New month, new Open Thread. So, what was your view of BBC’s Question Time and Ask Nigel Farage programmes last evening? I get the impression this morning that the comrades seem a bit disappointed that Miliband gave the appearance of being less than enthusiastic for a pact with the SNP. Thoughts on this and any other issue of bias welcome here!
WEEKEND OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
An interesting evening, all used their usual patter and evasive tactics but I thought the Prime Minister stood out with Ed Miliband exposed. BBBC this morning are scoring it for the audience no doubt the deflect from the poor performance of their champion.
Scoring it for the audience rather than mention Farage, who has had little or no mention.
Yes Barry & Geoff very noticeable instead of the usual dissection of “Who won” it was how hard the audience was on the candidates. Well when I say candidates 3 of them but strange silence on Farage which I didn’t see so I have no idea how he did.
Meanwhile also on Breakfast. Another reporter in Nepal I don’t remember seeing.
CHARITY ALERT! It’s obscure it’s the Royal Institute of Navigation. http://www.rin.org.uk/ bitching about smart phones and |GPS map reading should be a school subject. Charlie tells us he thinks sat navs in the middle of the windscreens are dangerous, thanks for that Charlie.
An article on the NHS involves a trip to the mary seacole day centre for no really apparent reason.
News round up after 08:00 Naga asks a correspondent who won the debates, strangely we don’t get an answer to that question. Farage gets a couple of seconds viewing after Sturgeon & that Welsh woman who can’t speak Welsh.
Indeed she doesn’t speak welsh Dave, but claims to be learning.
It’s not an easy task, I can tell yer ! But I have now passed the point at which I ought to change my name from Dysgwr, to wedi’i dysgu!
Wot’s more I can read and rite it proper, like i does in english, and I’ve passed the exams.
Leanne? No, not so much..
Just why the fools who live here listen to the clueless idiot I simply don’t know.
Oh I know that too well, as I’ve said before my Father in law is a Welsh speaker, I tried to learn and gave up.
I saw Farage (though being in Scotland I had to search for BBC England on the Tivo) and thought he did very well. Clear answers, though he was frequently interrupted mid-flow by the presenter. Only one questioner tried to harangue him in that typical lefty way of asking a question but not actually wanting to hear an answer, right at the end.
I saw a tweet last night that suggested he’d laid into the Beeb but if he did, it wasn’t shown.
Al Beeb Radio Wales this morning. Same bias towards the UKIP representative . The woman asking the questions was not allowing time for an answer before rudely interjecting with the next question. Blatant venom.
Why doesn’t any interviewee that is being rudely interrupted on a regular basis call it out and if no satisfaction is received then end the interview stating why. I certainly would.
So let’s mention Farage here…
It is amazing, the BBC hardly mentioned Mr Farage, the guy who , actually answered questions and didn t snake around them!.
Unlike Camoron who even pulled out the deceased son story again, as a deflection, in fact he avoided questions, appeared to be frenetic and less calm, when that was required, faced with challenging/difficult questions, he sought to deflect attention to Labour as often as possible
I had R4 and R5Live on sparsely this morning as I drove back, and a shocking lack of coverage on Mr Farage from last night.
Absolutely Geoff. They’re doing it again here (“Leaders grilled on post-election deals in Question Time special”). Comments are being solicited (but no doubt only during working hours) so go on, everyone, do your best!
My comment seems to have disappeared into the ether. Not even a ‘broke the house rules’ tag next to it. Why would they want to pull my comment?
Farage was the clear winner, but due to the BBC deliberately excluding UKIP from the debate and scheduling him after the papers had been printed, they’ve got no coverage. How do the BBC justify this blatant bias and manipulation of the UK General Election? Sign the petition to abolish the TV Tax.
Can’t think why they’d want to do that.
Does anyone know how you go about finding any given comment on that wretched system? You have to continually click to reveal the next 20 comments which is an eternity if your comment is in the middle of hundreds. Always assuming you can remember roughly what number it is.
‘Comments are being solicited (but no doubt only during working hours)’
Current top two (rest of page not so great for the saviour of the BBC either):
‘6. Posted by Beavo
Miliband does not believe that the last Labour government overspent. I hope this opens people’s eyes to the turmoil that Labour would, once again, create.
How many more chances are we going to give them?
If Miliband gets in, it’s out of nothing but short memories and naivety.
Comment number 30. Posted by Fetch A Cloth
Ed Milliband claims Labour did not overspend.
That one sentence sums up everything that is wrong with Labour. No more words are necessary.
On past history, how this thread fares as the day unfolds will be… ‘interesting’
Very well put Barry. It limits the damage doesn’t it?
The BBC had to give Farage some coverage (OFCOM electoral rules, dammit) so solved it by segregating his Q&A into a much later, solo slot. Did you notice how, at the end of the main programme, Dimbleby made no mention of the later programme with Farage, even though it was on his own BBC channel? It was blatant.
BBC aren’t under OFCOM’s remit. That is how they manage to avoid their rulings.
They, literally, are a law unto themselves. They are too big, too powerful and far too dangerous to be allowed to investigate and rule on themselves.
Have I got News for you has made some very fuuny comment about Farage and Cameron. Meanwhile Slippy Ed falls off stage and the only thing rolling across the prairie is tumbleweed. Bias on a satirical program. Shameless.
I’ve recently found out that I need major heart surgery and I go under the knife tomorrow. I hope to read you all soon. Yes I really do hope to read you all soon!!!
Let’s also hope the result on Thursday will be sensible but I doubt it, otherwise how do Labour even stand a chance of government. And if Scotland people are so stupid to vote in a carpet of National Socialist seats then I think we need to immediately close our borders and end the Union, waving them goodbyee.
Speedy recovery, Demon.
Thanks outsider.
Take care Demon…Given your condition I think it best you stay away from the BBC for a week or two!
Best wishes & a speedy recovery.
Demon, best of luck, it is not as bad as some say. I went through it last year as an emergency and was not expected to survive (3 arteries 95% blocked), but a few hours later I was awake and re plumbed. There are dozens of these being done every day in this country and the cardiology medical teams are amazing. Keep positive and remember every day after the operation you will be better than the day before rather than now where the opposite is the case.
Please let us know how you get on. I am sure most on here will be thinking of you and wishing you the very best.
Thanks General for that. I’ve got an Aortic Bypass replacement. I’m dreading it but I can’t wait for it to be over as well. I should be able (hopefully) to watch the election results from my hospital bed. This had the potential to be one of the most interesting elections for donkey’s years until the UKIP vote started slipping. I hope that they do win a few seats.
It shows my mind isn’t on this. Not Aortic Bypass but an Aortic Valve replacement. No bypass.
You will be OK. Just keep hugging the pillow. (you will understand what I mean soon. It becomes your best friend.)
You will be watching the Election alright but please try to keep your cool with the TV reporting both before, during and after voting day. You don’t want to put too much stress on your new valve !!!!! All in all its going to be the General Election you will not forget.
Good luck and stick in there. I had the same last year and am now officially 0.5% pig (aortic valve).
Artic bypass or Guilford by pass , good luck .
20+ UKIP seats may be your reward!
Good luck, look forward to your speedy return to the sanctuary of sanity here at biased BBC (the sanity bit has a few obvious exceptions!)
Good luck. I hope everything goes well and you’re back moaning about the bias (and hospital food) soon. I’ll be sure to fill in a few postal votes in your honour 😉
Good luck Demon.
I had a 9-hour op last year to replace one valve inside my heart and repair another. Yes there is some slight risk from heart surgery – but the operating teams are very experienced. If anything, the worst risks are post-operation, from infection in the hospital.
The main thing I learned was to do exactly as advised by the doctors and the physios – especially to get mobile as quickly as possible to clear any fluid that may have gathered in the lungs during the operation. And stay cheerful !
Again – very best wishes, we will see you here soon.
All the best, Demon. My father had a triple bypass over 20 years ago and is still going (fairly!) strong at 87.
Hope you had a postal vote organised! It’s not looking too good up here, but I actually think the SNP will be shown as rather impotent if Miliband has enough seats to dare them to vote his proposals down. It promises to be very interesting, if somewhat depressing.
Only just read your post, Demon. Best wishes, and my hope for a speedy recovery.
They can do amazing things in heart surgery and people I have known where they have done it say they feel better almost immediately. Trust that is how it is for you, Demon. Get well soon
Good luck demon! Don’t have any worries. You will be in very good hands, and you will be much better when you get op done. Trust me!
Good luck
Best of luck, Demon. Looking forward to you having a full recovery and getting back on here soon.
Just got in , Demon will be thinking of you tomorrow. Good luck and return soon.
We can find some maintenance and building work for the illegals and unemployable if the SNP were to storm Scotland.
It’s a sixty-mile long structure that was last maintained around AD 130.
Before you go under mate, make sure it is your consultant holding the knife and not the “intern” (only joking!)
Hurry back, B-BBC cannot afford to lose any players at this time.
Death to the licence fee.
Sincere best wishes for a speedy recovery,
Hope all goes well Demon, we wanna see you fighting fit during, and after the election…don’t let the buggers grind you down.
Best wishes Demon. Hope you’re well recovered for Thursday night’s viewing!
Well said about the Scottish idiots Demon, and i wish you a speedy recovery from your op, serious stuff. Chin up.
Good luck Mr Demon!
