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
- moggiemoo Dec 22, 16:17
Weekend 21st December 2024
Why bother? It’ll all be forced upon us soon enough. - vlad Dec 22, 16:05
Weekend 21st December 2024
The lying BBC (tautology) are claiming that the latest muslim terrorist (tautology) was a right-wing atheist anti-muslim, and it’s all… - Lefty Wright Dec 22, 16:04
Weekend 21st December 2024
Fedup2 The BBC love to do bit of Imam bum licking. - Lefty Wright Dec 22, 15:56
Weekend 21st December 2024
Zephir Are Sir Keir’s baying mob ” women of a certain age”? - digg Dec 22, 15:53
Weekend 21st December 2024
While I don’t support some of the bad decisions made by some of the Christian Church elders in the UK,… - Up2snuff Dec 22, 15:45
Weekend 21st December 2024
TWoTWee Watch #1 – BBC bashing the the former Bishop of Chelmsford & Church of England Stephen Cottrell, is the… - Zephir Dec 22, 15:44
Weekend 21st December 2024
This, from a little while ago I noticed online: “To understand the very serious trouble the U.K. is in I… - Lucy Pevensey Dec 22, 15:28
Weekend 21st December 2024
Converted? Well Praise Jehovah! Hello Mr recent convert, you must be so happy to learn that Allah and the false… - albion49 Dec 22, 15:26
Weekend 21st December 2024
Main headline on BBC Wales news website today: “I wouldn’t poo if my husband were at home”. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdekdn3j4y3o. More brilliant…
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
On another thread Albaman was asking for proof about just what a mountain Labour has to climb for it to win an election.
So just how bad was their defeat? Well from the current position for a majority of just 1 they would need a swing of nearly 9% !
That seat currently has a majority of 8000 against them!
Prior to the election the seat they needed for a majority of 1 was 4000 votes against them.
A 6% swing in Scotland would deliver just 2 seats to Labour !
To win a majority of 10 would require Labour to win Conservative held seats which have never been Labour in their history !
Anyone supporting or a member of Labour should be in despair for a party which has been destroyed by far left trade union meddling.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/05/labours-path-back-power-tougher-you-think
Labour without 50 seats in Scotland will never win an election in England, ever. They would require all the votes that have deserted them to the Left ( Greens) and to the Right ( UKIP). That would require policy’s such as no Nuclear power station or weapons, yes to Trident replacement, mass immigration, no immigration, being a part of the EU, leaving the EU. How do they square that circle ? Let alone policy’s that will bring back the missing 50 scottish seats. People have just looked at the headline figure of the Tory majority, look at the more important figure of Labour now being down to 232 seats with no obvious chance of getting over 260. They are dead and they know it.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/05/20-seats-lowest-turnout-show-labour-voters-drifting-ukip-or-not-voting-all
An interesting insight into what was going on:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9528312/inside-the-milibunker-the-last-days-of-ed-did-ed-miliband-sacrifice-ed-balls/
It is amazing to think an operation like this could have ended up running the country, and do so with the support of a monopoly media broadcaster concerned only with their narrow social engineering ambitions and, latterly, installing a puppet who had guaranteed their survival and revenue stream.
Sorry missed off this very revelatory first look at labours loss of the working class vote. It woz UKIP wot one it for the Tories, after a period of reflection they might want to ponder this point. They NEED UKIP to promote the concerns of the working class and draw votes away from Labour, concerns that they prefer to pass by at the moment in the rush to build a multi kulti EU province. Either work in a loose coalition of the Right or wait for UKIP to replace Labour in all those northern seats which are now in their sights and then as a mature party with 50 seats turn on the Tories. Labour are dead, reduced to being a party of the main cities and their public service / union/migrant votes.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/05/it-was-working-class-not-middle-class-sunk-labour
Digression
A “mural” on the house of a “Labour” Party supporter shows the PM “strangling a nurse”
I plan to have several murals painted showing :-
Tony Blair murdering a million Iraqis.
Tony Blair importing ten million Muslims.
Several nurses chatting while NHS patients die of malnutrition.
Kim Il Sung chatting while three million Koreans die of starvation.
Lenin at a banquet while four million Russians die of starvation.
Mao swimming in the Yangtze while fifty million Chinese die of starvation.
I still have some more space, suggestions please.
If I was you, I’d move to a smaller house. Your leccy bill must be horrendous.
Was it Paul Nurse? It should have been…
Ahhh, Paul Nurse, custodian of nullius in verba.
Like putting an Islamist in charge of a convent.
How about a cartoon depicting Liebore as the Titanic, with Captain Millibland refusing to see the UKIP iceberg on the advice of his navigator,Lieutenant Kelner ?
‘But Captain, my polling instruments tell me there is no UKIP iceberg ahead ‘??
It’s nice here. I’ve just had a 2 day battle to get 2 posts in The Guardian. Perfectly decent posts although they went against the consensus. When you see some of the hate-filled rants that are left on there, you can see why the left are finished in this country. They’re only interested in talking amongst themselves.
Was ‘pre-modded’ after the first post. Probably banned now, oh well.
It’s always worth checking the BBC House Rules to see what modding they advocate.
Even more when there’s a thread with posts that clearly break their own rules left up, perhaps because they like them.
Typical BBC censorship, as it were.
They put me on pre-moderation a few times over the years and finally banned me a few months ago. There’s quite a struggle going on there. On the one hand, they want to appear enlightened and supporters of free speech and on the other they grit their teeth and clench their fists at comments that are not PeeCee and often delete them.
If you want to carry on commenting there you should just post a number of fairly neutral comments over a week or two until they lift the pre-mod. If they don’t lift it, a polite email enquiring as to why they haven’t might do the trick.
You’ll know if you’ve been banned because you’ll see a message that your account has been disabled.
if the left are only interested in talking amongst themselves how come we are here?
“It’s nice here” says The Lord, slowly lowering himself into the warm vat of right wing bile
Bile is the raison d’etre of your party the’ Party of Hate and Envy’.
Bile is the raison d’etre of Labour the’ Party of Hate and Envy’.
well which of these statements do you want to go with? Maybe try a few more while you’re thinking out loud. Colonel Blimp.
”Arthur”
Seems to me Arthur your wasting your time on this site.
Why dont you go and set up an anti Centre Right web page, at least that way we wouldn’t have put up with your non contributory, meaningless waffle.
………….or go and join the BBC, or perhaps you already do..!!!
Is that the best you can do Arthur Pest?
Ha ha ha – I’m devastated. Sorry boys that you should hear a voice that doesn’t chime with your own narrow world view.
P.S. Don’t any of you actually go to work? I can picture nurse letting you sit up in your jim jams.
