Here you go, on-time and ready for your completion! Detail the bias here please and keep it polite.
MID WEEK OPEN THREAD….
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Scroblene Dec 22, 06:34
Weekend 21st December 2024
Great clips there! Was Rik Mayall the voice of Bliar? - Scroblene Dec 22, 06:26
Weekend 21st December 2024
Stay up on your soap box, Lazers, you sum up what most legal citizens in the UK feel, and it’s… - Yasser Dasmibehbi Dec 22, 03:46
Weekend 21st December 2024
I found this interesting. https://youtu.be/tA8zz7niOy0?si=YwrTyvtMxLn2vVvH - StewGreen Dec 22, 00:14
Weekend 21st December 2024
Youtube just pushed a video at me that invading North Korean troops had been smashed cos they were using 19th… - StewGreen Dec 22, 00:09
Weekend 21st December 2024
“Jawdropping” propaganda from woke-Supremacist BBC and police https://youtu.be/IMuafLX0xhQ - Greencoat Dec 21, 23:22
Weekend 21st December 2024
Mantel was a deeply unpleasant, dishonest person. And her books? Next to unreadable. - tomo Dec 21, 23:12
Weekend 21st December 2024
Trump shooter…….. https://x.com/TonySeruga/status/1870474697676325217 - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:39
Weekend 21st December 2024
And that ‘Let’s get ready to rumble’ announcer is still going. He was doing the Tyson fights back in the… - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:35
Weekend 21st December 2024
Right going to watch the Fury fight now. The build up has been about 5 hours long. I think 4… - Lazy Cat Dec 21, 22:28
Weekend 21st December 2024
Indeed. I’ve seen few NK documentaries down the years. In a few of them, I’ve seen clips and interviews with…
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
Who coordinates the Labour message with the BBBC news items? Today both are going on zero hours contracts, watch and weep.
Both sides of the story – As two groups of Fascists take sides in regards to UKIP..
First from the hard left…http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/british-fascists-attacked-an-anti-ukip-meeting-last-night-356?utm_source=vicetwitteruk
And now Britain First…http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9f4_1427754299
A number of business leaders come out in the Telegraph in favour of Conservative business policy. So a spokesperson is invited onto the “today” programme with the interviewer running through the Labour agenda (zero hours etc)
& indicting both his support of it & stating that in his experience SMEs would prefer Labour’s plans e.g. cut business rates not corporation tax. In case the business leaders’ case still had any sway over the audience the next “today” item was Robert Peston telling us that the “guild of macro economists” (or somesuch) were polling 66/33 in favour of Labour’s deficit reduction plans of borrowing to invest.
Do I miss the comprehensive demolition of Labour proposals by the BBC?
No because Peston’s dad is a Labour Peer. He was also floated as new editor of The Guardian.
(H/T NISA re my slightly later post on the same topic) One of the things in the early interview by the BBC’s business editor I recall was the comment that Corporation Tax is paid on profits, but if the business has to pay business rates, then they might not have any profits, so they won’t pay tax. OK, so now we reduce business rates, far enough for them to make profit (really ? just how much difference does this guy think will be made to Business rates to make that happen ? and aren’t Business Rates controlled to a great extent by local authrities, and not Central Government ?) – which would then attract Corporation Tax…..?
Please can someone clarify for me, am I correct in thinking that Business Rates go to fund local economy, councils etc, whilst Corporation Tax goes to the central exchequer? Is that right?
If that is correct, how do Labour plans in this respect help the country as a whole?
(Sorry richard D, I was called away whilst asking my question… our posts crossed)
Business rates are collected by local authorities on behalf of central government where the funds are all sent. They are then given back an amount by central government.
This is a better system, or otherwise the city of London would be enormously wealthy, and certain other urban boroughs completely destitute.
Presumably those would be the same economists that all failed to predict or forsee the worst financial crash since the 20s. As did Preston and the rest of his ilk at the worlds biggest left wing propaganda factory.
Maybe you could provide us with one and then we can see what the BBC missed out . I assume you are familiar with a comprehensive rebuttal of Labours plan.
I’ve tried to find out more about Peston’s claim, in order to point out to you at least one, if not more, of these ‘macro-economists’ who hasn’t held a real job and couldn’t spot the oncoming train of Labour’s colossal recession that so many others did spot – but strangely enough…….
Can anyone point MOCO in the direction of a list of these so-called ‘experts’ and their CVs?
If you believe that the British Labour party managed to engineer the complete global banking crisis and subsequent worldwide recession, then perhaps you would be good enough to explain how they achieve this?
I had it on good authority that about 60 people collapsed the world economy. Brown wasn’t one of them.
Correct, he was just their tea-boy.
‘I had it on good authority…
The BBC heard it on the grapevine, I have learned. From sources, who say.
The BBC has seen a letter sent to…
Balls. He was one.
Let me guess, ‘good authority’ = the BBC’s in house copy of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion ?
‘If you believe that the British Labour party managed to engineer the complete global banking crisis and subsequent worldwide recession, then perhaps you would be good enough to explain how they achieve this? ‘
Simply by relieving the B of E of its supervisory role. As a result the likes of B and B, Northern Rock, HBOS etc – all run by aggressive retailers, not bankers – were allowed to expand their balance sheets unchecked, going bananas borrowing on the inter-bank market and pushing the money out on 125% and self-certified mortgages, buy-to-let and other high-risk property-based lending.
Then when the inter-bank market dried up after the Lehmann Brothers collapse i.e. because no bank wanted to risk lending to another bank, these short-term borrowings couldn’t be rolled over and they found themselves in deep do-dos.
But, as we know, Brown and his co-slimeballs have managed very successfully, with the help of a certain national broadcaster, to re-spin the story over time so that a majority now believes it was ALL the fault of the American sub-prime market, whereas in reality the aforementioned balance sheets were a ticking time bomb which would have gone bang anyway. So, Brown’s one and only suceess story – tell a lie often enough and big enough and people will believe it. If you think that sounds like the BBC’s favourite ‘settled science’, you’d be spot on.
During the mid to late 1980’s I worked in the RBS Centralised Mortgage department in Edinburgh. One of our major competitors was Northen Rock who even than were providing self-certified mortgages, high loan to income multiplier mortgages and loans in excess of 100% of the property value.
At that time we were limited to 3 times the main income plus any other applicants income or 2.5 times the joint income. We were not permitted to provide self certified mortgages or advances in excess of 100% of the property value (only around 10% of all our mortgage book at that time was at 100%).
I know that you will not waver in your assertion that the” world financial crisis was the fault of Gordon Brown” but surely even you can agree that the initial de-regulation of the mortgage market started under the Premiership of Mrs Thatcher.
Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher – change the bloody record
I was an independent adviser during the noughties and, believe me, RBS did loans up to 75% LTV without the need for proof of income. They weren’t called ‘self certification’ loans but that is exactly what they were.
Nortern Rock worked on exactly the same basis as RBS with this type of business. NR did do 125% LTV loans and pretty high income multiples but did NOT do self certification in exactly the same way as RBS ‘didn’t do self certication loans’.
NR’s problem was that they grew too quickly and did not have a sufficient deposit base, therefore relying heavily on short term interbank lending.
The real villain was Halifax who, through their subsidiaries Birmingham Midshires, The Mortgage Business and others leant to anyone who could put together a 10% deposit and who could fog a mirror.
The business ran completely and utterly out of control between 2003 and 2008. It really was a complete joke and anyone with two interconnecting brain cells could tell it would end badly. The only question was when.
125% LTV wasn’t the problem. It was Northern Rock’s multiplier of >1 – i.e. for every £1 it borrowed from a customer (depositor) it borrowed more money (30p) on the open market. It then lent out £1.30 to new borrowers. This is the exact opposite of how Fractional Reserve is supposed to work. HSBC had a multiplier of 0.83 and was able to absorb the losses caused by some people defaulting. Northern Rock still owed money to their creditors, if a borrower defaulted. It also meant that when they couldn’t borrow via Inter Bank Lending, they had no reserves to tide them over.
‘During the mid to late 1980’s I worked in the RBS Centralised Mortgage department in Edinburgh. One of our major competitors was Northen Rock who even than were providing self-certified mortgages, high loan to income multiplier mortgages and loans in excess of 100% of the property value. ‘
Northern Rock was still a building society at that time:
‘Formerly the Northern Rock Building Society, the bank was formed in 1997 when the society floated on the London Stock Exchange’.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Rock#Subprime_mortgage_crisis_and_nationalisation
And therefore subject to the Building Societies Act 1986:
‘Section 6 of the 1986 Act provides that at least 75% of the “business assets” of a building society (or of the society’s group) must be loans fully secured on residential property.‘
http://www.bsa.org.uk/information/consumer-factsheets/general/the-building-societies-act-1986-a-bsa-summary-fift/
So where do you get 100% plus Northern Rock mortgages in the mid to late 80’s?
Nope – I don’t believe that, and I’ve made that pretty clear today on other posts – so what’s your point ?
On the other hand – I eventually found a list of those ‘macro-economists’. Trying to find out their personal affiliations was tedious, but, guess what, most of the list of those who supported the Labour viewpoint, and as far as I could be bothered to go checking out their backgrounds, had affiliations/predilections like ‘lecturer at LSE’, ‘funded by the EU’, ‘never had a real job’, ‘never had to fund a wages bill ‘ , etc., etc. Pretty predictable, really.
A bit like the BBC Kamel Ahmed ‘Business Editor’
Strange that a ‘Business Editor’ has never worked in business ?
Conservatives have an open letter signed by over 100 business leaders, including some significant former Labour supporters, all supporting the Conservatives’ economic policies.
Step up Robert Peston on the Today programme who tries to minimise the effect of this by mentioning some other document, apparently signed by a few ‘macro-economic experts’ who don’t like the Conservative approach and prefer Labour’s economic policies – mainly involving more borrowing and spending. Peston doesn’t give any names for these so-called experts, but says one used to work for the Bank of England, one is a Professor at Oxford, another at Cambridge…..
Hmmmm – as opposed to the signatories of the open letter supporting the Conservatives, I wonder how many of them have actually had a real job, where their ‘expertise’ determined whether they remained in employment or not ? And I wonder whether any of these so-called ‘macro-economic experts’ predicted the car-crash economy that Mr Brtown was taking us into with similar tax, borrow and spend policies on steroids ? I guess we’ll have to wait to find out just what ‘expertise’ these ‘experts’ really have, but I’m not holding my breath for the BBC to tell me the answers to these sorts of questions.
But never mind, good news for the Conservatives, instant hatchet job by the BBC, never to be really followed up so we know what we’re really dealing with on the hatchet job, nothing to see here, let’s move on….. Job done as far as the BBC is concerned. SOP for this election run-up, I am afraid.
“Instant hatchet job by the BBC”
Oh, noes, this is simply timely analysis. Mind you, like ‘not news’ ((c) A. Newsroom Tealady) it can be well complemented by ‘not going near’ if from a friend of the family.
Rather enjoying on twitter the usual po-faced relaying of ‘Ed says’ claims by dutiful BBC editors being viewed as April Fool jokes.
Well, we all know Robert Peston as Labourite in his reporting, but his piece this morning was startlingly blatant. I was quite astonished – as clearly others were. It was indeed a hatchet job, and the Today programme needs to be taken to task over it. Unless stopped, Peston will continue in this vein for the next few weeks.
