Here you go, a John Whittingdale approved OPEN Thread for your completion! Detail the bias here.
MID WEEK OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- pugnazious Dec 22, 11:14
Weekend 21st December 2024
Same with EV cars which might be more polluting than normal ones…not forgetting we have to scrap all those cars… - MarkyMark Dec 22, 11:08
Weekend 21st December 2024
Assisted Dying on the NHS – free POD for those who want to save the planet. - MarkyMark Dec 22, 11:08
Weekend 21st December 2024
[img]https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcThzT6qzemJKeCSKC5IWA1GlSv96j37liloUw&s[/img] - MarkyMark Dec 22, 11:06
Weekend 21st December 2024
German 2016 … HA HA HA HAHA ! Gay Islamist spies for ISIS! ……………………….. Berlin, Germany 2016 Arrested German spy… - pugnazious Dec 22, 11:04
Weekend 21st December 2024
Jeez…haven’t seen a BBC TV news report on Magdeburg….just as well might put a brick though the TV as [is… - MarkyMark Dec 22, 11:03
Weekend 21st December 2024
Panels – inverters – reinforce ceilings – lifespan 20 years – need cleaning – maintenance – interest on loan for… - tomo Dec 22, 10:55
Weekend 21st December 2024
Needs a holiday they say…. (Thanks Elon) [img]https://i.ibb.co/F4LZBF3/awww-kier-s-stressed.jpg[/img] Revolver and a bottle of whisky? - pugnazious Dec 22, 10:53
Weekend 21st December 2024
The difference of course between Southport and Magdeburg is that the Germans immediately unleashed a tidal wave of information about… - StewGreen Dec 22, 10:37
Weekend 21st December 2024
Radio Lincs news “A Lincolnshire leaiure centre has saved ALMOST £17K/year by installing solar panels.. they cost £350K” Councillor “With… - AsISeeIt Dec 22, 10:07
Weekend 21st December 2024
Read all about it/no doubt about it edition Print media this morning prove how, in the wake of one of…
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
At 7:10 the Today programme was about to interview Douglas Carswell about the UKIP “row” over taking taxpayer money allocated to opposition parties. In the introduction it was said that some leading UKIP members wanted “to ride the gravy train in the same way as in Europe”. In the subsequent interview with Carswell this allegation was not further mentioned & so remained a gratuitously derogatory comment.
Why didn’t the interviewer mention how much other parties are getting and if they trying to return some of it?
Simply because a lot of people will quickly scan the headlines, and all they will see is ‘UKIP money row’.
And they will think it is bad.
Which is what the BBC wants.
Everyone ready for this morning’s Two Minute Hate?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32732129
Boooo, hissss.
The BBC does seem to have turned up the heat on UKIP even more than usual this week, for some reason, what with the ‘short money row’ (which is not really a row) and all.
As is often mentioned on this site, it is interesting to note what the BBC considers ‘news’ or ‘not news’.
Could it be that the BBC are trying to prove their worth to the Tories, and well known BBC-sceptic John Whittingdale, by poking a stick in UKIP’s eye?
But the gravy train reference was made as a straight BBC editorial statement, they didn’t even try to dress it up with a “some say….” element, neither was any evidence advanced to support the use of such words.
BBC and gravy train go together like peaches and cream.
It’s not just the BBC, the Telegraph and Spectator are also puffing the ‘Ukip row’ story.
Perhaps Douglas Carswell should have kept the disagreement out of the public domain? I’ve always worried that he was trouble – indeed most of UKIP’s troubles seem to come from ex-Tories.
Don’t worry. Be happy.
“to ride the gravy train in the same way as in Europe”
That’s a pretty horrible piece of bias though, arguably slanderous. Seems we’re back to the pre election UKIP smearing and it’s just as bad as ever.
And very rich for the BBC to talk about gravy trains in Europe. Maybe Portillo could do a program on it using his Bradshaws pointing out how similar the times are between now and 1913 with the fall of overambitious and shortsighted European Empires just around the corner (fingers crossed).
I’m sure there are plants in UKIP and we’ve seen some emerge too. I’d say Carswell’s all right though, only a hunch. His blog entry after the election was well written I thought.
http://www.talkcarswell.com/home/good-reasons-for-ukip-to-be-cheerful/2831
When it comes to being gratuitously derogatory – what with the agenda having moved smartly into ‘leadership contest’ territory – our revered Political Correspondent, Norman Smith (no, I don’t remember his enthronement either), anyway, Our Norm managed to use the phrase ‘disastrous election result/performance’ three times in the space of six or so minutes on the VD show this morning. This was, of course, in reference to those 4 million votes and a plethora of second-places which, oddly enough, was not regarded as ‘disastrous’ at the time, even by the BBC.
For the second day running, “Farming Today” has become “Enviro-green-sustainable-climate-change-news”.
Today we were treated to Mad Moonbat and his “re-wilding” ideas. The man’s certifiable, but a Guardian contributor, so that’s all right, then.
Then we had a bit about El Nino (which is a long drawn-out and weak, will-it-won’t-it affair, this time around). So we were informed all about El Nino, and the fact that they really didn’t know much about this one, at all. No emphasis on the fact that this is a natural cycle, alternating with La Nina events, and really has no basis for being included in the global warming scam, at all.
Once upon a time, this programme was all about, well, farming today, with bits about cows, lambs, chickens, piggywigs, cereals, crops and arable stuff. Now, it’s just an agenda-fest – probably based around the BBC ideology on climate change, in preparation for Paris, at which a deal MUST be struck, at any cost, to save face, and take all our money.
Agreed. And this is an affliction common to just about any programme into which the BBC can squeeze its shrill AGW hysteria – from the Food Programme to its half-baked rural coverage, gardening and, of course, the endless wildlife programmes churned out of the Bristol sausage machine.
It has reached the point where I rarely watch any of the the BBC’s ‘natural world’ output any longer because it is do heavily dosed with ‘climate change’ astrology throughout.
As for Monbiot, the man’s a laughing stock to all but the dwindling number of Guardian readers who haven;t seen through him yet. Using him at all simply proves how much of a bubble the BBB lives in.
The once impartial World Service has also gone the same way.
The obvious a choice for a right wing equivalent to The Moonbat would be Robin Page, who writes an excellent country diary in the Saturday Telegraph.
Sadly, they’ve all but banned him for…….his right wing views on ‘climate change’, badgers, red kites, the hunting ban and everything else that country folk know a damn sight more about than the urban elite who present the BBC’s wildlife/countryside programmes.
certainly some country folk know how to kill all the above (and ignore climate change)
And some city folk know nothing about the country way of life or science.
and of course you know more about science than the scientists don’t you fishy johnny?
I know about hypotheses and evidence, as do hundreds of scientists the BBC chooses never to interview, Mr blistered arsehole.
PS what are you and your lefty friends at the BBC and beyond going to try now that your bully boy and brainwashing tactics have failed? How does it feel to be TOTALLY ROGERED – you know, like you’ve been stuffed with the wrong end of a ragman’s trumpet*? Heh heh!
*A working class northern expression for you out-of-touch Islington Labourites to learn for your next election campaign. Good luck, you’re going to need it!!
Oh fishy johnny – that’s a bit rude – might need to report your comments. Never been to Islington, don’t work for the BBC – just don’t like you nasty little right wing bullies attacking/destroying some great British institutions like the NHS, the BBC, local councils. If you can’t indoctrinate it you want rid of it.
P.S. From NASA: Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities. http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
What, this 97%?
What does a study of 20 years of abstracts tell us about the global climate? Nothing. But it says quite a lot about the way government funding influences the scientific process.
John Cook, a blogger who runs the site with the ambush title “SkepticalScience” (which unskeptically defends the mainstream position), has tried to revive the put-down and smear strategy against the thousands of scientists who disagree. The new paper confounds climate research with financial forces, is based on the wrong assumptions, uses fallacious reasoning, wasn’t independent, and confuses a consensus of climate scientists for a scientific consensus, not that a consensus proves anything anyway, if it existed.
Given the monopolistic funding of climate science in the last 20 years, the results he finds are entirely predictable.
There follows a 12-point deconstruction of what is no more than a desperate PR stunt:
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/05/cooks-fallacy-97-consensus-study-is-a-marketing-ploy-some-journalists-will-fall-for/
e.g. 2. Cook’s study shows 66% of papers didn’t endorse man-made global warming
Cook calls this “an overwhelming consensus”.
They examined “11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming.