Thank you. I wonder where the edit facility has gone as I want to change the awful grammar in a couple of places.
Good luck!
Thanks
Hi Demon, Just wanted to give you my best wishes. I underwent VERY major heart surgery 6 months ago, and although I felt rough for a while afterwards I am now feeling much better and can walk several miles without stopping. I couldn’t do that before! Just wanted to reassure you!
Yes, good luck, Demon!
We’ll keep your seat for you.
Thanks to all for your best wishes. See you soon.
Good luck and a speedy recovery
Ve at zeee BBC wish u a speedy recovery Demon. Dont forget to make sure your direct debit is in order before you go into hospital or the first thing you will see when you wake up will be our TV licence enforcement officers and sugery will be the least of your worries
Here’s to a very successful operation and a rejuvenated Demon taking on the BBC with renewed vigour!
All the best.
best wishes, best of luck,
and get back soon
If the betting and polls are correct this time next week we will be in a media frenzy of speculation about coalitions / agreements etc.
Meanwhile the markets and exchange rates will be on their way down, with many wishing they had baled out a week ago.
Uncertainty and a weak government will be the worst of all worlds for the country.
I still have a sneaking suspicion that many (who have not already voted) will eventually vote for the “least worst” solution and produce a bit of a surprise.
Even in Scotland tactical voting in the “shires” for the one with the best chance to beat the SNP may well bring surprises.
Interesting times ahead!
”Meanwhile the markets and exchange rates.”
There’s more to a country than ”markets”, when the demographics of the nation becomes majority African and muslim, there won’t be any ” markets ” the place will be like Somalia.
Of course there will be markets!
You’ll be able to exchange your daughter for a goat and watch the beheading at 11.
I thought markets were indigenous to the Kalahari desert, apart from a few who ended up in Russia !
Simples !
The markets are a pretty good indicator of the expected future for a country.
With a growing economy, stable government, not over restrictive employment laws etc, people will buy government debt at low interest rates, businesses will invest their capital building factories, which provides jobs, you get on a roll and things go well.
Uncertainty comes along, one side in a election says you are going to pay for my policies, investors sell government debt, the interest rate goes up meaning more of the taxes go to paying off interest. Businesses are likely to make less profit, investors are scared off so no extra jobs etc. and it soon goes into reverse or stagnates at best. No extra revenue for the NHS apart from taxing joe public for more.
The markets and exchange rates usually fairly accurately reflect what is ahead.
The BBC gloried in telling us GDP growth in the first quarter was ONLY 0.3%. Would you be signing the cheque for a multi million spend in the U.K. at the moment, or would you be holding off to see how things turn out?
Thinking of elections, which nobody is at the moment, but we all on here know who the BBC will be backing for President of the USA.
If she gets in, will she be the first President to both literally and metaphorically have no balls?
I bet Mr Putin will be surreptitiously helping out with campaign funds for her.
FDR ” Presidents are not elected, they’re selected.” It’s her turn.
I didn’t see it so the question isn’t rhetorical, did Od Miliband do serious harm to his electoral prospects in al beeb’s QT?
Miliband wasn’t a complete car crash but was a bit surprised that some members of a BBC audience were actually hostile to him. He almost tripped when walking off the dais, we’ve all done it but it was amusing to see such a sanctimonious prick like him stumble in front of camera. Probably won’t be shown by the BBC again prior to the election unlike if Cameron had done it. Cameron was a clear winner (and I didn’t vote for him – postal for obvious reasons) and Miliband was quite surly at times.
Ed’s little trip can be seen here: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/04/30/watch-three-leaders-face-question-time-and-the-audience-is-the-winner/
thanks.
You’d have thought with all that maneuvering from one kitchen to the other (stairs presumably involved) he might be able to handle one or two steps in front of the cameras.
I like how Two Kitchens is quick to point out the tories are out of touch (which of course they are).
Not so keen on the fact it’s coming from a bloke who has two kitchens in a £3m house, and a very substantial inheritance with which to sustain a lifestyle surprisingly similar to those he berates for their remoteness.
I’ve got a documentary theme for after the election for the well-funded beeb news and current affairs department, which posits the following question:
Is it possible to have a functioning democracy when the state, via a legally enforceable media tax, controls around 60-70% of news output?
I am always confused when I hear ‘Millionaire Socialist’. “How can any socially aware individual be a millionaire?”, thinks I. Oh, the irony.
And I feel the same confusedness when I hear the phrase ‘Tory Toff’ when spoken by said ‘Millionaire Socialist’ who is really as much of a ‘Toff’ as the ‘Tory’ they are lambasting.
My head hurts.
I believe a well known former manager of a football team who play in red and a well known Labour Party supporter is party to an aggressive tax avoidance case.
Always remember the mantra for Polly Toynbee and all the others is “Do as I say, not as I do”.
When I hear Billy Bragg, that favourite son of the BBC mouthing off, and usually talking over those not holding the only correct view on anything, I always wonder whether he tells his accountant not to worry too much if he pays a bit too much as all those poor people could benefit from his extra tax
The Miliband family paying lawyers to get them out of having to pay Inheritance Tax on their Marxist father’s Hampstead mansion is par for the course for socialist hypocrites.
Melvyn Bragg did a programme a few months ago about Wat Tyler, and ended with a sermon about the desirability of everybody having an equal amount of wealth. Yes the same Melvyn Bragg who was on the board of LWT when they discussed either giving shares in the company when the listed on the Stock Market to all of its employees or just giving them to the board – making each of them multi-millionaires. Guess for which option our Labour Party supporting egalitarian Melvyn Bragg voted?
To be fair the LWT Board did decide to give the other LWT employees book tokens – none of whom I am guessing were spend on the novels of the aforementioned Bragg.
Should all football matches be required by law to end in a draw, so no team loses? Toynbee is laughable. I’ll take her at her word when she redistributes her own personal wealth to make the world a “fairer” place. Don’t hold your breath. The Russell Brand Challenge, you might call it.
Ironically, I know of far more mouthy Liebour supporters of the neighbouring team who play in blue – the Peoples’ club, financed by Arab oil billionaire Sheik Mansoor of Abu Dhabi.
i doubt Sheik Mansoor is a uk tax avoiding nondom and he is pumping millions of his money into east manchester
I’m sure he uses taqiyya, and IIRC his country isn’t exactly a human rights beacon.
“Miliband wasn’t a complete car crash”
Demon you really are not well !!!!!
Of the three debates that Miliband has appeared in, I reckon this was his worse performance by some distance.
Miliband is a manufactured politician. He cannot keep up the act forever and at times last night the mask slipped.
And the summary I saw on 10pm News had Miliband with one hand in his pocket, is that how he stood all evening? It was so obvious that he had been trained to stand like that ; ‘statesmanlike, relaxed’, except he didn’t. Just added to his falseness.
This was the very first time he was not surrounded by labour sycophants, and had been faced with people from outside his very carefully controlled bubble.
Farage deals with ordinary, everyday people very naturally and in a very impressive way. Miliband is hopeless at even walking, talking and eating.
Burnham is on Five Live now…I wonder if by way of compensation he will get an easier ride?
Cambell is protecting him.
Nigel Farage on “Today” this morning, STILL, I thought being interrupted far too much by Humphrys.
Sometimes, most of the time, in fact, I get exasperated with these stupid “interviewers” – when they ask a question, they should really have the courtesy to allow the interviewee to get an answer out before talking over what he or she is trying to say. Half the time, I never quite know what the answer is to a pertinent question, because it is overridden by an interruption, or the next question.
Very poor interviewing.
Nigel had the last laugh, though, pointedly criticising the BBC yet again for its bias, complaining that the BBC didn’t abide by OFCOM’s ruling that UKIP was one of the four major parties, and insisting that HE should have been with the other three yesterday evening, rather than being stuck with the “also rans” at some ungodly hour of the night. and calling the organisation an anachronism – which it surely is.
Yes, another crisp no-nonsense interview by Farage. And he really does not pull his punches on the BBC’s bias.
If the election leads to a Tory Government dependent in any way on UKIP confidence-and-supply support – there would be some negoiiations beforehand. And I bet UKIP puts the future of the BBC on the agenda – they know they have the support of a lot of Tory backbenchers. The very least UKIP would look for is that the BBC Charter review should really look at all options – at present it looks as though the review would be a tepid affair, already tending to leave the licence fee in place at much the same level rather than really examining the benefits and procedures for a switch to subscription
If the Lib Dems are involved in any coalition with the Tories we can forget anything that may damage the BBC. Only a coalition of Tory, DUP and UKIP will take on the BBC, as all three parties have good reason to resent the leftist bias of the corporation. But to get such a coalition of the centre right the arithmetic is that , assuming the DUP get 9 seats, UKIP 10 ( which is quite a stretch) the Tories need to win 307 minimum, in reality 310 plus. To get that result the Tories need to get more than 39% of the vote. Presently they are on 34/35% , perhaps a little more if you only look at the more accurate telephone polls as opposed to internet polls. So they need to get a boost of as much as 5% in the last few days.
The DUP can’t possibly get more than 10 seats. Can UKIP get more than 10, with the extra ones being taken from Labour? I doubt it, unless there is a tactical voting pact to keep Labour/SNP and the other daft progressives out of government.