”HA HA HA”
Its not having a narrow world view Arthur,its trying to get fairness..
You must love us really mate, your always on here
It’s been fun – but jeez it would get boring reading the bile oozing from this site for very long
Awwww, poor old out of touch arthur.
Never mind love, if the electorate got it wrong you’ll just have to change the electorate. What’s that? You’ve been trying since 1997? Oh yes, so you have.
So prey tell why are you still here ?
He is still here because he loves it really and deep down he’s a latent right winger that’s trying to get out.
bile…a little strong mate.
We all have opinions and beliefs and sadly we dont all agree,mind you, the world would be a dull place if we did.
Sorry boys that you should hear a voice that doesn’t chime with your own narrow world view.
Er, that would be the narrow world view – I’d prefer to call it good old-fashioned common sense – that won the election.
Poor old out of touch arthur.
Majority of 12? Seem to remember old grey pants Major had more than that. Can’t wait to witness you all tearing at each other’s throats when the internecine war inevitably breaks out over the EU. I’ll be sitting in a comfy chair with popcorn, clapping. Fishy smelling John.
Tourette’s just bubbling under again I see!
Just think: 5 more years! The probably another 5!! The Left have been kicked in the bollocks, well and truly and boy will they hurt for a long, long time!!!
Enjoy your ‘leadership’ contest! Yvette still in denial – well I never!!!
Te-ra Chippy, me old whacker!
… Yesterday
… “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 ”
… Today
BBC … Pope Francis delighted his Palestinian hosts by referring to the “state of Palestine”
… “The Vatican says that it wants to see the “establishment and recognition of an independent, sovereign and democratic State of Palestine”
… “first new saints from the Arab world (?) to be named since the early days of Christianity.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-32727421
Meanwhile … while the Pope s so busy recognising, apologising and appeasing.
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/05/13/islamic-youth-bullied-insulted-christian-group-in-northern-italy/
Italy … “On Sunday morning, a group of young Muslim immigrants interrupted a Catholic procession in honour of the Virgin Mary with verbal insults, shouting, and threats” — “Apparently understanding the procession to be a provocation, a group of Muslim youth from the Islamic Centre began hurling verbal abuse and threats at the passing procession”
“If only they weren’t so…Catholic.
If only they wouldn’t stop needlessly provoking the Muslims by
…not being Muslims
… then things like this wouldn’t happen. I mean, what if the Muslims had set off a bomb? Then the organizers of this procession would have had blood on their hands!”
R Spencer.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/05/italy-muslims-disrupt-catholic-procession-with-insults-and-threats
Reminds me of the twelve Christian refugees thrown overboard to their deaths by Muslims on a boat bound for Italy. On their way to refuge in a Christian country they murder Christians.
One cannot make this up. It’s beyond insane.
Posted the following in response to your previous comment:
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 after the Holocaust to declare that the Jews should no longer be blamed for killing Christ and has so much to hide that it 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.
Following the meeting, the Islamic Center prepared a formal letter of apology and delivered one copy to the mayor and another to the members of the parish.
Obviously a bit of deception was required there.
In a statement, the mayor said that “the incident, even if it concerns the behavior of minors, is intolerable and must not be underestimated.” She also said the youth involved have been reprimanded by representatives of the center.
Where does the good mayor imagine the youth are getting their ideas from?
As far as I know Palestine (or Palestina as it was called then) was created by the Romans.
Not by any muzzies, who didn’t even exist back then.
so … is there a “Palestinian” state today?
“Palestinian” the term so pneumatically invoked by Arafat
to insidiously create a victim narrative.
“The Vatican says that it wants to see the “establishment and recognition of an independent, sovereign and democratic State of Palestine”
There’s a slight snag in there somewhere and I can’t quite put my finger on it.
well the pope does believe in god, the tooth fairy and santa as well
obviously a sensible chap
Interesting overnights.
Anyway, back on the BBC, have to say they really are starting to get back to what makes their unique funding so essential:
—
BBC News – As a child did you get any toys stuck up your nose?
—
The head of PR of the Nasal Insertion of Toys charity will soon be on the Breakfast sofa to explain the concerns we all have at this, and why more funding is needed.
No doubt we need to initiate an inquiry to investigate the underlying problems within our society which causes children to stick toys up their noses.
Poverty and Tory cuts.
The tories just don’t care about the young!
I don’t care about you either.
Yes they do, that’s why they’re trying to reduce the number of immigrants taking their jobs.
Is there a charity for The Nasal Insertion of Left Wing Broadcasters?
All it needs is for you to believe there should be one, and lo, so it must be.
Head office in a small terraced mews off Oxford St, and satellites around the country, mostly funded by government subsidy using taxpayer money to keep some very well paid staff with no real talents of value off the dole.
And frequent outings on BBC shows, from the One Show to Newsnight if they intone the correct mantras.
Ouch! Jack Straw just implied it was a bit rich of the BBC to seek to obtain details of decision-making by other bodies under FOI whilst refusing to disclose its own. John Humprys didn’t want to go there.
“John Humprys didn’t want to go there”
Rampant double standards by the BBC? I bet he didn’t.
Please let there be a neat audio capture of that exchange; it would be worth having. And sharing far and wide.
Here at around 02:40:00. Those more tech-savvy than I may know how to extract the relevant bit:
JS: Let me just take the case of the BBC
JH: I’d rather you stuck with Prince Charles
I bet you would, John.
Download Audacity (its free) and it will record what is playing through your PC soundcard.
I’ve captured and saved it.
Ta very much. And to Geoff.
In case Audacity doesn’t work, there’s always holding the mobly in front of the speaker. Just as there is pointing the camera at the screen.
Also serves.
Pest described this years economic growth as pretty much negligible and next years predicted growth of %1.25 as barely noticeable. If this was Labours efforts this years economic growth would be described as a good solid footing for the %1.25 growth expected next year which will kick start the boom which we can be thankful to Labour for.
I notice that the Guv at the BoE blames immigration for stagnant wages, yet the Guardian has no obvious mention on this issue on it’s online paper, but they love the snarling thin skinned Farage story!
In the real world which is more important news? Hence of course the guardians decline, why oh why can’t they see it!
Not that I care of course!
Well, I reckon the BBC will waste no time propelling this to the top of the headlines.
Nigel Farage condemned by UKIP election campaign chief
And you can’t really blame them, with quotes such as “snarling, thin-skinned, aggressive” about Nigel Farage. Truth to tell, I think Nigel did himself a lot of damage with his un-resigning act and that, much though I admire him, perhaps UKIP needs to move post-Farage if it is ever to progress. But why would someone so prominent make quite such a vitriolic attack? It seems counter-productive to me and I wonder what else lies behind this.