Odd isn’t it that Peston hasn’t had any scoops under this government? It’s almost as if under the last Labour government he had friends in the Treasury who fed him news. Surely not?
A further thought struck me. I well remember the Labour Party, in previous elections, employed a group called the ‘Instant Rebuttal Squad’ (or some other such similar title) whose job it was to latch on to any positive comment about their rivals, to latch on to any negative reports about the Labour party from either opponents or any media sources, and immediately try to rubbish them.
It would appear that the Labour Party could well have decided not to waste any of their election war-chest on such a group this time round, since the BBC is basically focused on doing the job for them – free of charge !
The “Instant Rebuttal Squad” was run by that odious New Labour prick Matthew Taylor [whose father entirely coincidentally you understand works for the BBC on a programme called (don’t laugh) “Thinking Aloud”].
Maybe you should go through the list and find out how many Tory donors or MPs or Peers there are is the list. You might find a few names that supported the Tory cuts in 2010 and then started to bottle two years later when the economy flatlined.
As to previous Labour supporters these companies supported what in essence were thatchers policies under new labour. Thatcher you will remember liberated the finacial sector with light touch regulation! But that was then.
Unfortunately for you time and the economy have moved on. Different things need to happen if the economy is not to collapse ,Government investment in real industry for a start,not just flogging cheap chinese phones which implictly you seem to be advocating.
I really don’t care how many of them are Tory donors or peers, or former Labour supporters who mysteriously weren’t Labour supporters before…. the important thing I pointed out was that they were industry leaders – people who have met a wage bill – rather than some left-leaning Labourite supporters who, were they to be identified, might well turn out to have never had a real job in their lives.
And you are right – time has moved on, and some politicians have actually gone a long way towards fixing the biggest economic mess left to the country by the Labour Party (although that’s not the first time). Our economy was going very well in 1997 when Labour took over. Following the Conservative economic policy for two years, it was getting even better – then Mr (Boom/Bust) Brown decided he knew better than anyone else, and started the splurge that contributed so heavily to the UK’s disastrous position before the last election – so yes – different things were required….. that’s why we got rid of Labour – the real risk is that spendthrift Labour government might just be allowed to get a foothold again, and with their track record…..
And where the hell does that crack about me advocating cheap Chinese phones come from? The only cheap and nasty things I might have mentioned so far have been Labour envy politics, designed to appeal to the basest instincts of its supporters, with no real benefits for the longer-term economy.
Cheap cracks all round then with the gag about left wing ,never had a decent job etc etc.
The fact of the matter was that the Blair government came in on a tide of disatisfaction mainly because of the massive underinvestment in social provision including health and education . Its all very well you talking about a great economy but the question is a great economy for who and a great economy based on what? As to Boom and Bust then that simply isnt a moniker that can be pinned of Brown. The collapse of the economy in 2008 was the result of forces unleashed and nutured by Thatcher and various US Presidents. As to government debt under Brown,this was coming down after 2005 and at the point of the Banking collapse was 37% .It is a point in fact that ,at that time,the UK was in a far better state than many other major economies including the Germany and the US.
As to the future ,it is evident you arent clear on the nature of debt and why now is a good time to borrow and build. As I have said before,there is no evidence that austerity economics works and the fact that the UK’s recovery is the slowest in decades is ample evidence.
The reference to pedaling cheap phones is a portent of the kind of economy we will end up with. Low productivity,low wage,low standard of services.Great for the 0.5% not so good for the rest. Obviously you are comfortable with that.
Another lazy check list. Thatcher; tick, US; tick, ‘no boom and bust’; tick, ‘it wasn’t us gov, honest’; tick.
Sadly you forgot ‘Four legs good, two legs bad’ but otherwise you are mostly on message. Well done!
No but I did forget to say that growth between 1997 and 2010 under labour was the highest amongst the G6 though!
Like too many others (mainly on the left wing of politics) you have mistaken debt growth for economic growth – anyone can borrow and spend more and more and apparently grow the economy. We found out all too quickly that we had not had real growth at all.
Adding a million public sector jobs, for instance, is not real economic growth.
LOL. You are an amusing chap.
The growth you speak of was around 6% in 1997 and fell consistently until recession in 2008 where it plummeted. As usual Labour took a healthy economy and pissed it way.
So, as a Labour supporter Mr Busman, what is it that appeals to you most about the BBC?
I have made no cheap crack about you personally – neither have I sought to put words in your mouth – yet.
However, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about here. Mr Brown DID follow Conservative policies for the first two years of the 1997 Labour government, because it was an economically sound policy – else why did he stick to it ?
Mr Brown then went on a massive splurge, spending money we didn’t have, running up additional huge debts on a previously innocuous fiscal instrument called PPI, which were off the books, so therefore, along with other wheezes he thought up, they did not appear in the National Debt. The world crisis was indeed aided and abetted by many former world leaders – not least President Clinton – who forced US banks to loan to deadweights who had no chance of paying back their debts -these were then folded into derivatives (i.e. hidden) and the result is what we all know. Nobody disputes that, BUT…what Brown did, and his claim of invincibility when it came to the economic cycle (i.e. where he claimed to have rid the UK economy of Boom and Bust forever – full stop….. left us in a disastrous situation, for which he is undeniably culpable – along with his henchmen Messrs Balls and Miliband.
However, whilst Mr Brown’s behaviour may not have been the sole specific cause of the global financial collapse in 2007-2008, his actions meant that we were in the worst position of all major economies to withstand the problems it brought about. In addition, it brought about the longest and deepest recession the UK has ever seen, and has set up problems for up to 30 years into the future (Mr Brown’s PPI wheeze), and all of that left us with the sickest possible economy. And that is reflected in the length of time it has taken to get any recovery. Dig the biggest hole you have ever dug in your life, and it will take the longest time to fill it in.
And you clearly don’t understand debt – you don’t get yourself out of debt if you just continue to borrow more and more, and use it to fund handouts to your own party constituency. All that does is create more in interest payments, and the cost of these has to be met by the taxpayer. Obviously you are comfortable with that.
Let’s face it, what did Gordon Brown actually build with all the debt he ran up – and don’t tell me about any building funded by PPI – that building has yet to be paid for.
Oh, and some of the knock-on effects of Mr Brown’s behaviour are now beginning to bear fruit – the PPI debts he gleefully ran up are now being charged to the annual budgets of hospitals (for instance) who suddenly find themselves in deficit on their annual budget because of Mr Brown’s collapsing of the rest of the economy – and they will go on for years to come. These contracts can’t be cancelled, and even when the buildings run into virtual collapse, they will still have to be paid for, even if the hospital decides to move to other buildings. Brown left a whole mess for this country to suffer for years to come – and he is already up there as one of the most disastrous Chancellors and PMs this country has ever had.
Re the worst position of all advanced economies go on YouTube and type in Osborne select committee. He will explain it to you
Why is it so hard for you to understand, he inherited the most god-awful mess of an economy from Labour.
There- I’ve explained it to you without using youtube.
The trouble is you don’t provide any evidence.moreover what you say doesn’t tie up with reality. They are statements of an ill informed opinion.That is hardly convincing,
i’ll provide you with evidence, go and have a look at the empty gold vaults that the one eyed scottish gimp left us with after selling all of Englands gold for next to nothing to prop up his socialist regime.
OK – I’ll play the game just once more. Let’s try the BBC as a reference, then, shall we, describing the economy as still recovering, in 2013, from the ‘longest and deepest recession in modern history’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22290407
– and that’s one more bit of evidence than you have provided to support all the wild claims and assertions you have made, but been unable to sustain any further than a single post, all day.
‘The trouble is you don’t provide any evidence.’
All the evidence is in Richard D’s long post just a few lines above, which you’ve chosen not to dispute.
Even by your own short memory standards Mr Groundhog Day Magical Mystery Tour Busman, that’s a record.
“Low productivity, low wage, low standard of services”. As you say, and what created that economy? What has happened over last six years is simply recovery of public finances. Running up deficits – including the PFIs – at the top of the cycle caused overheating of the economy and asset bubble. The growth rate was an extended aggregate demand injection in a favourable international situation. Brown had the unenviable experience of the leader in Argentine saying that they had been prudent during the boom so that they had the fiscal reserves to sit out the crash. The actual core productive economy did not generate real economic progress. What we actually had was a binge as the public sector swelled. We now have this dependent sector as a drag on the economy but, unfortunately, it has a political lock in the establishment with the result that we have to feed its insatiable maw. New Labour did not enhance the technological and productive capacity of the economy.
It was PFI; PPI is a different sort of financial scam.
Yeah – you’re right – mea culpa – I managed to correct myself in other posts, but not quickly enough for that one. I’ve had far too many cold calls in recent months about PPI…not a good excuse, but true, and the best I can do at the moment. 🙂
Richard, to pick up on something in your last paragraph of your 1.01 post – the NHS is trying to control costs by moving services out to the community, away from expensive hospital provision. But, as you point out, the Public/Private contracts will require the NHS to go on paying for the hospitals whether they are needed or not. Brown’s financial wheeze has locked the NHS into a pattern of service it cannot afford.
Something else you’ll not see on the BBC.
Richard D I agree with you entirely as that is what actually happened, not the re-written history version we are presented with.
‘The fact of the matter was that the Blair government came in on a tide of disatisfaction mainly because of the massive underinvestment in social provision including health and education.’
And here’s me thinking he got in on the back of ‘Tory sleaze’ (you know, ‘Tory toffs’ in Milibandspeak). Then when he got in presided over more sleaze than a century of Tory governments could muster. But of course, when it’s a Labour minister involved it’s ‘Their private lives have got nothing to do with their government jobs’. Heh, Norman Parkinson and David Mellor cudda done with a bit of that, eh?
And I wonder, would Blair have got elected had he been up front about his mass immigration policy?
What do you think, Busman?
Still, keep up your spinning for Ed – great entertainment and, in your role on here as a defender of the BBC, confirmation every time you post that it is rotten to the core with Leftist bias.
Most of the “Tory sleaze” meme seems to have been orchestrated by Max Clifford. Shame we didn’t know he was a rapist at the time really.
‘Maybe you should go through the list and find out..”
Traditionally, if seeking to engage in comprehensive rebutalling ((c) A. Debating God), that’s kind of the job of the person seeking to offer any counter.
But you are clearly busy today.
Remember, at this difficult time, like postal votes, it’s quantity not integrity that counts.
You are right I am busy. I think it is encumbent on any one that wants to use this as some sort of evidence to verify its not just a cobbled list of a few pro tory donors.I personally do see it as relevant to anything and would therefore not spend time on it.
‘I personally do see it as relevant to anything and would therefore not spend time on it.’
That was well worth typing.
Here’s a free apostrophe for the next time: ‘.
And a few spaces .
‘You are right I am busy’
Plus a soundtrack (sadly for me, ze lunchbreak is over):
I personally do see it as relevant to anything and would therefore not spend time on it.
Well, apart from the lack of a ‘not’, I suspect, your lack of spending time on clear thinking is showing up in other areas as well…. for instance you choose to ignore more than 100 senior businessmen who actually know how to run businesses and know what policies will help them grow, recruit, pay taxes, etc. in favour of what ? Your own expertise in managing and running a business ? I suspect not, but perhaps you could advise us of a single company you have run, so we can see how magnificently you did so ?