Perhaps the large number that are uncertain merely reflects the situation: climate science is complicated and most scientists are not sure what drives it. The relative lack of skeptical papers here is a function of points 4, 5, and 7 below. Though its irrelevant in any case. It only takes one paper to show a theory is wrong. Who’s counting?
source?
I’ve provided the link. Answer the points.
Jo Nova’s not a meteorologist or climate scientist so, it’s a bit like getting a quote from Bill Oddie
Nor is Roger Harrabin. Or George Monbiot. Or the vast majority of the 28gate meeting attendees who now dictate BBC ‘climate change’ brainwashing, I mean broadcasting, policy.
jonny
Please stop referring to these ****s as “elite”.
So it’s the BBC that’s to blame for the Arctic rapidly melting! – thanks for your insight and wisdom Old Goat.
Arctic sea ice measured since when?
And are you a scientist? Can’t have it both ways, you know – you should have learned that from the election!!
I have a BSc as it happens. This site explodes the myth that the present rate of melting ice in the Arctic is just part of a natural cycle:https://www.skepticalscience.com/Arctic-sea-ice-melt-natural-or-man-made.htm
Of course the Daily Express would say otherwise, but then they are a tad unreliable in their weather forecasts (well fraudulent really) let alone climate forecasts. Fishy John.
I have a BSc as it happens
Wewwww! Get you!
A BSc in what? Evasion? You didn’t answer my question so I repeat: Arctic sea ice measured since when?
And why no warming for over 18 years? Why were the unequivocal forecasts of the models of this ‘settled science’ so catastrophically wrong?
And didn’t you know it only takes one scientist with evidence to disprove a hypothesis embraced by thousands, as was virtually the case with stomach ulcers (where I think it was 2)? You know, nullius in verba and all that? But anyway, anyone with an ounce of curiosity knows there are thousands of scientists out there publishing peer-reviewed papers – despite the best efforts of Mann, Jones et al to have them suppressed – that go against the man-made warming theory. ‘Settled science’ – about as settled as last week’s opinion polls!
Still, keep pushing your desperate myth – you have to get your hard left totalitarian Agenda21 state one way or another!
P.S. You are Chippy Minton/Nicked Emus and I claim my five pounds!
P.P.S. Nearly forgot – do you mean this kind of natural cycle:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/02/cache-of-historical-arctic-sea-ice-maps-discovered/
Next up you’ll be telling us the Himalayan glaciers will
be gone by 2038!
you keep mentioning names of people I haven’t heard of, but glad to know there are other free thinkers out there.
Shall we cut to the chase? – any scientific conclusions that end up costing money must be untrue, because it’s coming from my taxes. Fishy Johnny, flat earth society (presumably without a BSc)
‘Flat earth society’.
Look in the mirror.
And keep avoiding the questions.
Too much time on your hands arthur blessed. Troll-boy. Tine to disclose source of funding.
London Calling BSC (Hons)
tine to disclose? sorry – English not your first language I guess
Hi Arthur. I wonder do you envy the guardinistas and beeboids who embarked on the Ship of Fools last winter to chart how ‘global warming’ had changed the Antarctic ocean since 100 years ago, only to be frozen solid in the pack ice and needing rescue.
Weather forecasts? I’m sure the D Ex’s are cr@p.BTW do you know of any climate forecasters that been proven reliable over the last 30+ years?
Never mind the wanton un-wilding in the name of climate change of vast areas of natural beauty with gigantic wind turbines on an industrial scale all over and the cover up over the numbers of birds killed. Got to keep at that stumm.
FAO all BBC journalists reading this site:-
if youre worried about your job and your future, please phone the first number before the second
08457 90 90 90 – The Samaritans
0333 014 3098 – B&Q – if you need to buy some rope
Yeah – this forum definitely has the feel of a lynch mob – thanks for making it so explicit ‘BBC welfare services’. There’s a really nasty smell in here….
Nasty smell?? Most of it is coming from your bitter and rancid posts.
Bitter and rancid mate? This whole forum needs a good bleaching. It smells of a strange mixture of venom, bile and elderly perspiration – not nice.
the british electorate have just rejected leftism and the hatred, bigotry and anti white racism of the fascist left because it wants strong right wing leadership. get over it
Well I suppose about a third of it did. And any person posting on a forum that accuses the other side of being fascist has automatically lost the argument. Didn’t you know that? Just sayin’.
arthur , may I suggest that you vote here ?
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
Urban Dictionary: Merched
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Merched
Merched. “Pulling out” during sex and cumming unexpectedly on a female conquests face. Mainly applied to drunken hook-ups. “You’ve just been Merched!”.
Different language arthur .
And any person posting on a forum that accuses the other side of being fascist has automatically lost the argument.
Lefty Arthur inhabits an irony-free zone.
can you ‘ironically’ accuse people of being fascist? sort of in a playful way? interesting.
My God, I do believe you’re actually serious.
Lefties obviously need to learn a little more self-awareness as well as not to be so fascistic (which means, in its most widely-used sense on here, attempting to close down debate and stifle free speech).
Seem to recall seeing quite a few BNP postings elsewhere on this forum – your more extreme right friends can tell you what being fascistic actually means. Fishy Johnny.
Seem to recall seeing quite a few BNP postings elsewhere on this forum
Show us.
P.S. How come a Lefty like you comes on here defending the BBC? Coincidence or magic?
Fishy John – I came on here because I heard David Vance on the radio saying he wanted ‘to cut the throat of the BBC’ and I didn’t like that. He sounded like a right c***
I said: show us.
Didn’t have to look to hard to find BNP support on this forum
Philip
April 19, 2010 at 7:23 am
David, you shouldn’t have to qualify what you say about the BNP.
No properly constituted, legal political party should have to suffer the subtle slurs, blatant slant and venom dished out to the BNP, Israel and just about anyone/thing else that doesn’t fit in al-BBCeera’s cosy, Student Grant-esque middle-class worldview.
Maturecheese
April 19, 2010 at 8:22 am
Nick Griffin is on the bbc r5 now and Cambell is doing his slimy upmost to make Nick Griffin look like a nasty racist. Like or loath the BNP, immigration and its effects, is a huge problem that needs addressing and solving and trying to discredit anyone who wants to do that is just wrong. I notice that the majority of the callers so far are hostile. surprise surprise.
Cassandra King
April 19, 2010 at 1:14 pm
The left simply have to maintain the lie that nationalism is akin to nazism, the ultimate smears of racist and nazi have been shouted for so long at any enemy of the left that some otherwise intelligent people believe the leftist smears and lies.
I know many BNP supporters and not one is a nazi, I would never and could never join a party that harboured nazism or used the methods of nazism and they would not be tollerated within the party structure and rightly so. British nationalism is the mortal enemy of the internationalist left/progressive new world order globalists, the desire to maintain an independent British homeland simply has to crushed and the leftists will use any means, tell any lie, use any smear to make sure any nationalist party is destroyed.
The people who repeat the nazi/racist smears against the BNP have never had any actual dealings with BNP members or supporters they simply listen to the propaganda and repeat the mantras. The good news is that the more the public see BNP candidates and supporters campaigning door to door the more they see that far from being skin heads/nazis/KKK suited racists they are ordinary folks trying to stop the great betrayal of our nation, take the time to talk to a BNP member and you suddenly find that all the leftist smears have been invented, sit down and have a chat with a BNP member and what you find is just another decent Brit trying to save whats left of our shared home.
The BNP is open to all British nationalists regardless of colour, the party draws the line at nazis though
I’ve been trying out a bit of basic maths. I know what you may be thinking – maths is officially optional now.
I know, because I’ve been told by BBC Science reporters, Climate Change experts, Labour, the Scottish National Socialists Party, LibDems and Greens, that basic maths is optional in the political arena and I have heard nobody on the BBC suggesting otherwise, but bear with me.
Cost to british public of BBC is approx. £4B/annum. (£100B over 25 years, today’s prices). Its only 40p a day for each licence holder! I’d say its 40p a day that I’d rather choose to spend on something else.
Cost to british public of Trident Renewal is approx. £4B/annum. (£100B over 25 years, today’s prices). Its only 16p a day for each person protected! (tell that to the Scottish National Socialists Party)! Yep. I’m happy to pay that for the security it brings me and my family. In fact I’d be happy to pay 18p a day to cover for the ‘tight’ element in Scotland (though I want my Barnet formula money back, thanks).