Just watched ten minutes of the worst bias I’ve ever seen from the Beeb. Total hatchet job by VD and Norman Smith on Nigel Farage. Of course, the public remarks from the other ambitious people in UKIP have provided a pile of stones ready for them to throw. There does seem to be some feeling against Farage on this site, but I don’t blame him. Much as the other people are capable, I see him as the ‘leader’ who inspires. Anyway; surely the Eurosceptic Tories won the argument to ‘leave it to us- we’ll sort it’. We need to see what they can do. Personally, I have no confidence whatsoever that the EU, Cameron, Eurosceptic Tories or Douglas Carswell will do anything to stem the flow of foreigners flooding in.
‘Nigel Farage’s authority risks “draining away” without leadership contest – senior UKIP source’
‘Senior UKIP source dismisses NEC decision to back Farage – It was a meeting marked by “U-turns within U-turns within U-turns” ‘
‘”Patrick (O’Flynn) is not alone” over article in Times attacking Farage leadership -senior UKIP source’
‘”This is not about Nigel’s leadership” – @UKIP spokesman’
‘No one is talking about Nigel’s leadership – @UKIP spokesman’
‘I’m told “something will be done” about advisers around @Nigel_Farage who are being blamed for angry tone of @ukip campaign’
…on-going
Sky News on the story now. Tim Montgomerie, as usual, pure anti-Farage bile but surprisingly – to me, at least – the leftie Nick Watt is the first so far to emphasise Farage’s exceptional qualities.
I can only speak for myself on this one. I have immense respect for Farage and what he’s achieved and in particular his straight answers to straight questions during the election. But he did himself no favours by resigning then un-resigning within days. The truth of who persuaded whom and whether he technically kept his word doesn’t really matter: it’s perception that counts and it looks like he wasn’t willing to let go and is being slippery in his use of language. He could have stood down, then contested the leadership election and almost certainly would have won. It’s evidently upset some ambitious people, though that’s no excuse for being so public and vicious in their attack.
I think those of us sympathetic to UKIP have to recognise that while Farage inspires as leader, he’s inspiring the converted but perhaps has reached the limit of those who can be converted by his style. A different style may be required to convert others. I would have loved to see him as an MP but it was not to be: those uninspired by him were strongly-enough uninspired to combine to ensure that.
Anyway, just my thoughts and entirely unrelated to BBC bias so I’ll leave it there.
I thought stepping down seemed pre-emptive but the honourable thing to do. Suzanne Evans looks like a leader-in-waiting, and I think her appeal would be broader than Farage’s, and without the baggage that the liberal media has unfairly saddled him with.
Un-resigning looks a bit cheap and forced at best.
“and without the baggage that the liberal media has unfairly saddled him with.”
Unless the media have a lot more unused baggage waiting in the basement.
I’m with Julia
Quite incomprehensible why anyone would think that UKIP without Farage would be more successful than UKIP with Farage. The UKIP donor who referred to the “Vicar of Clacton” and “Euro-sceptic paper tigers” got it about right.
This is a damaging story to UKIP but I think/hope that because the BBC et al have been so relentlessly biased against UKIP they have shot their bolt. I won’t even bother to read the BBC stories about this as I know they’ll be pure propaganda.
Still, the BBC did keep a lid on the Blair/Brown fissure for all those years while the British government was dysfunctional at its core so they can keep quiet when they need to.
If you keep printing lies about me I’ll throw my nokia at you.
The Dark Charisma of Adolf Hitler
Before the Genial Erection this programme was put out early in the evening. Obviously, to gird the left’s loins.
With the election lost, it has now been shoved to the back of the schedule.
Adolf Hitler – the Greatest Story Never Told, now the 4th most watched documentary in the world, Its not pro hitler, not anti hitler, it just tells you the facts that the marxist historians in the west dont tell you, probably why the BBC will never show it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vnu5uW9No8g
Thanks for posting that link, fascinating – history truly is written by the victors.
You’re right, that would never be shown on the BBC or on any British T.V. channel for that matter.
Yes, the timing of that prog was so obviously contrived.
I never thought I’d cheer a Labour politician, but Jack Straw was bang on the money on the Toady programme this morning.
Humphrys was in full BBC / Guardian handwringing mode discussing the Prince of Wales spider letters. This non-event, as it turned out. had slapped the lefties in the face, ‘Good for Charlie’, was the response that the bubble hadn’t expected from many people, so to keep the outrage alive a different tack was needed;
Humphrys (paraphrasing): It’s not right that someone attempting to influence policy and the Government should be be exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.
Straw: Well lets take a look at the BBC, who use the act uncover their stories…but are fantastically careful…and have gone to court and won to protect it’s own decision making processes
Humphrys: Rather than talk about the BBC he’d prefer it Straw stuck to Prince Charles.
I bet he would. Hypocrites.
‘I bet he would. Hypocrites’
Reminded me of this:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-royal-family-are-exempt-from-freedom-of-information-requests-and-can-veto-bbc-programmes-why-do-we-put-up-with-this-9956702.html
‘I don’t blame the BBC. Lawyers employed by the royals are like Alsatians, fiercely protective and very sharp.’
Do they also turn up in half-dozens, accompanying Hugs Boaden?
http://www.thegwpf.com/foi-reveals-bbcs-spending-lawyers-28gate-debacle/
‘The serried BBC lawyers used a derogation, or opt-out, under the Freedom of Information Act that permits the Corporation to withhold information if it is required “for the purposes of journalism” – a clause designed to protect journalists from having to reveal their sources.
It subsequently emerged that the derogation has been broadly applied by the BBC’s legal team to withhold information from the public on a wide range of subjects, ranging from social media guidelines, to US income, to web site traffic. Even legal costs in previous FOI cases have been withheld using the “purposes of journalism” derogation.
Unique.
Basically with 28gate the BBC had lied through their teeth and were crapping themselves about getting found out. Despite spending hundreds of thousands of pounds of licence-payers’ money on legal representation they still got found out by a ferretting blogger.
And still they weren’t held to account for their lies. No wonder they think they’re untouchable.
Leading immigrant speaks out… on benefits of immigration.
Canadian immigrant Mark Carney – Governor of the Bank of England (also Bilderberg, Group of Thirty, World Economic Forum and formerly of Goldman Sachs) – has spoken on the benefits of immigration, much to the joy of the BBC no doubt (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32733033). More specifically he makes the incredible claim that “UK productivity (is) not harmed by foreign workers”. Contained within the article is this extraordinary claim, that goes unchallenged: “However, older people willing to work and workers seeking more hours had added 500,000 to the labour force over the last two years, said Mr Carney. That was 10 times more than immigration, he said.”