If not, then you have simply displayed a very closed mind.
‘Thatcher you will remember liberated the finacial sector with light touch regulation! But that was then.’
Another Groundhog Day with Mr Busman!
Ok, for the umpteenth time please give an example of what it was about Mrs T’s ‘de-regulation’ that got Northern Rock and B and B into trouble.
And whilst you’re there, just how much p.a. does the financial sector contribute to the Excheqeur? Any idea?
P.S. The 2 questions are connected – spot what it is!
Thatcher’s Economic Policies included:
* Belief in desirability of free markets over government intervention. E.g. pursuing policies of privatisation and deregulation.
* Financial deregulation, e.g. building societies becoming profit making banks.
* Encouraging home ownership and share ownership.
All 3 can be argued as reasons for the subsequent funding problems encountered by Building Societies turned Banks and High Street Banks turned Mortgage Lenders.
‘Financial deregulation, e.g. building societies becoming profit making banks.’
Oh, that dirty word ‘profit’! From what I recall banks, through their ‘profits’, have always provided massive funding to the Exchequer (far, FAR outweighing any subsequent Brown-inspired bailouts) and, under Mrs T (and Major thereafter) conducted their business under strict B of E supervision.
And a building society would only lend to you for a) a house b) an extension to your house and c) nothing else.
“Oh, that dirty word ‘profit’!”
Exactly where did I say “profit” was a diry word?
If you object so strongly to the “Brown-inspired bailouts “what do you think should have been done and what impact would this alternative solution have had on the UK economy?
If under Thatcher and Major lenders “conducted their business under strict B of E supervision” how does this explain the aggressive lending policies of the Building Societies turned Banks in the years immediately after the “big bang”.
‘….how does this explain the aggressive lending policies of the Building Societies turned Banks in the years immediately after the “big bang”.
When, exactly?
‘Under the chairmanship of Matt Ridley, Northern Rock had a business plan which involved borrowing heavily in the UK and international money markets, extending mortgages to customers based on this funding, and then re-selling these mortgages on international capital markets, a process known as securitisation’.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Rock#Subprime_mortgage_crisis_and_nationalisation
‘Ridley was chairman of the UK bank Northern Rock from 2004 to 2007, during which period Northern Rock experienced the first run on a British bank in 150 years’.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Ridley
Thatcher’s Economic Policies included:
* Belief in desirability of free markets over government intervention. E.g. pursuing policies of privatisation and deregulation.
Nope, the better interpretation is
‘Belief in desirability of free markets over government intervention. E.g. keeping the dead hand of government and civil servants, in which no great expertise lies for running businesses, out of places they don’t need to be in’.
Government to invest in real industry? What does that mean? Are you suggesting that the government is capable of identifying a sector of manufacturing anf setting it up. A Five Year Plan.
Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher. Change the bloody record.
Poor Clarkson. If only he’d abused a child instead of a producer, then the BBC would’ve covered the whole thing up…
I see in the Daily Mail the weight of Lord Hall’s armoured Prius meant it ran out of charge halfway between his mansion & W1A, and his close protection detail had to tow him in the rest if the way with their Range Rover.
Where’s BBC Click when needed?
Man Hacks Prius to Run on San Francisco MUNI Electric Bus Power Lines http://t.co/oVvVcr0HdM ~Inhabitat http://t.co/70SgAWOMPT
This is an April 1st joke?
He would have to have run out of petrol to have done that!
‘He would have to have run out of petrol to have done that’
As you well know, the use of petrol at the BBC is verboten except on Hypocrisy Days (there are currently 364), so the fuel tank was removed to accommodate extra spokespersons. An all-rubber band Twizy would not have been able to accommodate driver, Lord Pantone and a Cohen-approved spokeselection. Experiments are under way to see about harnessing the power of compressed air from all the raspberrys blown when these fine fellow/ettes issue a daily ‘comfy in the belief all was got right’ statement, the BBC has learned.
It seems until the threat is lifted (still intrigued how they assess such a thing after one email) it seems they are moving his commute to the solar-powered helicopters the BBC keeps on standby for celeb gotchas and watching cars drive slowly around London with people who may be important in them.
Either that or he’s going to liftshare with HRH Chasness.
Excellent. You should be a scriptwriter for ‘The Now Show’ or ‘The News Quiz’. Oh, hang on….
You know bugger all about anything , Clapped out busman. A Prius , is diesel /electric , not petrol . I notice you hardly reply to questions you are asked . I think you are, not real, but a auto response app. located in New Broadcasting House .
Hate to see my April 1 excesses of tease run off in darker directions, but it pains me to point out that a Prius is a petrol/electric hybrid.
I chose it over exclusively electric options as it is the symbolic mode of e-transport still. And gave me an unexpected gift to enhance my initial post, courtesy of MOCO’s welcome intervention.
As I understand it, diesel electrics are now possible, but have come well after the Prius concept was established.
Strange I’ve been sticking petrol in mine for the last three years and it still works.Why would that be?
‘Why would that be?”
Probably for the reasons explained 40′ earlier, making your comment… entirely to be expected.
I considered a Prius. Certainly the economy aspects appealed if little else.
Then there was the reality of the environmental footprint. Didn’t seem quite fair getting others to chip in for lugging around a honking great extra load, and one whose end of life reputation isn’t that great either.
Guess the bus pass didn’t appeal then?
They don’t give me one of those till 65.the rest of it I don’t understand. I thought mpg catered for weight.
‘I considered a Prius. Certainly the economy aspects appealed if little else.’
Even then, in tests, no better than the superb BMW 2.0 litre petrol engine. Then there’s the resale value, then there’s the cost of replacing those batteries, then there’s the ‘carbon footprint’ (giggle) of manufacturing those batteries, then there’s the environmental impact of getting shut of those batteries, then…..(you get the idea).
While I am on about the Today programme this morning, Mr Naughtie was on just before 07:00. Apparently, two cities in Taiwan will be stopping water supplies for two days a week because of water shortages. I was in Taiwan very recently, and visited quite a number of towns and cities. I could easily see for myself that water levels in rivers, lakes and reservoirs were low, but the country is well into its dry season. Nonetheless, there is a drought, but a quick bit of research reveals what the BBC failed to mention – i.e. that the cost of water in Taiwan is one of the cheapest in the world (30 cents US per ton, for both industrial and domestic consumption), meaning that no-one thinks about conserving it at all, and that Taiwan’s ancient water infrastructure leaks more than 20% of the total water supply on the island.
However, be that as it may, Mr Naughtie (after some technical difficulties), gets a couple of ‘experts’ on who are encouraged to tell us about water shortages world-wide, and the effects (like wars) which are destined to follow as water control becomes an issue. You can imagine his incipient tumescence as the first guy mentions the IPCC in passing, and you can almost see him salivating as he pretty much invites them to blame Global Warming, but, for some reason, the ‘experts’ don’t bite, and go on about the lack of water conservation, poor water infrastructure, population growth, and other causes, as being the real culprits in this area….
Mr Naughtie, at a couple of points, falters, apparently almost dumb-founded at the direction the discussion is taking, the interview fizzles out because he’s clearly NOT going to get the responses he wants….and so it’s off to pastures new, rather than letting these guys say any more. Quite amusing, really.
The stuff falls out of the sky on a regular basis in the UK and we still manage to engineer a shortage. Same with energy an Island built on coal what was it they said only an organisational genius could organise an energy shortage in the UK
Israel is helping with water issues – world wide -little reported or acknowledged by the BBC see http://verygoodnewsisrael.blogspot.co.il/2015/03/the-water-of-life.html
‘The stuff falls out of the sky on a regular basis in the UK and we still manage to engineer a shortage.’
I think you’ll find the EU won’t let us, or makes it prohibitive – environmental impact, and all that.
“…Mr Naughtie, at a couple of points, falters, apparently almost dumbfounded at the direction the discussion is taking, the interview fizzles out because he’s clearly NOT going to get the responses he wants.”
Yep – you are quite correct and I think you summed up Naughtie very well; I also listened to that piece on Today this morning and it was exactly as you described. One could almost envision Naughtie fulminating at the unhelpfulness of his interviewees in Not Going To That Place (blaming it all on CAGW). Most amusing.
Do I detect the first stirrings of a return to common sense and genuine respect for scientific uncertainties from some of our climate science commentators? Costing the Earth on BBC R4 yesterday, which examined the state of ‘climate science’, was similarly quite surprising in some of its conclusions – and especially skeptical of the IPCC.
‘do I detect the first stirrings of a return to common sense and genuine respect for scientific uncertainties from some of our climate science commentators’
I dont know, but if you are suggesting that the basic science is incorrect and deniers have some traction then this program did not provide you with any ammunition.
‘I dont know’
As the opening phrase in answer to a question, pure class. Really you should preface all in future this way.
What I don’t what Phil Ford is getting at.! Not appropriate for every mail surely
‘What I don’t what Phil Ford is getting at.! ‘
Clearly. The Unwin with this one strong is.
Deep breaths, now.
The ‘basic science’ you think ‘proves’ the extent of CAGW has not followed the basic Scientific Method, and many of the main progenitors have refused to provide the data/methodologies they have used to be openly scrutinised….. that’s what basic science should be all about.
And you really ought to disabuse yourself from thinking of those people who do not believe that there is any proof of the extent of CAGW as ‘deniers’. Your use of that term implies that they deny that climate takes place at all. There are very few people who believe this – after all, it’s pretty damned obvious that climate changes over time – and has done so from the beginning of time, without any help from humankind for the vast majority of that time. What they do NOT believe is the extent of climate change, caused by mankind, postulated by so-called ‘warmists’, without the real evidence to back this up.
And before you try to quote anything to do with ‘97% of scientists….’ I suggest you look at what that actually means – it refers to about 25.5 people in the whole world.
So what’s the basic scientific method then and why are the datasets they use open access.
Maybe given you obviously know about science you can explain why energy captured over millions of years in fossil fuels can be released in 100 without any effect.
The term denier is well used and understood.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines the scientific method as “a method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.”
In order for hypotheses to be tested, the data, analytical techniques and methods have to be made freely available, so the results can be confirmed.
There – done your job for you again.
Jeez – are you really that simple ? You think CO2 hasn’t been released and existed in far greater quantities in the atmosphere before today ? You really need to do a bit of research yourself for a change.
The term ‘denier’ is wrongly used today in Climate Change terms – the vast majority of you and those like you would like to imply that anyone who does not accept the current CAGW theory (and look up the term if you don’t know what it means) is a Climate Change Denier – they are emphatically not, and it is completely disingenuous for anyone to imply that. Climate Change Denial and non-acceptance of CAGW theories, as put forward today, are NOT the same thing. And it’s amazing how many people, and especially so many so-called ‘reputable scientists’ can’t work that out.
Ok well the scientific method you refer to is an idealised version of how science works and clearly inapplicable in the case of global warming. Actually I would be surprised if there is a scientific method other than run with an idea until the facts no longer fit and you can’t modify it.
To repeat the datasets are available and you are free to come up with your own ideas and publish them. None is hiding anything expect from ignorant spammers. The Data is independently verified from different sources as I understand it.
As to the notion of denier it is quite evident what is meant and very applicable to this site as it happens. Quite frankly debating pedantry when people think that because it’s snowing the world has cooled down is a bit of a waste of energy.
absolutely only snows round my way when it is warm
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
The fundamental process of how scientific hypotheses can be proved to be true is through the scientific method – through challenge and verification.