Boy, do numbers and statistics get abused by the BBC. Now I also know from the BBC, the Scottish National Socialist Party , Plaid, the BBC and the Greens that Trident Renewal is unnecessary. We have perfectly stable and reasonable political leaders in Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey and North Korea, with strong leaders in Germany, France, USA, here at home (cough) and elsewhere in europe and this gives me much comfort I can tell you! The future, however, is unknown and I think ‘better safe than sorry’ – best to have the bigger stick.
In BBC la-la-land, “Trident Renewal is £100Billion! [Boo!] The SNP [ooh aren’t they lovely!) ask how can ‘we’ afford that with our public sector finances? The BBC is only 40p a day! Great value for money! Yay!”
Back in the real world, the BBC which demand my money under threat of imprisonment, providing me with high blood pressure and little else in return, costs £100Billion! Yet Trident Renewal is snip at 16p a day??? Yay!
We all have opinions and slants. Personal bias. But the BBC shouldn’t!
Scrap the telly tax.
Trident renewal? Why?
It’s a con! Having worked for companies who produced the original one I can tell you that the way the companies mislead the politicians and the public into believing they need replacing is an art form.
It’s also called being economical with the truth!
The war heads last a long long time, although they do degrade. One of the methods to mislead is to ‘let one off’ in a test, and then to tell the politico that ‘it no longer delivers the yield expected’ In other words the bang isn’t as big. However this can be because the yield is just a couple of percentage points down. Anyone on the receiving end is still just as dead as they would have been !
Then there’s the delivery system which still cannot be intercepted. It’s not like jet fighters which need constant development to stay ahead of the opposition. Once fired the enemy still has no chance of stopping it.
So why bother spending all this money to massage a politicians ego?
Politicians who have cut back our armed forces to such an extent that the only option they realistically have is a big red button !
Given the mess the EU and European politicians have made of their countries Vladimir Putin might not be such a bad alternative anyway !
Err, it’s not the missiles but the boats which are approaching end of life.
Agree about the bullshit by companies. The crap by BAE over the 2 new carriers and the cost of fitting ‘cats and traps ‘ led to the farce that was F-35B to F-35C and back to F-35B. We spend loads of money and still end up with the worst option of a non flying turkey. We could have had 2 full squadrons of F-18Fs and some Growlers for less money and had them now, and they would work. A national broadcaster which was worth it’s salt would have done some investigation and uncovered the truth. The bbc just swallows pr spooned into the mouths of its thick ‘defence’ correspondents.
Alas if that were true! The boats have a cost of around £1.5 billion each, the first vessel ordered in 1986 the last in 1992.
“On 18 May 2011 the British government approved the initial assessment phase for the construction of new Trident submarines, paving the way for the ordering of the first long-lead items and preparations for the main build to begin in the future. The new submarine class will retain the current Trident II missiles, and will incorporate a new ‘PWR3’ nuclear reactor as well as technology developed for the Astute-class SSNs.”
So, the boats are actually on order!
Published information states the boats are designed for a 25-30 year life. Possibly being extending to 30-40 years. Trident missiles will last till 2042. The last boat was launched in 1998, roughly we need new boats from 2025-2030.
The boats still need to be replaced before the missiles, which is what I said.
Trident renewal? Why?
Oh, just imagine an Iran-sponsored nuclear device smuggled into the UK and a terrorist threat to explode it – somewhere in Central London, say – unless we accede to extreme Islamist demands.
Situation a) We have a nuclear deterrent and Iran know we know they’re behind it.
Situation b) We don’t have a nuclear deterrent.
Now work it out: in which situation is the device more likely to be planted?
If we had the supreme autocrat in charge, you would not be spending your time criticising the state broadcasting organisation. Are you an RT fan too? No doubt Gorgeous George will be increasing his output after his election failure.
If we wouldn’t have existed without nuclear weapons, how come every other country in Europe, as well as France and UK, still exist?
They had nuclear weapons as well -just not their own
Saved themselves a few bob too, didn’t they?
Yes, a free ride. Very European.
so the French are ok then fishy johnny?
They get their free ride on CAP.
Still in CND are you, Mr blistered arsehole?
Oops – still a little rude fishy johnny. We don’t like Europeans, we don’t like the Scottish, we don’t like the Welsh, we certainly don’t like the Irish, we don’t like the northerners, we don’t like the uppity working class. In fact we don’t really like anyone who doesn’t live on our street, and there are a few of them we don’t like too! Would that be a bit right? Fishy Johnny?
Your conclusions are about as sound as your ‘climate science’ i.e. no evidence whatsoever.
And fyi I’m a born and bred council house lad from t’ north who’s never lost touch with his working class roots but who made good in life thanks to an aspirational dad. The sort you champagne socialists despise, in other words.
Ah – white van man. How’s Talk Sport these days?
Better than Talk Bollocks, aka Radio 4.
Nothing over which one has no choice can ever be good value, reasonable value or poor value.
Without the freedom to exercise choice, the notion of value is nonsense.
Mr Whittingdale carries the hopes of millions on his shoulders. But will he do something to curb the BBC? I would think that a high % of those who voted Tory, DUP, UUP and UKIP , over half the votes cast, would welcome the leftist bias of the BBC being reined in. There is widespread public support for tackling the BBC. But this will be drowned out by those on the left who see the propaganda of the BBC being essential to the survival of Labour and the rest of rag tag and bobtail leftist parties.
The longer the Tories it before dealing with the BBC the more the monster will grow. Now is the time to strike. So Mr Whittingdale Strike hard, strike sure. You have our full support.
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/05/andrew-allison-heres-a-bbc-reform-plan-for-whittingdale-including-the-end-of-the-licence-fee.html
A measure of reality creeps in.
Every little bit helps……
Sign here if you haven’t already
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
If you can’t see the value of the BBC you should be stuffed and mounted on the wall of some country hotel.
Wow I’m convinced
Wow – the taxidermist will see you now Stewart
I hope Scott didn’t see that ?
arthur,
the value of the bbc lies in management of the status quo narrative, and as a gravy train for thousands and thousands of troughers, whose standard of living would diminish dramatically absent a state broadcaster.
your friends in the press overwhelmingly control the narrative there – you are just miffed you can’t dictate to the broadcast media as well. Poor bloody BBC – tread on eggshells every day because of little Englanders like you. But the BBC still has the confidence to make a comedy taking the mickey out of itself unlike you lot of senile armchair warriors.
I think you need to gen up on common purpose otherwise you risk looking rather uninformed and naive.
You should also avoid ad hominens when attempting to make your (absurd) points.
ah – the illuminati! I wondered when that would come up. you’re a conspiracy nut outsider! there was no moon landing! the americans caused 9/11! they’re all out to get me!
Arthur, any chance you can play the ball not the man?
I feel a robust approach is necessary playing away from home
I sense the ‘robust approach’ is a barely-suppressed case of Lefty Tourette’s.
Any minute now….
Do you live anywhere near Clapham?
Rarely visit London – try again
Ah, such imagery – and such barely-suppressed bigotry in so few words!
Pass me the red-tinted specs and I might be able to see your point more clearly.
And while you’re at it, go empty your bile bucket – at least it will remove the smell of your own bitterness.
Fishy Johnny – this whole forum is one of the more infested parts of the net – it should be on the dark web! And your leader, David Vance, seems to be a very nasty piece of work – researching him as we speak.
Yes, I can understand how you feel, you and your lefty friends at the BBC and beyond having failed to eliminate all right-wing opinion. You must feel so….so….inadequate.
Still, look on the bright side – you’d have been thrashed even more soundly on a level playing field without the help of your beloved BBC!
Better luck next time – in about 30 years, that is.
Things can only get bitter
soundly thrashed – what you boys get up to in boarding school, eh, fishy johnny?
My oh my, you lefties should listen to yourselves and your tired old clapped out mantras of envy and spite! That’s why you lost you dimmy Mr blistered arsehole!!
Oh, sorry, nearly forgot – grammar school, like many council house kids who were grateful for a hand up in life.
What about the overwhelmingly right wing press you one-eyed fool?
Sorry, but are you Scott, omnibus man, or bunny in disguise ? I get confused with the trolls constant name changing .
we are legion
You are minority!
you are a mynah bird, squawking repeated phrases with no meaning. Fishy Johnny.
Lefty Tourette’s! Gotcha!!
Awww, poor Mr blistered arsehole – he lost!
we are a legion of minorities
I won’t argue with that!
The overwhelmingly right wing press?