Well that’s strange. Let’s put aside the possibility that some people are having to work harder and longer to cope with the “austerity” that the BBC are normally so keen to report on. For it means that immigration has only added 1/10th the number of workers in the last 2 years, or 50,000 people. Yet net immigration for that period is around 600,000, so what are the other 550,000 doing? Clearly a proportion of these will be children and others not of working age, but that still leaves, say, 300,000 who have not been added to the workforce. Benefits anyone? Criminal activities in some cases? A deathly silence emanates from the BBC.
and no mention of him saying immigration was compacting wages??
productivity not harmed hmmm, and not improved either i see
Guest Who this morning (9.11) brought the following brilliant article about ‘Milliband in his Bunker’ on the last days, to my attention and for those that have not read it, you might like to have a little gloat:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9528312/inside-the-milibunker-the-last-days-of-ed-did-ed-miliband-sacrifice-ed-balls/
Could not resist my input in the Spectator comments, to ensure the truthful biased BBC complicity is included:
“Constituency offices of Lib/Lab/Con all hold a mass of information and insiders will know how easy it is to conduct internal polls down to ward level, should it be required.
It is only the resources, management strategy and organising ability that prevents accurate internal polling.
Labour ‘red mist’ ideological emphasis, class war and ‘spin’ combined with party management of ward polling efficiency prevented the polling reality coming out.
In this day and age the gigantic contribution of subtle BBC allies leading almost daily on the ‘Labour’ story and demonising UKIP and the Tories could only last so long before social media overrides with the Truth.”
11 22am BBC 5Live
After yet more BBC Faragefest,
(why couldn t UKIP get this amount of airtime pre election?)
… and next
The Al BBC 5live dipsh-t s are going to give listeners “a guide” on Sharia courts?
lawd help us
A relative of mine has been invited to appear in the audience of Question Time which will be held at her University. She has been informed that she will only be allocated a ‘silent seat’ as the speakers and questioners/and questions have already been chosen.
A very interesting comment.
Have any other posters experience of attending a QT? I have applied but have not yet got in.
I attended a BBC Look East Question Time. They seemed to struggle to fill all the seats. Four questions were pre-selected, but hand raising and commenting was actually encouraged certainly without any obvious fiddling.
The best moment was when the Green said we propose cutting rail fares by 10% – ripple of applause – and we are going to pay for it by stopping road building – stunned silence!
She should do a Bunny LaRoche – always guaranteed to break the ice at parties.
I haven’t heard this on the box:
.
Much sombre, heart-searching concern on the BBC about the Labour Party leadership contest. Not even a hint that it resembles a beauty contest on the Titanic.
As with the election the British – or English, more like – will listen and make their own minds up. And let’s face it, it doesn’t sound good to hear the likes of Burnham and Cooper turning so quickly on a manifesto which only last week they were saying was the bees bollocks for Britain.
Nah, we’re not fooled that easily. They’re hard left and no amount of turd polishing will change that.
Ehh, it’s the gift that just keeps on giving. More, BBC!
” Ed Millibands spin doctor’s latest comment”,the guy is barking mad or running scared,either way,still a dickhead.
Tom Baldwin says BBC showed more bias against Labour than the Tories
Ed Miliband’s spin doctor Tom Baldwin has been rather quiet since Labour’s disastrous election night results. Now the former Times journalist has explained his radio silence in an article for the Guardian. He says he has been avoiding the news after the Tories had ‘a win they did not fully expect or really deserve’. However, the appointment of John Whittingdale as culture secretary has caused him to resurface:
‘But one story has finally made me stumble out of bed. The Tory newspapers have welcomed the appointment of John Whittingdale, an old Thatcherite, as culture secretary with gleeful headlines about the government “going to war” with the BBC. This was accompanied by unsourced comments about how the Conservatives were determined to “sort out” the broadcaster, cut or even kill the licence fee in revenge for “infuriating” them during the election campaign.’
Baldwin says that for the Tories to threaten to ‘kill the licence fee’ in return for their election coverage would be based on a falsehood, given that it was actually Labour who the BBC wronged the most. While he does not blame the BBC, he does say responsibility for the party’s defeat must include taking responsibility for ‘failing to win our battles with the BBC’:
‘Far from being in the pocket of Labour, the BBC was too easily swayed by newspapers that support the Tories and are heavily invested in Labour’s defeat. It contaminated everything, from the questions that were asked in interviews, to the lazy assumptions that were made about Ed Miliband. When the rise of digital is causing the direct influence of the Sun, the Telegraph, the Mail and the Times to plummet faster than their readership, it was frustrating the BBC should have so often have provided an echo chamber for them.’
Baldwin goes on to say that this influence stretched to the election debates, which he says were decided at the bequest of the Conservatives; ‘I am genuinely puzzled about what exactly did Cameron find not to like?’ Perhaps the boldest claim in the piece is the suggestion that BBC employees were repeatedly warned not to cross the line:
‘I suspect, however, that something else is going on too. BBC executives and journalists have told me that there were regular, repeated threats from senior Tories during this election campaign about “what would happen afterwards” if they did not do as they were told and fall into line.’
Fighting talk from a man who is now rumoured to be without a job. If the Guardian don’t snap the former scribe up after this article, perhaps the BBC will be so bold as to consider finding a home for Baldwin. After all he does make time to describe the organisation as one ‘that is invested in fairness, seeking balance even when it is impossible to achieve, listening and speaking to everybody’.
‘When the rise of digital is causing the direct influence of the Sun, the Telegraph, the Mail and the Times to plummet faster than their readership, it was frustrating the BBC should have so often have provided an echo chamber for them.’
That would be mainly the rise of BBC digital, helping to give it the 70% news coverage which dwarfs anything in the newspaper world and is gradually obliterating the UK local press. This is one of the reasons the Left are so bitter – they thought they’d just about got it all stitched up.
Odd isn’t it that the BBC bias towards the Tories – and the right generally apparently – has not resulted in the creation of a similar site to this one but citing evidence of righty bias. You’d almost think that Baldwin was making it up as he went along. I’d be very interested if he could overcome his obvious reluctance (or inability?) to name names concerning who actually issued the “threats” and who was actually threatened. Of course, libel (if proved) can be a very expensive business so Baldwin’s reticence is understandable. Baldwin’s opinion piece is at one with the oft-repeated crap from the BBC that since it gets as many complaints of bias from the left as from the right “the BBC gets it about right”.
