So it’s all over bar the shouting….and what do we know that’s new? Nothing.
Anyone who has listened to Sturgeon swatting aside the hopeless journos of the Today programme will know she is an effective speaker….never mind the poll ratings in Scotland. And everyone else was as expected.
A complete waste of time that was more about the Media and its sense of its own importance than any attempt to provide us with real enlightenment….Paxman’s over aggressive interviews were equally unenlightening though they had the potential to be much more effective….in fact that was the format that should have been used for all party leaders….a head to head with a sensible journo with questions sent in from the public and fellow politicians….we might actually have learnt something and had less posturing from all, including Paxman and the interviews could have been longer and more involved spread over the day and not crammed into a couple of hours for 7 party leaders to try and get a word in on complex subjects…..you could also have known in advance when your politician of choice was going to be grilled and tuned in to watch without having to waste time on those of no interest to you….after all did we want to know what their policies are and how they defend them or was it more about watching a political dogfight to see who could out-talk all the rest, and not necessarily the winner because they had the best policies…..aren’t we told we are tired of such smooth talking politicians and want more grit and reality from them? So why put them on show in a gladitorial contest? Because it supposedly made good TV.
And what of Farage and his comments about HIV and immigration, comments he has made before?...the BBC lays into Farage …
BBC Political Correspondent Alex Forsyth, on the campaign trail in Ramsgate, said she had been told by a senior UKIP source that “people who support us are likely to agree with us on this issue”.
And the comment could be viewed as part of a “shock and core” strategy to “reach out to their core voters”.
…and quotes as many of the self serving sanctimonious put downs from other politicians who haven’t the guts to say the things that Farage does as it can cram into a report….a report that is remarkably lacking in honesty…..what’s missing? Perhaps a quick shufty on Google would have made Farage look less like the pariah the BBC is trying to paint him as….how about this from only a year ago….
Ban on HIV positive immigrants entering the UK proposed for Immigration Bill by Tory MPs
Or how about this from 2005…
Tories plan HIV tests for migrants
The Conservative party raised the political heat on immigration yesterday by demanding that anyone seeking to come to Britain for more than a year should undergo compulsory health tests including screening for HIV and TB.
And it wasn’t just the Tories…
Labour responded a week later with a range of tough proposals in the Home Office’s five-year plan, including its own proposals for migrant health checks, focusing on TB.
And never mind that ‘core’ UKIP vote that the BBC is so worried about….I suspect you could ask almost anyone in the street if Farage is right and get an answer that would have the chattering classes demanding a new voting system…perhaps each vote in leafy lefty Hampstead be worth 5 of those from UKIP ghettos.
The Mail looked into this subject a while back…
Immigrants, HIV and the true cost to the NHS: Should the ‘International Health Service’ be treating patients who come here with the killer disease, asks SUE REID
And it’s not as if the BBC themselves haven’t raised the question about health tourism….
“It seems very strange when we’re shaving off the pennies here and there to actually open the door wide to the citizens of the world to walk in and have free medical care at primary care level in the UK.”
Farage is evil. Or just honest.
The wee Scottish lassie seems to be really upsetting both Alan and DV.
I can only imagine Albaman that you are the perfect example of the person who votes SNP and why…because you don’t actually understand what is being said to you and would rather embrace your own unique interpretation of what someone says and means, an interpretation that makes you happy rather than one that might in fact be true.
Alan, why should I not vote SNP? Why should I not vote for a candidate that proposes to look after the interests of their constituents? Are you suggesting I should vote for a candidate who does not give a toss about their constituents?
Anyway you did not reply to the key question: why are you and DV so concerned about about a wee Scottish lassie!!
“Why should I not vote for a candidate that proposes to look after the interests of their constituents?”
How does treating the world’s sick instead of providing treatment for the constituents “look after their interests”? Or is it that magic money tree again?
What patronising language to describe a party leader who happens to be female.
Albaman wrote:
“The wee Scottish lassie seems to be really upsetting both Alan and DV.”
Are you saying she’s a dog? I always wondered why she walked around the bed 3 times before she got into it
Muslim Brotherhood supporter, anti semite and Islamist Nicola Sturgeon telling us that freedom of speech will not be tolerated under the SNP.