Despite the headline read the attached.
You will note something rather surprising with regard to the Blair years when he realised what Labour needed to do to get elected, but when Labour come up with crap policies ….
Read also the analysis on who the readers of various papers vote for. It is most definitely not as black and white as the hard done by socialists would have us believe.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-political-affiliations-of-the-uks-national-newspapers-have-shifted-but-there-is-again-a-heavy-tory-predominance/
Good report by LSE, including “As we note in Section elsewhere, the BBC’s own codes and guidelines have been highly successful in maintaining its reputation for balanced reporting and for ensuring that a platform is provided for a range of political views to be heard. While there have been occasional controversies, these should not deflect attention from the widespread consensus that the BBC provides impartial and balanced coverage. “
‘Good report by LSE, including “As we note in Section elsewhere..
Totally worth it.
Well, thanks, BBC Today Programme (Radio 4). This morning some absolute f*ckwit was permitted – uninterrupted and unchallenged by the ever-willing Justin Webb – to explain to the nation that Dante Alighieri’s 14th century poem Inferno is actually a rather clever narrative on the undoubted advantages of the European Union and how a ‘borderless Europe’ would be a good thing for us all.
The ugly historic revisionism of the despicable BBC continues apace… drip, drip, drip…
Well I thought he put forward a very good reason why we should not leave Europe….Dante would not like it !!!
Compare that interview with the one with the highly ineffective Teressa May who stuttered and stammered her way through the limited answers she was permitted to give by a highly aggressive verbose John Humphrys. She submitted without the slightest hint of a challenge…..pathetic.
It’s not surprising that May had such a hard time defending and defining “British values” in modern Britain. It’s all part of the “even though we have vibrant diversiy, we can all share “British values”” shtick. Clearly we all don’t, because, if we did, there would no reason to continually talk about shared “British values”. What May is hoping for when she tallks about “British values” is a set of values that are or could be shared or accepted by all the inhabitants of Britain. For most people, shared values arise from a common culture. What Britain’s “communities” might have in common, except being British in a legal sense, is hard to see. So “British values” in this sense is meaningless or so restricted to be of little practical use. If she means traditional liberal British values, then our “communities” have been encouraged not to assimilate into the dominant culture and so are being given contradictory messages.
Good point. It always strikes me that the attempt to enlist everyone under the same banner, a rather limp one marked “tolerance and fairness”, is doomed to failure, if its aim is to unite us all.
The reality, as one looks around now, or at an ethnic map (by the way, is there one?) is of an England, at least, (I know less of the other UK countries) in which the big cities have fairly distinct ethnic territories, the outer suburbs and the rural districts are indigenous white, and there is a strong East European (and therefore possibly less permanent) representation on the East coast. We are not becoming one happy family in practice, but a collection of different groupings that more or less get along, but have pretty differing lifestyles.
Good question whether an ethnic map of England exists or not. I did find one based on the 2011 census but I have no idea how reliable it is. According to this map London and Birmingham stand out as red areas and so are “Asian”. The far North/North West of England , central Wales and the Northern part of the East coast are white. Does this mean indigenous white?. The rest is mixed. In England at least there seems to be a strong correlation between blue areas and the popularity of UKIP in the recent election. You can see clearly that London and Birmingham would become small city states like Hamburg in Germany if the locaIism/ city mayor agenda is pushed. British as a cultural identity is obviously on the way out, if not already defunct.
Mark Easton offers deep philosophical insights on the matter of extremism. He asks:
‘Would those who oppose homosexuality or multiculturalism or feminism be accused of threatening values of tolerance and equality? ‘
Note how multiculturalism is assumed to be an acceptable standpoint. Well it is not, was never put to the electorate and certainly the BBC never encouraged any debate on it. Multiculturalism with its emphasis on moral equality of all cultures, is incompatible with the post Enlightenment and liberal doctrines of equality of all individuals. Some cultures do not tolerate equality of individuals, others embrace racial and gender segregation. Geddit Easton. And multiculturalism is not the opposite of racism and jingoistic values. It is also incompatible with a liberal notion of multi-racial society. Hence opposition to it is not extreme, or even worth putting in your bundle of extremist standpoints.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32723645
AMuN,
“I’ve been trying out a bit of basic maths. I know what you may be thinking – maths is officially optional now.”
Bit dangerous that, maths. I suggested some back of the envelope maths on the Beeb w/s t’other day and got marked down heavily.
I’m sorry to have to say it again, but we cannot expect anything other than Pro European propaganda from the BBC as they receive substantial funding from the E.U. to promote it. Hence the drip, drip, drip.
Don’t forget a supposed In/Out EU referendum within the next two years. The BBC will go into europhile overdrive.
Has anyone noticed the subtle change in Met Office diction being broadcast by the BBC? Cool, Chilly and near average. Well, what they should be saying is, Frosty, snowy and well below average, but that would indicate the opposite to Global Warming. With the prediction (one which I gave last year) that the sun spot cycle 24 is doing what mirrored sun spot cycles have always done, we are having a cold year. We are having the greatest number of “Frost Days” for nearly 60 years and temperatures across the U.K. have been depressed. Yes, the Met Office might bang on about April being the sunniest, very clever….sun equals warm..NOT… but the mean temperatures since October of last year have been falling and continue to fall against long term average. U.K. Cooling. How can that be with “Global Warming”? So here we are mid May and this weekend and into next week, snow in the North, cold North to North West and then North East winds next week spreading right through Europe. Only a few weeks to go before the nights start drawing in too. I’m off collecting wood.
Yes, all very odd, when only last week I was reading somewhere that the Met Office had predicted that May was going to be the hottest on record.
Certainly not warm in Yorkshire. Plenty of sun, but low temperatures and a chilly wind for weeks. But we all know the warming thing is clearly unsound and so has been replaced by the catch-all Climate Change, which is by definition almost impossible to argue against, so vague and all-encompassing a term it is.
I really don’t care what spurious theory the Beeb believes in, but I do object to the result of this C.C. nonsense in energy policy and the various raids on our wallets that it brings with it.
Not very warm down here in the West either , and its May !
You see – you old blokes and old goats won’t be around for much longer so you reckon global warming is someone else’s problem. You’re right in a way – doesn’t mean we have to take you seriously.
Ageist. Not nice.
I didn’t think any of you lot knew what an ‘ist’ was! Well done.
‘Us lot’ definitely know what you are Arthur, and that is an onanist.
Oh well done Larry – you type that with one hand?
Who’s Larry? – and No. Did you reply with one hand Arthur?
Have to admit I did Larry – my other hand was waving two fingers in your direction.
Bless. I am glad that I have annoyed you.
And I am glad to disrupt your cosy little bilious forum.
Larry.
Dream on. You haven’t disrupted anything. Try harder.
I think you might be the ex rock ape who posted as chippy Minton , correct ? Your sneering style is similar .
Que??????
BBC Punk’d
I’m something of a connoisseur of those little off-the-cuff BBC exclaimations, the spur of the moment odd reactions and the jarring misplaced questions all off which tell us so much about BBC office culture and outlook.
It is my fondness for these rare gems such as Tony Livesey’s ‘only English by default’ or Rachel Burden’s feigned concern for rising house prices that has tempted me to stick with BBC Breakfast whilst imposing a strict personal boycott of Five Live.
There has to be, I must admit, a certain guilty pleasure in watching, – through the keyhole, as it were – the antics of the BBC morning sofa harem and the eunuch that is Bill Turnbull.
Today the editors and producers come up with the wizard wheeze of inviting the former drummer of 80s band The Jam onto the sofa which gives them the chance to play Going Underground.
See what they did there?
But for me the key moment in the item is our Bill’s utter incredulity that The Jam hale from leafy suburban stockbroker belt Woking – and not the mean streets of ‘Sarf London’ (where presumably the BBC assume the gutters run with tears)
You see, for the BBC Punk is straight up anar-chic a radical anti-Fatch movement
Whilst sensible people realise it was a teenage youth fashion.
And very mid-70s! By the time Mrs Thatcher was elected as PM, Punk was easing past its BBE date.
Amazing just how many of Punks ‘stars’ were yet more ex public school rich kids.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/13/tory-officials-threatened-bbc-miliband-tom-baldwin-licence-fee
Mr. Baldwin now unemployed. I wonder where he may end up?
“Baldwin reveals one reason he feels confident that the BBC does not contain a leftwing bias is that he fought and lost a daily battle with the BBC about its coverage of the campaign.”