For a flavour of Baldwin’s mendacity he asserts that the overdue electoral boundary corrections are actually a plan by the Conservatives “to gerrymander parliamentary constituencies in their favour”. I don’t think anyone seriously denied – not even Labour during and before the election – that the Conservatives in this election and in 2010 had to overcome an inbuilt disadvantage due to population shifts not being reflected in electoral boundaries. I suspect – and I have no direct evidence, just the universal despair at the BBC – that the BBC (in its desperate anxiety that Whittingale might not be a paper tiger) got Baldwin up to this in the aforementioned grand “BBC got it about right” tradition of welcoming (and possibly even composing?) spurious lefty “complaints”.
Roger Haribo was on PM the other night getting very excited about the prospect of an El Nino event. This will help push up global temperatures to the highest levels ever recorded, apparently, and the effects should be felt just in time for some climate jamboree later in the year. You could feel his excitement. No doubt he will cover global temps, should they rise, in great detail and pin the blame for it all on us. Alternatively, should the temps disappoint, then the pause that has now been predicted by climate scientists will be to blame.
Don’t worry if the subject of climate change and its many contradictions confuse you, Roger and his complete lack of any scientific qualifications will be on hand to interpret the IPCC/FoE/Greenpeace press releases for you.
£4 Bn well spent if you ask me.
Meanwhile, if you want to read sensible and objective articles by a scientifically qualified former science editor for the BBC here is an example:
http://www.thegwpf.com/the-sea-level-acceleration-trap/
It should quickly become apparent why Dr Whitehouse is no longer employed by the BBC.
Roger Harridan (ie a belligerent, scolding old nag) eh!
at least the Pope … and the BBC believes him
Vatican presses politicians on climate change
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-32487874
Even the researchers themselves state the obvious fact about these numbers; they say, “Neither of these figures is significantly different from zero.” You would think that would be the end of the matter as both results are statistically unimportant being not statistically different from zero. But you would be wrong.
The researchers take the view that there is a difference between the before and after results because the initial figure is smaller than zero (but not statistically different from it) and the corrected figure is larger than zero (but still not statistically different from it) so that means there has been an acceleration! They say “…the revised estimate is significantly different from the earlier estimate derived from data unadjusted for the effects of bias drift.” To reach such an important conclusion based on such statistics is not supportable, in my opinion.
Not that the media noticed such scientific details such as the flimsy base for claiming an acceleration in sea-level rise. The vast majority headlined it without any qualification. It is a clear case of widespread poor science reporting. No financial journalist would not look at the figures behind a headline. Very few covering science ever do, and many would not even think to ask! It is yet another mismatch between what many in the media report, and what is in the peer-reviewed literature.
In a nutshell.
The more Labour loons open their gobs the more you realise why they lost the election.
TWATO and Yvette Cooper (?) Talking about the need to resist calls to stem immigration and in an atmosphere of falling living standards caused by the previous coalition, we need to challenge racism and narrow nationalism.
Oh yeah? So how much of this ‘narrow nationalism’ did Labour challenge in Scotland and how successful were they?
Or could it be that yet again it’s only the English they want to oppress and nationalism in everyone else is perfectly understandable and the nasty white English people deserve it !
Welcome to another double decade in opposition !
The BBC bravely defaming the dead, again – Charles Moore writes in this week’s Spectator.
“In her recent official history of the BBC, Jean Seaton makes the striking claim that BBC executives ‘had to ration’ Mrs Thatcher’s appearances on Jimmy Savile shows, because she wanted to be on with him so much. If this is true, they were successful. She appeared on Jim’ll Fix It three times in her 15-year career as leader and was separately interviewed by him once. MT loved being on the Jimmy Young Show on Radio 2, however, and appeared on it 18 times. Is Professor Seaton confusing her Jimmys? I notice that poor Jimmy Young, who despite being an ex-disc jockey aged over 90 has not yet been charged with any sexual offences, does not appear in her index. There is a tendency among people who do not like Mrs Thatcher to try to link her name with Savile as often as possible. They should be careful. The fact is that he got close to almost everyone famous. During the 1987 general election, for example, he was president of Hands Across Britain. The name suggests a mass movement of gropers, but in fact it was an implicitly anti-Tory campaign for the unemployed. Savile shared it with Cardinal Basil Hume (who also put him up for the Athenaeum), Bishop David Sheppard of Liverpool, Glenda Jackson, Sting and the general-secretary of the TUC, Norman Willis.”
Savile was also pro NUM during the Miner’s Strike in the 1980s but so what? Essentially he used politicians as much as they used him but for charitable reasons rather than political ones.
As for Mrs T the sole reason Savile had many of the initial and now disproved accusations levelled at him was in order to attack her through him not the other way around.
Savile no stranger to Labour PMs
That’s disgusting. Two men flagrantly smoking, it shouldn’t be allowed.
Saville liked to suck on a thick cuban 😮
I’m Shocked. Shocked I tell you. [Newsnight 13.5.15]
How refreshing to see….
….a BBC journalist providing a relatively impartial political report which includes UKIP in its subject. Step forward – David Grossman. There, not hard is it? Whilst the report was followed by a soft interview (a reflective Comrade Evan Davies) with Liz Kendall (Labour leadership contender), the location piece by David Grossman was informative and balanced (in the context of UKIP v Labour in the Middleton and Heywood constituency). Both the elequant UKIP candidate (John Bickley) and the elected MP (Liz McInnis – Lab) were given fair hearing and people can make their own minds up. A limited number of local opinions were garnered (one small business owner and traditional Labour voter who voted for UKIP) and it would have been nice to hear more locals’ opinions.
David Grossman, I suggest, is a reporter who could find work with commercial operations. To coin an Evanism, David’s ‘tone’ was better, less sinister.
But why is this impartiality such a rarity with BBC political output? (Andrew Neil excepted {except for the Bowe-gate incident with Ben Harris-Quinney/ Michael Heseltine})
Foot in mouth moment from the BBC.
Ah, the trusty NaughtieMarr, so named after two other BBC senior staff who ‘accidently’ twist their tongues… if somewhat unidirectionally.
Looks like Norman is inducted into a select(ive) club.
It sounded as though Naughtie did it deliberately, when referring to Jeremy Hunt. Either that, or alternatively, he and others referred to Hunt by the rude appellation so often in general talk in the BBC studios, and it became habituated in Naughtie’s speech. I’m not sure about the latest from Norman Smith.
WARNING ………extremely bad language, (not to mention also very aggressive behavior):
Was it Bunny LaRoche?
If Farage is brave enough to appear on Question Time tonight (I don’t doubt that he isn’t) why do get the feeling that its going to turn into Griffin style stitch up.
Tonight’s QT will be the culmination of an establishment hatchet job, possibly even including the South Thanet result.
Sadly he won’t be given opportunity to laud his party’s 4 million successes last week.