So if you want to see the power of the BBC curbed and a return to something like democracy, you vote Tory where they have a chance of winning and UKIP where they don’t. Do that and you get a chance of doing something about the BBC and an EU referendum. Whats not to like?!
He should have been on last nights QT, no ifs or buts, shocking BBC bias,
There are times when it is reasonable to interrupt and times when it is not.
Sadly the BBC seem to have these backwards.
They let labour pontificate for ages, often not even answering the question asked (often using that obnoxious, arrogant phrase, “No, the REAL question is…”) when they definitely should be interrupted.
Sadly they are all too keen to interrupt Farage when he IS clearly and fully answering the question.
Did anyone hear that unbelievable outburst by the BBC business correspondent around 6.20 on R4 today?
He was interviewing the director of the British Film Institute about the success of the film industry in Britain. It was pretty clear that much of thius success is down to the tax incentives introduced by George Osbourne, which wasn’t going down too well with our prickly Oirish Beeboid (incidentally – why are there so many?) nor was her stance on cuts in government funding, which she said everyone is having to live with so it means her having to manage things more efficently and effectively.
Expanding on her theme she was explaining that for every pound spent by film makers in this country a further £12 is generated for the economy, such as hospitality and tourist attractions.
At which point came the incredible Tourette’s-style interjection of our impartial BBC man: ‘Including the black economy, like more money in drug dealer’s pockets, but let’s not go there’ he spluttered (and obviously not joking – which would have been in poor taste anyway).
‘Oh, my goodness’ was the reaction of this very eloquent, pleasant and impressive lady, obviously very shocked indeed.
‘But let’s not go there..’ having just gone is a Beeboid staple.
If the reaction is poor (please let there be a YouTube soon) then stand by for a ‘just jooooooking’ scrabble.
I remember the hypocrite Toynbee used that wonderful phrase’ “Let’s not go there.’ when Richard Littlejohn informed us all about her holiday home in Tuscany during QT. That is still one of my favourite TV moments of all time.
Toynbee is so biased to the Labour Party it is almost as if she works for the BBC.
I thought she had kept her old desk from the number of times she comments (from the approved standpoint) on social affairs on the BBC.
Has the Mail’s social affairs correspondent featured heavily on BBC programmes?
I did. As you rightly say, unbelievable.
johnnythefish,
“At which point came the incredible Tourette’s-style interjection of our impartial BBC man: ‘Including the black economy, like more money in drug dealer’s pockets, but let’s not go there’ he spluttered…”
What he actually said:
“And some of the black sector of the economy as well I’m sure we’ve all discussed drug dealers etcetera etcetera.”
So he didn’t say; “let’s not go there”. You made that bit up. Desperate to find something to complain about?
But what could have caused the interviewer to make such an interjection? Perhaps it was this article from The Indy:
“Some have expressed surprise that Hoffman, who seemed so calm and erudite in public was a drug addict, yet this shows an ignorance of how socially acceptable drug taking is in the film industry.”
http://goo.gl/pzq4wl
Or perhaps it was this from David Vance:
“Hugh Grant, a man who works in the film industry, an industry that spends prodigious amounts of money on drugs ultimately obtained from murderous gangsters and drug barons who kill and terrorise without a qualm.”
http://goo.gl/8QILjw
Lies & hypocrisy; just another normal day on BiasedBBC.
dezmong!!!!!!!!
where u been baby? you havnt been here for ages. Have you been staying away licking your wounds after the maulings u get here with your pathetic posts? I take it youve recovered enough to come back until you get humiliated some more and then stay away til you recover again?
The Manon troll persona is looking a bit battered and bruised today; team leader probably thought it was time to freshen things up a bit..
‘Lies & hypocrisy;’
Still the same old drama queen.
‘Desperate to find something to complain about?’
Why do you pick on one isolated post?
‘I’m sure we’ve all discussed drug dealers etcetera etcetera.’
It was totally out of context and his tone was very prickly. Whether or not he said ‘let’s not go there’ is irrelevant and doesn’t affect the point I was making.
Anyroads, I’m sure Oirish is pleased you could dig up some defence for him, though I’ll wager 99.999% of listeners were left scratching their heads as to what the fuck he was going on about.
Yo Dez
I was pretty sure the gist of what I’d written on this was correct, so I’ve just checked it out.
What he actually said was not, as you say “…I’m sure we’ve all discussed drug dealers etcetera etcetera.”
but..
“……..we won’t discuss drug dealers etc etc”
As good as ‘let’s not go there’.
To which she replied, taken aback “Oh my goodness….”
So where did you get your recording or transcript? I’ll be generous and, rather than accuse you of deliberately misleading, assume you were given a duff budgie by…..someone else.
I will, however, be pleased to accept an apology for your ‘lies and hypocrisy’ outburst.
Still waiting, Dez.
And by the way, did you actually hear it yourself or was the information for your reply above courtesy of some proxy listener, aka ‘a researcher’?
I do enjoy those awkward little BBC news juxtapositions
You know, the ones where the BBC picks a couple of lines of supposed news that they think each fits their narrative – but the two following one on the other busts their agenda.
This morning we have the Church of England (at which the BBC worships, just so long as its sermons are heading off into the leftist out field). ‘Climate Change is the most important moral issue facing the world!’ Well the trendy vicars are divesting their assets out of fosil fuels (hurrah! more windmills).
Next up – some twitching charity is fretting about man-made structures getting in the way of migrating bird life – ‘animals need airspace’. Nasty buildings, powerlines and even drones (!) are badmouthed on Breakfast.
Wndmills?
NB. I note the online report (no doubt a cut and paste from a press release by the BBC ‘journos’) does list those wind turbines.
Not so the editor of BBC Breakfast. Off narrative, you see. What a Marxist would recognise as a ‘contradiction’
Two more climate change digs this morning – the Church of England has crossed to the dark side, not supporting coal any more. I wonder how much coal has been burned over the years heating their useless, underutilised churches?
And the Emperor Penguin, it seems, is likely to become extinct, due to the “global increase in temperature”. Are you familiar with a “global increase in temperature”? I certainly am not, believing, instead, that there has been NO increase in global temperature for almost nineteen years. With the sun in a cold, spotless funk at the moment, I suspect that another name-worthy “minimum” will be on the way before we can say “Frost Fair”. All those Cornish wave-driven electricity generators, and the myriad sheep-dwelling solar farms, and wind turbines will be hard-pushed to deal with THAT eventuality, I suspect…
I heard the report about the Church of England’s decision to ‘divest itself’ of its fossil fuel investments. Absolutely sickening hypocrisy, as usual, from the all the typical leftard eco-whack-jobs.
And I really do think that above all else, this kind of hypocritical ‘green’ grandstanding is what sticks in the craw; I can negotiate the logic deficiency required to bend the knee to The Holy Consensus; I can suffer the empty, bankrupt rhetoric around ‘renewables’; I can even stomach the conspicuous ‘group think’ required of all true CAGW believers, but I can never – ever – understand the anti-human progress, menacingly Malthusian agenda required by all who want to wage a war on fossil fuels.
The total lack of empathy for millions around the world still without access to basic, reliable, cheap electricity, clean water and health services, damned by the self-interest of the western world’s anti-fossil fuel zealots to poverty and homelessness, is absolutely staggering.
And these hypocrites – these smug moral pontificators – want to tell me they consider themselves ‘compassionate’?
Disgraceful. The Church of England should be entirely ashamed of themselves.
The C of E is certainly dying.
I’m glad to say I do not expect it to emulate its patron and rise again.
Unfortunately fossil fuel ,being highly subsidised ,is increasingly being seen in a lesser light than green options. This is particularly the case in the third world who would,in any event, be the worst to suffer as global increases in intensity. I think it’s very sad that the oil companies rather than seeing to writing on the wall have decided not to research new techlnologies and have instead decided to spread disinformation about the science.
@Manonclaphamomnibus:
Ask yourself this, friend: Do you think the thousands of victims of the recent Nepalese earthquake need wind turbines or helicopters? Solar panels or reliable, always-on electricity? ‘Renewables’ or heavy, petrol-guzzling trucks filled with relief supplies of food and clean water?
If fossil fuels cannot rescue these people – who now have nothing but hope to sustain them – will you be asking them to put their faith in your rainbows and unicorns?
I think I’ll be counting on fossil fuels to get them the help they need right now – because only fossil fuels can deliver it.
The question is do you think the whole world will be on a day to day basis be like Nepal. If so then I’d be interested in knowing why. Oil will be fundamental to our future lives if only because you get polymers from it.
Perhaps they should even it up by subsidising wind farms as well.
What like they do with oil currently?
Manon.
If this is the same person who wrote the erudite piece on the economy today you really must be on some amazing upper and downer medication. In fact you could actually be the subject of a BBC documentary on a modern day Jekyll & Hyde.
To lurch from that piece to this one littered with grammar and spelling errors is unbelievable!
Al Beeb sockpuppets
Predictive text I am afraid. Not very good at predicting but I don’t know how to turn it off.
If we shut down the BBC , that will save billions in Leccey & Carbon Footprint. If we shut down , the Clapped Out Bus Driver , with his computer too, that`s more saving of the world too .
Good job those Emperor Penguins don’t live in a place like, say, the Antarctic where the amount of ice is increasing due to cold caused by, er, global warming. Er, what do you mean: they do live in the Antarctic?