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/13/bbc-labour-election
“The BBC was not in the pocket of Labour this election. Quite the opposite’
Clearly something that cannot be told often enough?
Now, when Ed Miliband told the BBC the fee and their lack of accountability was secure if he got in, what happened exactly?
Some of those comments are really baffling. Here is a real dinger: “Labour were treated no worse than UKIP.”
To be fair a lot of the people commenting on there acknowledge that much of the public don’t take their news from the BBC anymore. But anybody who is intellectually honest has to see there are constant repeated themes. I always noticed climate change alarm woven into all the output, especially the nature programs (which tbf are really well made in other ways) and I largely swallowed that but I’m more sceptical about it now. I also spotted the consistent pro EU agenda, which I never liked. To me though, the bias is getting worse and worse. They really are quite shameless now.
The trouble with those that sit in front of cameras or mic’s on the BBC believe that by promoting the socialist viewpoint at every turn they are so “right on progressive” and have become legends in their own minds in spreading this doctrine. The trouble is, the Electorate view them and “it” (“it” being the BBC) differently as recently witnessed. The trouble they have with that, is that they are always right and everyone else wrong, which of course includes the BBC, the cornerstone of metropolitan socialism.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3078942/BBC-licence-fee-dodgers-shouldn-t-face-court-say-Tories.html#comments
Looking good
you’d soon have them in jail if they didn’t pay their poll tax though, typical tory hypocrites. bit simple, simon.
1 in 10 court cases are for licence fee ‘evasion’.
How many for non-payment of council tax?
It’s in your favourite paper: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/15/thousands-court-council-tax-arrears-benefit-cuts-bedroom-tax
And this one’s in yours:
CONVICTED hate preacher Abu Hamza’s family will continue to live in their taxpayer-funded £1.25million house – and receive £650 a week in state benefits.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/477268/Abu-Hamza-s-family-allowed-to-stay-in-1-25-million-London-home-and-claim-33-800-benefits
Funny old benefits system, what?
Oh and btw, if you didn’t cut benefits what would you cut instead?
I find it incredulous that the BBC,union officials and Labour politicians will not accept the fact that Labour and the BBC have lost the election.
Listening to Radio 5 Live,watching news outlets you would believe it was a massive right wing conspiracy that Labour didnt get elected.
Do these complete dickheads not realise it was a fair (despite all the antics of the BBC) democratic election. Bloody hell Labour and the BBC,the people have spoken, they were not taken in by your lies and waffle, now piss off and take your seats on the opposition benches take your punishment.
Well it appears the bBC are a little confused about the PMs stance against Extremism in the UK :
Well before they define that and draw lines, they need to adequately define what that meaningless bully word ‘Racism’ is, and draw a line in the sand.
For far too long the Tories have allowed the Fascist left, the use of a bully word, whose meanings are as defined as Jelly. It’s time wrongful or false allegations of Racism were made a criminal offence.
There were laws in 2005 against teachers promoting hatred to children but were they ever enforced or could they be enforced ? This example shows the answer to that ! See http://netanyalynette.blogspot.co.il/2012/09/action-to-ban-teachers-incitement.html .. So how can this change with the ridiculous attitudes of the BBC and others who seem to have no perception that we are fighting a war against our freedoms which is being fought by words and that putting so much emphasis on the concept of freedom of speech is so wrong if we are to have any chance of winning this battle.
On this occasion, the Beeb is dead right.
I’d appreciate if you could define ‘rich’, ‘poor’, ‘wealthy’ or ‘extremist’. for me.
R4 Today programme interviewing an academic about research finding that red is perceived as a dangerous colour. Surely no bias could intrude here?
Humptie then says something like ‘And I know you know what question I must ask now, should Labour change its colour?’
Even I didn’t see that coming. It seems that to the BBC everything is seen as it relates to Labour.
Given loyalties, a fair few BBC presenterettes may be pulling a Lady Godiva.
That is not as appealing as may at first be imagined.
Wetdream – have you no sense of humour?
Do these BBC presenters not realise that they are going to be scrutinised with regards to there left wing bias. Has nobody told them Mr Wittingdale is closing in on them, I don’t think they do or they really don’t care.
All morning its been the same old crap, how Labour are the dogs bollocks, how unlucky they were to lose the election, how long the Tories will last with such a small majority, how the unions will bring them down, how the back benches will turn on Cameron and that’s just this morning.
All this left wing bull is incomprehensible.
I’ve decided to write to my MP about it and if we all do it may have an effect on how Mr Wittingdale approaches the BBC, get scribbling folks
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/05/13/bbc-post-election-analysis/
I suppose their evident inability to adopt a neutral and impartial stance rather proves that they are not conscious of their bias; they genuinely don’t realise it exists and therefore can’t avoid it. Either that or they are utterly brazen and defiant. Or they are so contemptuous of the Conservatives and the massed ranks of their critics, that they feel no apprehension.
What I love is that you old gits carry on listening to and watching the BBC. What would you have to complain about if you get it scrapped?
We only watch the BBC for evidence of its bias.
Along with many ,many other people ,and for years now, we look elsewhere for unbiased news .
Only bovine sheeple and Liebore diehards take BBC news at face value.
unbiased news – that will be the sun, the telegraph, the mail ,the express, the times……..
UNBIASED NEWS………………..!!!
What about the Guardian, Daily Mirror the whole of the BBC,the destructive unions, all the lefty hacks who’s sole purpose in life is to bring forward a Marxist extreme leftist agenda..????
If all the above had there way this country would be in shit street.
Thank God for the Mail,Telegraph etc and people on here who realise the serious problems these lefties are causing
Despite what you infer there are now only two left of centre daily newspapers – The Mirror and The Guardian (even The Independent came out in support of the coalition). As for the BBC – I refer you to the study by the LSE above” the BBC’s own codes and guidelines have been highly successful in maintaining its reputation for balanced reporting “. By the way, has it ever occurred to you the BBC can be just as annoying to those of us left of centre? That’s why it’s called balance. P.S. You can be on the left and not want Marxist totalitarianism – just a bit of fairness.
We are forced to pay for the BBC. One in ten court cases are for licence fee ‘evasion’.
I have a free choice as to which newspaper to buy.
By the way, has it ever occurred to you the BBC can be just as annoying to those of us left of centre
Feel free to start your own ‘biased BBC’ website, then. You can start by quoting some right-wing tweets from BBC correspondents/presenters/’comedians’. Or even test it out on here.
Over to you.
Radio 5 presenter thanks David Vance for his views after saying he would ‘like to cut the throat of the BBC’ and asks if David Vance would give him a job when the BBC is gone. I’d call that bending over backwards to appease the right wing nutters for a start.
I’d call it arrogantly taking the piss.
Is that the best you can do? No tweets then?
Here here. Few can match Andrew Neil’s impartiality and cutting through the obfuscation most politicians practice.
Good man.
He is almost alone within the BBC which is so institutionally infested with lefties that is generally not fit for purpose in this area.
Andrew Neil’s well-researched and forensic approach, his realistic coping with big numbers, his brushing aside of weasel stats, plus his common sense touch, makes him a particularly dangerous interviewer for lefty smoke and mirrors wafflers.
Unlike, for instance, Andrew Marr, the lefty lot can’t just win him over with their platitudinous promises of rainbows and unicorns.
My favourite demolition was Emily Thornberry on taking passports from terrorists
A real treat for grapple fans
Yet for all his research, Neil disputed Farage’s claim that UKIP takes as much support from Labour as from the Tories on numerous occasions for about two years.
The election showed that Farage was right and Neil wrong. No mea culpas from Neil.
I thought highly of Andrew Neil until his disgraceful attack on Ben Harris Quinney – with no justification what so ever, except that he’d strayed from the anti-UKIP script. It left Neil seriously damaged.
Yes RJ, I switched on in the middle of the “interview” and wondered what the hell was going on. The Bow Group’s patrons are defunct Tories like “you destroyed him” Heseltine and Howard. So your conclusion is correct.
Still waiting for @afneil to destroy an islamist, as he promised after the Tommy Robinson interview.
Still waiting…..talk is cheap eh?
11 48am bBC world news. The bBC has just stated that the EU has GIVEN several countries the options not to take any med economic immigrants. GIVEN – GIVEN, no the EU did not GIVE us any such f**king option out of their largesse. The UK opted out of this area from the very beginning. The bBC biased all the way on every subject.
Imagine what would have been agreed if Red Ed had won last week.