At the start of the programme, Nigel Farage should ask the chairman to conduct a quick survey of the audience to see who voted for UKIP. If it looks far less than approx. 1 in 8 then the BBC might care to explain how a random sample did not match the GE turnout.
Ahh, what a dilemma for the lefties in the audience. Do they lie and put their hands up to help the BBC look ‘impartial’ or do they stay schtum in the hope so few put their hands up it’ll make it appear UKIP is already losing support?
Decisions, decisions – life is so hard for them now!
But if it’s anything like the audience on last Saturday’s Any Questions – just 2 days after a spectacular Tory election victory – where lefties on the panel were clapped wildly and the Tory’s opinions were met with groans, it’s gonna be ‘business as usual’.
We’d best watch it and detail the bias. The ground has been laid for tonight’s QT ‘Show’ over the past few days with the MSM all guns bazing on ‘UKIP falling apart’ meme. The questions will be phrased to put UKIP on the defensive – that is my pre-QT prediction. I suspect the ‘vetted’ and pre-selected questions maybe of the following form:
“Does the public fallout following money squabbles between Carswell and UKIP mark the beginning of the end of UKIP?”
or
“Nigel Farage lied about resigning. How can UKIP be trusted?”
Whereas, the softball Labour question may resemble:
“Who does the panel believe would be the best leader of the Labour Party to reunite it and re-build its trust with the electorate?”
UKIP used to get ignored. You know what they say: The only thing worse than being talked about, is not being talked about. LibLabCon can’t ignore UKIP anymore and will seek to destroy it. The BBC is an all too willing assistant.
…And since the panel, as always, will be 4 to 1 against Farage (5 to 1 including the ‘impartial’ chairman) they might also want to sort out this thorny old question:
Is the BBC biased?
“…The ground has been laid for tonight’s QT ‘Show’ over the past few days with the MSM all guns bazing on ‘UKIP falling apart’ meme.”
Indeed. The msm as a hive-mind have been very industrious over the past few weeks viz the ‘UKIP falling apart’ meme. So, yes, all set-up very nicely (and entirely uncoincidentally) for tonight’s QT.
In truth, this kind of collective bullying was always going to be the price UKIP would be made to pay for having the temerity to get almost 4 million votes in the GE – and many of them from disenchanted ex-Labour voters.
The msm – the BBC and CH4 in particular – will have their revenge and for them it will be a feast to last them as long as it takes to hammer UKIP into the dirt and out of existence.
Who knows? By appearing tonight Farage might be able to turn it around and make the BBC look ridiculous, as long as he keeps his cool. He doesn’t have to sell his manifesto or party anymore, he’s done that successfully, so now he can give some back. We might be in for a pleasant surprise. He can say what everyone with eyes in their head can say, for one thing, that it’s interesting that UKIP are getting so much more attention directly after the election than before it.
And he’s always been brilliant at thinking on his feet, keeping his head and making funny quips. In a strange way, this feels to me like his biggest hurdle, to actually cement his electoral accomplishment and emerge unscathed. We’ll see.
Btw well done to everyone here who voted for his party!
The BBC sees no problem in equating the likes of Amjem Choudary, the notorious Islamic extremist hate preacher, with that of Mahatma Gandhi. No doubt it will make it easier for any Muslims who were deciding whether to engage in jihad against our society to be convinced that they were really freedom fighters, after all, that’s what the BBC are helping to convince them.
I only wish that these BBC types would be the victims next time there is an attack, then they can learn whether comparing Choudary to Gandhi was a fitting analogy.
Clearly they are more interested in making themselves appear appeasing to Muslims than whatever common sense dictates, and screw anybody else who gets hurt by it.
BBC under fire after Home Affairs Editor Mark Easton ‘compares extremist preacher Anjem Choudary to Gandhi and Mandela’
What! this Mandela Choudary?
Malzberg – Radical Islamist Anjem Choudary: Pam Geller Deserves to Die for Cartoon Contest
or this Gandhi Choudary?
Hannity Anjem Choudary Who Says Geller Should Be Put to Death
”I’m Spartacus!”
I am Geert Wilders.
I am Pamela Geller.
I am Spartacus!
I want to congratulate Arthur Blessed for his success in achieving what he clearly wants: to ruin this site and make it unreadable for others. I don’t mind disagreements and people presenting their views, if considered and reasonable: that is what a blog is for. But to chip away for hours and make nasty little comments on other contributors, so that one has to scroll through reams of silly rubbish, is tiresome, and I imagine turns many contributors away to other discussion forums.
Of course, Arthur would not have such success, if other contributors did not rise to the bait themselves, but just ignored his comments unless they continued some ideas worth discussing.
So I will make a plea: do not waste your time and the time of all other people who want to investigate this matter of bias by covering pages with stupid, immature and pointless jibes. If his aim is to destroy the readability of this blog, don’t for goodness’ sake do it for him.
I imagine turns many contributors away to other discussion forums
Pretty much the sole mission I’d imag… guarantee.
Which is why such as the BBC has mechanisms in place to prevent it. Here there is just the odd purge that messes up the whole thing anyway, which often sees a few regulars jumping up and down about censorship.
What is needed is a little calm, and who knows who may be qualified to share it?
http://www.derby.ac.uk/courses/international-spa-management-two-year-bsc-hons/
I quite agree. I reckon he was the reincarnation of Chippy Minton rather than the Man on the Clapham Omnibus, who wasn’t as much of a prick. Even so, it is a waste of time to engage with them on any level.
Not my neck ‘o the woods so I can’t validate with personal experience, but it’s all kicking off ‘Up North’. Apparently.
BBC News via BBC Trending
1 hr ·
Why thousands in the North of England are saying “Take us with you, Scotland”
Seems thousands… yes… thousands of people are upset about the result of last week’s GE result.
Luckily, the BBC is here to give them voice. And a solution.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-32736153
By BBC Trending
What’s popular with the BBC and why they’ll shove it down your throats
Oh, how we laughed. It’s a hoot, mon.
And, best of all, it can be called ‘news’.
John Wittingdale, please note.
Thank heavens for impartiality.
BBC – 5Live bods explore Sharia
Sharia Law – is a spiritual concept?
that it complements UK law?
… really?, this totalitarian and fascist stricture? that always tries to go past its legal remit.
You can t allow a totalitarian ideology, in law and expect anything else?
Islam, It aggressively asserts control, why should its law do any other? … for a prime example just listen in, as finally after much fluff and bluster, the Sharia Council Rep gets questioned
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05tk7hc
2hrs 38
Sure enough, the BBC did a hatchet job on UKIP on the Six News.
“Questions about the party’s future…”
…according to the smug reporter grinning into the camera. This is how the BBC set the agenda and the narrative they wish to promote.
CU next Tuesday’s the lots of ’em, I still think Farage will have the last laugh.
Meanwhile, from a BBC boat person editor…
BBC World News
“We can see there are actually people drinking their own urine.”
Lucky JonDon isn’t there or he’d be getting them on the good stuff they are floating on, before he floats off.
Comments could be going better, too.
ps: Oh, and Abbott is trying to kill Johnny’s dogs, the bastard.
To that last, this is interesting.
Top comment with 240+ votes:
Andy Smerdon DEAR BBC..THIS IS NOT NEWS… its about a Rich Actor who thought he was exempt from the laws everyone else has to follow.. he has the option of removing the dogs by Saturday… he has the money. GET A GRIP… your the worlds news factory.. THIS is NOT NEWS..
Has attracted 30+ comments. Mostly adverse, and a bit aggressive, fair to say.
Now, if it were a ballot, who’d win?
Seems like the shouties are rather outweighed by the silents.
Maybe a metaphor there?
Economic with the truth again, why can’t Olive Cooke’s local bBC region be honest about her death? Olive had been selling poppys for 75 years, but recently had become dismayed with humanity and after a theft of £250 was seen jumping from the Clifton Suspension Bridge.
Should have been Points West’s main point, instead we get the death of some drug dealer, Olive’s death is reported near the end of the program and without the mention of her dismay or suicide, which is the bigger part of the story.
I was watching that. Thought it was a tribute to someone who died of ‘old age’. I thought it mighty odd when, almost as an afterthought, they said her body was recovered from the Avon/Clifton? Gorge.
Wow!
Wall to wall liberal chatter and “analysis” from the BBC and Channel 4 re UKIPs so-called “travails”.
One big fat elephant balancing on an odor eater and harrumping about some UKIP squits like it`s Reagan/Gorbachev or suchlike.
Boy-the media are sure reduced aren`t they?
Are you going to tell these liberal eunuchs, crooks and Cricks-or shall I?
No one gives a fub about leaders and strategies…we vote UKIP because the need is the cause, the manifesto is the best on offer-and the more the loser left try to make capital out of this parish spat, the more UKIPs vote will go up.
We vote UKIP because Crick, Snow, Myrie and the like would rather we didn`t…the left are running dogs now, and we want them caged and put down.
Still though eh?..with only 1 MP and little else-they seem to be really putting the bat up the lefties nightie as ever-and we love them for it!
Yet more column inches and influence/publicity-without doing a damn thing that`s newsworthy in the process.
Establishment Tactics. #1
We can not hear You.
No. Nothing, Nadda, Nil Zilch.
You do not exist.
Establishment Tactics. #2
Did you say Something?
What? You don’t like the EU.
You must be a fool.
Establishment Tactics. #3
“You are a Loony.
A homophobic Fruitcake,
And a racist too!”
Establishment Tactics. #4
“Please come home”, begs Dave.
But his Euroland heaven,
Has no attraction.
Not BBC, this is ITV
However, it is always interesting to see how our broadcasters manage to inject a bit of that old ‘balance’ into their documentaries – particularly these days when everything, globally – morals-wise – is sort of relative. I’m sure the BBC would be proud…
ITV London
9:00pm-10:00pm (1 hour ) Thu 14 May
Fraud Squad
‘The documentary series exploring the work of detectives from the City of London Police unit concludes with an insight into an operation to shut down a large-scale bank-cheque fraud empire. Run by a Zimbabwean gang, the scheme involved counterfeiting cheques from thousands of people, government institutions, small businesses, and even a hospice in Scotland. The criminals used an army of `mules’ to cash their fake cheques for a small commission. Funds were then being transferred to Zimbabwe in the form of luxury cars, by a ringleader who viewed his crimes as payback for his native country’s colonial grievances against the UK’.
Oh come on, from a Keynesian point of view, this growing the UK economy, right?
http://www.tvguide.co.uk/detail/2137970/107922881/fraud-squad#.VVTmyPCgQgQ
Watch out for this chap on BBC’s Dateline London – he sounds like a shoo in
” A ringleader who viewed his crimes as payback for his native country’s colonial grievances against the UK.”
I see what he means, after all Zimbabwe has done spectacularly well since whitey left, hasn’t it ………….?
Or perhaps not.
I’m sure they’ll be a lot better off when they are ruled by the Chinese than they were by us; such delightful people to be governed by – as the Tibetans will tell be able to tell them.
After spending all day knifing Nigel Farage, the BBC UKIP campaign correspondent took a break to post multiple positive tweets about Mary Creagh’s leadership bid. Sluuurrrrppp!
No. No. I’m sure that must be some kind of subtle pro-Tory bias.
Just give me a minute…..
so shes saying immigrants from the 3rd world need to come here and set up business’s to give whitey a job?
The busniess plan for these god like immigrants who are going to create jobs for whitey is that they are first given a university education in bio-technology before setting up the said business thats going to give to give whitey a job
and she thinks that going to win the race for the top ecenomy, and Robin Brant thinks thats a very business approach.
what a load of absolute bollock. No wonder the beeb has been doomed for years now and all i can say is good riddance
Then help it along and vote here …..
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
Another smug Tweet from a bBC newsboy (Christian Fraser retweet)
Still not watching TV this week. I assume this is already on here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3081364/BBC-fire-reporter-Mark-Easton-compares-extremist-preacher-Anjem-Choudary-Gandhi-Mandela.html
But really WTF?
Almost beyond belief that the BBC is still naval gazing about why they lost the election. I have literally lost count of the number of times I’ve switched the radio on in car or at home on R4 or R5L only to be greeted with the same feckin story they were discussing when I turned the radio off 3 hours earlier….over and over and over. Sad, indulgent and entirely self serving. Of course, its not that the people wanted to vote for those nasty Tories. No. Its because they had zillions to spend on social media and nasty nasty people, they even managed to convince a gullible electorate that Labour would go into coalition with SNP (despite Milliband saying the exact opposite). That’s what happened. No one really wanted to vote for them…..its becoming really quite funny to listen to. We should all rejoice, that in spite of 5 years solid campaigning, the BBC lost the election. How utterly galling it must be for them.
David Cameron is facing diplomatic isolation and his first backbench rebellion over plans to scrap the Human Rights Act and exempt the Government …
Could Freedom of speech be turned into a criminal offence …
http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/Conservative-MP-David-Davis-rebel-Human-Rights/story-26496811-detail/story.html
Conservative MP David Davis could rebel over Human rights
Is the issue an inherent contradiction between banning orders and the core British value that one should be tolerant of different viewpoints, and NOT only extremist Islamic ones, what other curtailments could be in the offing?
Or … Is there any other hand in play
it is that articles 22 and 9 are the problems..
The Conservatives and their 12bn in cuts to erm “welfare”?
“Social security is a concept enshrined in Article 22 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states:
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.
Article 9 of the Covenant recognizes “the right of everyone to social security, including social insurance”. It requires parties to provide some form of social insurance scheme to protect people against the risks of sickness, disability, maternity, employment injury, unemployment or old age; to provide for survivors, orphans, and those who cannot afford health care; and to ensure that families are adequately supported.
Anyway we will probably not know til after the fact, there was no interest in letting the electorate know pre election, why bother now?
Nice to see despite the change to the political scene racist Diane Abbott is still on this week
Make your mind up Al Beeb.
Quote, ‘UKIP is to the right’ or ‘right wing’ . ‘Many voters left Labour for UKIP’.
So Al Beeb, are are UKIP right or left ?
Ask Dian Fatbott – she’ll tell you.
http://pamelageller.com/2015/05/islamic-state-call-to-war.html/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3081364/BBC-fire-reporter-Mark-Easton-compares-extremist-preacher-Anjem-Choudary-Gandhi-Mandela.html
A reprise from earlier in the thread
Re Choudary – BBC
The west is sick.
“The West is very sick.
The BBC thinks a preacher of violence and hatred is a hero on the level of Mahatma Gandhi or Nelson Mandela, and that people who fight for human rights and humane values, such as Pamela Geller and I, are bigots and hatemongers.
The Church is in full appeasement/surrender mode.
The government and law enforcement authorities are in full denial mode.
… No one is standing up. Cowardice and appeasement not only rule the day, but are celebrated and hailed as prudence and wisdom”
R Spencer
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/05/bbc-likens-jihad-preacher-anjem-choudary-to-gandhi-and-mandela
Where is the evidence to suggest that the BBC thinks that the preacher is a hero? There is none.
The basic issue is about freedom of speech not necessarily what is said. Best way of restricting freedom of speech would be to prohibit people from speaking unless they had verifiable facts to back up their opinions. That would have a surprising impact on our current media and yield uncomfortable insights in respect of our foreign wars/policies.
Hello, he’s back, the drunken bender of defeat has worn off and omnibus man rises early to blink into life and steel himself for five long years of right wing government……
Coffee smell good pal ?
Working out your notice eh ?
Trolls who have surfaced from the undergrowth best ignored, never fed.
“Best way of restricting freedom of speech would be to prohibit people from speaking unless they had verifiable facts to back up their opinions.”
Crikey. There would be a lot of space to fill on BBC news and current affairs programmes, especially any lasting more than 5 minutes!
The Fascist left has long prevented those who held opinions different to their own from speaking freely.
Take a look at the guy reading from a speech of Churchill arrested because someone ‘took offence’ !
We see perfectly reasonable people being hounded and attacked simply because they have views the Fascists don’t like.
Don’t forget that one of Hitlers first actions was to dissolve all opposition parties and to arrest & imprison anyone expressing dissention. We aren’t so far away from that now.
The fact of Anjum Choudary being a ‘hate preacher’ is a difficult one to justify without admitting that Islam itself is an ideology of hatred, which of course it is. And so the government is between a rock and a hard place it cannot arrest Choudary for following his religion, nor for preaching it, so it intends to make some lie up that he is ‘perverting Islam’ when he is not.
How can you arrest him for incitement to violence when the Qur’an is an incitement to violence ? (Slay the unbelievers where ever you find them & Then fight in the cause of Allah, etc etc.)
The fact that the government is wanting to do something, but knows not what it can do shows just how far political correctness has caused massive problems for this country.
Following a lengthy report on last night’s BBC News at Ten about Choudary’s ‘radicalising force’, Mark Easton appeared to question whether there were similarities between Britain’s most famous extremist and two of history’s greatest civil rights campaigners.
Referring to Theresa May’s pledge to clamp down on extremism, the journalist said Gandhi and Mandela had been seen as extremists and that those stances ‘are sometimes needed to challenge very establish values’.
Call that freedom of speech? Sounds like you’re comfortable with Easton’s comparison. I’d suggest it’s not his job to make such inflammatory statements. No wonder you lot got trashed last week.
Manon, come on now, please don’t insult our intelligence. The BBC reporter Mark Easton put the cleric/preacher Choudary on the same perceived hero status as that of Mandela and Ghandi by mentioning his name with Mendela and Ghandi. Only a fool would not see this.
BBC, and Today in particular still desperately trying to make some sort of serious point about the obvious storm in a teacup which is the current internal wrangling at UKIP. I think Justin sounded disappointed that he couldn’t wring anything nasty out of those UKIP folk that he interviewed.
I wish they’d give it a rest, it’s SO yesterday…
It’s a theme the BBC and CH4 in particular will collectively revisit time and again over the next few years. Liberal Marxism got a damn good kicking from the likes of UKIP at the election – and the true significance of that is only just sinking into the hive-mind Common Purpose collective. As it does so, they will step up their attempts to duff up UKIP wherever, whenever possible.
Their mission (and I include all other political parties as well as the massed-ranks of their friends in the left-liberal media) is to ‘get UKIP’ before the next election and neutralise the threat; they had a brief glimpse at just how badly they all got it wrong at the election – luckily for them, their wholly undemocratic FPTP system saved them from having to witness 80-something UKIP MPs take their seats in Parliament.
Such a close call will not be permitted to happen again. Welcome to the new media bias, same as the old media bias – but this time it’s personal.
I dont see it that way.
Before the Euros they published every bad story about UKIP they could drag up.
Result….they failed, realising their tactic just gave UKIP a boost.
So…what next……at the GE the policy was ignore them. Once again….abject failure.
They really dont know what to do next!
They are literally fucked.
I woke up yesterday morning to the news on Radio Two that someone in UKIP has said something about Nigel Farage. One of the three or four headline stories in fact.
After a full on day in that London to see a show (Let It Be, very good by the way) I wake up again to exactly the same Radio Two headline news. Didn’t anything else happen yesterday while I was away? What warrants the same news snippet two days on the trot when there are only news snippets in total?
No, only that contrary to popular BBC expectations, Nigel stood his ground, and ain’t going anywhere.
BREAKING: Chukka has withdrawn from Labour leadership.
The MP, 36, said in a statement that he was not comfortable with the level of pressure and scrutiny that came with being a leadership candidate.
Scrutiny ?
He added that he understood there was no scandal that lay behind his decision to step aside.
Hmmmmmmmmmm
I hope Andy Burnham gets the Job.