See http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/09/why-is-antarctic-sea-ice-at-record-levels-despite-global-warming
You need to do more research on your selected topic since you are drawing incorrect conclusions. Antarctic ice is melting rapidly,that is the stuff that’s been there for thousands of years. The ice you are referring to relates is a result of cold winds drawing water vapour across the antartic region. The ice is different and the long term implications eg water salinity is different too.
Global warming predicts changes in weather patterns and this is just one such example.
The wrong kind of ice.
And your qualiications for such a statement?
It’s fascinating watching the Warmists tie themselves, and logic, in knots trying to explain away their duff predictions and the intervention of reality. So now we are supposed to believe that Antarctic ice is melting AND spreading at record levels SIMULTANEOUSLY! That’s as astounding as the warmists trying to tell us that heat sinks in cold seawater thereby inverting the laws of physics. I wish I was as intelligent as a climate alarmist.
Antarctica has an independent Climate due to the fact that the Ocean currents can rotate around the whole coast, due to America not blocking Orbital rotation of the Ocean currents in this area. While the Arctic has far more heat input than the Antarctic region, due to the Gulf stream being channelled up into the Arctic Ocean.
I am sure that the Manonclaphamomnibus moron is confusing some past trend that he has heard about with regards the Arctic Ocean. But Antarctic cannot melt rapidly due to the fact that Antarctica is a land mass and could only melt rapidly if the air temperature was significantly above Zero. If in this case the Ice is accumulating more in Winter, than is losing in Summer. Then that would prove there is a cooling trend in Antarctica, while thermal lag due to the Oceans would delay this for the Arctic region. Also you must consider that an increase in cloud cover would increase temperatures as clouds trap heat, including the fact that the Arctic has far more heat input than the Antarctic region, due to the jet stream. But this could cause cooling in Antarctica because there isn’t much heat input to trap in Winter and the heat input direct from the Sun is blocked in the Summer.
Another reason why temperature extremes are greater in the Antarctic:
The earth’s orbit is also slightly elliptical, giving a minimum distance of 91.5 million miles from the sun in January (Antarctic summer) , and a maximum distance of 94.4 million miles in July (Arctic summer).
This corresponds to a 7% difference in the sun’s radiative output.
The BbC politics show just RT’d the BBC ge2015 show RT’ing this:
***
Today we team up w/ @BBCRealityCheck – a top tool for cutting through rhetoric to get answers. Give them a follow & check out #takeoverday
***
As an example of ‘telling it often enough’ hard to beat.
Also, by now, the notion of using anything BBC to check anything, especially reality, is funny.
Might be worth an FOI on how they conduct these checks, if only to see the BBC cut their own rhetoric at the ankles and suddenly go very untransparent all of a sudden in getting answers. Per usual.
Also like ‘take over day’. Has a nice ring to it.
“…Also, by now, the notion of using anything BBC to check anything, especially reality, is funny.”
Quote of the day. Spot-on.
200,000 Ballot papers stolen in Sussex.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-200000-ballot-papers-stolen-by-van-thieves-10213657.html
Absurdity piled on top of rampant political bias on Toady at around 9am this morning.
Humphries was talking to some earnest wannabe playwright about his new ‘drama’ on… zero hours contracts. Fascinating. Clearly the most important thing happening in drama today. In fact it’s hard not to imagine R4 listeners shouting at their radios, urging Humphries to give this star in the making more time to explain his ‘narrative’. Especially how he had undertaken ‘research’ by doing a few shifts as a cleaner. Oh, the humanity! The sacrifice!
The comedy value was heightened considerably by the addition of a jargon-spouting Marxist sociologist who sounded like she had stumbled into the wrong studio, having been booked for the R4 boreathon ‘Thinking Allowed’ .
Neither she nor our latter-day Bernard Shaw had any relevance whatsoever to a topical news programme. Still, they were both babbling in Leftispeak about one of Special Ed’s favourite subjects, so that was all right and, no doubt, why these two clowns had been booked for the show.
Shameless. Useless. Tear it down.
Too late to edit the typo in Hymphrys’ name in the above. My apologies.
He’s famously tight. It would be interesting to know if he declared his earnings.
bBC as ever, finger on pulse, or is it subliminal? Don’t mention the Tory’s… (Deverell is the UKIP candidate)
https://twitter.com/JulianDeverell/status/593331913303130113
The BBC is always fretting about race in sport – and sexism
(It’s a bit of an obsession)
>Football ‘must level jobs playing field'<
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32509958
BBC directive number one: hand the megaphone to the professional racialists and full-time sexualists whenever they ask for it and do not ever question anything they say….
'Now charity Kick It Out has called on clubs to alter their recruiting policies, to ensure they give a fair opportunity to people from all backgrounds to be considered for jobs in football'
Never mind that we already have plenty of anti-discrimination legislation. This is a call for extra-legal action. It is really about quotas and 'positive' discrimination.
'encouraging a greater representation'
Or, informal reverse racism. And reverse sexism too.
But don't worry, the picture is not completely bleak – not when the BBC can find an ethnic female success story…
'One woman from an ethnic minority who made it into the male-dominated football world is Sangi Patel, who worked as a physiotherapist at two big-name London professional clubs.'
Good for her.
I found one too….
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4162446.stm
'Former secretary Faria Alam has lost her employment tribunal against the FA. It follows a high profile hearing which re-opened an episode which had rocked English football's governing body. News of the FA secretary's affairs with England manager Sven-Goran Eriksson and chief executive Mark Palios generated endless yards of newspaper coverage, just months after England's unfortunate exit from Euro 2004.'
The BBC has a nice quote from their girl….
"Sometimes clubs may think it is easier to appoint a male – it is easier not to have to worry about potential sexism issues, or players feeling they have to watch what they say in front of a woman."
I found a nice quote from my girl….
In one [of her emails] she allegedly wrote: "I want to be… very, very rich".
I didn’t watch the 3-way boreathon last night. However, as with the first Romney-Obama debate (where Obama was led metaphorically bleeding from the dias), I can only assume from the BBC coverage – mirroring Hirohito’s vague and understated announcement to his people concerning the Japanese defeat (“the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan’s advantage”) – that the evening was not a triumph for Ed. Worse, it appears from the BBC’s lack of enthusiasm that Dave came out well ahead. Don’t worry though, this will soon disappear down the BBC memory hole as Robinson attempts to make the best of what he apparently views as a dire outcome.
BBC and others already spinning by concentrating on Eds forceful rejection of any deal with SNP.Like we believe that…
No mention of the after poll putting Cameron ahead.
This whole fixation on the polls and the arithmetic only adding up for Ed is driving me nuts.Like Demon I believe they are going to be in for a schock after the vote ,which is the only one that counts.
I don’t support UKIP ,though I have voted for them in locals,but even I think it was audacious of the BEEB to relegate them to late night and not straight after Clegg.
Reading this article I had great difficulty in determining whether UKIP had a candidate in this constituency, held by the Speaker. It does come clear at the end that a candidate will stand, but has little hope of victory. However, the opening paragraph states that there is no candidates standing against the Speaker.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32533034
That is normal. The Speaker does not normally vote in debates, and is supposed to be politically neutral, so he is normally elected unapposed, because his seat is not meant to affect the outcome of the makeup of the commons.
Then again most Speakers aren’t nasty little shitweasels like Bercow.
LOL!!
Manon MOCO posted this morning at 4.38am!
Is there a backlog at BBC blog control such that the licence fee is now covering a night shift?
Probably Dez is away in leave…the nightshift is normally his task.
Maybe it should be encouraged.
The strategy remains at its usual pointless level, but by some miracle the calibre of English to waffle it out has made an amazing leap forward since the last outing.
After not watching the debates last night, I thought I would tune in to 24News for a review of the papers. They had to accept that the FT and The Times had given the debate to Cameron. But there was no sign of the Daily Mail. Maybe, just maybe, they were late sending it in. So this morning I carefully listened to the 7.40 review on the Today programme. Still no mention of the DM and it is no good going to their web site because headlines are always changing. I had to go to Waitrose so I made particular care to read the DM headline, which was something to the effect that this is what a debate looks like when the audience is more balanced. (I know I have paraphrased but didn’t learn it off be heart)
But the whole of the Today’s review of the papers was a disgrace. Started with either the FT or The Times with the fact that Cameron had ‘won’, then to a story in the Mirror about teachers having to feed and clothe children and how Tory cuts were the cause, the a story about a man of 90 who has had the length of his prison sentence increased and Today played down the headlines as much as possible.
Another great performance by Farage on the Jeremy Vine show, Farage skillfully and honestly avoiding all the mines our genial host was attempting to lay.
Post interview, Vine reads out four (selected?) texts, one pro Farage, two pro Europe and one anti reversing the smoking ban. (Farage had left by then and wasn’t allowed a ripost)
So in essence 75% of those comments read were anti Farage, how can we be sure that this was an accurate representation of texts received, and not just a bBC ruse to subliminally suggest opinion?
‘how can we be sure that this was an accurate representation of texts received?’
It’s all down to BBC editorial integrity. Apparently. Try and check that and you’ll have Hugs and a bevvy of lawyers waiting.
Wasn’t Jasmine popped on backroom girl duties until her little failure to leave her politics secr… at the door blew up?
Two things we can NEVER be sure of from the BBC, are honesty and integrity. Especially where the Vine cretin is concerned.