It’s 2015. 13th May. The BBC, through its ‘reporter’ Robin Brant is discussing ‘Short Money’ on the Daily Politics.
Never on the BBC have I been advised about ‘Short Money’, and never have I heard of a political party taking a principled stance on the use of taxpayer’s hard earned and saying “Enough is enough! The people deserve better Value for Money!” Excellent representation UKIP! Well done! More decent people will no doubt be recognising this as another reason to vote UKIP.
Brant however, doesn’t appear to recognise principle, or representatives acting in the interests of the electorate. That doesn’t compute in Brant-world. Perhaps it’s endemic in those who never have to think of the people who provide their overfilled pay packets? Brant is paid by the BBC (us) to smear UKIP. To brief against them. To infer UKIP disorder, without proof or evidence of checked sources. To influence the public perception of a national political party, rather than report facts. That seems to be his job now. He tells us that the honourable actions of parliamentary UKIP as a ‘split’ and is laying his rumours on rumours and feeding into a ‘UKIP in meltdown’ meme, which the MSM en-masse working hard at developing into a ‘UKIP are dying’ narrative. Brant is aware of the support at the top of the party and amongst UKIP voters for both Carswell and Farage. He doesn’t like that and he will do all in his power to disrupt it. And the BBC is funding his activities by having him on the pay-roll. Yes, the Establishment is fearful and the SKYLabConBBC wagons are circling around the strengthened prey.
I hope Whittingdale is taking notes, though he is hardly an ‘impartial’ observer in these matters. Could the BBC’s future be safe under the Tories as long as (i) a fully manned UKIP smearing campaign is maintained and (ii) a full steam ahead pro EU message saturates the airwaves?
Because, in BBC la-la-land, the world will come to an end if we leave the EU, won’t it? And, although we can’t find anything bad to say about Carswell (and we’ve looked everywhere!) UKIP still are dangerous loony, fruitcake, racist, sexist homophobes, aren’t they? Aren’t they? Yes, because the BBC and Labour, and Paddy Ashdown, and all the people at HIGNFY say so.
Angryman – Yes good questions. The actions of otherwise goodguy Andrew Neil in tearing the Bow Group chairman to bits at the behest of Heseltine would suggest that the BBC undermining UKIP would be a very good way to curry favour with the Cons.
That fat prick is usually filling the TV screen with his face whenever there’s any bad news about UKIP.
Precedent can always be interesting.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/name_of_the_actor_who_played_the?
‘Turns out the information requested was not covered by FOI Act but the BBC very kindly provided the information anyway.’
Isn’t that nice?
Thing is, some have found the BBC very unkindly does all in its power not to provide information it should, and is obliged to, involving vast amounts of effort jumping their deliberate hurdles.
Yet for a trivial, irrelevant punt they decide to invest staff time to research and respond.
Balance, of a sort?
This lady is proving quite forensic:
https://endbbclicencefee.wordpress.com/2015/05/13/whittingdale-good-news-or-bad-news-for-the-bbc/
Agree or disagree certainly a lot of thought and fact to chew on.
I’ll stay focussed on this:
‘On freedom of choice, Whittingdale thinks it is an important principle that, where possible, people should be able to choose whether to pay or not.’
Especially where the service is not felt worthwhile, or actually contrary to the interests or beliefs of the person being required to pay.
And on that note, it concludes with a petition.
An early ‘in other news’, covering unique funding mostly:
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/app-stopped.html
‘suspect the BBC has also realised that making an online subscription service work around the world while fending off Whittingdale at home is not a great strategy’
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/instant-replay.html
‘However, for the New York Times, the issues is trickier – if it’s “free” on Facebook, why bother with a subscription ? And how will Facebook decide which content is promoted ?’
One is sure Mark Thompson will work his magic. Charging for content on free sites outside easy control always tricky.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/cell-sum.html
In jail. For not paying a fee for vital stuff like… what now?
En passant.
And finally:
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/hell-yes-im-panicking.html
Food for thought.
Seem to have seen a lot of David Miliband in the past week, including on the BBC.
Remind me again – which one’s the geek?
The one with the banana.
Breaking news – The Police are investigating electoral fraud in south thanet. Maybe our lord and saviour, St. Nigel of Farage will soon take his place in the Commons. UKIP say they didnt make the complaint. UKIP won the council election but not the general election. Postal Fraud anyone?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32725167
http://order-order.com/2015/05/13/police-investigate-alleged-electoral-fraud-in-south-thanet/
Hi Bunny How is Ed doing ??????? Nige is back baby I bet you thought he was going……..hahaha tough shit but then that’s what bunnys eat isn’t it
Taken from another blog site and definitely worth a read if you wish to understand the in’s & out’s of a complicated subject which is being vastly misrepresented.
“as a lawyer, I think there are a number of misconceptions about the British Bill of Rights that are being circulated both in the media and on this board. Hopefully this will help.
The European Convention on Human Rights is an international treaty and the UK was a signatory for many decades before the Human Rights Act was passed. Under English law, international treaties are not considered part of domestic law. In short, you can’t sue the government or anyone else based on breach of a treaty. By the way, I understand that is the position in many jurisdictions, though some, such as Germany, are ‘monist’ and treaties have different status.
Repealing the HRA will not affect the UK’s international obligations to respect Human Rights as set out in the ECHR. It will simply mean the domestic courts cannot adjudicate on allegations of breach of the ECHR.
The HRA contained a provision that the domestic courts should give effect to decisions of the European Court of Human Rights which was controversial – partly because it seemed to subordinate national courts to the courts of an international body, and partly because domestic courts have a different approach to court decisions than international courts – while case law is relevant to each, English common law is based on the principle that earlier court decisions are binding on later courts. That has no equivalent in the European Court of Human Rights, which has never been bound to follow its own earlier decisions.
One point to remember about this is the fact English Common law is based on case law is linked to but logically separate from the fact that English law has – compared to most continental jurisdictions – favoured legal certainty over judicial discretion. The two should not be conflated, and while a British Bill of Rights would respect the traditional approach to case law, it can hardly avoid broad statements of principle.
The simple way to introduce a British Bill of Rights would be to:
1. Repeal the HRA and return to the pre 1998 position
2. Substitute a new Bill of Rights restating the Convention obligations but without requiring English Courts to consider the ECHR jurisprudence.
This would mean the UK would only ever be in breach of the Convention insofar as the English courts differed in their interpretation of the Convention from the ECHR.
Clearly, the British Bill of Rights could depart from the wording of the Convention. In that case the UK would be in breach of its treaty obligations in any case where the altered wording made a difference to someone’s rights.
I don’t think anyone is suggesting repudiating the Convention completely, so that isn’t really the issue. Likewise, all member states have been found in breach of the Convention multiple times, so being found in breach is not a major issue. Nor need it damage public opinion of the UK government if it’s found in breach, since the public may agree with it – and frequently do!
I’m not an expert in Scots law, but I suspect the points being made about the effect of repeal in Scotland (and for that matter NI) are essentially political, not legal. If Westminster decides to repeal the HRA, it has power to do so, even if that breaks a treaty or rewrites the devolution settlement. The real issue will therefore be how this will be perceived politically.”
The treaties regarding rights to be expected in all UN and Council of Europe states, are fine and dandy as sentiments. They do not stand up to any critical examination. But as lofty propositions they have a certain aspirational quality, though very much related to a particular philosophical approach. The issue is that I believe that they were never intended to go beyond that into enforceability within the courts of states.States could be held as in breach but in a purely formal sense of the relevant treaty organisation declaring a “concern”. I have often mused at the point when a judge allowed application of these principles within a domestic case. My feeling is that treaties were an emotional response to the war and should have been left at that. But one of the problems of their creation was this idea of some world government which would obviate all war. The problem with these treaties is that they undermine democracy because they now override what the population want and also encourage our politicians not to serve the people but to serve ideas. The differences of nations expressing the will of the people is undermined by the setting of a universal standard that ignores the expression of that will. This is where alienation and atomisation comes in. So, I feel that lawyers have had too much of an influence on our society and we should stop being afraid of the bogeyman, some atavistic reincarnation of Hitler stalking the land. Trust the people and celebrate national diversity so that normal history can be resumed.
yeah, all the human rights act means is that poor people can enforce their rights in courts rather than just rich people who can afford to take the matter the European Court of Human Rights
The Labour government should have known the HRA would cause problems after Irish Republicans took their cases to the courts in the 1980s and 90s and scored massive propaganda points against the UK government
Still we cant opt out of the convention because we need to have signed up to the Treaty to be a member of the European Council (nothing to do with the EU) and to be a member of the EU
So scrapping the Human Rights Act will just mean rich people can enforce their rights and fuck the poor
its a tough one, but im sure the tories can figure it out cos dave is great 😛
The problem with Human rights law is what a court says in germany or france has to be enforced in a court here because you cant have different human rights in different european countries and we have different systems of law and different histories. it s a legal mess
The BBC putting up two fingers again. I have nothing against pop/rock/whatever but I do resent it being shoehorned into absolutely everything:
“In a further surrender of autonomy to the BBC’s mass-market networks, the Proms announced this morning that the Jackson Five have been booked for Proms in the Park.
