criticised
A report into allegations of fraud at Tower Hamlets Council reveals a “culture of cronyism”, the government has said….The investigation has prompted Community Secretary Eric Pickles to send in three commissioners to work at the council for three years. Auditors said the council grant system lacked transparency and some groups got cash without applying for it. The east London authority said it “regretted” flaws in its processes. But it added the report showed “no evidence of criminality or fraud”.
Right so according to the impartial bBC, nothing much has transpired in East London.
Here is how the Guardian reports this story:
Eric Pickles takes over ‘rotten’ Tower Hamlets
The communities secretary, Eric Pickles, has taken over the administration of Tower Hamlets council in east London for two years after an inquiry commissioned by his department found wholesale mismanagement, questionable grant-giving and a failure to secure best value for local taxpayers.
The Evening Standard:
Tower Hamlets: Damning report sees Eric Pickles send in inspectors over ‘cronyism’ and ‘corruption’
A takeover squad was ordered to run Tower Hamlets today after a bombshell report found the council flouted spending rules over millions of pounds in grants and property sales.
Cabinet minister Eric Pickles branded it a “rotten borough” and told MPs there was evidence of “cronyism” and a risk of “corruption”.
The independent:
Eric Pickles sends hit squad to tackle ‘rotten borough’ of Tower Hamlets
A minister is taking control of a “rotten” London council after a damning investigation found evidence of political cronyism and taxpayers’ money being used “improperly and unlawfully”.
Can anybody explain why the bBC version of events is in stark contrast to what everybody else is reporting. If I didn’t know better I’d say they are covering for the Islamic mayor who is known to be a radical Islamic. if so, why?
I carefully read through the BBC report. Can you guess what was missing?
Of course you can – it was the name of the political party in charge.
I wonder who that might be.
UKIP ?
Part of the problem is our corrupt government – not the politicians themselves, but the system.
So your council is corrupt, who you going to tell? The Local Government Ombudsman? Well aside from the fact that it’s the public body with the lowest satisfaction rating and hardly ever finds for anyone it cannot investigate corruption, nor can it pass details to any other agency!
The district auditor? Well I wish you luck because there is a very short list of reasons they can investigate, mostly accountancy based.
Worse than that most agencies won’t investigate until the council has had a chance to do so internally, immediately giving them the heads up something is going on.
Then when they find ‘nothing’ according to Eric Pickles the council can refuse to undertake any further investigations because it costs too much!
Politicians local or national will always seek to protect themselves and their institutions from the public, and they have done for decades. Basically honest people have given way to those who have come from cultures where politicians have only their own best interests at heart, and making money figures high.
The UK is ripe for corruption to take hold, just look how easy it was for Tony BLiar !
Channel 4 News at 7pm led with the Libyan militiamen running amok in Cambridgeshire story.
Predictably 4 took the angle that questions needed to be asked of the authorities – what were they thinking? There should be an inquiry!
In the main I’m with Channel 4 on this one. Although if – like 4 – one takes the relativist multi-culty line seriously there really oughtn’t to have been a problem bringing to Britain a group of lads from any creed or culture from anywhere in the world – ought there?
Afterall lads are lads right? I hear they were often busy scrambling over the fences so as to buy alcohol from local villages – so I doubt they were Muslims (sarc.)
BBC News Channel are having an Ebola Day (get used to it). Mind you, nice guy Gavin Esler brought up the Cambridgeshire story as item two after 7pm.
Our Gavin had a link up with a Beeb-ette interlocutor out in the weather for one of those nice cosy blue-on-blue controlled discussions.
The BBC line was along the lines of yes indeed what were the authorities thinking and perhaps the discipline was a bit too strict.
It gets worse. You’ll all be pleased to hear some of the first batch have claimed asylum – my giddy aunt how does that work? You are part of a military unit undergoing training on the territory of an ally and you can claim asylum from your state of origin? Surley not. Surley there was a clause in the bilateral agreement with Libya to cover this possibilty? No? Blimey it’s like the Olympics.
It gets worse. You’ll all be pleased to hear some of the first batch have claimed asylum – my giddy aunt how does that work?
5 men have been charged with rape, 5 have claimed asylum Something tells me the cocksuckingleftwingethicallattedrinkers will suport their claim for asylum..
And funnily enough Alex Thomson was outside the Army barracks tonight for Channel 4.
Same bloke who thought it “odd” that the murder of Ann McGuire did not bring out the school, priest or police of Leeds in his file for Jon Snow only 24 hours previous.
Yet didn`t seem to think it “odd” that the MOD, Army or Libyan Peoples Bureau gave him no statements.
In other words-the likes of Thomson sneer at priests, schools or Saviles coppers…but won`t presume to ask a Muslim or PC clown from Whitehall about WTF has been going on in Cambridge recently.
A lack of curiosity when its comes to all things Islamic…and , of course, no remorse whatsoever for removing Gadhaffi and not replacing the butt plug that he turns out to have been…we`ll be paying for that for years-but Cameron won`t need to!Prat.
And tonight’s top story on the web site is a Libyan cadet complaining about the “poor” treatment dished out to them. Have the howwid waycists CO’s been shouting at the poor dears, The humanity?! That excuses the rapes and sexual assaults. He also claims no cadet has claimed asylum, hey don’t want to live in a foreign country.
More complaints follow as he blames the situation on dear old blighty for not keeping them informed on their captive comrades. Lessons surely must be learned from Libya in this case.
All reported as fact by Auntie. She’s getting a tad senile in her dotage
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-29923770
Has the BBC ever covered Israeli sport before? Probably not very often.
Tel Aviv derby abandoned after player and fan clash
Only when it makes Israelis look like savages.
Censorship. And propaganda.
http://bbcwatch.org/2014/11/05/the-bbc-news-websites-middle-east-priorities-missile-ignored-football-fight-reported/
Of course seeking an explanation for what floats their editorial boat vs. Being best left unmentioned is going to founder on the BBC’s own ‘purposes of’ exclusions to protect the integrity (sic) of their independence (really sic), so readers will simply need to make up their own minds on what was said and done. Or not.
When I first began reading on the BBC News website about black NFL star Adrian Petersen’s admission of ‘reckless assault’ on his four year old son, I thought to myself, hmmm, somehow, this is all going to be the fault of white people.
Lo and behold, at the end of the article, there were two links to ‘further reading’ on the subject of black Americans and their apparent harsh disciplining of their kids. Here’s the one I read:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29261462
My initial prediction was correct. It is all the fault of white people.
It’s just so……well, I don’t know……disappointingly predictable. The moment of realisation that what you’re reading on the news website of the National Broadcaster is not really news, but a vehicle for ramming politcal correctness down your throat.
Isn’t it more correct to describe the bbc as a racist organisation, by their own standards. For they discriminate against white people at every opportunity.
It is racist against black people too as it infantilises their behaviour and robs them of self worth by not allowing them to accept their individual faults and, thus, not allowing them to grow into fully functioning adults.
By constantly blaming whitey the BBC is actually damaging black people.
The same applies to cultures. By insisting that people from the third world hang onto their old world cultures they are denying them access to the modern world.
Sackcloth and ashes at the BBC. The shrieking and wailing can be heard across the Atlantic
Not only have the Republicans increased their control of Congress, increased the number of state governors, they’ve wrested control of the Senate from that odious little creep, Harry Reed, and now have the majority.
The BBC are already running with this:
“Defending Obama’s economic legacy”
THERE IS NO LEGACY BBC. Its all smoke and mirrors
The real fun starts soon with proper Senate oversight of the criminal activities of the Obama administration.
Impeachment of Eric Holder (if it’s not too late) for his criminality.
The blocking of obamacare.
And my share prices will also go up.
Suck it up BBC vermin.
Obama’s legacy may yet be safe if left in the right hands to tell it often enough.
Acknowledging Umbongo’s caveats on the motivations of the source (they don’t think he went far enough), the pronouncements about President Obama by one of the BBC’s top, embedded (literally, in perpetuity, like the license fee) editors make for an interesting contrast:
http://medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=779:a-match-made-in-heaven-president-obama-and-the-bbc-s-john-simpson&catid=52:alerts-2014&Itemid=245
Analysis from one the BBC has selected to educate and inform that may not be as professional or valuable as the BBC would have you believe.
Not too sure defaulting to accusing the entire country of racism will play this time. Or a right wing media conspiracy.
Heh:
Wrong in 2010, wrong again.