Probably the same bint, from the end of “Ask Farage”, he barely got to answer her last night either.
Most of the polls suggest approx. 25% public sympathy with Farage and 75% extreme distaste so not far off.
I believe there is talk of tactical voting in Thanet by Laour supporters, which could be a reflection of the polls you mention.
My wife certainly has a down on him.
Ahhh, another one of those trolls with everyman-type names to join Essex Man and manonclaphamomnibus. We all know you’re a bunch of frauds. If you ever met a real Cockney, a real Essex man or a real manonclaphamomnibus you’d fucking shit yourself. One thing I will say though, the first four letters of your name are spot on.
Well I am real , & if you saw me, I am sure you would shit yourself . The truth will out on May 8th , so we will see that the Kipper surge will be nothing in the end.
Which polls?
A bloody good reason to vote UKIP!
As Trust Chairs and DG’s have found and are finding, it’s all well and good warning politicians to play nice with the BBC or else, but when the BBC doesn’t play fair anyway, there is really not much to lose, is there?
How’s the old conflict of interest and professional integrity working out Tony (crossbench peer – no affiliations, apparently), James (ex-Labour Minister), Ian (ex-Graun royalty), Danny (Dinner circuit royalty), etc… with the guy who has told you you are safe under him?
Unless the direction of the economy could be considered a tad more important in the overall scheme of things?
Will the one or two, if they are lucky, UKIP M.P.s be in any position to implement it? After all, it might not feature so highly on the new leader’s agenda!
“Unless the direction of the economy could be considered a tad more important in the overall scheme of things?”
To be blunt, personally no, would rather be poor in the short term among my own rather than better off and fearful for my own safety in a nation of increasingly non indigenous.
This is where both Cameron and Miliband want to lead us with their anti Islamaphobe Law..
Don’t worry you’ll be poor either way round. If you think the economy is going to recover the lost 12%. Under the Tories then you will be sadly disappointed.
Moreover, austerity only takes disposable income out of the economy which inevitably leads to contraction.
I am just grateful I live in Monarco for tax reasons. I am also grateful to this site for supporting people like me. It is so refreshing that at least some of those in ,let’s say,the lower classes realise the benefit that the more advantaged and talented bring to the country despite the obvious loss in revenue. I read with interest that similarly Amazon pay a marginal rate of 0.01%. Less tax does mean of course a lower standard of services but needless to say that won’t affect me!
You can’t even f**king spell Monaco you lefty illiterate.
Manonclaphamomnibus thought Africa was a “country” on a previous post. A mistake he made twice in the same post.
Spelling Monaco as “Monarco” is a step up the educational tree for the lonely passenger.
” Monarco ”
Where is ” Monarco ? can’t find it anywhere in my Atlas, is it near Ruritania and the Lost City of Atlantis ?
It’s next to socialist la la land.
It’s alright I’ve found it. http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Restaurant_Review-g503974-d3437047-Reviews-Monarco_Fish_Restaurant-Cleethorpes_Lincolnshire_England.html
I am down your way next month ,Clapped out White Van Man , try Monte Carlo for size. Your economic theory is like your spelling , Crap .
If the Tories had done something about the BBC earlier, perhaps we wouldn’t have quite the level of indoctrinated electorate who believe in the magic money tree? That strikes me as a huge threat to the direction of the economy.
Instead we have folks believing that austerity causes growth. Pretty sad really.
‘… believing that austerity causes growth…’
MOCO, I’m guessing you are a fan of J M Keynes?
‘Keynes did not expect a lengthy war, predicting in September 1914 that World War I “could not last more than a year” due to a lack of funds among European governments to continue, and “became quite angry at the stupidity of anyone who thought otherwise.”
But after several years working for the war effort Keynes came to believe the war meant that a likely collapse of Western civilization, and although “frighten[ed] by the prospect of general impoverishment” following the war, expected the “abolition of the rich” for which “I am not on the whole sorry.”
Click to access Keynes.pdf
Wrong factually on two counts and wrong morally – like most big government lefties.
Keynes also propagated the myth that the Allies were much too hard on the poor little Huns at Versailles, largely because he was infatuated with a German youth at the time. In fact if the Allies had insisted on occupying Germany and disarming it totally, World War Two could have been avoided. Nice one Maynard!
We seem to be operating on two levels.My level is finding evidence to justify certain statements in respect of economic causality. Yours appears to be on using entirely irrelevant ephemera to make an unrelated point. I don’t care whether Keynes shaged a Goat on a regular basis or didn’t use a toothbrush.the fact remains that there is no evidence that austerity causes an economy to grow.If you have evidence then let’s see it!
What austerity are you referring to? The austerity that doubles the National Debt to £1.6 trillion in five years? The austerity that has a government still having to borrow £90 billion a year to balance the books? Is that what austerity looks like?
I don’t care whether Keynes shaged a Goat on a regular basis…
Does the BBC permit you to use language like that on a public forum? BTW: Those educated in the 60’s, before the modernist advances, would probably have used ‘shagged’ with two g’s.
MOCO – how much more, do you want our Grandkids to inherit for your assumed desire to increase borrowing again, rather than attempting to give them a cleaner sheet?
That is on top the Labour introduced tuition fees and deficit resultant Blair/Brown/Milliband/Balls & Co Ltd mismanagement of the economy, last time round, which the Tories and UKIP propose clearing and Labour and Nationalists propose kicking the can further down the road?
You show your ignorance on past history I’m afraid. The Labour government didn’t cause the crash in 2008. It was a worldwide phenomenon due to the liberalisation of finance under the Thatcher Regan years. Chickens coming home to roost. As to grandchildren I don’t think they should carry any more debt than I did. But I did grow up when the UK were still paying back lease lend and a few years after the NHS was brought into service.At that time borrowing was running at around 250%. The important and only important thing is this. It isn’t debt reduction that will ensure a bright future for our grandkids,it is growth. If we have a stagnant economy but no debt then you won’t have job creation you won’t be able to pay for the growing proportion of elderly.there won’t be innovation because the economy will be demand retricted. Under those circumstances the only way out would for a government to borrow and invest. We are in a similar situation now except that the economy is being drained by the fact that you can earn more through the ownership of capital than through work. Thus income is exponentially filtering upwards which is why the rich have become disproportionately richer in the last 5 years whilst the poor have got considerably poorer. That will include kids and grandkids I’m afraid unless something is changed quickly.
I see the reliably off-topic Labour troll is back again.
So the appalling regulatory regime created by Brown had nothing to do with it?
The huge off-balance sheet liabilities run-up by first Blair then Brown, in addition to on-balance sheet spending played no part?
The relentless expansion of the population necessitating ever more debt funded public services bore no responsiblity?
For me, this election represents the last, or at best, last but one election where we, the sovereign people of the United Kingdom have any chance of voting for the people who actually make the laws of our land.
The strength in our democracy is in OUR collective ability to vote out those people who make bad laws, and run the country badly.
If UKIP get in and we get our country back, then whatever they mess up, WE can vote them out and repair the damage.
If liblabconsnp get in, more and more powers are going to increasingly head over to the EU, and the 75% (ish) of the laws that the EU create for us, will increase until Westminster will purely be a rubber stamp for the dictators in the EU commission… And guess what? When the EU commision make a mess of our country, NOBODY will be able to vote them out!
What will you do then, eh? moan on an internet forum?
It is essential that UKIP win and give us OUR country back!
Is has been estimated that immigrants will dictate the outcome in 25% of seats. what will it be in 2020? Which is 5 years of endless aircraft landings, ship docking’s and lorry fulls of unwanted’s arriving at Dover, not to mention tens of thousands of immigrant offspring getting their polling cards, maybe even 16 year olds.
Could that figure be has high as 40% and maybe even as high as 50% in 2025?
There was a recent cross party report by the House of Lords pointing out that there was very little interference from Brussels. As to Cameron trudging off to Europe,they couldn’t find anything that needed changing. Be interesting if you could give some examples about the interference you imagine is happening. As to voting governments in or out the great British public are doing a great job. Arse from Elbow appear to be the keywords in this election.
“Unless the direction of the economy could be considered a tad more important in the overall scheme of things?”
All three legacy parties support the Climate Change Act, so whichever of them is in power the only direction that the economy is going is down the tubes.
That’s because they are informed and you are not. Happily however you are very much the minority.
Have you got any more fascinating insights? The last one was profound.
Where does ‘Monarco’ get its electricity from Mr Clap? Bet it’s not effing wind turbines.
Still, you just carry on lecturing from afar, it somehow becomes you…..
The grauniad reckons the outgoing government can be proud of its record on same sex marriages and foreign aid, but that it’s now time for Two Kitchens.
Is it May 1st or April 1st?
Looks like Dave the Tosser has failed to win over the Guardianistas by following policies which his own supporters, you know, the ones who might actually vote for the prick, hate. Who’d have thought that?
Perhaps the BBC might consider a favourable interview with these guys. The seem to be opposed to UKIP
OT, but as Smiffy is a(nother) Labour peer the BBC seem to love, after his outfit’s last outings banning left, left and left of centre, I thought this worthy of note:
http://asa.org.uk/News-resources/Media-Centre/2015/Limiting-the-number-of-points-of-complaint.aspx?
Get your beach banning bods ready, Beeboids!