Only a CAGW troll could possibly come up with the phrase that the Scientific Method is ‘clearly inapplicable in the case of global warming.’ Unfortunately, all of science is based on this methodology – and even more unfortunately, CAGW supporters are getting away with just ignoring that approach
You then say “Actually I would be surprised if there is a scientific method other than run with an idea until the facts no longer fit and you can’t modify it.” The only minor problem there is that unless you follow a basic method of providing the information on which your hypothesis is based ….. how the hell would anyone know if it really works or not, or whether what you say is factual or not ?
Quite frankly, debating anything with you is becoming tedious – you’re looking more like a troll by the second, and your ‘arguments’ hold no water whatsoever. It appears that you have come across some left-wing drivelbase that you dive into and pick whole chunks from, to regurgitate in some form or other – lacking in real facts, loaded with suppositions and just plain fantasy at times.
These are the basic tools of a troll.
Actually you are talking crap but obviously you are too stupid to realise it. How can you have an experiment with the Earth. Moreover the sort of determinism you are talking about is just not applicable in complex chaotic systems. Science went from being deterministic to probablistic donkey years ago.
Science is a way of building models of reality .The weather has a model ,quatum mechanics has a model the universe has a model. Thats the way it works. Sure you can carry out small scale experi ments when you can but the big science deals with models.
God, how obtuse can you get ? Who said a hypothesis needed a physical experiment.
There have been hordes of computer ‘models’ trying to explain the behaviour of the environment. People are trying to check the validity of these hypothetical ‘models’ to determine whether they can reasonably explain climate change. And have been trying for years to get the information on which these models were based. The refusals to provide the basic scientific data have usually tended to be along the lines of “…why would I provide you with the information you need to test my model – you’ll only try to disprove it….” Sheesh – which part of science do these people not understand ?
The models are crap – none of them, for instance, has predicted the 18-year absence of any statistically significant global temperature rise. These models all predicted a continued rise in global temperatures, and some of them even predicted a quasi-exponential rise in global temperatures. They were all wrong, reality doesn’t even fall within these models’ quite wide margin of error. Yet people like you can’t accept these FACTS.
Did you know, for instance, that FACTS trump hypotheses every time ?
I am only surprised that you bother reading his posts.
What can I say, Rob ? I enjoy debate. And someone has to show this stuff up for what it is.
And also, sometimes I surprise myself by inventing a nice new word (i.e one I haven’t come across before) – like ‘drivelbase’ – I like that one, I’m gonna keep it !
Clearly you are unaware then of sea temperature changes. You’re quoting surface temperatures but that doesn’t mean there hasn’t been overall warming
So where’s the experiment gone or have you dropped that from your definition.or are we talking about mental experiments now.
Jeez, you are obtuse – the experiment is to try a model and find out if it fits with the FACTS. You really don’t have a clue, do you ?
In addition, all of the models which have turned out to be wrong were about surface temperatures. There were, perhaps conveniently for warmists, no models of ocean temperatures 20-odd years ago – and there still aren’t – as I understand it there are still no great number of data sensors to rely on.
There is some frantic hypothesis-creating going on that there have been ocean temperature rises, but that somehow these have completely by-passed surface waters and been hidden in the depths, and we can’t really define these because there hasn’t been enough data gathered over any significant period… but – believe us, the heat has gone into the ocean rather than the land……yeah right.
Try dealing with FACTS – you know, these things which have been proven. I know it’s an alien concept to you and your ilk, but just try it for a time – you’ll find the change quite refreshing.
Me and Piers Corbyn did use the scientific method to find the solution.
It seems obvious to use the carbon dioxide Atmospheres of Venus and Mars as a proxies for a solution.
Also, I liked this statement about the BBC in the Mensa article on BBC Censorship.
At the BBC, belief, speculation, assumptions, consensus and political ideology are preferred to facts, proof, evidence, observations, correlations, results from experiments and the scientific method.
A scientific hypothesis can’t be “proved” to be true . It can only be confirmed under various conditions to be consistent with reality. What may seem to be a “good” hypothesis may have to be rejected on the basis of new or more accurate results. Unless you can put real world data into a climate model and the model outputs coincide with real world changes, climate models do not seem to have much predictive power.
The energy is used up you idiot, the man made CO2 released represents less than 4 percent of all CO2 in the Atmosphere, that is less than 16 percent of the increase of CO2 in the last 200 years, some if not most of the 4 percent is Volcanic CO2, and that means that 84 percent of the CO2 was released by Oceanic outgasing, which correlates with an 800 year lag after the Medieval warm period, found in ice core records.
The method used in all IPCC Computer Models was the Arrhenius method. Using the same data, but another method based on thermodynamics, and proved using the CO2 Atmospheres of Venus and Mars, the Unified Theory of Climate by Ned Nikolov & Karl Zeller, finds that CO2 warming is effectively so small it should be undetectable, therefore this is why Climate Change correlates with the length of the Solar Cycle, NOW and in the past.
Science censored by the IPCC and the BBC due to the same charlatans being in control of the Media and Politics through corrupt Environmental organisations such as the Tyndall Centre and the Grantham Institute, full of social parasites drunk on power and money.
But in Britain, Apart from Me, Piers Corbyn and a bunch of Mensa members and Oxford and Manchester Astronomers. I have not seen this mentioned in the media, not even the GWPF has pick up on this yet.
Manonclaphamomnibus should know about the confrontation between Mensa members and the BBC morons, over the “BBC Censorship” article, and with Whittingdale on other matters.
In the mean time, I suggest reading the Weatheraction website.
‘So what’s the basic scientific method then and why are the datasets they use open access.’
Very simply, because they aren’t.
Have a read of ‘The Hockey Stick Illusion’ by Andrew Montford, or a short browse on Steve McIntyre’s excellent Climate Audit website, then come back and argue your case.
Or have a read of this, a pretty comprehensive and damning analysis of the Climategate e-mails:
Click to access climategate-emails.pdf
But then, if you’re honest, being a socialist and a defender of the BBC and its 28gate mates, you know this is nothing to do with science, don’t you?
‘I dont know, but if you are suggesting that the basic science is incorrect and deniers have some traction….’
It is a failed hypothesis, as modelled projections vs real world data have demonstrated.
But you already knew that because you’ve been told. Many times. Mr Groundhog Day Magical Mystery Tour Busman.
Real world data shows warming so I dont quite understand what youre talking about.
Real world data shows no significant warming for more than 18 years, far more than the sort of period that was suggested and agreed, way back in time, would be the point at which Global Warming scientists would have to pay attention, since it then would represent a significant scientific change to the warming trend they purported to have observed before that time.
Somehow that gets lost in translation, too, these days.
By the way, If you don’t understand ‘no significant change in Global temperature for 18 years’ – try a quick Google search. there’s plenty there to help you out.
‘Real world data shows warming so I dont quite understand what youre talking about.’
Liar.
Today is Wednesday, the third day of the BBC election coverage and I’m bored beyond belief. On Radio 4 the Today program just goes on and on. I don’t care what is going on in some obscure housing estate just outside Glasgow, James Naughtie, I really don’t.
I want to be educated, informed and entertained but not saturated in reports that the BBC thinks I want (think of the length coverage of the death and funeral of Nelson Mandala by the BBC).
The BBC often reports on voter apathy but I wonder how much the BBC contributes to this by it’s biased, dull and over the top reporting. Still over a month of this crap to come so I’ve decided to turn off and get some objective views of the election elsewhere and at a time when I want.
Agreed. Boring Britain Clueless. The coverage is a waste of taxpayer’s money.
Ah, but it’s a good wheeze for Naughtie to get up north, at every opportunity, isn’t it?
Much the same on Channel 4 news every night this week – the daft, breathless Guru Murthy allegedly cycling everywhere around Yorkshire and Lancashire, when he’s more likely to have been ferried by car from place to place, and then when the cameras are on him, he pedals into view from around a convenient corner, and there is a reception committee who just happen to be there, waiting for him. That, followed by pointless comments from the “public” and various “experts”
One grinning young female vox pop, last night, when asked about her voting intentions, and why, said “climate change”. That’s as far as we got. Just “Climate change”.
I suppose every night is going to be like this. And these fools will determine the next government.
The only difference between the parties on ‘climate change’ is UKIP’s promise to repeal the ‘Climate Change’ Act. So I presume that’s what she meant, as that’s the only clear choice?
yeah theyve got a guy called Canute in charge of that policy.
Canute was merely trying to prove that even though a king, he was only human and thus powerless against the forces of nature.
So very apt – well done!
So many ignorant idiots invoke Canute as an example of an ignorant idiot.
In Tory HQ, “a lie a day keeps Farage away” appears to be floundering a little … so next they wheel a copy of the “100 Imams letter”, stunt .. no less believable … its only day 4
Clarkson is bearly out of the building and suddenly the usually sofa-bound eunuch Bill Turnbull has to apologise for himself and Ed Miliband “not wearing seatbelts”
Not that this was a Clarkson-esque stunt – our Bill and the Dear Leader weren’t co-driving a pink Ferrari backwards down the Cresta Run with Diane Abbott strapped to the roof disguised as the black Stig
This reckless contravention of elf and sarny was simply a cosy interview across a table in the Labour Battle Bus as it pootled along at 20-EU-Blue-Peter-approved kilometres-p-h and then our Bill asked “Is David Cameron a Troll?”
Friends, I think I just glimpsed the future post-GE
I honestly fear for us all with the likely incoming Labour/SNP Government. I am going to start saving all of my cash as the economy is going to bomb with massive tax rises and interest rate rises on the way. The BBC will blame the Tories though
I am voting for the Conservatives in May
Don’t worry .They are all mad as a box of mad frogs. Just laugh and don’t forget to vote UKIP.
They might be mad as well but my kind of madness.
Emigrate. There’s only one word for it!
I did. Five years ago. Best move ever. If UKIP doesn’t make a breakthrough, the UK is finished. So sad.
Simon ,agree with you too , hopefully we will keep Essex Blue , but Harlow might , be veering towards Millipeed /SNP . Colchester is a Lib stronghold , might get Clacton back too .
Dara O’Brian / Shrek and Ed Byrne traveling the Pan American highway, while in Mexico they did a 10 minute piece on ” undocumented migrants !!! ” that’s a new one, not illegal immigrants or illegal aliens, but undocumented.
Then they toured a local market with the aid of a transgender tourist guide !!! You just can’t make this shit up.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05p2cpf/dara-and-eds-great-big-adventure-1-arizona-to-southern-mexico#group=p02mp6wg
I too saw these two unfunny Irishmen blag a freebie down the Pan Am Highway at our expense.
The few real people they managed to film looked upon these two weirdos as utterly alien-yet the interviews were all with ex-rebels and Sandanista types, and(doubtless) gay/sex change cheroot tooting Sancho Panza types that the World Service have sought out for them.
Noted a lack of security for these two bloated oafs-are we REALLY to believe that they sallied through these “post-Yankee colonies” safely without guns, beefy steroidal types and drug lord permits?
At least Top Gear are honest-Byrne and O Brian( can`t spell his own name huh?) are cultural pimps who`ve seen too much Buena Vista, not seen enough dank cells where Fidel put their likes.
F888in Children of the Revolution-they`ll be doing the Belfast Dublin road trip next.
Phoned-in anti Yankee crap from the BBCs dream team of lefty unfunny Oirishmen.
Still-at least Lenny Henrys Big Bed Card would have been maxed out along the Best Westerns and Hiltons chain up to Panama City.
‘Undocumented migrants’: extreme PC-speak, and by a couple of impartial ‘presenters’/’entertainers’.
Anyone would think the BBC was run by lefties.
Why won’t the ‘man’ just give them their papers?
When’s the last time the beeb ran a poll on its website along the following lines:
‘Should the BBC receive its funding via a legally-enforced licence system?’
Warming to my own theme (even if the bbc probably won’t), each tv licence gets a unique code, with which its holder casts their vote on the aforementioned question on the beeb’s website, thereby avoiding manipulation by bots.
Why on earth wouldn’t this great public service – the envy of the world, a national treasure – seek the approval of those they serve?
There’s one flaw in your plan. The BBC will have the master list of code numbers, so for those who don’t vote the BBC can vote for them – in the pro-BBC way the BBC just knows they would have voted if they’d bothered.
A variation on the Tower Hamlets ploy.
True, my bad – British democracy has ‘evolved’ somewhat in recent years.
There is a classic example of the bBC’s contempt for the licence payer happening every afternoon on bBC2.
In the evening I have been watching recordings of the daily repeats of Hi-De-Hi (not a classic comedy, but far better than today’s offerings). The problem is that the bBC can’t be arsed to show them in sequence, with characters/actors that have left/died suddenly reappearing at random the next day or day after.
On other forums people have complained to the bBC only to receive the standard response that ‘because of varying lengths of episodes and schedules there is a need to show them out of sequence’ . FFS these episodes are all 27 minutes long give or take 30 seconds or so.
It ruins the whole thing, imagine showing a episode of Poldark out of sequence. The bBC probably see the afternoon audience of this program as a load of grey haired UKIP voting indigenous old duffers and not metropolitan or multicultural enough to be bothered.
It reeks of disrespect both to the viewers (licence payers), writers and actors (many dead) of this series.
Are the bBC really fit to be the guardians of (our) wonderful archives when they can’t get this right? which probably in truth is down to some spotty youth who wasn’t even born when the series was made.
All fools day and who happens to appear on R4’s ‘news’ but their resident anti semitic liar and bigot Jeremy Bowen with one of his anti Israeli pro Hamas rants.
How about broadcasting some f*****g truth for a change BBC and put this lying a******e out to grass.
I agree with your sentiment – Bowan’s “interview” with Hamas was merely a chance to put out vile anti Israel propaganda! But the language that you use really doesn’t help !!!!
Like you I also saw Bowen giving the Hamas terrorist leader a platform to spout his bile against Israel. They then followed it with a sob story about some Palestinian who has been conned out of a Banksy mural that he daubed on his front door. This then nicely led them in to a whole piece about how Banksy has daubed his stuff all over Gaza in support of the cause. Queue shots of piles of rubble with his stuff painted on it……pure unadulterated bias morning, noon and night funded by you and me.
The hilarious aspect of this was that the original owner of the door, on which Banksy’s daubing was made, was perfectly happy to sell it on for £100 to one of his brother Palestinians, presumably thinking his fellow countryman was some kind of schmuck (oops, sorry, probably not halal to use that word in this context) and bragging about his good luck in meeting this idiot, since the door was the only thing left standing after his house of cards had been folded up in a war basically started by his fellow countrymen.
Then somebody told him these paintings can make up to £100 thousand on the open market…. cue wailing, rending of garments and gnashing of teeth ( is that halal ? – ah – who cares).
His mate, however was happy to let the BBC know that he had bought the door above board and legally from his willing neighbour (and therefore implied…..who’s the schmuck now, my son…?)
I had assumed this was an April fool’s joke. Are you telling me it’s for real?
Just checked – rest of the world’s media must be in on it if it’s a joke.
I thought it was real. Then when the question was raised, I wondered. It is real; this is from 2012:
http://banksyworld.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/banksy-graffiti-in-palestine.html
But the fact that none of us could tell says something…
Was Bowen’s interview an April Fool joke?
Most of Bowen’s pieces are a joke !
Seriously, though – Guardian and Indy carrying the story – must admit, if it’s a joke, I fell for it.
Maybe we should have suspected, for instance, when the guy who supposedly now owned the graffiti didn’t immediately return it to the former owner, not wanting to be accused of usury.
The BBC would never dare to let the British public laugh at an uber victim’s misfortune. This was supposed to be a sob story. I laughed. A lot.
From BBC News Website.
Extensive coverage for their favourite Ken Loach of ‘Cathy Come Home’ from the wonderful 1960’s.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32128790
He launches the radical (as in edgy and rebellious) Left Unity manifesto.
—Its most high-profile member is Ken Loach, the Kes and Cathy Come Home director, who said at the manifesto launch that the party is “against the logic of the market” which he believes has “failed in every respect—
Has he got an alternative to Capitalism?? I’d like to hear it.
No mention of Left Unity on Sky website.
..
If you want to see the Left’s real alternative to capitalism have a look at the Green Party manifesto. And yes, it was published before April 1st.
100 business leader have written a letter to the Telegraph giving their support to the Tory party so naturally the BBC feels the need to supply a bit of balance and give a bit of airtime to the former MD of Morrison to explain that he supports Labour, disapproves of zero-hours contracts and doesn’t want an EU referendum.
Would that be the Morrisons MD who presided over that company’s decline ?
That is the one – putting people before profits sounds caring until your company goes bust.
He wasn’t the MD, he was the HR director. HR is necessary to the running of the company, given the thicket of employment law we now have, but it has nothing to do with the actual running of the business. He could organise the employment contracts at a whelk stall, but he would not know how to run the thing.
Human Resources – surely a resource is something you exploit and then discard? I much preferred ‘personnel’.
100 business leaders give their support to the Tories.
Well I never. Who would have thunk that?
We’ll be having 15 Trade Union leaders writing a letter to the Guardian stating that you must vote Labour next.
Personally, I believe all these ‘buisness leaders’ should keep their traps shut.
Sorry, Alan…..? didn’t quite catch your second name.
Quelle surprise ,right on que the Millipeed`s henchmen produce a letter written to the Guardian /Bbc , from a bunch of socialists shites.
For what political reason does Islam Not BBC (INBBC) irresponsibly still label Islamic State as “militants”?
INBBC’s “militants” = Islamofascists.
‘Jihadwatch’-
“Islamic State justifies using child executioners by invoking Muhammad’s example”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/03/islamic-state-justifies-using-child-executioners-by-invoking-muhammads-example
Turkey.
Beeboids seem to be politically coy about labelling the murderers of the Turkish prosecutor.
The term such as “far left” does not appear in Beeboid reports.
But ‘France 24’ has-
“Turkey rounds up dozens of leftists after prosecutor killing.
“Turkish authorities on Wednesday rounded up two dozen suspected members of a radical leftist group behind a bloody hostage standoff that left a top Istanbul prosecutor dead and shocked the country.”
http://www.france24.com/en/20150401-turkey-rounds-dozens-leftists-after-prosecutor-killing/?
Could be a “Top Trumps” dilemma here. Who would win in a Leftists versus Islamists stand-off on the victimhood index ?
In the 1970s all the talk at the universities was about the evil of the Shah of Iran, and that monarch’s overthrow was championed by the Iranian students and the Left, wanting a secular socialist state.
The end result was not socialist, but an Islamic theocracy, and then the mob switched their allegiance from the Left to the Islamists.
It was probably Khomeini’s rabid anti-Americanism that motivated that mob.
Khomeini’s media managers were astonished and obviously pleased, that the West’s media was so sympathetic to their cause. They found it very helpful, though they wondered whether the MSM of the West actually knew what Khomeini represented, which was clearly anti- west. BBC got a mention. This is where left meets Islam with the old “enemies enemy is my friend” trope. The left was against a monarchy, the Shah, so they assumed the revolution would like those fondly remembered European revolutions. Because they never learn, 30 years later they make pretty much the same mistake regarding “Arab Soring” channeling adolescent Wordsworth. He learnt; the left never.
The first wake-up call for the Left?
“Syrian Journey: Choose your own route”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-32057601
BBC website today. Do the BBC ever give up?
There doesn’t appear to be the option of claiming asylum in Turkey or Egypt. Why is that?
Jordan doesn’t even appear on the map despite 627,295, according to UNHCR, having already taken that route. Nor does Lebanon 1,191,451. Israel isn’t an option for most but UNHCR labels it on its map. The BBC does not.
So much for extensive research.
On BBC Breakfast this morning, Steph McGovern was out in a quaint looking village gauging whether people were feeling any benefits from a recovering economy. Bearing in mind that inflation has hit 0% and disposable income is up – mainly due to falling oil prices and intense competition between large retailers – one would expect to get a positive response from members of the public.
Not a chance. Steph discovered that it was a “mixed picture”.
It is beyond me how all the people she spoke to said that their weekly shopping bill had gone up! They did say that petrol prices had gone down, but one couple with their toddler and baby in arms said everything had gone up in price, “…especially now he [the baby] has arrived”.
Well obviously, if you have an extra mouth to feed and look after, your costs are going to go up regardless!
All grossly misleading and out of sync with the rest of the country. Blatant political bias!
‘out in a quaint looking village gauging whether people were feeling any benefits’
Takes one back to a different time when the BBC stumbled across Mrs. Katz and a bunch of Mumsnetters who represented how the wimmin of the UK were really feeling.
Apparently.
Seems all Ed needs do to swoon them over is a quick Poldark shirt peel and he is in like Flint.
they really do pick out the idiots to ask (deliberately) as if you have a baby then of course your bills will go up! Product of the Facebook Generation and why Labour gets so many votes
I’m reminded of an episode of Jonathan Creek. Jonathan’s “magician” boss paints a number on his chest, puts on a jumper and goes out into the street. While being filmed he asked random members of the public to name a number between 1 and 50. All those giving the “wrong” answer are thanked, allowed to go on their way and the footage binned. When someone gives the “right” answer he lifts up his jumper to show the same number on his chest – cue gasps of amazement at his “magic”.
At the time I thought it was an interesting way of showing a fake magic trick. I hadn’t realised that it was a BBC training film for their political interviewers.
Total twaddle with the ridiculous assumption that a globalised measure affects everyone the same. You do realise that 5 families in the UK own more than the bottom 20%.I suggest that these extremes might experience the economy in different way as would all those folks in between.
And t’ was ever thus….
Just out of interest, what did Labour do to solve that ‘problem’?
Cracking letter here to the bbc reference their climate catastrophilia
http://joannenova.com.au/2015/03/big-government-propaganda-abc-bbc-are-aggressive-political-participants-sell-or-split/
“So when the BBC:
Routinely ignores its own Editorial Standards (as it happens, legal requirements), that is an ethical issue;
Proceeds in the comforting knowledge that its political masters will not hold it to account, that is an ethical issue;
Subverts the accepted meaning of language in order to generate a spurious justification for institutional bias, that is an ethical issue;
Claims that its much vaunted impartiality has been ‘calibrated’ on the advice of a specially convened assembly of experts, that is an ethical issue;
Subsequently spends large quantities of licence fee payers’ money seeking to avoid disclosing the composition of that convocation, that is an ethical issue;
Has, as it later transpires, lied repeatedly about the accreditation of attendees, that is an ethical issue;
Is in possession of information indicating gross malfeasance within the climate change community, which for weeks it deliberately suppresses, that is an ethical issue;
Rejects the findings of an independent committee, set up by itself, to rule on its own impartiality, that is an ethical issue;
Later, in order to justify its propagandist line, accepts on
demonstrably spurious grounds the opposing verdict of a paid lapdog scientist, that is an ethical issue;
Subsequently, and for years, deliberately and willfully ignores rivers of evidence and reports from unimpeachable sources which run counter to its prevailing orthodoxy, that is an ethical issue;
Continues to give currency to demonstrable misinformation generated by vested interests, that is an ethical issue;
By silent acquiescence lends its authority to false and defamatory slurs aimed at eminent scientists who question its prevailing orthodoxy, that is an ethical issue;
Establishes a complaints procedure which, on artificial and synthetic grounds, is carefully designed to reject all objections to its prevailing orthodoxy, however well attested, that is an ethical issue.”
Won’t change anything but an excellent summary of how the BBC is failing its charter obligations
Excellent. So how the hell DO they get away with it, especially 28gate?
It`s been a real education coming to this site over many years now.
I find that I don`t need to bother my arse with the BBC any more-years of their lefty lying crap simply have no effect….the words, the loaded lyings and their steamy windows cover ups for Savile, for Driberg, Blake and Assange now allow the BBCs history to be squeezed into Anjems burka pocket.
Basically a dead tree walking, and wa-king all over anything that might hold this country together-family, faith, self-respect and patriotic love of history and country.
But we all know it-yet the young will just say “woo hoo, Russell Brand and climate change” to any question asked of them.
Especially from pocket pixies like Krishnan…surely a good bump to the head might restore Snows mole to something approaching a sane brain-so why the safety helmet?
Can`t say we didn`t see this coming-any youngster that thinks for him/herself has had thirty odd years of cultural conditioning from school, cBBC to overcome.
Let alone the free broadshits doled out on “YuniKampfusses”…university campuses-to todays media monkeys and ciphers of state diktat, EU/UN dreamings.
Poor sods have been steeped in it-and the parents have been nowhere.
But-a few thousand have not bent the knee to Ariel, let alone Oreo-and God won`t need that many to slap the elite hard across their baby bum cheeks very soon-Islam as a purgative to the godless oafs of Marxist/Freudian spoutings.
So-stuff the BBC-don`t pay `em a penny-just “invest” in a ringside seat-don`t take the kids, but remember the smell as you leave-you`ll need it for what follows.
Rev 19.10
Beeboids seems to be into ‘expertly’ dissecting some current U.K political claims.
Will Beeboids note what happens when this method is applied to themselves, on e.g. Islam, as here?-
“HOW EXPERT ARE THE BBC’S ‘ISLAM EXPERTS’?”
http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/news-libertygb/6742-just-how-expert-are-the-bbc-s-islam-experts
More INBBC euphemistic language from Peter ALLEN on Radio 5 a few minutes ago (in conversation with a Muslim, Nazir Afzal)
which needs to be politically decoded-
” people who may be radicalised and go to Syria”
-translation-
‘Muslims who may become Islamic jihadists and join Islamic State Islamofascists’.
‘Daily Mail’-
“Pupils ‘will use the Easter break to join jihadists in Syria’: Senior prosecutor warns headteachers are failing to tell the police about pupils who are at risk.
“Nazir Afzal said schools were worried about pupils travelling over holidays.
“But schools protecting teenagers because they do not want them placed under investigation, he claims.
“About 600 Britons are believed to have joined Islamic State since 2013.”
By HARRIET SIME
FOR THE DAILY MAIL.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3020804/Pupils-use-Easter-break-join-jihadists-Syria-Senior-prosecutor-warns-headteachers-failing-tell-police-pupils-risk.html#ixzz3W3gIfzSm
‘Jihadwatch’-
“UK teachers fear students will join Islamic State, but won’t tell police”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/04/uk-teachers-fear-students-will-join-islamic-state-but-wont-tell-police
Teachers fear that they will ‘criminalise’ the kids. Well, if they go to Syria, they could end up dead. Surely, their duty of care is primarily to prevent the kids dying?
Point of information, your Honour, some go to join Assad and some even go for the Syrian National Council (the good guys?).
Saying they all join the Islamic State is like saying all British volunteers in the Spanish Civil War joined the Communist dominated International Brigades. Some, especially Catholics infuriated by the murder of clergy and nuns joined the Nationalists.
BBc continues to bang on and on on about the “epidemic” of zero hour contracts. Shame they were not in the slightest bit interested in them when Liebour were in power.
Sharia UK
“Headteachers have admitted they fear pupils will not return from the Easter holidays because they are planning to join Isis in Syria”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/headteachers-say-they-fear-pupils-will-use-easter-holidays-to-flee-uk-and-join-isis-syria-10148098.html
“A former chief prosecutor has warned they are not telling police of their concerns because they do not want to see students face criminal charges.”
“The school leaders confessed to Nazir Afzal ”
So …
Islamic children to,
Islamic Teachers to,
Islamic Head to,
Islamic Prosecutor
No need for infidel law at all then?
… A question … how long before it goes full circle?
Islamic MP to
Islamic Prime Minister?
If this is not a glaring red light, I don t know what is.
N Afzal? the no Islamic connection to Islamic child gang rape one?
Nazir Afzal:
‘There is no religious basis for the abuse in Rotherham’
Can we set up a fund to help them buy their tickets out of the UK?
Maybe Children in Need (c/o BBC) could lend a hand with the financial side of things?
As a student of CECUTT at its most blatant, and a £4Bpa supposed original ‘news’ gathering organisation’s professional reputation laid out at its most bare, I thought this was worth sharing:
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/04/01/carry-on-lying-at-the-bbc/
‘So apparently it is OK to publish false information, as long as you got it from somewhere else and the Guardian did the same!!’
Apparently, yes.
In the spirit of balance, there is this too:
http://isthebbcbiased.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/the-bbc-admits-errors-over-suffragettes.html
Not sure a small tidy up concession later after a supposed professional BBC historian ‘accidentally’ gets some whopping facts wrong (especially with the BBC’s fave hate figure) really atones much.
Thank you for the links – I have been educated. Pressure in inches of mercury or in millibars I understood, but pressure in hectopascals was a new one on me. I had to look it up – the PC term for millibars (especially if you’re French).
That came in years ago – I left the met. office in 1985 (NZ)and millibars were long gone. But still used for TV and info. for the general public. When I started in UK (1960) we used both millibars and inches (especially when liasing with the USAF Bases).
Many thanks for the link.
‘The section of the programme on Mrs Thatcher’s role in the Falklands war was meant to show her determination not to focus on “women’s issues” as Prime Minister and her resolve as a military leader and not to criticise her politically or personally.
Describing the Belgrano as a “troop carrier” was a factual error and the production team would like to thank you for pointing it out. We can assure you that the programme will not be repeated in its current form.
The iconic clip in which Mrs Thatcher invites a crowd of journalist to “just rejoice at that” was meant to be the full stop to the point that she was determined to be as dauntless as any male leader in the pursuit of a military campaign. However as it followed immediately on from the reported sinking of the Belgrano it could unfortunately have been interpreted as referring specifically to that sinking and the related Argentinian deaths. That apparent reference will be re-edited before the programme is repeated.”
From the world’s most respected broadcaster (allegedly).
Makes you want to weep.
I once spotted an error in their ‘history’ section that stated ‘Mrs Thatcher lost to John Major’. I was 11 at the time, but even I knew that Major only stood for leadership after she stood down. Who do they have working for them?
Labour (and especially Chuka Umunna, Shadow Business Secretary) basically dismisses 100+ business leaders, effectively telling them their views don’t count, and fundamentally telling them to shut up and p!$$ off, their views are worth nothing…..
Errm…. what was that idea that Labour (and especially our mate Chuka) was trying so hard to promote the past couple of days – ah, yes, Labour respects business, and indeed is itself the Party of business…..
Some things you just can’t make up.
you have to bear in mind that many more businesses donate regularly to the Tories so getting a few together for a post Leveson Tory photo shoot.
I understand 4 on the list are Tory peers and another had his collar felt for tax issues. Probably ousing with arms dealers oil frackers and loan sharks. Normal Tory supporters in other words.
So – even if you dismiss the 4 Tory peers – the other 100 guys’ views are just dismissable as well – make something up about them and just dismiss their views.
Yep – that’s left-wing-think for you – don’t bother listening to anyone who really does know more than you about industry and commerce,
Precisely the same sort of logic that Mr Brown succumbed to in order to tank the UK economy.
Pretty much. They are for rent and moreover you don’t know who they are. Just because you being fed you don’t have to eat.
“You don’t know who they are” ? They signed a letter, for heavens’ sake. We all can easily find out who they are.
However, you’re the one who’s claiming to know their devious intent and direction, not me. And you clearly haven’t a clue who they are at all. You only have the stuff you make up in your head – you’ve done no research, but somehow you can tell they are for rent. You make yourself look more ridiculous by the post.
The real difference between you and I is that I at least make the attempt to do some research – you just throw out lies and false claims willy-nilly, in the hope that no-one will challenge you. Tough.
Manonaclaphamomnibus Been reading your blogs for a while . I will admit I am a natural tory voter…yes single white male earning about £18.000 pa and the reason is just I need to keep as much of my low wage as possible, without Labour taking it and giving it to other people who don’t work and live in a much bigger property than me without paying rent for it. And I only have to look out of my window to confirm that. So I am working class and I simply cannot afford a Labour Govenment….so pls stop the crap it is tiring
BBC TWATO did seem to redress the balance somewhat with the Business leaders letter in the Telegraph. They compared Red Ed who they claimed to be uninterested in business, with the careful nurturing of business by Nu Liebour. (they still haven’t got over their break up with BLiar).
Their analysis of it all appeared to conclude that Red Ed had failed to engage with business, and that Labour just didn’t seem all that bothered about it either.
They had a pollster (Ipsos Mori?) who seemed very impartial who said that the effect would probably be pretty limited as business doesn’t get a vote and most people would be taking in other factors than the opinion of business leaders.
“business doesn’t get a vote”
but business leaders do – and so do their families and employees
Sir Stuart Rose was interviewed this morning. IIRC, he said they ‘spoke for 500,000 people’. That’s a bit naughty. The unions used to make such claims. I guess they only claim to speak for public sector workers now. People can speak for themselves in the polling booth.
But those businesses may decide to relocate to a more business friendly country if Miliband and Balls decide to tax them until the pips squeak and cripple them with unnecessary red tape. Then Labour would have to use their “investment” of tax payers’ money to create non-jobs in the Public Sector in order to re-employ those 500,000 workers laid off thanks to Miliband’s Marxist hostility to profitable private business.
Great news on Jeremy Vine today, Nigeria has a new Muslim leader! Nothing to do with Islam.
Just as well, as the previous leader was tainted by Boko Haram and the still-missing school girls. Nothing to do with Islam.
What could be better? Labour winning the election and handing over the keys to Chuka Umunna? Nothing to do with Islam.
BBC – of course is all “fears”, “concerns”, and the “IS crisis”
: Parents of radicalised children ‘not going to police’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32148031
had to wait for the worlds best newscaster -Al BBC, to catch up with all the other news outlets
Sharia UK
“Head-teachers have admitted they fear pupils will not return from the Easter holidays because they are planning to join Isis in Syria”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/headteachers-say-they-fear-pupils-will-use-easter-holidays-to-flee-uk-and-join-isis-syria-10148098.html
“A former chief prosecutor has warned they are not telling police of their concerns because they do not want to see students face criminal charges.”
“The school leaders confessed to Nazir Afzal ”
So …
Islamic children to,
Islamic Teachers to,
Islamic Headmaster to,
Islamic Prosecutor
No need for infidel law at all then?
… A question … how long before it goes full circle?
Islamic MP to
Islamic Prime Minister?
If this is not a glaring red light, I don t know what is.
There is one point of reference for blame here, Islamic texts and teachings, one of which is to deceive the non Muslim, lie to them, One reason for not reporting to the police, that is exposing that fact again and again.
Where have these children seen the Quran?
where have they heard the Hadith?
who has told them that Mohamhead is the perfect example of conduct to follow?
Every action, every narrative, every outrage by ISIS, is following those texts or Mohamhead s personal example, they are driven by Islam.
and Nazir Afzal? … the no Islamic connection to Islamic child gang rape one?
Nazir Afzal:
‘There is no religious basis for the abuse in Rotherham’
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/03/nazir-afzal-there-is-no-religious-basis-for-the-abuse-in-rotherham
Link to the comprehensive report on the grooming gangs: ‘“Easy Meat” – Multiculturalism, Islam and Child Sex Slavery’
The report examines in detail:
•What these gangs do
•The chronology of the problem
•Institutional failure and the abuse of the narrative of racism
•The Islamic cultural background
•The scale of the problem
It establishes that 20 years ago child-care professionals dealing with the victims made recommendations which could have protected the schoolgirl victims, but these steps have never been implemented.
The report is definitive – there is no analysis of this problem of this quality anywhere.
Click to access Easy-Meat-Multiculturalism-Islam-and-Child-Sex-Slavery-05-03-2014.pdf
The BBC, as usual, are not averse to nailing their colours to the mast with their handy guide for Syrian refugees wanting to find a new home (presumably in the UK).
All in the form of an interactive game…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-32057601
That’s our money being spent on this propagandist crap.
A game that is missing the most obvious way to survive – i.e. request asylum in the first country you enter – i.e. Turkey or Egypt.
…and in a culture most likely to fit your own.
I was having a discussion with an acquaintance re the election and the role of the BBC. Of course I didn’t hold back about what I thought of the BBC. He replied that he would rather have the BBC than something like Fox News. I pointed out that if he didn’t like Fox News, or something similar based in the UK, he didn’t need to pay for it, but if you didn’t like the BBC you still had to pay. He didn’t really have an answer to that.
“…I pointed out that if he didn’t like Fox News, or something similar based in the UK, he didn’t need to pay for it, but if you didn’t like the BBC you still had to pay.“
This is what will ultimately deliver the killing blow to the BBC. It’s such a simple statement of fact there is no defence to it. For how much longer can this avowedly left-wing, politically biased, completely disingenuous organisation continue to be allowed to demand money with menaces off the general public?
The Left will never give you a choice. You can have any colour so long as it is red.
Fox News never claims to be the national broadcaster. Nor does it have a stated mission and legal obligation to “inform, educate and entertain”. The charter states that the Corporation exists to serve the public interest and to promote its public purposes: sustaining citizenship and civil society, promoting education and learning, stimulating creativity and cultural excellence, representing the UK, its nations, regions and communities, bringing the UK to the world and the world to the UK, helping to deliver to the public the benefit of emerging communications technologies and services, and taking a leading role in the switchover to digital television.
Anjana Ahuja asks if polygraphs – or lie detectors – should be used to monitor sex offenders in the UK, when it can reportedly take just five minutes to learn how to beat them.
BBC Radio 4
But why broadcast this? It’s little more than a heads up to all the Paedos that they don’t need to fear that they will be tested, and how to beat the test should they be given one.
The program explains that now Paedos in the UK are being tested on lie detectors. In many cases they have given information prior to even being tested in the belief that the ‘infallible’ lie detector will find out anyway.
This program tells them that they need have no fear, and where to go to find out how to beat the test.
They tell us just how unreliable this test is – but that’s not the point ! The point is that the offenders believe it is accurate and cough descriptions before they’re even tested.
There can be no good public interest in broadcasting this, only a heads up warning paedos that it’s likely not to be scared into disclosure, and how to beat it should they be tested. If even one child is protected by it then it’s worth doing and I can only see this program as being for the benefit of child abusers – well done BBC you haven’t changed one bit since Saville.
What need for lie detectors to spot a a paedo?
1. Do they-did they ever work for the BBC?
2. Do they-or did they ever-attain some level of leadership in the Labour or trade union/co-op movements?
3. Have they been active in the charity sector, especially in the childrens, health and mental health fields?
4. Do they seek out publicity for their charitable showcases?
5. Do they vote Labour or Lib Dem, or otherwise support them?
After that, you`re on your own.
6. Are you a retired Prime Minister that lives in a Cathedral Close and takes a close interest in choir boys?
7. Do you take yachting holidays to children’s homes in Jersey, where children’s remains are found berried in the cellar?
I don’t believe your slur on Ted Heath – or whoever else did you mean? He was obsessive in his chase for the top, worked crazy hours, and in his few spare moments played the piano – well.
But apropos all the allegations of cover-ups, it struck me –
“The Heath police dismisseth us” – say 6 times quickly.
No, sorry, Heath was a Eurofanatic, a consensus Tory which was the fashion those days as much as now. Wet as a lettuce. But it is not right to traduce a dead man without evidence.
Fox News never claims to be the national broadcaster. Nor does it have a stated mission and legal obligation to “inform, educate and entertain”. The charter states that the Corporation exists to serve the public interest and to promote its public purposes: sustaining citizenship and civil society, promoting education and learning, stimulating creativity and cultural excellence, representing the UK, its nations, regions and communities, bringing the UK to the world and the world to the UK, helping to deliver to the public the benefit of emerging communications technologies and services, and taking a leading role in the switchover to digital television.
Fox only claims to be fair and balanced.
A new thought for Beeboids?:-
“The Islamic State Caliphate is Pure Islam”
by Jerry Gordon,
with Bill Bennett of Morning America and Dr. Michael Welner.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/Jerry_Gordon/The_Islamic_State_Caliphate_is_Pure_Islam/
Thinking Allowed on radio 4 which is an Oxymoron as only left wing thinking is allowed !
Citizenship ceremonies, and castgation of the US versions for expecting patriotism (anathema to the Fascists) and for failing to mention red Indians and slavery (seriously in a citizenship ceremony?)
Their self loathing burns so deeply that their hatred is externalised so much that nothing a white person does can ever be right, and always subject to criticism.
Appalling bias.
The program also criticised the UK version for ignoring colonialism, slavery and racism and for its undue emphasis on ‘ancient history’ i.e. Romans, Vikings and Normans.
The citizenship exam could do with some more real world knowledge:
How do you dispose of an old fridge,?
What is a litter bin?
Should you spit in the street?
What time should your children go to bed, to be ready for school?
When is it acceptable to gather in large groups drinking on street corners?
It was written by civil servants what do you expect ? Competence?
Who should you call when a crime is committed in your ‘community’:
a) The police
b) The local Imam and elders.
What should you do if the police arrive first?
a) Let them get on with it.
b) Ask them to leave, ‘the community’ will deal with it.
So now the splendid Ed has moved the focus of his campaign to “zero hours contracts”.
Brilliant…… there are an estimated 700,000 on zero hour contracts 66% of which are very happy with them, so that leaves 238,000 who might or might not think its enough of an issue to vote for Ed. Presumably a good proportion of those are staunch Labour voters so how many is this strategy targeting ? 100,000? 150,000?
Good use of resources Ed !!!
The other thing is the proven stupidity of stating that they will have to be given a full contract after working 12 weeks of regular hours, which means that they will never be given 12 weeks of regular hours !
Exactly, its the same sort of unconsidered cock up as his idea of freezing energy prices. An action which promoted a reaction from the energy providers which adversely affected us all.
Radio 4 The Media Show
The Supreme count has ruled that 27 letters written by Prince Charles to Ministers, the so-called ‘spider letters’, should be made public. It follows a ten year campaign by the Guardian newspaper and reporter Rob Evans, who first submitted a Freedom of Information request to see the letters back in 2005. Steve Hewlett talks to Rob about the ruling, what it means for press freedom, and what he has learnt about the content of the memos.
A Guardian hack interviewed who is openly anti Royalist and a quietly respectful interviewer who never questioned his motives, just agreed with him.
Anti Monarchist, pro republican, and just to close to the Guardian for comfort.
So no changes there then !
I thought Charles was too close to the Guardian for comfort.
…and the chances of that defender of freedom of information, The Guardian, pursuing a ten-year campaign on the release of the Balen Report from the BBC ?
Or even replying to FOIs regarding the Guardian Group tax avoidance scams (sorry, schemes)?
Yeah – a real bastion of freedom of information.
This morning before I left I read the news and noticed a couple of stories from the bBC about GAZA. One about one family was beaten to the punch by another in selling a Banksy. and the other where Abu Bowen interviews the leader of HAMAS in which to allow Hamas, the bBC and Bowen to disparage the Jews as…Evil. Well I notice something which is yet another example of how the bbC surreptitiously promotes anti-semitsm as the NEWS. Here are the pictures from recent bBC news article:
1st April 15
25th March 15
23 March 15
Every time the bbC reports from Gaza they only show wreaked streets, thus perpetuating this image that all of Gaza is rubble…really. Here are a few shots the bBC doesn’t want you to see:
It seems that the bBC is only allowed to show pictures of wreaked buildings when it comes to Gaza thus allowing it to brainwash the unwashed around the world that Jews are evil and Muslims are victims which is the reason why so many people in the UK feel that Anti-Semitism is acceptable.
The bBC the propaganda arm for Islamic terrorism
The bBC, its onesided view of the Isreal/Gaza situation and how Hamas is a victim of Israeli aggression.
Hamas leader accuses Israel of killing peace process
The political leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, has condemned the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for killing the peace process.
Yup, Abu Bowen following his interviews with such peaceful Islamic despots such as Gadaffi, Assad completes his hat trick with an interview with the leader of Hamas.
Chuckle with Khaled Meshaal when he claims that Benjamin Netanyahu is deemed an extremist in the eyes of the west.
Marvel at how the leader of Hamas leader is allowed to opine that Israel has rejected every avenue for peace since time began and Bowen didn’t mention this latest snippet:
Hamas rejects UN proposal on five-year Gaza ceasefire
Listen to how he laughs when Bowen asks if Benjamin Netanyahu is right to equate Hamas with other Terrorist Orgs such as ISIS and AL Q by claiming that Hamas are the victims and actually Israel the terrorists and that Hamas does not allow terrorist thoughts to exist in Gaza and that actually Hamas subscribe to a moderate form of Islam.
Yup just another Pro Islamic terrorist spot from Abu Bowen and the bBC.
The timing was perfect for Bowen to ask ‘Some days ago Netanyahu defeated his opposition in an election. You threw your opponents off the tops of buildings. Is there a message here for Hamas?’ But he never asked it. Maybe pressure of time worked against him.
Good post.
The fall out from liebours awesome political broadcast continues to fall out.
http://order-order.com/2015/04/01/freeman-at-the-point-of-use/#_@/Oa8Id0tlSGZ0AA
Anybody seen this bBC play the asylum seeker game.
Play the female , go via Turkey and run away when you see the boat sink which sees you landing at Manchester Airport on false passports. This is how the bbC ends that thread:
You leave the mother and daughter struggling in the water and hope they make it.
You are now in Greece with your family – Europe at last! You know you need to keep a low profile because you can only claim asylum in country you first set foot in.
Three days later you find the man in a restaurant in the suburbs of Athens. He sells you fake UK passports. You then fly to Manchester.
You see the police at the airport in Manchester and you approach them and say: “I have come to seek asylum. I am from Syria.”
Bit like this story that I’m sure most have forgotten about & disappeared from the media faster than adad news story for liebourhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11039485/Illegal-immigrants-in-Tilbury-shipping-container-were-Sikhs-from-Afghanistan.html
Some of us have very long memories.
So I’m reading the bBC news story on the winner of the election and came across this photo:
Would I be correct in saying that the ethical thought police at the bBC should be screaming …’Racist’?
Not Lenny Henry again?
Yet another bBC blame the British article:
Bengal famine: Remembering WW2’s forgotten disaster
In 1943, during World War Two, Bengal in British-run India was hit with a severe shortage of food. Following the Japanese occupation of Burma, the Allied forces had halted the movement of food in the region.
Really bbC, Bengal was fed from Burma, as it was Japanese occupied that source of food was denied, then there was the great Cyclone of Oct 1942 which devastated 4200 square miles of Bengal which lead to the next crop being struck by disease. Then there was the local accounting procedure which resulted in the facts and figures regards food stocks, population being inflated and deflated resulting in no alarm Bells ringing elsewhere. Typical white liberal guilt and I’m the child of Indian immigrants who came to the Uk during the 50s.
I don’t see how the BBC can describe the famine as a “forgotten disaster”. They run a story or make a programme on it almost every year.
Also, I believe that Britain had its hands full in 1943, for some reason or other.
Did anyone watch or record ‘Nurse’ last night? My recording failed but I saw the programme on iPlayer. There was a section in which a character sang the praises of J Clarkson. It’s most unusual for my machine to miss a recording and it’s left me wondering whether the programme was actually broadcast.
Fred
22:00 hour BBc broadcast and the the end of the “epidemic” of zero hours contracts by liebour slowly begins to morph, have you noticed? It’s now supposedly going to be 90% now. OK lets have a closer look at what they are saying. “”In our first year of government, Labour will pass a law that says if you’re working regular hours, you’ll get a regular contract… a legal right that will apply to all workers after 12 weeks,” he said”. Now here is the reality if they are on zero hour contracts it’s unlikely that they are working fixed hours. My friend who is in a zero hour contract certainly isn’t. Some of you will also be acquainted with temporary staff who are laid off or who have been given a new contract on a 12 monthly period in the past, I suspect after 11 weeks there would be a similar event if this were ever to be put into law. In my own experience a few years ago I worked for a well known high street name after jumping through hoops, well almost, they gave me a 16 hour a week contract. Every week I was in on different times and different days, the promised full time contract never materialised and ~I moved on. With travel costs I was actually worse off than getting JSA. On staff member asked if they could be given the same shift times every week as they wanted to look for a second job. They were told that they should show more commitment to the company. End to zero hours? I’ll believe it when I see it.
When 70% of all new jobs in this economy are going to Eastern European migrants which Tory bosses are making full use of, what does it really matter to British people?
What is going to matter more is when the poor sods who have no hope of a job because Camorons mates have given them all to migrants are told that there’s £12Bn of welfare cuts, and there’s no money to pay them anything.
Then perhaps they’ll get off their fat lazy arses and so something, although what exactly I can’t imagine !
Both immigration and welfare by default dumb down the masses.
No decent employer would have the nerve to use zero hour contracts. I never would have .
Neo cons and modern liberals like them of course. It keeps labour costs down and the uppity workers in their place. Like I have said before. Real conservatism would have nothing to do with them but real conservatives are very much in a minority these days. In a truly conservative society contracts between employers and their workers would be unnecessary.
On Politicalbetting website
“Emily Maitlis reveals more than she wanted to.
Maitliss to Martin Sorrell “…and isnt it right that what WE are looking for is a range of people signing these letters?”
Martin Sorrell “We? If by we , we are talking about the Labour party….”
Some things never change – can anyone corroborate this.
Meanwhile the Mail is leading with 40 labour MPs who employ staff on … ZHCs!
“The Mail is leading with 40 Labour MPs who employ staff on … ZHCs!”
Thank goodness attempts by the Left to “regulate” the free press and the Internet have come to nothing! No thanks to the BBC, whose behaviour was appalling.
Much to my surprise looking at the front pages the BBc did actually mention the charge of ZHC usage by liebour.
I understand Labour controlled Doncaster Council (Miliband’s constituency) has quite a number of its employees on zero hours contracts. Another example of Labour hypocrisy.
Woman’s Hour today.Alibhai Brown on again.- Israel is evil her latest bon mot ( see the latest Independent diatribe by her ) . A very apposite choice for this hard left show.
A soothing piece on immigration. We always have had immigrants and always accepted them eventually. So now millions are arriving you can all stop complaining. Stupid people that you whiteys are.
Looking at the Daily Mail front cover for tomorrow, it will be interesting if those high integrity editors for ‘today’s newspaper front pages’ who select what to feature, again decide what news there is no space for.
And what every curious interviewer from Today to Newsnight focuses upon. Or not.
Way up earlier in the thread the idiot-on-a bus said that the 100 business leaders are “for rent”. As if the Tory party bunged them a few bob to sign a letter.
How stupid can the idiot be ? The idea that a whole bunch of people earning at least a million per annum each can be “bought” for peanuts by any party is stupid. To try to have bought those 100 business leaders would have emptied the funds for the whole Tory campaign.
Idiot-on-bus – you have the Internet equivalent of diorhoea. Crapping all over this site all the time.
Yep moronona is the only one brought off for peanuts [about£145pa] round here and to be honest is now just an utter waste of time and space ! I’m all for open debate on the shrinking pros or rapidly growing cons of the BBC but moron isn’t here for that and it’s getting very very boring !
Turkey Lurking
BBC Breakfast telling me nine ‘British’ people have been picked up on the Syrian border – the soft sofa bods are scratching their heads over what on earth this could all be about.
BBC on line are deferring to another new agency – Associated Press – to do their journalism for them. The well-funded BBC appears to be completely in the dark about this breaking story.
Meanwhile the BBC are up to speed on this media-created non-story…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-32094307
#BBCtrending: The ‘Eid Pray Love’ movement
‘Even though Ramadan is still more than two months away, some Muslims are already fasting – as an act of social media solidarity.’
Many Moslems may be Turkey-bound, but according to the BBC they’re vioting for Easter
‘Using the hashtag #Muslims4Lent, Muslims are posting pictures online showing what they are giving up until Easter, when traditional Christian Lent ends’
Seems the BBC treats Moslems as one happy group
This could work, we give up fatty foods, you lot take a break from terrorism.
This gives the game away :
“changing our perception”
Have the BBC ever promoted Lent with the same degree of obsession that they do Ramadan ?
In the same way Christmas is being reassigned by lefties as ‘Winterval’, I propose to refer to Ramadan as ‘Fastival’.
Of course, “Winterval” was only used in 1997 and 1998, and was used in conjunction with Christmas (not instead of).
Since then, the only people who keep bringing it up are the paranoid, delusional conspiracy theorists who are too busy congratulating themselves on how they are superior to everyone else to notice how they’ve become a laughing stock to everyone except their fellow nutcases.
And then they blame it on the “lefties”, as if it’s someone else’s fault that they are living in cloud cuckoo land.
‘Fastival’. Brilliant!
It was depressing to see how few religious cards there were in shops over Christmas. Most were of the ‘Seasons Greetings’ variety with infantile cartoons of cats and teddy bears on the front.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-32156570
Looks like Danny Cohen has been moved to picture editorial selection. Mixed results.
Remarkable. Couldn’t happen here… could it?
When I were a lad, the local education authority provided an exam number which was the only identification available to the external markers. Teachers proudly explained that Britain was more successful than other countries due to such measures minimising corruption. It was a shock twenty years later to hear that ‘progressives’ had decided exams weren’t fair and had introduced teacher-assessed coursework.
Today, with cheating, quotas, etc., idiots can rise to the top everywhere. Little wonder the country is in a mess.
In the early 1980 I was a teacher and attended meetings on replacing GCEs. The old system was criticised because it was exam based and therefore favoured boys to the disadvantage of girls. Coursework was introduced to favour girls. Inevitably one of the major problems today is under-achievement by boys, but no one makes the connection.
Utterly astounded by the obvious, blatant visceral hatred displayed this morning, in the “interview” with Nigel Farage. Good on him, he kept his cool despite spit-flecked vitriol, pointless questioning, and unmitigated interruption from the harridan
He’s dead right, though – they pick up on the tiniest misdemeanour of any UKIP member or candidate and make hay with it, whilst allowing much worse from the other “major” parties to slip under the bridge, virtually unchallenged, as he says, to the point of imprisonment.
I seriously hope that UKIP does far better than anyone expects, resulting in egg on these smug presenters’ ugly faces.
Yes, I heard that interview. It certainly wasn’t the cosy chat afforded to the favoured ones. You could hear the venom in the interviewer’s (Sarah Montague?) voice. Although Nigel did rather give the impression that he was making up his immigration policy on the hoof, which I think is one of his flaws.
He was asked about various misdemeanours of UKIP candidates, but when he attempted to point out that other parties have the same problem, but less reported, Sarah (?) prevented him by talking all over him whenever he tried to answer. He should know this is likely to come up and have a list ready to recite – and keep reciting it regardless of the interruptions.
Mishal hussein, I think.
Yes; Mishal Hussein. Starts 02:10:00 hrs:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05nxgd9
Thanks.
‘You could hear the venom in the interviewer’s (Sarah Montague?) voice. ‘
Spot on. They just can’t hide their indignation with anyone whose views are not left of centre. It’s called Lefty Tourette’s.
Over at itbb Craig has run the numbers.
http://isthebbcbiased.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/bringing-stories-to-audiences-around.html
Without a blatant factual error (Which he recently forced them to concede on) the outcome of a complaint is regrettably near enough forgone.
Mr. Farage’s frustration is understandable simply because it’s obvious what is going on, but few in the public will be aware of how it is carried out so relentlessly.
Worse, any reaction hands another opportunity to twist the knife.
One can only hope that a glimmer of professional integrity may still lurk amongst those tasked to report the news, analyze it or debate it when it is clear the personal is not being left at the door.
I just read this:
“Venezuelan shop owners arrested over long queues”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-31086391
on the beebyanka’s website. The chavista regime’s assertions and opinions occupy about ninety per cent of the article. The Venezuelan opposition gets a whole paragraph… ermmm, except that that paragraph consists of just a single sentence, immediately confronted with another slab of Maduro propaganda.
Incidentally, BBC Mundo’s Daniel Pardo reported on the non-availability of basic household items in Caracas, just over a week ago. He hasn’t been heard from since.
Has the beebyanka had anything to say about that?