Like the Germans in the 20’s and 30’s the people of Scotland are blissfully unaware of just what they are voting for and the terrible consequences for the country and it’s people if they are given free rein.
Already like under the Nazi era people are complaining about their threatening and intimidating attitude towards people on the streets and on their doorsteps towards anybody who doesn’t share their ideology.
I don’t share many of her politics, but she’s clear what they are and doesn’t hide them as the BBC do. It’s good to hear her, a shame the DUP didn’t get a look in.
“Perhaps a quick shufty on Google would have made Farage look less like the pariah the BBC is trying to paint him as…”
And a “quick shufty” would show that just about everyone agreed that Farage was a “pariah” – except from Alan!!
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2015-04-02/itv-news-poll-farage-voted-as-best-and-worst-in-debate/
The quickest shufty I have ever had on Google reveals that actually, Albaman, you are talking rubbish as 24% of the viewers thought that Nigel Farage was the best performer (the highest rating). That is nearly 1 in 4 viewers, leaving 76% of the vote to be shared by the other 6 leaders. That’s hardly ‘just about everyone’ agreeing he is a pariah.
Having read Alan’s post from start to finish (trying reading the post and the words in it instead of just looking at the pictures) you will note that the article is not really a two minute hate about wee Nicola Sturgeon (as you would imply) but about the BBC’s bias concerning UKIP and Nigel Farage.
And it is spot on.
And while you’re on, Albaman, seeing as you seemingly disagree with what Nigel Farage said on Thursday night, what is your view on two of the issues he raised?
1) What should we do with HIV positive immigrants that come to the UK to be treated because their own countries will not or can not treat them? Should we, the British taxpayer, reasonably be expected to foot the bill for their treatment?
2) A house needing to be built every 7 minutes to accommodate the burgeoning UK population. Why is the population increasing. What can we do about the burgeoning population? How much is too much for you? And why should we, the British taxpayer, contribute toward the cost of building houses in such high numbers?
I suspect you will probably ignore these questions, although if you do answer them, I suspect I already know what your answers will be.
Try and have a go at answering them though, knock yourself out mate.
‘just about everyone agreed’
That is used by CECUTT a lot too. There’s a special BBC Editorial Guideline in complement it refers to.
So much semantic potential to ‘just’.
Of course, it is written by the BBC.
Tell it often enough. You never know.
Really? Amongst the political class whose views on just about everything a much the same – yes he is a pariah. Good. As you well know he wasn’t actually lying was he? I’m sure you’re familiar with an Orwell quote “In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
The debate was boring and didn’t shed any more light individual party policies. But it did show that none of those state funded leeches give a crap about winning the election.
It also proved that none of the main party leaders understand the difference between the national debt and the deficit. Farage said the debt has increased (true) and Cameron butted in to say the deficit has been halved (also true), but Farage said “No it hasn’t!” obviously confusing debt and deficit.
But notice how NONE of them – ESPECIALLY Cameron – pointed the finger at Farage to point out his mistake!!!
We either have politicians in power who think we wouldn’t understand such complications (think we’re stupid) or do not understand their own economics (Natalie Bennett?).
I’m willing to bet that it’s the latter. Cameron should be trouncing this election as a dead cert to win – but he is, sadly, as out of touch with reality as Ed Miliband.
Cameron butted in to say the deficit has been halved (also true), but Farage said “No it hasn’t!” obviously confusing debt and deficit.
It’s not obvious that Farage was confused. The Tories re-defined ‘defecit’ some time ago from absolute to ‘as a percentage of GDP’ to allow them to make that claim.
A number of commentators like Guido Fawkes, but more notably the Spectator Editor Fraser Nelson (a committed Tory) strongly took issue with the deceit. Farage was correct.
If Cameron and his predecessors were true Conservatives, Farage would still be a commodity trader. For Cameron, of course, it would rule out any chance of a second career in Europe or in any of the other gravy train operators that provide similar lucrative opportunities for politicians that the public have tired of.