The Jacksons said: ‘We’re looking forward to coming to London, to Hyde Park, and when we get there we’re going to be singing all the greats, and we’re going to have a really big party. We always bring great weather over from California!’
Also on the menu: Russell Watson and an X-Factor winner.
Judgement, balance and brand-awareness have gone phut. Classic FM would never lose the plot like this.”
– See more at: http://slippedisc.com/2015/05/just-what-the-bbc-proms-need-the-jackson-five/#sthash.C6B983Ig.dpuf
Err shouldn’t that be the Jackson 4.
i say, what wonderful news the Jackson 5 will be performing at the proms this year. The girls and I will love this.
Hopefully next year we can get to hear some jungle techno and drum and bass that better reflects our multi cultural heritadge and our diverse country. It makes a change from all that land of hope and glory british empire racist clap trap nonsense.
Like i said, Wonderful news!!!
#standuptoukip
Hate to disappoint you, darling, but it’s not replacing all that ‘land of hope and glory british empire racist clap trap nonsense’. Well not yet, anyway. Give it a year or two – if the BBC is still around.
However, you’ll be able to get a nice warm fuzzy feeling by seeing those wonderful black people performing at a classical concert, except that it isn’t. Never mind that the audience will still be 99.9% white (ie: safe) and that black people like Jessye Norman and Willard White have already appeared at the Proms (the real Albert Hall ones) on several occasions. They’re just Oreos, aren’t they?
i say, ive just asked my niece Miranda-Bethany what she shouts at the black fasch when she goes on her anti fascist stand up to ukip protests, and she said either Oreos or coconuts.
but im hoping this year at the end of the proms, it can finish with this song, which highlights the injustices that black people have had to suffer while the white man wastes trillions on space travel, nuclear weapons and bras. Enjoy!!
You really have a twisted mind Harriot. Are you a professional bigot, or do you do it just for fun? If you don’t like waste and if you actually give a toss about ‘the poor’, you won’t be too keen on the immoral Telly Tax I guess, and will fall full square behind the thrust of this site!
omg get a sense of humour and spot the sarcasm.
I think it’s the Jackson four, now…
So Jackson Pollock left?
Sorry, I missed that.
… “State of Palestine”?, is there one?
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/05/13/vatican-officially-recognizes-state-of-palestine-in-new-treaty/
… shakes head
he s into Global warming too!
I suppose the Al BBC will be lapping this up tomorrow
This is the same Vatican that endorsed centuries of anti-Semitism in which Jews were murdered in pogroms, actively helped Nazi scum to escape justice and flee to South America and elsewhere, remained mute while Germans and their collaborators slaughtered half the Jews of Europe, took twenty years to declare that the Jews should no longer be blamed for killing Christ and has so much to hide that will not open its archives to Israeli and other researchers.
So it’s unsurprising that it would cosy up to the Palestinians with their goal of destroying Israel, despite the oppression and killing of Palestinian Christians by Muslims. And how convenient it is to be able to couch such a deal in the noble sentiment of concern for the rights and progress of others.
And yes, the BBC will be greatly encouraged by this move – as it is by anything that empowers the Arabs and disempowers the Jews.
The people were very sad
Bunny had hopped on the Clapham Omnibus
She waved bye bye, “bye bye Bunny ” said the children
“Come and visit us soon, they cried”
And then one day in early spring there was a commotion on the common
It was Bunny ! ” hello everybody ! She cried, ” I’ve missed you !
Everyone was very happy to see Bunny once again, weren’t we children ?
Mr McGreggor came from his cottage with a present for Bunny, can you guess what it was children ?
oops
BBC seldom misses the chance to remind us that in its wonderful diversity the SNP has Parliament’s youngest MP.
Not so interested in the cabinet promotions of Britain’s most senior Muslim heritage and Hindu heritage politicians. If it doesn’t fit the BBC narrative it’s ignored. Much like this story was http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-natalie-bennett-admits-the-green-party-has-a-problem-over-its-lack-of-black-and-ethnic-minority-candidates-10193937.html
could this be why?
The greens should be more concerned about a lack of members, and leadership, with a full set of marbles.
Hey, daft Bunny – seen this? Your name in lights
http://order-order.com/2015/05/13/no-agreement-between-farage-and-carswell/#_@/enteXCR1dtKUnA
Crunchers of numbers may wish to nibble at this as who won wot for whom, and how is debated endlessly:
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/content/why-labour-party-cant-blame-biased-coverage-sun-mail-and-telegraph-its-general-election
‘The great unknown is the extent to which papers reflect the views of their readers, and the extent to which they influence them.’
The same may be said of broadcasters who, surely, in some cases do see their mission as being to interpret events and enhance narratives.
Especially monolithic monopoly ones with vested interests beyond shared ideologies
‘The party will have to look elsewhere to find out why it lost the 2015 general election so badly’
Despite the best efforts of some, as yet unmentioned influences.
Search for the missing Edstone continues.
No comment from the BBC.
I do hope there is a reward for information regarding its whereabouts. I believe the man in the photo – a BBC favourite – took it to Stonehenge. See the hand signal.
Article in New York Times, pokes fun at Labour. Link immediately below
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/13/world/europe/british-press-hunt-labour-missing-ed-stone.html?smid=tw-
share&_r=1
UKIP have suffered the might of the state against it, even the BNP didn’t suffer such a long running campaign against it.
We have to be positive and I am, nearly 4 millions voted for UKIP just over 9 millions voted Labour which had a truly glowing light shone on it… not a very good result at all in comparison imagine the rolls reversed. Those 4 millions are bedrock, the more immigration we have some 3 millions ( gross but replacing the indigenous ) till the next election UKIP will fare very well.
Labour refuses point blank to address the colonization issue, quite simply they will never attain power until the demographics are stacked so much against us that GB will be no more anyway and by then of course the colonizers will have ditched labour anyway, it has become a dead party. As for the Lib Dems they are already dead and buried. The Greens! not even on the counter.
That leaves the un conservative party that hasn’t represented it’s core voter for decades, a party that only won because of the nightmare of a Labour SNP government. They also won’t and can’t tackle immigration.
The only way to destroy UKIP is to end or reverse immigration and it aint going to happen.
Cheer up all, the future is looking good its looking UKIP.
Nah, I think this is it. The movie actually makes sense now.
The Edstone- seized upon as Milliband’s Kinnock moment- and it was!
Surely the most cringing moment was ” Am I tough enough ? Hell yes !!!”
A weak person trying to look strong. Pathetic and dangerous.
Putin would eat Miliband for breakfast.
Blimey. Take a look at Pesto’s performance on the Daily Politics this afternoon (from about 32 min 30 secs in).
Pouring cold water on the latest economic good news doesn’t go anywhere near describing Persto’s sourness, not least his disappointment that Mark Carne hadn’t spoken out earlier and ‘underpinned’ Miliband’s attack on the Tories. Blatant or what?
Clearly he’s not got over last week, embittered that the Tories won and he and his lot didn’t…or is it that he’s once again lost out on those career enhancing, Northern Rock destroying leaks that he used to be the breathless recipient of ???
Not only do Labour need a reshuffle…the BBC do to.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05vwl74/daily-politics-13052015
”BLIMEY PESTO”
Just listened to Pesto,my god the guy was almost bursting trying to get the Labours point across….
coaster – May 13, 2015 at 8:27 am
“Why didn’t the interviewer mention how much other parties are getting and if they trying to return some of it?”
The Green Party are in a similar position. The Beeb won’t pursue this, so, just out of interest, does anyone know how much they’re entitled to, and what they’re going to do with the money?
Wikipedia short money:
“From 1 April 2014, eligible parties receive £16,689.13 for every seat won at the last election plus £33.33 for every 200 votes gained by the party.”