Listened to Farage on Jeremy Vine’s show this lunchtime. I thought he got a fair crack of the whip and came across well airing his views and UKIP policy on the E.U. and immigration (which are just common sense really), it also showed up Jezza’s limitations as an interviewer I thought.
…in other news…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/thinking-step.html
‘Then you make the programmes you can afford. Once you’ve paid for the 25 people on Danny Cohen’s Television Board….
…Danny will have no problem with Executive gender balance, should he eventually step into Lord Hall’s shoes’
A nation breathes easier.
However critics are saying ((c) Any. BBC Editor) that Danny may be lucky to market rate oversee a whelk stall soon if his and Tone’s efforts to get their man in don’t pan out.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/we-love-list.html
‘nearly all have a Beeb background’
[gasps]
‘Dom, of course, helped Lord Patten uncover George Entwistle… but this vacancy has come at a difficult time…’
Like the last was so smooth.
And, lastly…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/bearded.html
No EastEnders or Strictly, maybe, but still vital, surely?
BBC News Channel doing their very best to save Ed today
During the 3pm news we get a long anti-Tory diatribe from a new BBC star.
Linda Green, author.
You must remember Linda from last night:
” people have DIED from the bedroom tax!”
http://www.linda-green.com/author-biography/
A little background not provided by the BBC
‘I have written for The Guardian, The Independent on Sunday….’
‘I… have a really weird accent which means I can do Yorkshire, London and the Midlands in the same sentence….’
‘And here are a few of my favourite things: ….TV: Newsnight, The Royle Family, Ally McBeal, Have I Got News for You, Smack the Pony.’
So just one of those ‘members of the public’ who, scratch the surface, turns out to be a raving leftie
Our BBC news anchor admits:
“You don’t have to answer, but I’m guessing you’re not voting Tory?’
Yep, she’s for Labour – she would be a Green but she reckons the electoral system is buggered. She has a point there but I’m not convinced the Greens are main victims. And she thinks we have to have more women in politics. Not thinks – is damned sure about it.
But our male BBC anchor chap most decidedly likes the cut of this lady’s jib:
“You should go into politics!”
To missquote Bogart : Of all the audience members, on all the debate shows, the BBC had to pick her
‘“You don’t have to answer, but I’m guessing you’re not voting Tory?’’
In this vein:
BBC News FaceBook
This is how you “empty chair” a #GE2015 candidate
Take the wildest of guesses which party was not chosen to lampoon visually in complement, despite one of their prospective MPs being empty chaired by a fraud conviction vs, not turning up to one of countless silly media ratings ra-ras?
The BBC on last nights news gave the briefest of mention to the Israeli aid delegation to Nepal. What they did not mention was the following…and it should have been… Although even to mention Israel at all was a miracle: (
According to figures reported by CNN, Israel’s total official aid delegation, not counting several private aid groups, numbers 260 people, more than all the other aid efforts examined by CNN combined. The next-largest delegation, from the United Kingdom, numbers 68 people, followed by China’s 62, the US’s 54 and South Korea’s 40. Taiwan sent 20 personnel, Italy 15 and France 11.
at http://tinyurl.com/kpbwp7m
The BBC.
And news.
And ‘not news’ ((c) A. Newsroom Tealady)
http://bbcwatch.org/2015/04/30/two-videos-from-jerusalem-the-one-bbc-viewers-saw-and-the-one-they-didnt/
Maybe they didn’t have space? Or enough staff? Or excuses?
If true, does this surprise anyone?
Depends if any of it is true.
It maybe true he turned up
It maybe true he follows UKIP
It maybe true that they had their quota of Kippers.
However if it was a murder trial would you really base anything on this characters observation.
In reality he felt because he was a Kipper he had some right to change the balance.
How much do your masters pay you for writing your endless rubbish ?
Do your realise that many people think you’re a very sad individual who will sell his own mother to please his masters ?
Go and get a life pal because all the evidence says you don’t have one.
“Manonclaphamomnibus
March 15, 2015 at 1:09 pm
I contribute here because I am highly critical of BBC news.”
? I think we get the message.
I’m not surprised. Are you?
How did your May 2nd comment end up here, Old Goat??!
Lord knows. This site does some very strange things…
lol nope and I really tried to listen hard to see what it was saying – what did old Shukker’s do nip up there grab a spade dig a bit of ice – write a load of old tosh on the way back and then put it on the radio. Oh the the one thing I did hear somebody says was ‘… the climate models do not contain this information yet’ – so how come you set so much store by their output if the input does not match real life
Ask Farage..
An audience member (asking about the smoking ban) is interrupted by Jo Coburn.. “Can we just stick to defence..” only to allow the next question relating to UKIP being referred to as ‘closet racists’.
And did you see Coburn’s reluctance to shake hands with Farage at the end of the programme? You could almost hear her gritting her teeth.
Did not see it, was lefty Coburn wearing red ??
Yes she was.
The BBC – always ‘nudging’ its viewers.
I expect she was also wearing her lucky Lenin knickers too.
The BNP person on Daily Politics seemed to have the right response to Brillo, whom he shut up very effectively. The old BBC favorite “Define British or Britishness” is always trotted out to bamboozle the white working claas whom the BBC wishes to show is confused about its own identity. Being English in a cultural sense is a lived experience and so is not capable of definition. I’m sure even Brillo knows that meeting the legal requirements for British citizenship has nothing.to do with being or feeling British in a cultural sense.
Yes, he had his answers for Brillo and responded well to the initial off putting remarks
Apologies if it’s been posted here already, but I think a few regs who might have missed it (like myself) will find this piece in yesterday’s Independent, by Nigel Farage, most illuminating:
Arrogant, biased and bad value for money – it’s time for a radical shake-up of the BBC
Because of the broadcaster’s arrogant attitude, its journalism is being reduced to the lowest common denominator
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/arrogant-biased-and-bad-value-for-money–its-time-for-a-radical-shakeup-of-the-bbc-10216598.html
You may vote here …..
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
Good points made by Farage, but I’m not sure about this:
….as well as its decreasing relevance in a social-media age…
I believe the opposite to be the case. For several years the BBC has been actively courting social media on Twitter and Facebook, for example. The short-attention-span generation is a dream come true for a propagandist outfit like the BBC.
I just find I don’t actually watch very much of what the BBc broadcasts. I don’t listen to any of it’s radio shows. In effect I watch the news (only then to have to look around the internet to see if the stories have been twisted). BBc breakfast it has a clock the local news occasionally gives you relevant traffic information and the ITV show is somehow even worse. The only other BBc program I actually make an effort to watch are the re runs of TOTP some of which thy don’t show. I got bored of Top gear and I imagine the re launch will be abysmal. I used to be a Dr. Who fan but I haven’t watched the last 2 series because they. made the ones before so bad. Question time I only watch if there is a chat on here about it, so how do I get value from money from a service I don’t really use and can’t trust.
Can someone please explain why in the middle of a General Election, and when people are still being dug out of the rubble in Nepal, the BBC chooses to give its second main headline to some police case in Baltimore ?
Is there some kind of agenda here ?
The BBc does not have an “agenda” they told me so following one of my complaints in one of my complaints in which I accused them of having an “agenda”. And hey lets face it they wouldn’t mislead me would they?
You are already sadly misled.
No it’s called news reporting
No it’s not.
I wonder if MSM (inc Beeboids) will stop playing the race-card on Baltimore now that we know that of the six police charged over Mr Gray’s death, three are black and three are white. And that the policeman facing the most serious charges is black.
Of course according to the BBC it’s major news for the UK audience unlike police shootings in Brazil http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/brazil-10-year-old-boy-shot-dead-police-raid-drug-traffickers-1494945 , or Mexico http://rt.com/news/251141-mexican-police-january-killings/
Even though the QT last night was fair I think there are 2 areas where bbc have shown amazing bias.
1. Their attacks and interviews with N Farage. Totally aggressive interviews plus constant interruptions.
2. They have given the SNP far to much air time, The Sturgeon has been given an easy ride, I mean she is not even taking part. It is only the Scottish TORY leader Who has given her a hard time and dared to question her.
Couldn’t agree more about Sturgeon. Yorkshire has more voters than Scotland, but all we hear is what SHE wants. Unbelievably, i heard a stupid woman (on LBC), an English woman, actually lamenting that there was no SNP candidate for her to vote for, as she liked their policies. Someone should tell her that the magic money tree that is going to give the Scots whatever they wish for is in fact the English taxpayer.
From this I guess you want England to break away from the Scots Irish and Welsh. Given your dislike of distribution from rich areas to poor ones what about splitting off the Se from the rest of the country. One better we could separate off Thanet and use it as a dust bin for those that can’t earn a living wage. maybe have Croydon as an open prison! Just gotta leave the EU and then your little bit of England can rule the waves again!
The snag is that Northern Ireland, Wales and – less so – Scotland are economies that are not economically functioning without huge injections from the UK government. The source of this largesse is England. Ireland was very keen on reunification with Ulster until they looked at the cost burden and – just like South Korea faced with the cost of North Korea – thought better of it. You talk of a “dislike of distribution from rich areas to poor areas” as if this was not already the case on a massive scale. The UK has a very progressive taxation system with huge transfers that do not shock us simply because we have got inured to it. Transfers distort and we now face a situation that Chua highlighted where we have an electoral system that no makes it structural in its entitlement with more transfers from the productive to the unproductive locked in. You might say that it is fair but all that happens is effectively expropriation to assure large swathes of society a standard of living with little correlation to their productive capability. What odd is that they are not even grateful for the providers of this largesse. The providers, in fact, are demonised. Truly you would think we are in Marx’s point of being “beyond necessity”. This is decadent and ignores economic reality and rising world competition.
“given the SNP far too much air time”
To be blunt, the biggest tub thumpers for the SNP
are Camoron, Pinochio Osborne, and the incompetent, grasping No10 liars.
willing to … “sell their grannies for a tanner” and increasingly seen by pro-union Scots as hugely irresponsible and a self serving danger to the long-term survival of the union.
This appalling Tory campaign, giving the SNP extra grievance against England that the nationalists could use to push again for independence, and is kicking the teeth of all those that won the last referendum.
A shameful tactic, by the Tories in their “a lie a day” election.
Sadly the Union is finished. That occured last year with the referendum. Whatever the result it meant that there is a substantial body of Scots who wish to leave .Two things can then happen. The numbers go down or up.In such cases it is always up.
Sorry, don’t really agree with you. Where is your evidence for this….
however that is not what I am saying, the bbc are giving them to much national air time, when not a National party. Then they don’t even argue the points..
Whilst they say they are anti austerity they are not … Big lie….. Reading ability has declined in Scotland schools was she challenged – no, .. Independence once in a lifetime, no back in next year..another lie..
NHS A&E times… Fail has she been challenged – no
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/11571724/SNP-accused-of-taking-eye-off-ball-as-literacy-standards-decline-in-Scottish-schools.html
Never seen her questioned I know the answer even though this is totally devolved would be to blame the english
The Islamic-‘political left’ alliance (inc Beeboids), are well set on the road to criminalising the criticism of Islam.
The only BBC-NUJ demos in worktime at W1A of late have been in favour of Al Jazeera of Emirate of Qatar, and against the Muslim Brotherhood-opposing Egyptian government.
“UK LABOUR PARTY Plans To Enforce Islamic Blasphemy Laws By Making Criticism Of Islam A Crime”
http://shoebat.com/2015/04/25/uk-labour-party-plans-to-enforce-islamic-blasphemy-laws-by-making-criticism-of-islam-a-crime/
At the same time, BBC-NUJ supports Islamising Turkey’s entry into E.U, so as to consolidate Islamisation of Europe, regardless of these sorts of intolerances-
“Turkey: Historic 12th-century church to be reopened as a mosque”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/05/turkey-historic-12th-century-church-to-be-reopened-as-a-mosque
“Once I’ve voted for him, Ed Miliband wants to make me illegal.
“After 8 May, if Labour get in, it may be made illegal to disparage Islam.
So I’d better get it out of my system.”
By Rod Liddle.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9513162/heres-everything-islamophobic-that-i-have-to-say-all-at-once/
Just watched a recording of Nigel Farage’s performance last night. He was really impressive and inspires confidence in his leadership abilities. Miliband, by contrast, appears as if he would be incapable of effectively leading a local council. Can’t picture him as PM of the UK.
It was interesting to note that Farage totally ignored each and every interjection from Jo Coburn, concentrating on answering the questions from the audience. No doubt he is pissed off with BBC anti-UKIP bias, as he has every right to be.
It was noticeable how limited Milliband’s reasoning powers are. He is capable of no more than mouthing soundbites : “tax cuts for millionaires” and so forth.
When he faced real people, who were not to be fobbed off with this, he was reduced to a gobbling 6th form debater.
The Beeb must have regretted their decision to allow (under scrutiny as they now are) a fairly balanced audience instead of their standard rent-a-mob. Their man let them down, with one week to go! Disaster!
Too True. May the Labour Party long continue to commit foolish errors such as giving a clown like him the leadership.
Milliband has great reasoning powers but unfortunately he has one difficulty that the Tories don’t have.
If your a Tory you can talk eloquently about doing the right thing ,building a stable economy,we’re all in it together and not mean a word of it.Why ? simply because they are representing a sectional interest represented by those that can look after themselves.
Millibands project is vastly different in that he seeks a fundamental change in the way that rewards are distributed and that involves stepping on toes. It also involves less intuitive thinking which is why it isn’t readily understood. The issue of debt and the banking crisis are two such examples as is the notion that a government budget is the same as a household budget. Sadly life is much more complicated than it was at the battle of Bosworth. Now we have economics,econometrics finance and a whole host of other disciplines which cannot be reduced to sound bites. What determines elections now is the brute force of a carefully nurtured ignorance.
Milliband has great reasoning powers…
Funny guy MOCO. That’s a good one. But this is not (usually) a site for satire.
Remind me. What subject was your degree in?
To Manon Claptrap :I’m tempted to write a coherent reply to these ramblings, but they don’t honestly deserve it. I will say, however, that when I read of a “project” I smell the vast inhumanity of totalitarianism.
There is some truth that a state’s budget is unlike a household budget, in that the state can compel payment from its citizens through almost infinite taxation, whereas the private citizen becomes bankrupt. However, the principle that both should not spend much beyond their means, and should endeavour to repay debts as soon as finances allow, is plain common sense. I don’t think you need “a whole host of other disciplines” to grasp that.
By the time you were explaining that “life is much more complicated than it was at the Battle of Bosworth” I can only assume you were drunk or under the influence of narcotics.
Your final sentence is resounding but is all sound and fury, signifying nothing.
“Miliband impression”
(2 min video.)
Al Beeb reporting the disaster affecting the great people of Nepal has reminded me of the time that the Labour government left in to this country so many immigrants from the Middle East who have no affinity to our culture or ways, many of whom are hostile to our country.
On the other hand the Labour government turned their backs on the British Gurkha Soldiers who have done great service for this nation for two hundred years. Disgraceful
As with so many of these things, it is a great deal more complicated than it seems.
Joanna Lumley probably did more to threaten the long term future of the Brigade of Gurkhas than anyone else.
Agreements were made with the King of Nepal (I imagine these are now negotiated with the dysfunctional government) and Indian government.
Pensions which allow a good standard of living in Nepal and support of families are wholly inadequate in Hampshire, particularly as property in Nepal may push people over the benefits threshold.
Poverty has increased in a country that could ill afford it as families have followed elderly relatives who were suddenly “encouraged” to come to the UK and are stunned to discover the cost of living and how little a pension from a few years of service 50 years ago goes.
It has become more and more expensive to employ Gurkhas and it is likely that eventually the UK government will no longer think it worth the effort.
I am not arguing about whether it is right or wrong, just that the issue was a great deal more complicated than “Jai Gurkha” made it seem.
you could use that argument for most people wh come fom the sub-continent
The whole point of that post is that the Labour government encouraged and let in a considerable amount of undesirables from the middle east , but kept out the people that proudly and honorably served this nation with their lives.
I am afraid your comments about the Gurkhas are true, and I think Joanna Lumley (for good but misguided reasons) and the last Labour government (for reasons of spineless lack of integrity by ministers such as the elections cheat Phil Woolas) have completely undermined the raison d’etre of the Gurkhas. The point of the Gurkhas is that they are not British nationals, and never have been. They are citizens of Nepal, who, with the permission of their government, serve in the British Army, and after their honourable service, return to their home country with a pension that is generous by the standards of their local economy. If you have to pay them the full wages and benefits of a British soldier, and give them full settlement rights in Britain at the end of their service, then why not just employ British citizens in the army, especially as this pathetic Coalition government just sacked 20,000 soldiers.
I know personally 4 Gurkhas (2 retired), the last time I visited, one still has the photo of the queen in his lounge
and the eatery I have been to with younger rifles has one too.
Anyway, these proud servicemen, serve our country, will fight for it and our queen, and are willing to die for it
… Not act as a bloody 5th column, try to bleed it dry, lie, cheat, and actively fight against it, our communities and democratic society.
I would be happy, for the retirees to be here over and above any 5th columnists
“Bravest of the brave, most generous of the generous
… never! … had a country more faithful friends than you”
Sir Ralph Turner MC, 3rd Queen Alexandra’s Own Gurkha Rifles, 1931.
Everything you say is true, but the fact is Gurkhas are not and never have been British, and a British passport was never part of the deal. If they are to be paid the same as British troops, and get a British passport at the end of their service, why employ these excellent, but foreign soldiers, when the bullshitters in government have just made 20,000 British soldiers redundant?
Rob, excellent point, our,(and, they are our) armed services have always been treated appallingly especially after war or in retirement, I personally find painful truth in the words you speak,
Our disagreement on point, is only slight and I hope
as always as gentlemen.
“but the fact is Gurkhas are not and never have been British, and a British passport was never part of the deal.”
Neither were the hoards of undesirables that flooded this country from the middle east . The Gurkhas have given 200 years of loyal service to this country of ours and hold our nation in esteem .
You are missing my point. The Gurkhas were historically part of the Indian Army. After 1947, they were split between India and Britain. Britain used the Gurkhas as cheap but effective infantry East of Suez, they were never assigned to NATO or BAOR. After Hong Kong went back to China in 1997, there was little for the Gurkhas to do in the Far East, so now they are more integrated in the Army force structure. But it is an anachronism to be using foreign troops at full British rates of pay, and pension, and with citizenship rights, when the role we used them for has gone, and 20,000 British soldiers have been made redundant. By forcing the Army to give the Gurkhas all these benefits, which historically they never had, Joanna Lumley has, unwittingly I expect, made the case for keeping the Gurkhas very dodgy indeed.
One thing I did note during last night’s questioning of Nigel was the extreme youth of the audience. Most of them were very young, some barely of voting age. It was an odd demographic and hardly representative of what we are always being reminded is “an aging population.” Was this a deliberate ploy on the part of the Beeb due to youngsters being more likely to be “progressive and left leaning.” Or so they like to think…
Farage actually answered the questions, even the loaded ones. There was none of the subtle avoidance we see so often with Ed, Dave and Nick. It was refreshing.
Everyone knows you can’t trust Nick, Dave has completely failed and Ed is an irritating lower sixth prefect.
Whatever the outcome of this election UKIP have done themselves proud and their leader is head and shoulders above the rest.
i spotted that too where are all the grumpy old pensioners
True, that was a pimply young audience with its collective head full of little but leftie sound bites, with the exception of the level-headed young Sikh, who I imagine was allowed in by mistake.
Farage handled them with ease, sincerity and conviction.
Just for once, and having been called out, the BBC were compelled to ensure that a QT audience was more evenly balanced. But just look a how the loony left have taken it.
http://labourlist.org/2015/05/about-that-question-time-audience/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11577810/Conservative-stooge-Ed-Miliband-BBC-Question-Time.html
With not one ounce of irony Labour sources have accused the BBC of “rigging” the audience against the party, and Alastair Campbell has got out of his pram about it.
It’s worth looking at some of the demented comments on the labourlist article. It beggars the question that should not these people be committed to an asylum rather than being given the power to vote.
Actually, Miliband had more support from that audience than warranted. What the Comrades of the left are really objecting to here is balance and fairness
Stalinist mindset appears exists over at LabourList.
They don’t like unpalatable (for them) facts so they remove your posts and bar you from posting again.
How very socialist. There will be no thought except what we tell you to think. No wonder sane and rational people detest and despise them.
How come the BBC was so keen to keep Farage away from Prime Time last night?
Because Cameron has done a deal with the BBC at the highest level:
No Platform Farage in the crucial week of the campaign and in return Cameron will be Metro-soft on the BBC in its Charter Review.
Watch Fargage give the performance of the Campaign and indeed his life to see just what Cameron was so scared of.
http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/ukipdev/mailings/149/attachments/original/Screen_Shot_2015-05-01_at_18.47.48.png?1430503266
a coup happened in the UK last night, not a tanks on the square one but just as undemocratic and far far more subtle a shift in the schedule and with it the last best chance to save our civilisation slips quietly off into the night without a sound.
God save us all now.
Tom its definitely a “No Platform agenda”, to which I would add the BBC circumvents its erm “responsibilities” by, savage interviews, and ridicule which is unwarranted … In comparison to the Cons whose patter is so full of holes they deserve nothing else
Underhand, devious, orchestrated, yep! … that’s Camoron and co.
and here’s a link that works
Why do you think Farage is getting the kitchen sink thrown at him? If he wins in Thanet what a thorn in the side of the LibLabCon he will be; look at his performance in debates in the E.U. Parliament. They want to keep him out of Westminster at all costs – tactical voting, character assassination, victimizing him and his family, forcing him have to have bodyguards when he campaigns, anything and everything to exert personal and political pressure . It truly is an outrage.
This is a democracy: if people don’t like him or UKIP they wont vote for him or it; if they do they will (I hope).
The plain truth is , Al, that the Labour party do not believe in democracy, the Left and the muslims even less…they all desire a tyranny…..that is the truth, which they will deny.
Farage was the best by far in the debates. I’ve just watched the link (thanks for posting) and no Party leader here or in the world comes anywhere near close.
He had a hostile woman in red to deal with as well as a number of Agitprop members of the audience.
His style was not to engage in hostility, but to bring logic and eloquence to the debate.
His style succeeds.
I wish him and his Party well.
..
Hear, hear!!
AQ with Brother Jonathan this evening shows the BBC back to it’s old tricks. The baying crowd are shouting down Paul Nuttall on immigration. Back to business as usual it seems.
The few minutes of it that I caught (could stand), sounded like it was being recorded at a UAF rally.
Yes, AQ is the ultimate in BBC crap. Very strange programme tonight. Much hot air about gangmasters, exploitation, minimum wage enforcement, raising the skills of the congenitally stupid and lazy native Britons. What has all that to do with a RATIONAL immigration policy. The problem is too many immigrants lowering wages for indigenous workers. The current mantra is always “We can’t blame immigrants”. No one is blaming immigrants. It’s simple economics. If the supply of a commodity expands its price falls. More unskilled workers offer their services, the wages of unskilled workers fall. The ever increasing number of immigrants and their offspring increases the demand for schools and houses. The refrain is yet again “We can’t.blame immigrants”. The BBC would have us believe this problem is due to “lack of proper planning” and “austerity”. Clearly, if the demand for something increases either its price increases or you have to introduce rationing.
Dimbledumb minor in his usual condescending manner says “Paul, Paul, the audience is looking at you as if you were talking nonsense” The “carefully selected” audience has obviously completely lost touch with reallity and are followers of the new religion who believe that immigration is the panacea for all woes.
Even one of the questioners was a BBC stooge who had figured in one of those BBC “in depth investigations” that prove indigenous British are too lazy/stupid to pick fruit and everyone would be out of businees if hard working Eastern Europeans hadn’t stepped in to save the day.
I completely agree. I have never heard Dimbleby stoop so low as effectively to accuse a panel member of talking nonsense before. I don’t know why Paul Nuttall didn’t call him out on this. The amount of institutional hatred that Ukip faces from the BBC is an unbelievable disgrace.
Hard left Hope not Hate furious as Farage declares war on their beloved BBC.
http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/news/home/article/3702/nigel-farage-declares-all-out-war-with-the-bbc
hating and hopeless “For a modern inclusive Britain” unless of course you don’t share their fascist views.
Just watching Al Beeb in Wales – a political debate involving election leaders .
Once again a ‘carefully selected’ biased audience from the topics and questions raised .
I wonder whether they are “carefully selected” or just not selected properly at all, but are simply the pushy noisy lefties who love demonstrations and abuse and who plot to invade QT and suchlike Beeb events. I know the Beeb pretends to aim for a balanced audience, but that is clearly nonsense.
The one time that care seems to have been taken was at the Thursday “Leaders’ Debate” when the Beeb apparently felt it was going to be watched carefully for bias; the result of this experiment was a bruising for Milliband. I thought Cameron looked relieved that for once a Tory was actually clapped and applauded for his remarks, and skipped off waving. Milliband really staggered off like a boxer who had taken an unexpected beating.
Temperamentally, Leftists are noisy, so you can reckon on those applying to be audience members on programmes being Left wingers. The BBC knows this and could easily correct for it. They choose not to, so we can draw our own conclusions as to why.
Often if you watch a Labour politician being interviewed by Mr Neil you get same shocked look as they get relentlessly pummeled. Last year Harriet Harman looked as though she was in shock when her usual leftist platitudes and lies were dissected and shown to be tripe by Mr Neil.
If we didn’t have the leftist BBC pumping out Labour propaganda 24/7 I reckon that Labour would be lucky to get 25% of the English vote as only those reliant on the government for their livelihoods, public sector ‘workers’ and welfare scroungers, would vote for them .
In Scotland the situation is complicated by decades of anti Tory propaganda from the BBC morphing into anti English sentiment which is fueling the SNP. I suspect that when they wake up in a socialist republic those non public sector ‘workers’ who vote SNP will think they made a bad mistake.
Why have an audience to participate?
We need to hear from the politician not an audience.
Just a thought.
..
The BBC feels the need to make it ‘entertaining’. Someone talking to a camera is deemed boring.
Of course, this is how we have ended-up with the dumbing down of almost the entire BBC output but never mind. Our intellectual betters at the BBC (!) know best.
It would appear that one member of last nights debate audience is not unfamiliar to the bBC, apparently has appeared on the bBC 12 times in the last year
Now you aren’t seriously trying to suggest the BBC is biased in favour of the Tory Party, are you?
Because if you are, I’d beware of men with white coats…
Its an odd one isn’t it? I think the case here against the bBC is exactly how the audience was selected and the clique’s within the bBC, we also don’t know the reasons for past appearances, but she’s obviously on the payroll….
Claims to be undecided between Lib Dems (for whom she voted in 2010) and the Conservatives.
Are you going to call her a liar?
I knew I’d seen that weird looking sod before – Look North, of course, several times.
And who, I wonder, is the BBC insider that has access to the BBC archives and can go back counting the appearances of this woman from Question Time.
A BBC staffer who is disgusted the Beeb showed a bit of balance for once?
Now that really is a very clever question.
I’ll take bets that we never get an answer to it.
Troll is a good description
Hello,
I’ve been busy for a few weeks and only managed to pop in now and again. The same applies to me reading the news, anyway, I’ve just checked the front page of the bBC webpage and it is all labour. There’s even a story about how the guardian back….labour.FFS is there any other party in excistance not only that but the PM is nowhere to be seen. Have I fallen asleep and woken up on the 8th May.
Talk about left bias at the bBC