Cameron wrote Farage off as an idiot years ago, not realising that he’s a clever, thick skinned bloke who understands figures. His well judged and accurate HIV comment will have planted seeds of doubt with many people who might not otherwise have been listening. It’s not playing the Westminster game, and exactly what they’re afraid of. It’s amazing that there are figures explaining how our money is spent but politicians think it’s none of our damn business! People should be angrier.
Pity there’s no alternative, second vote for UKIP.
If Farage is so good at figures why arent any of his ever changing polies (except the one) ever properly costed?
You cannot run a country simply on the basis of kicking foreigners out!
I’m not interested in engaging with you in any shape or form.
This is the first and last reply you will get from me.
That is simply because you can’t provide an answer. Please don’t pretend otherwise
Well, we’ll never know, will we? But Anne did so over two lines, if you are correct. Whereas you have shown that you can’t either, but take many, many lines not to do so. I know which is the better approach.
Which is why I will not be entering into any further discussion with you.
Manon, which UKIP policy involves “kicking foreigners out”?
manonclaphamomnibus wrote:
!If Farage is so good at figures why arent any of his ever changing polies (except the one) ever properly costed?
You cannot run a country simply on the basis of kicking foreigners out!”
Well, he wouldn’t be running the country simply on the basis of kicking foreigners out. As you seem to be blissfully unaware/ignorant, let me enlighten you. One part of UKIP’s approach to government would be on the simple basis of not letting so many foreigners in, like many other countries around the world. It’s not actually that unusual.
Have you actually bothered to look into any of UKIP’s policies, or are you just ignorant/bigoted?
I bet you don’t live in a very culturally diverse area.
The author has gone insane! In respect of bias there is a book out called Is the BBC in Trouble which a lot of folks might benefit from.
In respect of UKIP ,if the BBC were a bunch of communists as many along with their tax evading multimillion pound proprietor masters,like to make out they would leave UKIP alone wouldn’t they. Trashing UKIP is meant to let Labour in so the story goes.
As it happens UKIP as Farage amply demonstrated on Thursday has only the one policy. This kinda relates to the final point.The quality of the interviews etc was admittedly dumbed down to the point of sound bites but people need to ask themselves why. Firstly is the Governance of a Country easy,answer No. Are there serious questions in respect of our Economy,answer yes. Are there issues with Climate change and security ,answer yes. Are there huge issues with the potential collapse of the European bloc,answer yes.
Why is not mentioned? Well it’s not mentioned because the voting public are not capable or interested. If you take a look a the Mail on a daily basis you see two things, the Red Ed denigration and the reduction of political issues to the level of a household squabble.
This trivialisation serves a purpose.The Proprietors want the people of the UK to see things in a particular way. And they do just fine in that project as evidenced on this site.
In short we have a dumbed down election for a dumbed down electorate.
My opinion was that the only contributor worth listening to on Thursday was Bennett. slick she ain’t ,Australian she is,electable she isn’t.But at least some important issues were mentioned.The others were either giving out lollipops or were just plain irrelevant.In most cases that’s all the electorate can cope with.
In respect of many things, if there is a point in there it has been cunningly concealed.
But good to get a sort of BBC one in there, albeit sanity free.
Are there huge issues with the potential collapse of the European bloc,answer yes.
That is not an ‘issue’; it is a ‘reason for hope’. Black Wednesday was viewed as a disaster on the day, but quickly proved to be a release from the ball-and-chain of Europe.
Sign this petition!
BBC: Involve UKIP in the “special” Question Time episode on 30th April.
https://www.change.org/p/bbc-involve-ukip-in-the-special-question-time-episode-on-30th-april?recruiter=223606761&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive
http://news-watch.co.uk/more-bbc-pro-eu-bias-in-farage-painting-by-numbers-interview/
A forensic take down on par with BBC Watch and Is The BBC Biased?
The template is so lazily adhered to it is clear they know that if they tell it often enough they will get enough to stick.
Impartial representation and reporting it us not.
As Jasmine and Frankie continue work on the scripts.
Except News Watch is similarly biased because it’s is dedicated to damning the BBC along with the Gutter press Fox etc etc. You people aren’t interested in bias or the news. You just want a news service to reinforce your own stereotypical views because in general you are too stupid or lazy to think for yourselves. It because of you people that British political discourse is so narrow in its scope.
“You people aren’t interested in bias or the news. You just want a news service to reinforce your own stereotypical views because in general you are too stupid or lazy to think for yourselves.”
Based on the above you are clearly happy to use generalities and stereo types yourself.
Such as?
“because in general you are too stupid or lazy to think for yourselves”
‘…you people…. It because of you people’
Aw, shucks. Now you have gone and spoiled it. And after after that all-inclusive, warm and fuzzy ‘us’ earlier.
Do you practice delivery in front of a mirror with a signed picture of Amy Rutland clipped to it?
‘News Watch is similarly biased because it’s is dedicated to damning the BBC’
Seems it’s is dedicated to watching the news, and the BBC crops up a lot as it is so often inaccurate, partial or lacking in objectivity to an extent that can only be explained by deliberate institutional bias.
Now excess of bias to be unable to see or reflect reality is not great anywhere, but blogs and private media can really do what they like as audiences will devote eyeballs or pay based on the calibre of their offering.
The BBC, about whom this forum is about, and you have so far dedicated over a dozen one-liners today to disrupting, is different; uniquely so. It is supposed to be totally impartial and is Charter-bound to be so, or risk the consequences (clearly not happening).
Hence it fails a lot. And people notice, comment and share.
I am sure you and many at the BBC wish it were above answering even to such free-speaking accountability, but it isn’t yet.
Tough.
Others seem to be tiring of your broken record. I still see it as an opportunity to re-iterate who champions the BBC, why and with what.
Keep it up.
Moco…. Define ‘you people’?
Please refrain from sticking defamatory labels on people you do not know.
It’s patronising and offensive and you wrong.
Indeed. In ‘lefty-speak’ it is “unhelpful”.
It may be biased but is it inaccurate? I don’t think so.
Farage has annoyed me about his comment on HIV, about which he was turned on. The numbers in the UK of Black Africans who have HIV and hepatitis is VASTLY larger than he said. The cost in drugs alone is over a £1B.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/401662/2014_PHE_HIV_annual_report_draft_Final_07-01-2015.pdf This is the document that lays out most of the facts. Politicians of this country are cowards for not addressing this truly staggering problem. Farage was the only one prepared to raise the subject and even he did not state it’s full amount. I suspect if he had he would have lost all credibility as he would not have been believed at the time.
So whats the answer Fred?
If I knew, I could be Emperor of the UK. A culture has been around for some years now, that politicians think they will lose if they are seen as hard or stony. It could be the subject of a PhD thesis, but I think the problem is the public, why did that audience mumor when Farage brought up that subject. If the public back the politicians who are prepared to represent the publics real views then maybe more would find the cahones to speak out as well?
I have supervised research on this, and there are solutions whereby drugs can be administered locally but it would require cooperation with African politicians.
You cannot get much sense in the UK because of views typical of Manon, where racism has to be dragged to the forefront of any discussion. Plus all the posturing about Fox News, Murdoch, the Mail and the usual/predictable ad hominem attacks
An interim solution would be to use the overseas aid budget to cover costs to the NHS. The money is meant to fund such treatments in the migrants countries of origin so would be a perfectly reasonable course of action.
Triage is brutal. But often necessary and inevitable. Wishing it were not the case is awfully sweet but hardly practical.
Medical care takes money and people’s time, which is money again. There is a form of money tree but it has a budget and that can be easily reached or exceeded.
Hence people are tasked to work with what there is and, looking ahead, planned for. Not a nice task in a profession dedicated to care and cure for all.
And pretty much impossible with political and activist-dominated media running shotgun on policy.
Hence it tends to fall down, in all senses of the term, to who shouts loudest and where.
The irony is who of this collection will be featured, and when., in the bizarre Top Trumps of our pea-brained, innumerate, tribal media.
Hence a child needing a drug NICE rejects will be poster fodder one week. But bumped by a beautifully-photographed young man from other shores whose lifestyle means he is, amongst so many other things, ensured of coverage if offended.
Equally a soldier rendered limbless by an IED may struggle for full support due to funding constraints, as a colleague seeking gender reassignment is fast-tracked to ensure esteem and headlines are satisfied.
The audience ‘murmured when Farage brought up the subject’ because they were biased as per the norm with Al Beeb .
Most people in this country agreed with his his statement.
Even many people who disagreed with his conclusion would accept it’s a reasonable topic for debate, as is the entirety of how scarce NHS resources are used.
We need to slaughter our sacred cows sometimes.
Manonclaphamomnibus wrote:
“So whats the answer Fred?”
Well, I’m not Fred, but here’s the answer:
Put an end to health tourism. We would not be the only country in the world to expect foreigners to pay for healthcare they receive.
What is your solution? Just how many health tourists does it take before it becomes unacceptable to you?
Tell me is it the colour that puts you off.if they were all like you would that be acceptable. The reason I ask is if it’s simply a matter of integration then I think policies could be put in place.
If is merely a case of racism then I suspect Powell maybe right.
Try looking at facts for a change. In the past this country did not allow in people who had TB. Looking at the numbers, Black Africans who by definition must be recent migrants, are over represented in the HIV population by a factor of fifty (50), then yes they are a major problem. A HIV test should have been done and reject those immigrants.
When I applied for jobs, my health record was part of it. I got rejected several times due to my health. If you can be turned down for a job on the grounds of health, then immigration should not be exempt.
MOCO (BBC employee #23?) You lack intelligence and respect for human beings. You think people can be forced, bullied and coerced through law, government and ‘policies’ into accepting your world view fantasy, containing your chosen demographic.
Tell me. Which bit about “Many people don’t want to integrate” don’t you understand? But you are prejudiced. You called me racially discriminatory in a different thread (or was that one of your BBC colleagues)? Why don’t you watch Trevor Phillip’s C4 documentary on race broadcast last month. Perhaps you can then explain why different racial groups don’t necessarily want to integrate? Then again, after many years as a state paid racist and race baiter, Mr Phillips has seen the light and been brave enough to admit it. He has intelligence and experience and now understands his work in the ‘Race Equality Industry’ was not only misguided – it was wrong.
Do you have the humility to reflect on your bigotry as the brave Mr Phillips has done? Or will you shun him and ostracise him as many on the far fascist left have done in recent times?
MOCO (BBC employee #23?) You lack intelligence and respect for human beings. You think people can be forced, bullied and coerced through law, government and ‘policies’ into accepting your world view fantasy, containing your chosen demographic.
The question I posed was directly to fred.
Your diatribe therefore is illplaced. You also make massive assumptions as to what I may or may not think,entirely because it fuels you desire to make straw men.
As to fantasies this is most amusing. You are going to vote UKIP but have yet to explain their policies which you have been asked to do. Are we going to get the usual dull silence on this topic from you?
As to health tourism ,maybe you can tell me how many health tourists come to Britain. Maybe you could also tell me how many brits go abroad for operations and what are the overall costs to each health service. Once armed with this info you might be able to have a reasoned debate.
Hi there MOCO. Twice recently you have referred to a book titled ‘Is the BBC in trouble ?’; claiming its publisher goes by the name of Abramhis in one of your references, but no author citation.
I have tried to find this publication, but to no avail, neither the book nor the publisher searches have yielded any information – it doesn’t appear to exist – but perhaps it’s an in-house BBC publication, who knows ?
Care to point us in the direction of a reliable source which would allow anyone to at least check out a precis of the book you cite as an authority on the BBC’s position, and also the author’s credentials/abilities/source of funding for the book ?
Turning back to Farage and his HIV remarks, the Indepenent has an article from an HIV health tourist criticising Farage’s “offensive” remarks.
Comments going remarkably badly. Farage is perhaps more in tune with public sentiment than the BBC would like to think.
As I’ve said on another thread, the alternative (partial) solution to health tourism is to allow the NHS to charge the full cost of treatment at private hospital rates to the overseas aid budget. We would still have the problems caused by a rising population, but it would take the pressure of the NHS. It would also focus the minds of the bean peasants, and especially the “working overseas charities” because there would be a lot less money going out of the country for them to skim.
To change the subject slightly (but still on the Great Debate), I listened to today’s repeat of the News Quiz and they excelled themselves with anti-UKIP bias. The first question was on the leaders debate, but none of them mentioned Nigel. My first thought was that they had finally understood that their attacks on UKIP merely increased public support and so decided that silence was more effective. But them they had a specific section on “get Nigel” where they could all focus on him in a concerted attack. Classic BBC bias.
Yes, well, the self righteous parasitic prick offends me.
I quite agree, but the BBC seems to like Jeremy Hardy no matter how big a prick he is.
I was referring to the prick in the Independent (Roland’s link) but yes, it applies equally well to Hardy.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Correct. The HIV infected man in the article is an ungrateful shit. He is “offended” by Farage’s comments?
It seems many are offended by him and his attitude to the NHS which you, me and Farage pay in to. Many “Independent” readers are too it seems.
I thought you would enjoy this – the Guardian review on the debate shows 100% of the panelists think Nigel Farage failed, but united in believing that Ed was OK, and the women all impressed :
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/02/leaders-debate-the-guardian-columnists-verdict?utm_source=Guy+Fawkes%27+Blog+List&utm_campaign=822ec86128-happy+hour&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_547885726c-822ec86128-229924641
Contrast that to the public votes – available on the Biased BBC ! – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-wales-32171921
I think this makes an important point – that the polls are utter rubbish and should not be given a tenth of the attention they get.
The worst of the lot, IMO, is YouGov. I am not alone in having more or less stopped getting political ones once my political position had been established (clumsily – their polls can be funny at times they are so crude). A quick trip to their site reveals the self-selecting bunch of SJWs and hipsters who frequent the place.
Most polls are wrong, most of the time. There’s a good case for banning the media using them too close to elections.
True. The polls before the Israeli election, for example, got it so wrong that they might as well have been polling a different election.
And strangely, or perhaps not so strangely, they were seriously skewed in favour of the Zionist Union left.
Each HIV infection is usually accompanied by TB. London is already the TB capital of Europe. It is treatable but not so HIV without expensive drugs that ‘distort’ NHS expenditure and the postive nature of of ‘Health Prevention’ i.e. avoiding such harmfull practices are lost in space. You cannot ‘prevent HIV’ when it is illegal to deter such people from doing it from Africa (or here in UK). The cost of each HIV infection was (when I last looked £3,400 per year for the anti-retro viral cocktail) for that is termed a ‘normal’ life on drugs. This unfortunatly hides the fact that increasingly infected Mothers (usually on state benefits) who then give birth to Children with HIV which in turn need more blood transfusion, drugs and healthcare. This projected increase in infections will inevitabally force the next government into nationwide ID health cards and appeals for ‘clean’ blood doners which will get critical if we don’t see the problems that the US already has. The NHS is not like the freespending and careless BBC License fee. NO fee, NO treatment should be the NHS for foreigners. Farage is right to address the problem that other politicians fear might be racial discrimination. But it is also a question of morality and the health of the nation that is being squandered.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2841235/HIV-infections-UK-reach-time-high-25-people-unaware-condition.html
Not being a UK-ite I am frustrated by the lack of access to several BBC programmes and others originating in the UK so I was chuffed to be able to access some election debates soon after the fact and must thank the generous souls who plonked them on YouTube.
The strongest impression I came away with after the seven-party debate was that politicians are so skilled at bluster and bluff that they can contradict one another for hours without the audience getting a clear idea of who’s bullshitting and who isn’t.
But I thought Farage came out of it quite well, despite telling the un-PeeCee truth about health tourism and HIV. He even got a few audience laughs.
Paxman appeared to lay into both Cameron and Miliband with equal harshness but Cameron handled him well whereas Miliband was visibly flustered. His response to Paxman’s charge that he would fall to pieces in a confrontation with Putin made me think of a kid who tries to bluff his way out of a beating at the hands of the school bully by claiming he knows karate. And the half-hearted smattering of applause at the evident bluff seemed to indicate that even his supporters in the audience were not fooled.
At best, Miliband could be in charge of a student body at a university and even then I imagine he would have trouble with the job. He is simply not a natural leader. He is certainly not PM material and Labour made a serious mistake, thankfully, in electing him to head the party.