I think its correct. Its the number of votes that UKIP attracted that makes the issue historically unique ( one MP, lots of votes, big short money/MP ratio). The greens, NI MP’s And Plaid get much less funding due to their relatively low national vote share.
In the run up to the election I had numerous discussions with people who agreed with UKIP’s ideas but thought that they’d vote for a different party because their UKIP candidate had no chance of being elected. My argument was that they should still vote UKIP because the Short money was partly based on the nationwide total number of votes, and so a vote for UKIP would help fund back office staff, which will make a difference to the party in the 2020 election. Some of them were persuaded.
Edit – I’ve just seen Old Bloke’s 7.17 post. We are making the same point in different words.
UKIP are entitled to that money.
The short money allocation for 2014 is £16.689 for every MP elected, that is the share for Douglas Carswell, if he wants to dump that then fine.
AND
£33.33 for every 200 votes, which for the 3,8891.099 votes equates to £646,785 which is money for UKIP to establish and maintain a parliamentary office, not for Douglas Carswell who gets his own funding for his office costs, but for the party.
As I’m not a fan of that word ‘entitled’ Old Bloke, I’ll be a bit contrary and give my view. The concept of entitlement to taxpayers’ money sticks in a libertarian’s throat. UKIP is represented in parliament by Douglas Carswell. Nobody else. His approach is proper, prudent and mindful of the taxpaying public and their view of troughing politicos. This is a good politicl move considering the national debt, deficit, practicing what you preach and the public perception of UKIP going forward – “UKIP practices what it preaches”. (I know the monetary value is, in the scheme of things, ‘a drop in the ocean’ in relative terms, but this is a statement of principle. Whilst my view is similarly irrelevant in the scheme of things, I back Carswell and I’m sure the Party will too.)
Sometimes I try to watch the BBC but I find I cannot relate to it at all. It seems to be a TV company that caters for people not of this planet. It is very surreal in some ways and has very little relevance to the things that my wife and I ponder upon.
You must be talking about ‘The Sky at Night’
Hi Bunny, how does it feel to be David Cameron’s Gimp?
BBC World service covers the response to Labour’s election defeat. A brief look at the respectful walk past the Edstone, now covered in flowers.
Absolute madness!! No wonder the scallies are moving out of Salford, they are sick of hearing the wailing coming from the BBC HQ.
On the plus side there has been a fire sale on Champers and they are pouring it on their cornflakes when they get up in the afternoon.
God that’s painful to watch.
Anyone faking grief will get a visit from the TV tax enforcers and if they haven’t paid they’ll be executed at dawn by a squad using anti-aircraft guns.
(Just to make sure they are really dead.)
Same old slopping out from the liberal media classes then?
Came back tonight to
1, Guardian hack(Joan Smith) saying that she doesn`t vote Labour just so Charles Clarke can suck up to Prince Charles as he signs off on a letter-one that the Guardian fought to have released in the interest of “public transparency”.
So will the Guardian hacks like her now stop shilling 24/7 for Labour now they know he`s a Royal Toadie after alll?
Course not-Labour morons `til they die.
2. The Migrants-boo hoo(pt 94)
3.Alec Salmond as Foreign Secretary for the BBC/Channel 4 spouting on
4. The joys of solar panels-keep paying for them, don`t let them die…not now when its sunny?
5. Cancer patients might be the victims of Tory cuts be not filling their boots whilst in Oncology…malnutrition apparently.
And tomorrow-the obesity pandemic wiping us all out.
6 Labours back!… any dodginess re elections and union payrollers not to be mentioned(Falkirk Protocol).
Now this time last week, I`d have been spitting feathers at the programmed sequence of lies and slurs-and despairing of the liklihood of this lot getting into power.
But they all were stuffed on May 7th
Yet they roll on-paid for by us, the likes of Matt Frei and Jon Donnison spout off as if we`d not voted for everything and anything but them and their fuckwit agendas.
Hoping that Whittingdale lines up Jon Snows neck under his chopper and fillets Channel 4s despicable news product-as rancid and cancerous as the BBCs.
Even if its halal.
Speaking of which-how come the BBC has been saying that Camerons views are aimed at “so called” extremists…and “alleged” online grooming for ISIS?
Has the BBC dared to give us ALTERNATIVE adjectives to describe Choudhury, Tibzuh al Tahrir and the other blowjobbies from the Levant?
Course not-just sneer at Cameron making a fuss over nothing…and why here`s George Galloway to give us the view from the Bradford street,
Channel 4 and the BBC…time for composting.
I’ve not been watching TV this week, and not missing BBc, so no real comments to make. However in the spirit of Charity Bingo I did briefly watch news 24 to see a representative from Save the Children on.
News Governor of bank of england says immigration holding down wages …. wtf … the racist bastard
oh teles on itv my mistake must turn back
Bbc news at ten. That odious little rat Mark Easton described Anjem Choudary as being labled an ‘Extremist’ just like Mandela, and Ghandi were once described as being extremists.
Sean Hannity from fox news called Choudary a ‘SOB’ to his face.
Who would you think was correct in their description?
And just to think that we are forced to pay for this shit!!!
So, easton is suggesting that one day the religion of peace will be free of the yoke of the western world and it’s evil ways.
That the cutting off of heads and the bombing of innocents is just part of the fight for freedom.
And that choudary will be seen as a freedom fighter and will have a statue erected in Londonistan celebrating his struggle?
Who is more dangerous to the UK, choudary or the bbc?
Sounds like Easton is wired up to the Green Party manifesto:
Green Party leader Natalie Bennett has said it should not be illegal to join terrorist organisations.
Ms Bennett said people should not be punished “for what they think or what they believe”.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30973388
Quelle surprise.
A bit of comedy gold from radio 5 dead today.
Peter Allen’s one liner “I just want to talk about labour for a moment”.
And that coming after gameshow nicky’s 9 o’clock call in on ‘Where did liebour go wrong and how can we fix it’ and 99.99% of the other time being spent on liebour!!
Then came the ‘news’ of an old lady who had had her birdbath stolen from her garden? Where was this leading I thought?
The old lady got up the next day and found a scrap of cardboard with an apology scrawled on it stating that the thief (it was a he apparently and not a female) had no money for his mother’s birthday so stole the birdbath!
Then came the punch line…it was all down to poverty, that’s right, poverty drove him to it, then Allen suggested that it isn’t really a crime as the thief had no choice? I was aghast.
Normal people would just get a card and show their face, most mothers would be happy with that, would they be happy knowing that you’d stolen an old woman’s birdbath? The bbc would.
Please, Mr Whittingdale, save us from this madness!
Typical left wing filth. Touch any of their stuff or ask them to pay tax and they scweam blue murder. See that Arthur troll, below, seems to think it funny.
Typical BBC bias – some woman was talking on Radio5 live about going into labour – tried to infer it was something to do with childbirth but I knew what secret signal she was giving out.
I think that we have another Al Beeb sockpuppet on board here, what do you think arthur blessed?
He’s an onanist
Larry – there’s you with your big word again. Maybe getting a weeee bit tired? Maybe look up your big dictionary and come back with a new word tomorrow? Would you do that for me?
No.
sigh, Larry – I fear we have grown apart
What – you like Sky? ITV? God help us – Channel 5? Have you ever been abroad and seen the general standard of TV? Yet you bunch of armchair warriors linger here, whining and bleating that the BBC doesn’t buy the enormous right wing bias of the press. Are you Putin? You really want all the media in your pocket? You that insecure?
Al Beeb has a world service arthur , I have heard it, have you ? That’s why you should vote here …
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
seems my reply was deleted – typical right wing censorship. I’ve just been merched!
Was it you that deleted it ?
Is it you that is liking your own posts? Isn’t that a little sad, Merched. (snigger)
Not guilty arthur.
Now, it would be good of you if you could answer my two questions ..
Are you voting here ?
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
and do you think we have a new Al Beeb sockpupet trolling on this site ?
Please do not feed the troll!
Chippy’s back !
munch munch
fortunately 38degrees usually do good work – didn’t they stop you lot selling off the forests for example? You know the cost of everything and the value of nothing, like the BBC. Now don’t withdraw early on me Merched.
Artthur , this came from 38degrees.
http://www.kctimes.co.uk
I am not withdrawing anywhere , some of us have jobs to go to .
Now are you going to vote?
The more the better and people like you are helping with your posts – carry on .
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee