Time for a new one of these. Do detail the bias please!
MID WEEK OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- MarkyMark Nov 29, 13:29
Midweek 27th November 2024
Money well spent … Register of Members’ Interests Louise Haigh Name of donor: Labour Together Address of donor: Langley House… - Deborah Nov 29, 13:28
Midweek 27th November 2024
There may be some civil servants who daren’t sign the petition. - MarkyMark Nov 29, 13:28
Midweek 27th November 2024
Assisted suicide? Keir Starmer will treat lightly on the voters! - tomo Nov 29, 13:20
Midweek 27th November 2024
https://twitter.com/triggerpod/status/1861733143880880618\ [img]https://i.ibb.co/XzBMJX6/Screenshot-from-2024-11-29-13-21-14.png[/img] - Deborah Nov 29, 13:19
Midweek 27th November 2024
Wallace was a barrowboy. He was obviously too stupid to realise other people were not behaving in the same way… - MarkyMark Nov 29, 13:10
Midweek 27th November 2024
“There’s no whip on the assisted dying vote – it’s a free one. Though word is that the boozy soirée… - tomo Nov 29, 13:05
Midweek 27th November 2024
Renewables are expensive rubbish – yet the lying creeps on BBC’s payroll laud them to the heavens at any opportunity.… - MarkyMark Nov 29, 12:53
Midweek 27th November 2024
Labour move into power …. … cannot power country on wind and sun alone … EV push forces factory to…
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 Media Show the head of BBC news said that the mission of BBC News must be to use non traditional methods of communication ie not radio and the TV, to ensure that it could continue its mission to inform people including the younger generations who watch TV very little.
So clearly they must be thinking of other ways of funding than the TV license fee which they must expect to decline quite quickly. This must present the Tories with a chance to finish the BBC off once and for all without too much of a political fight. All they have to do is to firstly, insist that the BBC can only raise public money via the license fee. Secondly, they should give as much assistance as possible to all and any new companies who wish to distribute news and current affairs via new technology. Even five years of this strategy will leave the BBC too far behind to catch up, even under a friendly Labour government.
Heard the same bleating too from the show.
I sensed that the coming meme will be that the BBC is there as “honest broker” for all those competing voices against progress and niceness to Islam-so needs to be treated as public good-and hang the cost if it “includes” all those without a voice.
The old, the traditional-and the young who have yet to meet Moylesy and Grimmie.
Utter claptrap-but the BBC are spinning around and away-so expect more trusties and toadies like Hewlett and Greenslade to bore us to death, whilst creaming our taxes.
The show spent ages as well on The Sun Page 3 non-issue…again, another pop at Murdoch, a plea for reason as set out by the Guardian and Clare Short…so thank Allah for the BBC huh?
And now PM-where everybody but Islamic State is in the dock over its inevitable beheadings soon to follow. Only the BBC would blame Japan or Jordan for not being chatty Kathys with IS.
It`s as if the BBC never see what IS are-who makes them up-and their sole reason to kill…bloody Page Three…and NOT Islam!
So blame the Japs, the Jews…anybody but Muslims, and their Satanic Perverses.
Communicate what? My objection to the BBC is that they have abandoned the remit to educate. I am disappointed that during the New Labour reign the law has been significantly changed such that the age-old definitions have been transformed through the government allowing radical groups to to change law out of all recognition. Of course, the murky world of NGOs and charities – with income in the billions, tax light – lobbying government is ignored with the BBC choosing not to shine a light on all these groups that are allowed to anonymously create significant changes in law that affect our responsibilities before the law. Given that ignorance before the law is not allowed, we need to know. Major changes have not had the BBC explaining what is being proposed and the research and justifications for the changes so that the public know what is happening particularly on the mass medium, TV. Radio is a little better but not much. People are before the courts mystified by the charges they face with juries confused. An example would be same-sex marriage, a momentous change. Now the BBC were all over the politics of this change but what about programmes on anthropology, history, theology, philosophy, economics, etc, of what “marriage” is and how this change in the definition could be rationally understood. This is only one aspect but the BBC seems to be content to keep us in ignorance and treat us like peasants subject to capricious law making. It has the resources so this “dumbing down” is a deliberate strategy because the BBC chooses not to direct light into these areas that suit their politics and of which they betray the anxiety that we may not like it if we get a bit of education on these topics. Tyranny occurs when the population is kept ignorant.
The BBC only employs ignorant people, the non-ignorant ones have retired. Reading the Guardian helps with ignorance, as does not reading the Mail, Express, BBCbias, Weatheraction, GWPF and Google Scholar. But the BBC sometimes has to talk to someone from UKIP, so that could damage the ignorance within the BBC, but only if they delved a bit too deep into conversation. Ignorance is what identifies people as left-wing, they need it for the ability to believe in the many fictions within the BBC Bubble.
27 “likes”? For someone suggesting reading the Express makes you more intelligent? Required reading in the Mensa space group no doubt.
Whoosh!
They won’t understand the ‘whoosh’ reference either.
I think you are being harsh. Mr Pinder was suggesting a dichotomy regarding correct and incorrect politics. He gave a list – and it could be a lot longer – of publications that are seen as opposing the political mindset of the BBC. So, the Express is in there and you think this is read by people who are educationally challenged. Well, it takes all sorts. Mr Pinder wasn’t suggesting an intelligence divide but a political divide in the media and that the BBC political editorialising and content could come straight from the Guardian, which it does as anybody who works in the BBC knows. Mr Pinder, I think, was asking for some diversity in the BBC output beyond this unrelenting pandering to the leftist Guardianistas. And I agree, because after reading the opinion heavy Guardian I thing it intellectually shallow, very different from 30 years ago. Reads more like Socialst Worker early 1980s.
Surely we need to wait for some evidence of success in running the country by the Labour Party before Guardian readers can claim intellectual superiority? It’s a fact, as Maggie liked to point out, that Labour always runs out of other peoples money. Patrick O’Flynn, ex-Express, now UKIP, has a better grip on reality than any Guardian writer. But then, reality is boring when you can endlessly pontificate in a vacuum.
Unfortunately, there is a sizeable portion of the electorate who depend upon their standard of living from the government through welfare provision. They are rationally only interested in what they can get and Labour, particularly panders to them. That section big as it is is noisy and is not concerned with whether there is something called “growth”; they are only interested in extracting income and resources from the state and see the latter job to expropriate income and wealth from the product sectors of society. Their view of the world is based on the state transferring payments to them. So this extractive bloc will be heavy weight on the economy and will complain about any cuts in their unearned income or rather that bloated Third Sector will. And, of course, this charity/NGO Blob has open access – with staff going backwards and forth between the BBC and the Blob – to the BBC, LBC and Sky with endless tales of suffering from the “Cuts”. Now Mrs Thatcher could not deal with this, can Mr O’Flynn? This is not just a British problem but the singular thing about the this country is its unique welfare system and its “needs” based provision.
I agree with all you say. One day the house of cards will tumble and attitudes among the indigenous population will change. Most likely by that stage it will be too late for UKIP, or anyone else, to recover lost ground. I just made the point that, at least, O’Flynn and the Express do have the wit to understand our current predicament. The Guardian still think ‘things can only get better’.
If you do not read the Express how do you know it is for the intellectually challenged? If you do read it doesn’t that make you intellectually challenged, by your own criteria?
It’s the other way round, the Express is the newspaper least likely to censor scientists, scientific information and scientific debate. And therefore it is advisable for intelligent people to buy this newspaper, as its support for UKIP means that informed people like Roger Helmer could mention information from Weatheraction or the Mensa Space group, and other information censored by the BBC, which would otherwise remain unknown outside these groups for years.
Don’t expect him to understand that, Richard, as his head will have exploded on reading the words ‘scientific debate’.
‘QUESTWHOOM, DEFENDER OF BBC IMPARTIALITY, IN ATTACK ON RIGHT-WING NEWSPAPER SHOCKER’
‘….the BBC choosing not to shine a light on all these groups that are allowed to anonymously create significant changes in law that affect our responsibilities before the law.’
At the time of Leveson I don’t recall the BBC questioning how ‘Hacked Off’ – in reality a collective of far-left activist groups who want to severely curtail press freedoms, or rather the freedoms of those news organisations they disapprove of – managed to wield such power with our political leaders when the regulatory framework was being discussed.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9963263/The-truth-about-Hacked-Offs-media-coup.html
The UKIP manifesto for the election has 100 reasons to vote UKIP:
No 39. Reviewing the BBC licence fee with a view to reducing it: Not abolishing it but: No 30. Introducing the ability for citizens to initiate national referenda: Means that we can initiate a national referenda to abolish the licence fee. Also in the mean time we have: No 40. Taking non-payment of the licence fee out of the criminal sphere: Also, this would help with identifying the incompetence and low intelligence of management on issues such as climate change at the BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit: No 71. Encouraging and protecting whistleblowing to get to the bottom of poor performance.
BBC’s Holocaust ‘Questions’ = Stirring it up for Jews
Holocaust Day is inevitably a very sensitive time for Jews all over the world. This year perhaps more so being the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, as well as the current reminder caused by increasing anti-Semitic attacks throughout the world including Britain.
So what does the BBC see as fitting questions to be asked and answered at this time, and by whom?
Well the first is on a programme called The Big Questions. This week it comes from Salford and the question being asked is ‘IS THE TIME COMING TO LAY THE HOLOCAUST TO REST’.
So let’s consider first what the holocaust might mean to most Jews.
It was not the first period that a particular society that Jews were living in decided to demonize and persecute them, despite all contributions those Jews had made to that society. While any minority in a particular country might feel that much more nervous than anybody else, recurring as often as it has, makes it that much more ‘alive’, especially when what has been meted out to them has been so severe. Half the number of Jews on the planet were wiped out by the Nazis.
Now it’s fair to assume that if on the whole life was fairly secure for Jews throughout the world, that Holocaust Day might be viewed as a thing of the past, probably never to be repeated, and would diminish in its importance. But considering the most recent widely reported attack being just over a week ago in Paris, following numerous others there and elsewhere, its significance not only remains, but increases.
So we can encapsulate the significance of Holocaust Day as being a reminder to Jews that ANY SOCIETY will sacrifice them as a minority if it believes it will serve them for another purpose. Jews are expendable, regardless of any contributions made.
With this in mind we need to see just why it is the BBC, who want continually to present themselves as caring and concerned, might be so insensitive to this.
As we see with their anti-Israel coverage of the Middle East conflict, they have no problem sacrificing the State in order to appease and promote Muslims, regardless of whether the actions and mindset in any way conforms to our own values.
So in their way, the BBC is the very real force within our society that makes Holocaust Day also a prediction to Jews about what might be coming here.
Just to make sure that their agenda makes its mark on the public, although they undoubtedly excuse it when facing criticism, on this week’s Question Time from Finchley, where the largest population of Jews in this country live, who do the BBC think as a fitting person to have on the panel?
George Galloway!
We shall see tomorrow just how this pans out.
In the meantime here is the Big Questions programme referred to as well as some observations by BBC Watch and Honest Reporting with links to other articles.
On the exceedingly rare occasion, the BBC asks for public opinion
instead of its own pneumatic Islamophile narrative.
Are Muslims Demonised – A hour of the most cringeworthy apologists, handwringing Beebots, and … Mehdi Hasan
Doesn t George Allahway, want Finchley to be a “Israel free zone”? no Jewish food, no Jewish scholars, no Jewish products, no Jewish tourists, no Jewish academia?
… because THAT is what he is saying, Israel is the eternal home, its spiritual home too, of all Jewish people.
Perhaps he just hates it, because Islam isn t a race
George knows what he’s saying, replacing the word Israel with the word Jew in any of his rants will get him in deep trouble with the law, that’s why he does not use the word Jew. His target audience knows what he means when he trots out the usual attacks and apologies for bloodshed. As devious as a bag of snakes.
What we have here, is a bunch of ultra left wing arseholes continuing to act with a schoolboy mentality of where they will do the opposite as everybody else in which to be seen as…different.
So when the majority say white, they say black. When the majority say jump they lie down. School children rebel by doing the exact opposite of what good manners dictate.
To these people they know best and if you don’t subscribe to their way of thinking it is you who are wrong. What makes the uber left even more dangerous is over time they have taken over positions of Power in the UK:
So we have MPs who subscribe to the above train of thought, only today the bBC reports that we in the UK (Not Europe,Not Russia,China,Africa, America, but the UK) have to reduce our consumption of meat in which to save the world. The same thing transpired with our Electric generation. I work on an Army camp and we have had to subscribe for some time now to Op TRAID. Where we are told just hours before that we have to shut down all electrical outlets and go home. This is part of the measures instigated by big government in which to make up for the shortfall of electrical power generation in the UK due to the closing down of power stations, and replacing them with. Wind turbines.
In the UK we are currently being told by all the political parties that they will find money from this and that part of the country in which to fund the NHS. Yet the very same MPS have inked into law that we continue to pay £17 billion a year to third world countries to spend as they like. This is after report after report states that the vast majority is not only wasted, stolen or misspent but that the people in need don’t see 5% of the total outlay.
The very same people who are screaming lets get rid of the holocaust are the same ones who scream in your face….”The Crusades” as an example of western intolerance against the brown skinned man. Yet the Crusades pale in significance when we look at how an Angry Genghis Khan on seeing one of his ambassadors return minus his head , decided to eradicate Islam from the face of the planet. Starting at Iran he got as far as Syria before he died and his eradication of Islam from planet earth stopped. Yet how many people know about that, we all know about the Crusades. The same goes for the Armenian, Greek, East Pakistan and Hindu kush genocides of people by Muslims. All of which are in the millions and yet the left refuse to mention them, but wax lyrical about the genocide committed by the Jews against Palestinians. Yet since 1948 a lot less people have died at the hands of the Jews than in each and every country which borders it. Yet to the left..Israel can only be Evil.
Which is why they have no problem bitching about the Holocaust
Pounce, isn’t Finchley local to you? Will we see you asking a question on Questiontime?
Sorry Deborah, I moved from NW7 to be closer to a young lady called ‘Levy’
And will be moving back once she gets another restraining order.
Wow cutting do you do children’s party’s ? [but not in your friends at the BBC way ]?
Scotty screamed:
“And will be moving back once she gets another restraining order.”
But Scott, you forgot to mention that the restraining order is yours because every bloke your Mother brings home, you try to Rodger up the Gary Glitter.
I reckon it’s dez, but difficult to tell with these lefty defenders of the BBC – they are all equally proficient with their ad hominems.
It’s not Scott. He’s too busy watching Russell T. Davis’ gayfest on Channel4 and its Freeview channels. W
It’s not Scott. He’ll be too busy watching Russell T. Davis’ gayfest on Channel4 and its Freeview channels. Three series spread across three TV Channels takes up a lot of time.
I never thought I’d say this, but Andy S is, for once, not completely wrong: the poster above wasn’t me.
Still, he made up forty that brief aberration of accuracy by following it up with another of his fabricated assertions – which he was so obsessed over he tried to write it twice. Poor lad. You’d think he’d prefer to spend his time learning how not to be an ass, but still.
Fyi, even though it’s none of poor Andy’s business or anyone else’s: we were watching The Good Wife last night, and we’ll catch up with Cucumber and Banana at the weekend. They’re both rather good, and a lot of my straight friends who are less hung up than the numpties on here are enjoying them, too.
“Scotty” needs to stop as it’s not funny.
“Scott” says enough stupid things on here that Scotty’s attempts are superfluous.
Demon is only saying this because he wants to hide the fact he fancies me.
I cannot believe that BBC title:-
‘Is the time coming to lay the holocaust to rest?’
I really can’t. And my money supports it! I’m ashamed.
Perhaps it would be far better to lay the BBC to rest?
Maybe theyre just a little embarrassed by the blizzard of Holocaust guilt inducing propaganda theyre feeding us now, given that it has not been the only genocide and some are rather more recent.
Do you seriously think Danny Cohen Director of BBC Television is even considering ‘laying it to rest’?
Just an excuse to champion why we should not, I imagine!
Slight correction – I just noticed the Finchley edition of Question Time will be next week 5/2/15.
the bbc bias i want to detail involves a certain stephen nolan at the weekend,he was only back one day from his holiday in the usa and he was off on his usual anti nigel farage and ukip bashing,yes gerry the fake conservative hayes and mohammed i shout alot shafique on the paper review on friday seem to look forward to insulting ukip and nigel farage always prompted by nolan who always seem to drag up and find some ukip story and a comment by farage or one of there members,it happens every weekend on the nolan show and i have to wonder has he and radio 5 live got this in built bias against ukip,i think they have.
Five Live is the BBC’s poltical channel and is their attack dog to take on anyone who does not share the BBC political persuasion. They are concerned with the “right” and will use any negative stories. Of course, similar stories attributed to the left will be ignored or downplayed. What the purpose of Five Live is to create a drumbeat that will instal in lots of people a subliminal idea that looking to the right of Labour is a place full of dangerous ideas and people. The worrying thing is that LBC shares the same political mission to stop the electorate from drifting towards UKIP and the Conservatives. What is Global up to?
Noticed Beeboids, Coburn, News presenters etc, heavily wearing Red….orders from Liebour masters perhaps ??
I’m sure Coburn was the slapper who launched into a Tory MP during a studio discussion just prior to the last election.
Having allowed the Labour retard to spout on and on about the economy it came to the Tory who pointed out Brown’s disastrous failure in advertising that he was going to sell the gold reserves at a bargain basement price, thereby depressing the price even lower. Cue slapper to bellow “Oh you’re not still banging on about that are you”
The BBC’s impartiality on display for all to see.
‘Oh you’re not still banging on about that are you.’
Er, yes is the obvious answer, and with a lot more historical accuracy than the BBC still bangs on about Thatcher.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/11374765/BBC-World-Service-under-threat-from-Al-Jazeera-and-nationalist-news.html
The BBC needs more money. That’s a surprise.
Danny Cohen £320,000 director of Televison:
One of the BBC’s highest-paid executives last night defended his huge pay packet and said that his £320,000 licence fee-funded salary was at ‘a significant discount’. Danny Cohen, the Corporation’s Director of Television, even said that he could earn twice as much money elsewhere.
I just don’t know how Cohen makes ends meet, having to slum it down with Yentob and others on 300k. I mean, Mark Byford, before his job was done away with, used to get nearly three times that much (£949,000 a year).
The key word here being ‘earn’. All levels of the BBC ‘receive’ money. It can be argued that few of them actually ‘earn’ the money.
typical rich leftie – they are all the same
I had the misfortune of hearing Giles Fraser doing ‘Thought for the Day’ this morning, if he is what passes for clergy in the Church of England these days then God help us!
I’m looking forward to the day (probably in an parallel universe) when Pat Condell does it.
Be glad youre still getting a CofE clergyperson!
Give it a few more years and it will be Imams, Rabbis, Gurus, Pastors, Witch Doctors…
No problems with Rabbi’s or Guru’s , Rabbi Lionel Blue used to be on thought of the day, a funny, thoughtful non judgmental man who happened to be homosexual, didn’t stick it in your face, likewise the Sikh Guru who they used to have, another thoughtful friendly man, no problem what so ever with Sikhs having worked with them for years, friendly, humane people like us, lots in common, like a drink, would be happy to stand alongside any of them in a fight, both far better than the usual C of E dullards.
On the general subject of the tyranny of left wing political correctness, bias and social engineering (such as we see daily at the BBC), it may be worth reminding ourselves that the Nazis were a LEFT wing organisation. The party’s name was “National Socialist German Workers Party” abbreviated to Nazi. Your thoughts?
There’s a programme called Palace of Shame on Radio 3 on Sunday, the Sunday Feature, about the destruction of the summer palace in China by Elgin. What’s the odds do you think that they’ll emphasise the barbaric savagery of the Chinese Emperor or will it be a condemnation of the British troops? Tricky one, isn’t it? (I’m going with the Flashman version myself.)
I think I know where this will ultimately go.
It’s a lead into clueless George Clooney isn’t it and his demand that the El Jin marbles be returned to the Pantheon.
And I kid you not, Clueless cannot pronounce Elgin and does not know the difference between the Parthenon and the Pantheon. And I’d hazard a guess and say he doesn’t know which countries they’re in.
I put it down to that ridiculous film “The Monuments Men”. Let an actor play a part and all of a sudden he’s a leading authority.
That’ll be the Chinese emperor who considered all white people to be less that dogs. ‘You don’t have to honour a promise to a dog’ was one of his aphorisms IIRC. He reaped what he sowed.
NB The Flashman series is a good way to see another view of history. They may be fiction but they are based on accurate research. They are very funny too.
It’s not really difficult to spot the BBC’s agenda when it chooses to cover a news item.
I say that because the BBC studiously ignored Christine Lagarde, the head of the IMF when she praised the British economy.
“IMF chief’s stunning endorsement of the British economy: Christine Lagarde says UK is setting an example to rest of the world”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2912493/IMF-chief-s-stunning-endorsement-British-economy-Christine-Lagarde-says-UK-setting-example-rest-world-talks-Cameron.html
Not a peep from the BBC
Equally when the ‘messiah’ deigned to praise the UK economy:
“Obama backs David Cameron over the economy and says US and UK are ‘standing out’ while other countries struggle”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2914159/Obama-backs-David-Cameron-economy-says-UK-standing-countries-struggle.html
Again, not a dickie from the BBC. Probably ‘not newsworthy’ in their parlance.
Well it’s the same with education matters isn’t it. I mean, some sexual deviant from Ofsted blunders into a school and demands that pre pubescent girls give an account of what rug munchers get up to and then demands from another child what muslim means, and when the hapless child, being stumped for a answer, uses that dreaded word ‘terrorist’, all hell breaks loose.
And how does the BBC cover that? Well as you’d expect from the BBC. It’s full rebuttal mode innit! Cos they’re Christians ain’t they. And how heinous can they be.
“Grindon Hall and Durham free school inspectors defended”
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-30952940
Yep the BBC are full throttle covering the defence in its entirety with barely a passing nod to the real issue, so it came as a real surprise to see the BBC airing this:
“Teacher Andrew Duffell banned over boy sex act claims”
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-30701892
Good grief I thought, the BBC giving space to cover some deviant’s homosexual acts with a minor. Whatever next!
But then this is the BBC and I come back to their agenda, and what they choose to tell you and what they choose not to tell you.
Here’s the missing bit from the last story:
“Teacher Accused Of Abusing 14-Year-Old Campaigned For Labour in Key Target Seat”
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/01/28/teacher-accused-of-abusing-14-year-old-campaigned-for-labour-in-key-target-seat/
Whoops. But then you can never rely on the BBC to give the full story can you. Just be thankful that the accused wasn’t a representative from Ukip. On the news , on the hour, every hour with Labour trash queuing up to be interviewed by an obliging BBC.
As a postscript and in case any of you were wondering tomorrow’s BBC will be bringing you an update on “Muslims fear backlash”
I had exactly the same thought when I saw this story covered (properly) by Breitbart. Can you imagine the fuss if it had been a UKIP activist?
In fairness, it’s not just the BBC doing this, it is also most of the MSM – which demonstrates the illusions of choice we are offered by the ‘elite’.
No doubt the Guardianistas will weep if Labour doesn’t get in this May. But they’ll soon get over it and get back to the game they so enjoy. But any chance of real change? Not a hope! Whichever of the big three gets in, everything will continue to slide downhill, much as it has for the last sixty years.
I’m gonna sound thick here, but…
The big three? Who’s No. 3?
As far as the Lefties at the BBC are concerned, they think the Lib-Dums are still important.
This isn’t to be wondered at, given how hard the BBC worked to promote the party prior to the last GE. That backfired when Clegg teamed-up with Cameron, but many BBC types still harbour a lot of affection for the party as an alternative Left wing option.
They base it on the seats in the commons, and currently, due the the unfortunate fact that the libdums are in Government (God help us), the libdems must be considered a serious major party. After all, they are in power and are making a right old mess of our laws.
Clegg – an object lesson in why televised debates shouldn’t be taken seriously.
Has Islam Not BBC (INBBC) noticed this?:-
” The West — Desensitized to Islamic Violence ”
By Raymond Ibrahim.
[Opening excerpt]:-
“Following the January 7 massacre at the offices of Charlie Hebdo in Paris, where Islamic gunmen killed a dozen people because the satirical magazine had mocked the prophet of Islam, one thing has become clear: the amount of atrocities committed in the name of Islam all around the world have become so frequent, so ubiquitous, that other, lesser hostilities by Muslims, which might once have been newsworthy, are now completely falling by the wayside, seen as minor and insignificant—commonplace, almost expected.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/01/raymond-ibrahim-the-west-desensitized-to-islamic-violence
So I’ve got home and noticed that Israel was attacked by the followers of Mohammed in the north of the country from across the border in Lebanon resulting in the murder of two people. The bBC headlines reads:
Three killed as Israel and Hezbollah clash on Lebanese border
At a stroke the bbC blur the lines as they report a confrontation rather than a one-sided attack. The reporting of the Islamic attack is further blurred by how we know 3 people died but not who. Now contrast that with any report when it is any Non Islamic country fighting Islamic terrorism and the dead man/mens are terrorists. The bBC usually lets you know that the US/Israel/UK have killed x amount of people, with a number of eye witness reports stating that a wedding, family or a man in a wheelchair was unlawfully killed.
Now lets look at the rest of the bBC article:
Everyone is mindful of the Hezbollah-Israel war of 2006, which lasted a month and caused death, destruction and disruption on both sides of the border without either side clearly winning.
Would that be the war where Israel knocked Lebanon back into the stone age, where each toffu eating liberal around the world bitched at the unequal death toll and where Hezballah went running to the UN demanding a ceasefire. You know that one the left screamed that Israel had lost when it had advanced up to the Litani [River]” (18 miles inside Lebanon) along its entire border. Oh how the idiots screamed that Hezballah had won by destroying so many Israeli modern tanks, the fact remains the truth is so much different from what the bBC would have you believe:
“52 Merkava main battle tanks were damaged (45 of them by different kinds of ATGM), missiles penetrated 22 tanks, but only 5 tanks were destroyed,”
The left claimed that Israel was wreaked by Hezaballah rocket fire, really…
“Hezballah fired between 3,970 and 4,228 rockets during the war. Israel fired 170,000 shells (alone) into Lebanon.
Now lets look at the Photos used by the bbC, the first shows a bunch of Israelis carrying a wounded man. The second shows a number of burning vehicles which ahs the following caption:
“Lebanese officials said dozens of shells were fired by the Israeli military in response”
The question to ask is, does the photo show the result of those dozens of shells. (Actually the IDF only fired 22 shells into Lebanon) no, it shows the aftermath of the Hezballah anti tank missile strike. I can see that clearly, yet how many people here presumed that the picture was taken inside Lebanon.
The bBC, the political mouthpiece for Islamic terrorism the world over and the reason why anti-Semitism is rife in the Uk.
Great job Pounce!
Further to my last, I’ve just watched the bBC video to the above attack. What a f-ing disgrace. According to the islamic cock sucking bBC reporter who tried to promote the image that actually Hezballah and Iran had a right to attack Israel due to their occupation of……Islamic land. Which lesds to that age old leftwing adage that peace will come to the world if Israel retreats to its initial border (Note the Muslims don’t mean 1947 or even 1949 they mean…1947.) Which is strange as a huge chuck of Syria was annexed by Turkey in 1939 (A chuck bigger than Israel) I don’t see any muslims bitching about that. Turkey annexed a huge chunk of Armenia, once again no muslims bitched about that. Northern Cyprus???? then there is Kashmir (Of which Pakistan handed over a chunk to china) Kosovo, again nobody ever bothers to complain yet when the shoe is on the other foot its a bloody human rights crime. Yet does the bbC ever claim it is occupied land???? yeah right its as if the bBC don’t want to know.
Then there’s this little bBC comment
“The cross-border violence erupted when Israeli military vehicles were struck by anti-tank missiles”
Those miltary vehicles were civy pick up trucks Isuzu D-Max to be exact. Now why would the IDF use civy trucks to patrol a contentious border , could it be it didn’t want to inflame Islamic passions and so keep their soldiering somewhat low key. Those civy trucks were hit by 5 Russian made Kornet
anti tank missiles. One of the most advanced AT weapons going. (The same one used by Hamas to attack a school bus) and the bBC forgets to mention that salient fact. Its as if the bBC go out of their way in which to carry out damage limitation for Islamic terrorists.
Which is why at the end of their diatribe agaisnt the Jew the bBC report on Shebaa Farms:
The farms cover an area about 14km (9 miles) long and 2.5km wide, to the south of the Lebanese village of Shebaa, on the western slopes of Mount Hermon/Jabal al-Sheikh
The area has been a flashpoint for violence since Israeli forces withdrew from Lebanon in 2000
Until the 1967 Middle East war, the farms were under Syrian control, but the farmers had Lebanese citizenship
The area was captured by Israel and annexed in 1981 along with the rest of the Golan Heights, a move not internationally recognised
The Lebanese government says the farms are part of its territory, a claim backed by Damascus, but not the UN I wonder why the UN doesn’t support the claims of Hezballah, could it be because the land belongs to….Syria. But with no reason in which to continue its genocidal war agaisn the jew, Muslims require every excuse they can get in which wage war. Yet to the bBC, Islamic terrorists are the real victims.
The bBC, the cock sucking apologists for Allah and his intolerant followers.
Michelle Obama being slightly disrespectful to her Saudi hosts by not covering her head ? Maybe, this chap however was definitely being disrespectful to HIS hosts while raping a 13 year old local, expect to not see this on the bbc.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/01/28/convicted-saudi-airman-sentenced-to-35-years-in-state-prison-for-raping-boy-at/
Not sure how the rights of guests are seen in Arabia but surely there must be some thought given to the duties of the guest, never mind the host.
One cannot complain about people behaving like third world barbarians here if we are not prepared to act as they do there.
Respecting the customs of the host is surely just good manners and if their customs are too barbarian for taste then don’t go there. Simple manners really.
Telegraph Columnist Alex Proud describes ‘Farage’ as an extremist and likens him to Russell Brand on The Jeremy Vine Show (14 mins in).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05056vv#auto
Good. Firms the backbone in the Kippers.
The sneering metropolitan elite now recognise this from time to time, shake their heads in disbelief that UKIP’s vote hasn’t collapsed, and then are shocked again the next time it happens. The vile Kippers are just so stubborn!
How does a politician, who calls for a democratic vote on this nation remaining in an undemocratic European Union, who calls for secure border controls and a control on the amount of people entering the country, be labelled an ‘Extremist’?
According to our beloved Home Secretary giving a factual description of the Religion of Peace is ‘extremism’ and on a par with those who gun down or behead people in Europe going about their daily work.
It is like being arrested for upsetting a tree surgeon when one points out that she is cutting through the bough that she is sitting on.
Who was it who said ” In some countries telling the truth can be a revolutionary act.”?
I was BLAIR
– no, not Tony, but Eric
i.e. George Orwell said almost your quotation.
If you are tired of the rubbish that passes for analysis and opinion in the leugenpresse then Takuan Seiyo’s latest essay on Gates of Vienna is essential reading.
The best description of the liberal delusion afflicting the West I have ever read. Superb analysis and argument.
It requires close reading and needs to be widely read.
“Oppression instead of Admisssion Part two”
Talking of “Lügenpresse halt die Fresse!”.
ZDF was in triumphant mood tonight as PEGIDA’s spokeswoman Oertel and various other organisers have apparently stood down. All to do with Bachmann dressing up as Hitler. Next Monday’s Dresden demo cancelled. Strange the BBC has not picked this up. Are UKIP’s dsys numbered too?
Martin Walser German author (leftist?) opines that PEGIDA has only a few more years to go and that AfD will bite the dust a few years after. The smug self-deluded arrogance of most German politicians and their media lackeys seems to be on Matthew Paris or Ken Clark levels. Like Paris on the “little people” of Clacton, their sneering contempt for the views of their potential voters knows no bounds. Rather than represent the views of the public, they seem to think their job is to rectify the “lower orders'” intellectual and moral shortcomings, in other words their rejection of the usual utopian leftist platitudes on diversity, tolerance and the cuddliness of Islam.
“Strange the BBC has not picked this up”
Actually, there was a fairly substantial piece on yesterday’s PM. Which, it seemed to me, glossed over the “threats” that led to cancellation and indeed the fact that violence only started when the fascists arrived to counter PEGIDA.
However, one phrase really stood out for me, when the reporter said something along the lines of “PEGIDA, who claim to oppose Islamification”. Why “claim”? Is anyone doubting it? Is there a suspicion they’re really targeting the Jews? Or does the BBC wish to put that possibility in our heads to muddy the waters? Leugenpresse indeed.
The meme they are clinging to is that disliking Islam is impossible without being racist. i.e. PEGIDA ‘claim’ to be anti-Islam when in reality they are just racist boot boys, like the BNP and EDL here.
Oh and in case you have missed it the recent attacks in France were not by Muslims at all, not even nominal ones with a misunderstanding of Islam. No they were Mossad operatives, obviously.
So yes, PEGIDA are anti-Jewish. Why? Because they are so there!
Yes, this is what the “claim of being anti-Islamic” means to the German media. It has often been pointed out on ZDF/ARD that the Muslim presence in Dresden is minimal and so Islamkritik is not the “real” reason for the demonstrations. Though some one on a talk show did ask if there are so few Muslims in Dresden why is the mosque there so big.
The media either paints PEGIDA demonstrators as a collection of old and new Nazis or embittered losers and Wutbürger, too stupid and prejudiced to enjoy the new, progressive and vibrant Germany. Some German politicians claim that they want to “enter into dialog” (Dialog suchen) with PEGIDA supporters but this is simply the “listening” approach of British politicians. In other words pretend to listen and ignore.
I think that both of those two you mention are representative of what Reagan was talking about when he spoke of the U.S. (but applicable here) – “We are a nation with a government – not the other way around.” It is unfortunate that so many of the elite in the West hold the opposite view.
Agree, it is well worth the time. You can read Part 1 from the list of Takuan Seiyo’s earlier essays, then go on to Part 2.
Compare and contrast ?…
Cuts in care for the elderly
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-31015807
or spending more on the world service
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31023561
What is your money on ?
Still the bbbc love in with apple then, the only big company they seem to adore.?
All BBC luvvies who live in Hampstead know that Tesco is evil because it has a post tax profit margin of 3% or so ( in the good years). CAPITALIST BASTARDS !
Meanwhile, lovely Apple Inc makes the iPhone 6, which costs Apple between $200 and $247 to build, giving the company a profit margin of 69% on this product. And the beeboids love this firm !
I wonder if it’s anything to do with the fact that Tesco was founded by Jacob Kohen (Jack Cohen ), the son of an immigrant JEW. No I must be mistaken, the BBCs not racist is it ?
Apple are loved by the beeboids because both corporations have the same goals: greater cultural and political control via stealth and ‘reeducation’.
Meanwhile, an article from a strange parallel universe may give another insight into the curious threads that permeate the BBC. And Oscar Wilde went on trial for this?
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/story/stephen-fry-quashes-baby-rumours/ar-AA8Fyrh
also worth noting that students get very large discounts on Apple products to lure them into the fold – the only group that gets a larger discount, larger than that offered to anyone else, is journalists – specifically NUJ members in the UK. Little wonder that every time the Beeb (or most other journalists, truth be told) has to show a PC or laptop or mobile phone, they use an Apple product. It’s all they know.
I’ve literally have just turned on BBc 24 as I haven’t seen the “news” since first thing this morning. I really shouldn’t have bothered it’s a bunch of “reporters” out in the snow telling us about the weather. In one case it looks like the road is completely clear and you can see the footprints from the clear looking road onto the snowy ground. I’ve literally just turned over.
Its that bloody global warming again! Where are Al Beeb’s climatologists when you need them to explain it ?
They’re busy trying to work out some spin to cover the fact that 2014 wasn’t the “hottest” year, evah…
‘Sitting in on a March 1 Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) press conference regarding global warming and heavy snowfalls, I couldn’t help feeling like the chairman of the Senate committee questioning mafia capo Frank Pentangeli in Godfather II. The chairman, listening incredulously as Pentangeli contradicts a sworn written statement he had earlier given to the committee, waves the written statement in the air and protests, “We have a sworn affidavit — we have it — your sworn affidavit…. Do you deny that confession, and do you realize what will happen as a result of your denial?”
The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Third Assessment Report was as straightforward as Frank Pentangeli’s earlier confession that he had killed on behalf of Michael Corleone. “Milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms,” IPCC reported.
That was in 2001. Now, however, with an unprecedented number of major winter snowstorms hitting the northeastern U.S. during the past two winters, the alarmists are clamming up and changing their tune faster than Tom Hagen can fly in Vincenzo Pentangeli from Italy to aid his brother in his time of trouble.’
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/03/02/global-warming-alarmists-flip-flop-on-snowfall/
I’m coming to the conclusion that the BBC wallahs and interviewees receive a cheque for every time that the magic words “Climate Change” is said.
If anyone says it in my presence I ask if the mean Anthropogenic Global Warming. Half give me blank looks. Those who agree, I ask why, then, has there been no warming for the last 18 years, even though the CO2 has continued to increase ?
Treat with extreme caution, unless you’re in the mood for a bit of self harm…Christ…
Bloody hell Banshees!
Good value for your licence fee?
Lets get rid of it. Vote UKIP.
Greenham common must really be missing this lot.
Sounds like me after hearing ‘Nagger Machete’, her voice could cut diamond.
As Stan Freberg’s Banana Boat Song goes, “Too piercing man!”
Who was the old dyke presenting that rubbish? Oh, silly me, it was ‘Albert’ Davis.
It sounded like the nightly gathering of wolves, under a full moon, we sometimes get around these parts.
I am almost at a loss for words to describe how awful this is. Let’s just say it is sh*t.
Amazing how much in-depth analysis Davis was able to go into about this sh*t.
If my dogs howled like that the Lib Dem council would send the dog warden to euthanize them
Just played it loud and my dogs went beserk.
I’ll bet they’re in receipt of a fat lottery grant. Probably a council one too.
Edit: just worked out that Evan said they’re from Belgium. Suspect it will apply there too, though.
Two comments on that pathetic pile od odure.
1. How stupid they looked for pretending to be following it from a book like real words, when that noise could be memorised in under 2 seconds. Any mistake would not be noticed.
2. The way Sturmbannfuehrer Davis said it was a comment on the times “like the end of the Autumn Statement perhaps”. They don’t care that they show their extreme left-wing intolerant bias in everything they say.
ha ha never noticed the books! Only down the rabbit hole would that be considered normal and only the bbc would promote such arty farty garbage
seriously what the f**k?! How can anyone take those people in any way seriously. From Evan Davies’ description before it you can tell he knows everyone at home will be thinking wtf
Surfing twitter this morning, my twitter feed offered this RT from BBC Radio 4 of a tweet from a Sima Kotecha:
—
Christi runs cafe in Leeds Central constituency. “Business has been shockingly bad – not feeling any better off” http://t.co/ekIG6FHaDl
—
That does seem a pity. If a bit free of context. Trying to find out what Sima had to do with R4, it appears she’s one of the thousands of cubicle gardeners at the BBC, specialising in multimedia.
If Today is going to be running random misery tweets from all BBC staff, this next hundred days is going to be a long one.
A new day dawns. The agenda remains the same. It’s snowy so yes I’ve seen another “reporter” stood by the roadside. A story about women in prison. but they pointedly miss out how many get sent there because of TV licence non payment. There’s another one in a bloody field in the snow now!
A long standing theme of the Left is that criminals are victims and deserving of compassion (essentially they confuse depravity with deprivation). An example of this is the campaign to decriminalise women and today the BBC reports that the ‘Justice Minister’ Simon Hughes wants the number of female prisoners to be halved (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31027549). This is arguably a moderate position – there have previously been calls to close down all women’s prisons (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13666066).
The ‘Justice Minister’ goes on to explain that very few women are inside for violent offences. The report on closing down women’s prisons states that it costs £56,000 to keep someone in prison for a year. But the BBC is very coy on some of the reasons that women are in prison. Well, one reason is for non-payment of the BBC television licence. For instance, in 2012-2013 some 50 people were imprisoned for not doing so. Many of these were women, often of very limited financial means. Even the BBC’s in-house newspaper acknowledges this (see http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/24/in-court-non-payment-tv-licence-television-desperate-cases).
People in prison… the BBC’s own blood stained hands are totally clean.
We’ve had 40 years of foaming-mouth, swivel-eyed screeching that women are the same as men… so we say, ‘Fair enough, stay calm, whatever, it’s more fuss than I need to argue..’. But now we have the exception clauses; a drunken man and a drunken woman have drunken sex; the man is a rapist. Women shouldn’t go to jail; seems it’s not ‘appropriate’. And the latest gem is that women should never be prosecuted for false allegations of rape. Seems that’s not appropriate either, other countries don’t do it, blah, blah.
This garbage is only starting to pick up steam. They have big plans for the future. But at some point the population of normal folk will rise up and say ‘Enough!’; I’d guess it will happen when the true state of our financial future becomes clear and this nonsense will be seen for what it is.
The BBC/Left genuinely believe it is “end game” time. They consider that they just about have the laws and surveillance technologies in place to control the population, such that no significant opposition can ever arise. Expect disapproval to become intolerance, followed by persecution.
‘The ‘Justice Minister’ goes on to explain that very few women are inside for violent offences.’
And many men, too. Isn’t what’s important that both are treated equally before the law, or am I missing something?
BBC Breakfast – politically Red Ed, but intellectually Blue Peter
So this morning, just before nine o’clock, we meet Buster – the RAF sniffer dog – ahhh, isn’t he cute
Buster has a row of campaign medals on his dog collar as long as his dog leg – a potted history of the aggravations muslim lands have caused us over recent years – Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan
Beeboid Charlie asks the squaddie dog handler to tell us some tale of daring do –
So we momentarily hear of an incident where Buster sniffed out ‘two suicide vests’
(Gosh, there’s a toy it never occurred to Valerie Singleton to craft from empty squeezy bottles and sticky-backed plastic)
And sadly we know full well what this recent update to the OED means – also, you can IED to the OED – thanks to the ROP)
“….And we made two arrests” says our RAF Red Cap (the man, not the dog)
What’s that I hear in my mind’s ear, coming from the BBC production gallery ‘pity it wasn’t a female squaddie with the doggie’ – watch this space, watch this space.
But naughty Charlie Stayt was getting all boy’s own on us there – naughty, silly Charlie.
Quick, Naga ask a good girl question – “tell me, Buster changed the whole relationship between the forces and the locals….”
Ahhh, isn’t he cute
Now this has me scratching my head. And not because of the thought of dog fleas on the BBC sofa – surely we’ve been told muslims don’t like dogs….?
Ah yes, saw that, while my mind was busy absorbing the 8am headlines, that one of the Sydney hostages in the terrorist siege was killed by a ‘police bullet’
Got that.! It’s the evil police to blame, not those nice cuddly islamic bastards.
They repeated it again at 8:30
Drip Drip Drip
Suck it up plebs
I heard that too. Killed by ‘police bullet’
Sky though have been reporting, for 12 hours, that it was the ‘ricochet’ of a police bullet.
An example of the ‘world’s most trusted broadcaster’ only telling half the story
Up (or, rather, down) to the usual patronising, cringeworthy standard, then.
As I See It,
With your comedic talent, shouldn’t you be writing the script for The Now Show?
It would be fascinating to see the BBC’s reaction to you submitting one.
The BBC reports that Ofcom are worried about the quality of subtitles on television. It’s a commendable enough cause and it can be argued that spending public service broadcasting money on subtitled and signed programming is a better use of money than having dozens of unnecessary BBC tv channels and radio stations.
Of course, this is a BBC report so there is subtle propaganda woven in it. For instance we are given an example of good subtitling – the BBC’s own Wolf Hall – and an example of bad subtitling – an edition of ITV’s Loose Women. See! You can trust Auntie to get it right but not that nasty commercial upstart!
One of the examples of a subtitling error is the phrase “be given to our toddlers” translated as “be given to ayatollahs”. Hmm. I wonder if that’s a Freudian slip rather than an error?
See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31035232
Sky News – that’s Sky; not the BBC – is leading that Rotherham abuse continues. Local Labour talking head, strong PR presence – says she is still getting reports from the past, there must be 2,000 victims, we need a massive support network and – you guessed it – the investment isn’t in place.
No mention of culpability.
Fortunately the Crown Prosecutor for Rotherham is on the ball.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/03/nazir-afzal-there-is-no-religious-basis-for-the-abuse-in-rotherham
Unruffled by mounting media hysteria over the ethnicity of abusers in Rotherham, he suggests stepping back and taking a wider view…
The late Mandy Rice Davies understood individuals like Nazir Azfal.
‘Media hysteria’.
Wow. What next, ‘public hysteria’?
With the overwhelming majority of comments saying that Pakistani muslims are the problem (Top score 709).
The GRAUNIAD have closed the board dpwn.
Very interesting, the guardian buyers, who, whatever you, might think, recognise sexual perversion when they’d see it, are calling a spade a spade, Islam and it’s Pakistani followers are found to be guilty of sexual crimes against British children. That the bbc fails to follow in the footsteps of its core readership must be worrying for senior beeboids. Who would have ever thought that they would see things differently ?
“Anger as BBC pours scorn on tribute to Churchill: Viewers’ shock after docker claims operators were PAID to lower their cranes in Thames tribute.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2930818/Anger-BBC-pours-scorn-tribute-Churchill-Shock-docker-claims-operators-paid-lower-cranes.html#ixzz3QCqOzsLA
Tomorrow, Friday, 30 January, Parliament TV channel, 9:15 a.m on-
“Rebroadcasting The State Funeral of Sir Winston Churchill – 50 years on”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/informationandarchives/archivenews/2015/rebroadcasting_the_state_funeral_of_Winston_Churchill_in_2015
Supplementary.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b050qtgj
Simon Hughes believes that the number of women in prison should be halved. Let me see, they do the crime, but can’t do the time, because they are wimmin. How does that square with their shrill cries for equality, then?
and he did not mention that failure to pay fines for non-payment of the BBC licence tax is why many many women are incarcerated
Others have.
He and the BBC may be regretting raising it now.
In keeping with the BBC’s crusade against men, here are two reports on new laws designed to keep women under the veil of a societal victimhood which hasn’t existed in decades – in fact, not even particularly relevant since the period in which their cultural Marxist sitcom ‘Up the Women’ was taking place but is a staple of sexist feminism and the self-loathing male middle-class paradigm.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-31032756 detailing the papers’ reaction to an amendment to rape laws that says suspects – all simply assumed to be male despite police stats proving otherwise – having to prove that they received consent. I suppose the concept of false accusations doesn’t resonate with the media elite. Not only does it have the potential to be abused even more than our existing biased laws are, but it’s being talked about with regards to historical sex offences as well. How on Earth can you prove consent for something that happened decades ago? Despite which, the BBC only covers the stories that spin this nonsense in a positive light, complete with anti-male terms of course.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31027549
Women should avoid prison because they’re ‘victims’ according to our own justice minister. The BBC makes no attempt to provide a counter view to what is frankly a shockingly misguided and dangerous statement that, once again, gives yet more leeway to women in laws that are already totally in their favour. A lot of men in prison are there because they snapped as well, some of them suffering abuse from women, yet this is again being treated as a total one-way street.
The worst part? The crime stats disproving these facile, sexist assumptions are readily available yet perpetually ignored by the BBC. It’s revolting.
So; to summarize the new approach:
1) Females will be encouraged to make rape accusations.
2) Males will be assumed guilty, unless they can prove consent.
3) Females will rarely be in a position to consent. Being drunk, emotional, stressed, in a junior position, etc., etc.. will negate any evidence to the contrary. (Playing out the Andrea Dworkin principle that ‘All men are rapists’).
4) The idea of ‘a false allegation of rape’ will be considered an historical aberration, dating from a time when it wasn’t understood that ‘the issues are complex’. A female will be free to make an allegation out of spite without fear of prosecution.
5) In the case of (4), (1), (2) and (3) apply.
You’ve got it right. But there are some exemptions to ensure balance and proportionality. Specifically, under age girls in Rotherham will not be allowed to make accusations of rape, what with them being filthy lying white trash and such.
So the cost of dates will increase then?
Cost of theatre/cinema/whatever + cost of dinner + cost of solicitor in attendance.
However, whatever you do, never ever date a solicitor.
There’s got to be an App by now, surely?
A ‘Consent confirmed’ App would be good. Both partners would have to acknowledge that were willingly engaging in heterosexual relations (assuming such a thing to still be permitted). The consent would be logged with the authorities. For maximum flexibility, it would not be binding on the female partner, who could subsequently withdraw the consent at any point during her lifetime. The App would be free to download, but financed by pop-up adverts for solicitors, abortion clinics and the Guardian newspaper.
Simples! When do I get my cheque please?
Technical problem. Forget it.
Be careful out there in the ‘thundersnow’ everyone. All weather is extreme nowadays and much scarier than it used to be. It must be connected to the threat of fracking and all that warming that hasn’t occurred for twenty years.
This global warming, you mean? Still waiting for old Harrabin to arrive, and say “Sorry to have misled you, BBC listeners and viewers, but it’s what I do best, and retractions are not my style, nor that of the BBC”.
http://www.thegwpf.com/nasa-gets-it-wrong/
Ah yes, Roger Harrabin, that over-qualified and objective climate scientist. My 7 year old son’s school science projects are academically more rigorous than the fiction that clown produces.
LOL “Thundersnow” that must be a new one I don’t think I’ve ever witnessed “Thundersnow” perhaps we could just call it a storm?
What make me laugh is the expression “Bits and Pieces of Rain”.
Do they mean “showers” ?
When Sharknado jumps weathergeddon we’ll all be doomed… doomed I tell ye!
Thundersnow eh? I can’t wait till we get a bit of lightningfog.
More talk of thundersnow by the North West reporter stood in his North face jacket in Glossop for no apparent reason. I’m still to experience a “thundersnow” incident, in fact I’m starting to feel left out. Now the definition of this event is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thundersnow a rare event so how come there seems to suddenly be a plethora of Thundersnow. The 22:00 news resurrects a story noted here before about Russian bombers in an area of UK interest. So yes they didn’t penetrate UK air space but it’s now being weaved into the ongoing anti Russian BBc agenda and in this case specifically into the Ukrainian situation that they have now returned to. . Did start to watch questionably time as I used to live near Wrexham. Now turned over as usual the sheep are conveniently forgetting the liebour led assembly are responsible for NHS Wales. One of the sheep is kicking off about privatisation she obviously didn’t see the burnham Liebour privatised more than the cons. Oh no I’ve turned over.
As I have said in other threads , the danger of the ‘bears’ flying around the UK is the fact that they are not ‘squawking’ I E they are invisible to air traffic control and therefore fucking dangerous to civilian air liners. They might think they are clever airmen, others, like me think they are an accident waiting to happen.
It’s January, there’s a bit of snow, an airport is closed for an hour or two, but you’d think it was the apocalypse. Intrepid reporters bravely standing OUTSIDE telling us about the CHAOS and the WARNINGS while talking to us as if we’re children in severe danger of getting our wikkle andy pandies coldy woldy woo….
Don`t Panic , Don`t Panic ,its snowing , so the BBC make 3 inches , look like 3 feet , everyone is stuck in a snowdrift , & its Dancing on black ice . We are all doomed ,the Global Warming handbook temporary hidden under the carpet . Bring out the Children in Need presenters, to go all gooey with the little brats, all getting the day off .Funny I thought we were told ,those children would never see snow again in their lifetime, unless they were taken to see Santa in Lapland, or went skiing in a high alpine pass in January . They have yet to accuse “snow” of being “Hideously White” & racist .I am waiting for that to happen in due course .
Jeremy Vine wonders how to enforce a media blackout on the demands of ISIS.
Well they have managed to blackout the true face of Islam up to now so what’s new?
blackout has negative connotations.
Could be worse it might be a whiteout.
Pretend they’re PEGIDA. Unless, of course, the BBC can find a picture of their leader dressing up as Mohammed.
There’s one here, allegedly…
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/01/29/government-funded-museum-hides-poster-depicting-image-of-prophet/
Same study about Britons’ attitude to global warming, 3 different reports:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-31024149
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/british-belief-in-climate-change-at-highest-level-in-past-decade-%e2%80%93-survey/ar-AA8HUqG?ocid=mailsignoutmd
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/11375124/Britons-believe-in-climate-change…-but-do-they-care.html
It is very interesting to see which points of the study are stressed by which organisation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8ncVV7VKMo
1984 very appropriate. Anyone ever seen a detector van in real LIFE?
Not since the 70’s.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/03/nazir-afzal-there-is-no-religious-basis-for-the-abuse-in-rotherham
Nazir Afzal:
There is no religious basis for the abuse in Rotherham’
This Nazir… is he of any particular erm “religion” ?
Any idea the erm “religion”? … that he so vehemently denies has anything to do at all, with
… the dozens of orchestrated, Islamic child gang rape cases?, that have been proven in court?, from all over the country? …
nothing to do with race, Pak, Bangladeshi
Afghan etc … nearly all, however of a certain erm “religion”
That is so so bad a situation, that is now considered “the norm” in some areas?
“Child rape, grooming of girls in UK is 91% Muslim men but Muslims only 4% of UK population”
Click to access Easy-Meat-Multiculturalism-Islam-and-Child-Sex-Slavery-05-03-2014.pdf
… reply to a post further up the thread?
While on the subject of the forgotten 1400
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/01/29/sky-news-rotherham-hundreds-of-new-cases/
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/story/46795/
Any mention on AlBeeb?
Rotherham*, the town** with more blind eyes than a glass eye factory.
*Though competition is fierce – see also Oxford, Derby, Rochdale, Keighley etc etc etc.
**Try substituting ‘town’ with ‘broadcasting organisation’, and ‘Rotherham’ with ‘The BBC’ – works just as well!
“When Rev Giles Fraser resigned as Canon Chancellor of St Paul’s Cathedral in 2011 over his public support for the Occupy protest camp outside the Cathedral, he picked up a column in The Guardian (where else?) and regular slots on the BBC.
“He provided Radio 4’s Thought for the Day yesterday. Talking in favour of debt redemption (naturally) he quoted from Socrates’ The Republic.
Except it was written by Plato.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2930737/BBC-man-Nick-Robinson-hailed-Cameron-one-respected-political-journalists-revealed-Miliband-s-threat-weaponise-NHS.html#ixzz3QDnocBuD
Shouldn’t such blatant political activism disqualify him from BBC employment – them being so scrupulous about their reputation for ‘impartiality’ an’ all?
Whilst allowing the teensiest of smiles even now, one has to presume there will of course be a superb BBC ‘unique’ difference to explain things..
http://bbcwatch.org/2015/01/29/bbc-pot-calls-the-russian-media-kettle-black/
‘Those observations may indeed be accurate and justified, but one does have to note the irony of the fact that the BBC finds it worth pointing out to audiences that the Russian state media’s failure to report that “insurgents frequently fire from residential areas” is one method used to influence the public’s perception of the hostilities in Ukraine…
…it might care to examine how – and why – its own reporting of the conflict between Hamas and Israel was tailored to influence public opinion in ways apparently not all that different from those used by Russia’s non-independent media outlets.
Jezza, Jon, Wyre, Orla, Tone, Hugs, Mary, Danny, James…. heck of a standard to peg against guys!
Spot on, GW – good find.
“European Scrutiny Committee: Lord Hall to appear before MPs”
https://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/111918/european_scrutiny_committee_lord_hall_to_appear_before_mps.html
-Two weeks ago, ‘Daily Mail’-
“BBC chief Lord Hall locked in stand-off with the Commons after refusing to answer questions from MPs ‘because he is a peer.’
“Lord Hall was accused of ‘hiding’ behind historic Parliamentary rules
Peers cannot be summoned to answer questions in the Commons.
“PM urged Lord Hall to back down, saying the BBC had to be ‘accountable.'”
By JASON GROVES
FOR THE DAILY MAIL.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2910254/BBC-chief-Lord-Hall-locked-stand-Commons-refusing-answer-questions-MPs-peer.html#ixzz3QEEhOgYU
Sack him. Come on Cameron, show some muscle.
Some further juicy links off that politics home link, and then links off the pages linked to.
Turgid but fascinating reading as people paid too much to oversee billions, badly, tie themselves in knots with a mixture of arrogance and ignorance.
The notion that Lord Hall Hall has now graciously consented to attend legitimate questioning is quaint. It was almost like a Lord had been installed to wave a ‘get out of everything’, ermine-bordered card when it comes to holding the power of the country’s least transparent or trusted media monopoly to account.
And that… did not go well, clearly.
He’s been hauled in, and now with the extra baggage of clearly trying to weasel out… for some reason.
The spotlight is on. And that date is bookmarked.
Does that arrogant toff not realise that the MPs are merely making him accountable to the people of Britain – you know, the ones who pay his big fat salary and expenses (twice) and who have a modest hope that, in return, he runs an impartial public broadcasting organisation that ‘entertains, educates and informs’?
It’s about time he realised he’s not being hauled in, in his capacity as a Lord, he’s being hauled in, in his capacity at the head of the BBC. Jeez – what an arrogant, lefty d!ckbrain.
Just when you thought the BBC could sink no lower in their treachery against the United Kingdom, they have now resorted to flying bombers against us.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/01/29/fighter-jets-scrambled-over-south-coast-to-intercept-russian-bombers/
(the clue is on the tailplane fin)
More of a problem than you might realise, Soviet, sorry, Russian ‘Bears’ (TU-95) flying down the same old same old Greenland-Iceland Gap as in the Cold War are no big deal, down to the Scillies and doing a 180 turn and home for supper, job done. These days Putins boys are being a bit naughty, last year they flew off the Danish Coast and frightened a SAS ( no not them) flight and this time they hung a left and flew up the Channel. Problem being these guys do not ‘ Squark’ that is they do not carry the equipment that shows up on modern secondary air traffic radar for civilian purposes, that is they are effectively not showing up on Radar and therefore are highly dangerous to civilian aircraft. They therefore force the RAF to shadow them on their little jaunt so that the fighter which is equipped will show up on radar and therefore so does the ‘Bear’. Basically, just Putin being a prick, ought to know better after shooting down MH17, accidents do happen. Curious that R5 lead with this story at 5 and 6 pm whilst bbc 1 lead with the failing schools story, usually in perfect harmony .
I concure with Mr D1004 , in a previous life in the 80`s , I ……… Russian Bear`s ,can`t really say here, because I signed the Official Secrets Act , but they would of been transiting the UK FIR (Flight Information Region) , a dividing line between,ATC control centre`s ,ie London ATC , now at Swanwick , & Continental ATC. In the Channel area,it borders French FIR, but could be Belgian , Dutch , Danish & Irish (ROI) FIR.The Typhoon`s would of been controlled by RAF Fighter Controllers ,in tandem with RAF ATC controllers, together they would of had to clear the bear`s, under RAF escort through controlled airspace /airway`s, coordinating with the civil ATC , co located at Swanwick, with RAF millitary ATC controllers , who transit RAF aircraft through controlled airspace .
I’ve noticed that it is getting light earlier in the mornings. Is this the result of ‘climate change’?
Gadzooks, Jim, get that peer-reviewed quick and off to the IPCC and it might, just might make the headlines at the Paris conference.
Better still, cut out the middle man and e-mail it straight to the BBC and sign it ‘Some Scientists’ (as in ‘some scientists are saying…..’)
No, you will find that it is probably “luminosity change” brought about by too many people still using old fashioned light bulbs. Expect a report soon in the Guardian and an EU directive banning their use altogether.
Climate change is SO last year.
Is this significant?
Got a bit carried away at times but much of what he said is true and fair.
Supplementary.
Geert Wilders’ message.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cda_1422290952
To find diamonds, one must wade through much mud…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/opinion-formed.html?
We ought to remember that the UK never got to vote on this deal, cooked up over a weekend by Mark Thompson and Jeremy Hunt. There is no mechanism for licence-payers to change the situation, no opt-out, and The Trust has not sought their views directly. Mr Harding can not seriously be expecting manifesto commitments from parties on this.
Remembered well. But worth the reminder.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/opinion-formed-2.html?
‘..and yet, here comes another, as yet unfunded expansionist proposition.’
Empire without the Sums?
‘The BBC a long time ago decided to get out of active moderation of forums, as too expensive and, for the moderators, too boring. ‘
Entertainment of modding staff being a clear priority over, say, objectivity? And looking at such as BBC World News on FaceBook, the introductory ‘please be nice’ requests of tribal nutjobs appears to be going down as well as a Hugs & Mary all-staff email.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/opinion-formed-3.html?
Yes, serving the youth is clearly where the problems lie.
Actually it is, if mine are anything to go by. They haven’t watched any TV in years.
So there are 20,000 BBC staff, comprising a few crinklies at the top on various telephone number salaries, and wadge of mutton dressed as lamb middle management on not much less, overseeing masses of clones in the cubicle gardens desperately trying to fill their niche wiv ‘content’ that no one bar the person in the next cubicle watches.
Roll on Glasto. Word.
On ‘PM’ tonight the BBC were all over the latest league tables for schools, trying to heap as much criticism on them as they could through their usual ‘impartial’ interviewees. (In fact, one of the London heads interviewed sounded very much like one who they had on not long ago telling us his school wouldn’t be offering vocational qualifications as ‘public schools don’t, so why shoud we?’ – but I could be mistaken.)
In the course of this, a woman who works on the ‘Good Schools Guide’ (or whatever it was called) who happened to be a former English teacher and who firmly believed that a school should not be measured just on its academic record, was bemoaning the fact that ‘speaking and listening’ would no longer feature in the marking of English GCSE.
The significance to the academic improvement debate under discussion that what, in exam terms, is now called ‘speaking and listening’ used to be known as ‘oral and aural’ will not be lost on the older members of this forum, nor the irony that the BBC are either too dumb to spot it or, more likely, too offended by such elitist terms to even give it a second thought.
Perhaps if she had said she said that she wanted a bit more oral, it might have been misconstrued.
The BBC seem not to have noticed that Labour are currently in talks with Sinn Fein in connection with this hoped-for ” rainbow coalition” of Labour with the SNP etc.
That the SNP are hell-bent on breaking up the UK is one thing….and its threats to prop up Labour ( if it can) has not been even discussed by the BBC in any meaningful way. But to have SINN FEIN being sucked up to by Labour should surely show them up for what they truly are.
Traitors.
They are natural allies – tooth fairy economics – but the stumbling block for Sinn Fein is the Oath Of Allegiance to Her Majesty The Queen. The first Irish parliament still had the Oath and so Sinn Fein were abstentionist. When they eventually got an elected majority, Sinn Fein members mumbled something which they claimed wasn’t an oath while the speaker accepted that it was. On taking office, they repealed the requirement.
It’s all denials so far, but in a situation where Miliband needs four or five seats for power, we can expect some serious discussion. You may think it would be outrageous for Labour to allow Sinn Fein to take a diluted, Queen-free oath, but the Tory Shadow NI Minister proposed just that some years ago:
Change the Oath of Allegiance to help Sinn Fein, says Tory
I wonder how that would work as Sinn Fein/IRA don’t attend parliament. (Doesn’t stop them drawing the wages and expenses though)
Labour+ SNP+ Sinn Fein is a sure recipe for a disaster. It would be a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise Englishmen in favour of a coalition of which there were members who wished to break up the United Kingdom. Majority minority rule. The goal of the elite.
So desperate are these politicians for power that they do not think things through. It would lead to a constitutional crisis.
At the point of that coalition being the government of the UK, my obligation to be a lawful citizen of said country would go out the window. Many others would no doubt feel the same, my obligation would to be to my Queen not her treacherous government. They might regret their actions, I hope so.
‘Noam Chomsky on Language Aquisition
How is it that we learn to speak and think in language so easily? Philosophers have argued about whether or not we have innate ideas. Whether we are born knowing things, as Plato believed, or rather, as John Locke and other empiricists argued, the mind is a blank slate on which experience writes. Noam Chomsky, gave a twist to this debate in the 1960s.’
Next up, Karl Marx.
Beam me up, Scotty (no, not you).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02hdy9f
JTF. I’ve just watched that waste of license fee. It was like listening to an eight year old trying to introduce the subject of astrophysics. Terrible.
What exactly was your problem with that segment?
Have you decided that because it was Noam Chomsky who said it it must be wrong? If you have, isn’t that called playing the man and not the ball?
Chomsky is one of the world’s foremost linguists. That doesn’t make him automatically right, of course, but it surely means that in a series called A History of Ideas his theory of Universal Grammar, around which there has been so much debate amongst linguists, is worth broadcasting.
Yes, yes, of course.
And when 2 of the 3 in this morning’s trailer were he and Marx, well…..no problem, really, just – uh – struck a bit of a chord, BBC being so leftist and that.
Anyway, on to more important stuff. Where were you on this thread:
?????
Again, Marx’s ideas have had a big impact on the world, for good or bad, so worthy of featuring in such a series of programmes.
What, you mean that article full of generalisations, personal opinions from Alan, and the frankly ridiculous statement that “indeed the BBC in many respects supports the ISIS caliphate”?
‘Marx’s ideas have had a big impact on the world,’ – won’t disagree, ‘for good or bad’, sorry but that is ignorant and deluded.
Just read your history, do the body count, and remove the word ‘good’ from your sentence. You just might start to understand that Marx was a selfish wanchor, who kept a sex slave housekeeper all his life, fathered a child with her but disowned that child, refused to educate his daughters, didn’t understand economics or the value of work, didn’t work, was kept by an allowance from a rich mate (Engels), who by providing such an allowance to Marx (read Bourgeoisie asshole) meant he had less money to pay his factory workers (the proletariat). Marxism in action – do what I say not what I do – and the world burns.
FFS. Marx has been buried once, and tens of millions died as a result of his ideas being ‘put into practice’. Young people don’t get it, but mostly grow out of it. Marxism nurtures evil. We don’t want the lessons of history to be forgotten. His grave should be pissed on by a human with a conscience, not worshipped at.
ChrisL. I’ll take the bait.
You ask what the problem was and ask whether I decided that it was Noam Ch….. Man not ball? Actually, it was a throw away comment to a familiar, polite, fellow poster.
I didn’t mention Noam Chomsky. He is an interesting philosopher and is a serious thinker. However, on the subject of the BBC clip, more relevant contemporary writings on this subject can be found by studying Richard Dawkins (philosopher/zoologist) and even more so, Sam Harris (philosopher/neuroscientist).
Without invitation, you ask a leading question, based on your false premise on my views on Noam Chomsky. Leading to a straw man accusation [play man not ball].
You make statements linking the subject of linguistics to the understanding of the development in humans of the communication tool of language, without appearing to understand the fundamentals of metaphysics, and biology, particularly neuroscience in the subject that the clip purports to be introducing.
Plato’s forms to Noam Chomsky. Discuss in pseudoscience department University of ‘Head-in-the-f&%king’ Cloud. (Angryman – the clue’s in the name ChrisL)
Ffs, I despair at the joke that is modern education.
Vote UKIP. They’ll sort out the schools. And the Universities 🙂
I wasn’t actually replying to you, and nor was I trying to bait anyone but anyway.
I just felt that johnny was dismissing the clip purely because the idea was from someone known to be Left-wing in his politics, which seems to me to be playing the man, not the ball. I don’t really see what’s Left wing about his Universal Grammar theory.
I didn’t realise I needed to be invited to ask questions. How impertinent of me. I didn’t make any such statements either. The clip was IMO a good introduction (and that’s all it claimed to be) to the subject for someone who might never have heard of UG before, who can then go off and read up about it some more if they’re interested.
I do see that my opening question may have come across a tad aggressive, though, and I certainly didn’t mean it to.
‘I just felt that johnny was dismissing the clip purely because the idea was from someone known to be Left-wing in his politics….’
Correct. Another one to add to the cast of left-liberal proxy commentators, thinkers s etc. the BBC use in their brainwashing ideological war day-in, day-out. Were there a smidgeon of balance in their output I could accept your point but, as it is, I can’t.
‘What, you mean that article full of generalisations, personal opinions from Alan….’
There were many quotes from the BBC report which are irrefutable and nothing to do with Alan’s opinion. If you are comfortable with the BBC’s obvious ambitions for local and global dominance of news output, and its desire to censor opinions that don’t fit with its world view, then your motives for coming on here are clear.
Finally, if you wish to criticise Alan for his opinions – formed from many years of analysing BBC output – you would do well more regularly to take up the challenge of the dozens of examples of bias posted on here every day. But somehow I don’t think you will.
I come on here because I’m interested in whether the allegations of BBC bias. Sometimes, I think they do. Other times, I disagree, and I post my response.
There are also occasions when I disagree with things but know that I will get into a long-winded, circular debate with the regulars here that will rumble on forever. For instance, you talk about the BBC’s ‘brainwashing’. That’s such a loaded term, and one I believe to be inaccurate. Same with ‘censor’ – not broadcasting something is not the same as censoring it.
If your insinuation is that I want to censor opinions that don’t fit my world view then you couldn’t be more wrong.
When you come on, and for what reason is for you to know and any reading to judge. Keep it civilised and no problem. FWIW you seem to more than most.
However, expecting to have pearls of wisdom left in the oyster without response if warranted is optimistic.
For instance…
‘I come on here because I’m interested in whether the allegations of BBC bias.’
Best left to the imagination.
‘..not broadcasting something is not the same as censoring it.’
At risk of a rumble, that is a semantic distinction good enough to secure an ECU directorship.
When ‘news’ become ‘not news’ because editorial decision based on ideology trumps professional integrity, it is censorship.
You can’t censor opinions here. The site owners can (retroactively) and rarely do. The BBC can and does. All the time.
Also, if a poster targets BBC editorial staff personally, they are at best a few strikes off a banning.
I find the coordinated references to Alan silly, especially when he is a lot more professional than most BBC staff and does much less than those who jerk knees to play him as much as any argument he raises, before running to mummy if the same is dealt out in response.
Call that a ‘hall monitor’ tactic.
Just a word on brainwashing which I agree is a complex concept. But I recall doing some research on it after the Korean War. Among the techniques was limiting the incoming news given to prisoners, such that only bad news came from home. But only good news about communist matters. Then there were the group discussions, lots of them, lots of mindless chatter – closely monitored and the main agenda always slipped in at every opportunity. In many ways the BBC engage in brainwashing, but I suspect their presenters have been brainwashed before their employment
Hurrah! With yet another BBC appearance fee, we’re topping up the pension pot of……
‘Convicted perverter of the course of justice’ Vicky Pryce, who will be joining Brillo and the usual suspects on ‘This Week’ tonight, BBC 1 at 23.45. (According to the BBC TV Guide).
Tune in tonight to listen to the utterances of a convicted liar!
BBC. Moral free hypocrisy Zone.
Scrap the telly tax.
Note Beeboids’ totally partial mis-use of the word “controversial” here, in final sentence-
“Controversial politician Pim Fortuyn was shot dead in the Media Park in 2002 after giving a radio interview.”
-from-
“Gunman arrested at Dutch news broadcaster NOS”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-31051114
Pim Fortuyn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pim_Fortuyn
In contrast, Daily Mail’ has, in contradiction of Beeboids’ misuse of words, the correct word ‘populist’, not ‘controversial’:-
“The media park in Hilversum, home to many Dutch broadcasters, has been tightly guarded for years, since populist Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn was gunned down in a car park there in 2002.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2932056/Gunman-arrested-storming-studios-Dutch-national-broadcaster-demanding-air.html#ixzz3QFrk9MdV
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
The word ‘Populist’ is replacing ‘far right’. Le Pen runs a populist party. And as it becomes harder to describe ukip as far right racists, they too can be populists
INEQUALITY.
What the political left and Beeboids do not recognise, and do not discuss:-
“The Worst Form of Inequality”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/01/the-worst-form-of-inequality
Labour’s tough new approach to immigration
Notwithstanding all the fine rhetoric, Labour have no shame about trying to out-UKIP UKIP. To be fair to them, the true-believers are not happy; e.g. Dan Hodges:
Ed Miliband has sold Labour’s soul – for 3.5p
Every tiny inconsistency in a UKIP position is mercilessly exploited, usually for three or four days, but the BBC seem remarkably shy to publicise this major piece of hypocrisy from Labour.
BBC Newsnight 27.1.15
Kirsty Sniper?
After exposing, to her credit, Andy ‘slash ‘n’ Burnham as a vacant leftard, Kirsty had a slot about a movie that seems to be quite popular with our friends stateside. I was prompted to take my boy to the cinema last night to watch this ‘controversial’ new film “American Sniper”.
The review on Newsnight consisted of an interview with an American gentleman involved with the film, Kirsty, and (for what reason I know not) a female representative of the RoP (called Heseltine I think?? From the MCB possibly?). Anyway….
The American chap was a bit taken aback by the criticism of the RoP girl who said the film was anti-Muslim and racist. He looked dumbfounded, as though he didn’t understand her point of view and inferred the girl hadn’t done her research.
So last night I gave up my hard earned (+ extra for my lad) and checked it out. I’m not going to review the film or give any spoilers. I found the film very moving and informative. I want Chris Kyle on my team. A patriotic American soldier with love of liberty, country and family. This film is well worth watching. Hollywood? Yes, but a good show.
Anybody who has seen Clint Eastwood’s classic ‘Gran Torino’ will understand that Clint Eastwood is no racist, and is one of the few film makers of recent times to tackle head on the real issues concerning racial and cultural integration in an evolving demographic, a fact that Kirsty as a Beeboid arts buff should be well aware of.
It was ill judged and disrespectful of Newsnight to invite an RoP representative to comment on a film which was essentially a character study and a loosely biographical account of a brave soldier. If leftists and RoP reps wish to have a dig at the Iraqi war, then Tony Blair and George Dubb-ya are the appropriate targets, not the ‘tools’ that they use in their warmongering such as the brave Chris Kyle, or any other soldiers. And not Clint Eastwood either.
Here’s a perfect contrast to highlight the hypocritical mindset of the BBC.
Bearing in mind that Tim Willcox saw no problem justifying the murder of Jews by Muslims for what he sees as the treatment of Palestinians by Israel.
As you point out, American Sniper is a true story based on the actions of an American war veteran who killed 160 extremists while on duty in Iraq.
In this article about it the BBC tell us :
American Sniper film ‘behind rise in anti-Muslim threats’
The ADC said a “majority of the violent threats we have seen over the past few days are result of how Arab and Muslims are depicted in American Sniper”…..
Kyle, a Navy Seal, served four tours of duty in Iraq and killed more than 160 people, making him the most deadly sniper in American history.
The film is based on his book, also titled American Sniper, in which he claimed to have no regrets and referred to those he killed as “savages”.
Now I haven’t seen this film, but I’m aware, as are most here, of what Muslim extremists have been doing in this part of the world. If Clint Eastwood has portrayed them honestly, and I believe he would have, then ‘savages’ would be an apt description, and they got their just deserts before they could murder others.
Where in this article do you see any justification a la Willcox to the ADC that considering the many terrorist attacks perpetrated by Muslims they should understand why the film portrays them as they do? Let’s face it – INNOCENT REAL MUSLIMS WERE NOT KILLED TO MAKE THIS POINT LIKE MUSLIMS DID IN FRANCE TO JEWS AND HEBDO STAFF!
But the BBC are all over themselves to be on the side of Islam.
Here’s what Breitbart has to say on the matter. Shows clearly just which side the BBC is on in our society.
BBC DESCRIBES TERRORISTS KILLED IN WAR BY CHRIS KYLE AS ‘VICTIMS’
Teddy.
The BBC ‘article’ has no journalist accreditation, and no wonder, as it is merely an organ for the ADC to comment. No specific crimes are referred to (other than kiddy ‘twitter and facebook’ comments), in contrast to the real world death-count of at the hands of Arabs on American soil.
I think that there is no intellectual merit in linking the film, with the current awakening in public discourse of Islam and it’s compatibility with Northern European / American values of liberty and protection of property rights.
From my viewing, the film is a loosely biographical account of a particular soldier and the range of physical and emotional effects of war on that soldier, his colleagues and his family. His Job was a sniper. He did his job well. In my view the film did not glorify the grotesque nature of war, but gave a glimpse of it and Clint Eastwood and Bradley Cooper did damn good jobs.
I only wish, as I’m sure you do too, together with most here, that there were more of Clint’s ilk.
We know the BBC would much rather have a film where soldiers were shown to have tortured the poor innocent Islamists than one which restores pride to our society’s soldiers.
Considering the roles which Clint has played so much through his career, it’s great that he’s living it in some way for real. If only a few more would ‘step up to the plate’, instead of the usual left wing PC claptrap that so many ‘celebrities’ subscribe to.
Al Beeb paid for by us, but not fit for purpose .
Where is our Prime Minister ?
Newsnight.
Change of tone. Its slag off Liebor night! I’m dreaming!
Evan’s thrown a sicky, replaced by a bearded smarmy chap who doesn’t let the Labour finish sentences, but more respectful toward the lovely Sarah Wollaston.
Interesting change of tack. Where is the Labour front bench?
Over to QT to check that out.
…a bearded smarmy chap
James O’Brien – the lowest of the low IMHO.
Vote UKIP.
QT packed with Labour stooges.
What a surprise. I will do my duty and endure this drivel.
I cannot lie. I turned it off.
It was the anti-fracking experts that did it for me, particularly the one who got her Doctorate, BSc, Chartererd Mech Engineership, VD and bar from the University of Wikipedia.