Here you go, a brand new Open Thread to see us all off into the wide blue yonder.
WEEKEND OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- JohnC Nov 15, 03:05
Midweek 13th November 2024
This sums up the Left perfectly. They are constantly watching GB News just looking for any chance to complain or… - StewGreen Nov 15, 00:27
Midweek 13th November 2024
Quick bit of info from GBnews.. “Musk has retweeted GBnews twice in the last 24 hours” One tweet was about… - StewGreen Nov 15, 00:20
Midweek 13th November 2024
The Alison Pearson case The police are now saying she was wrong to say it was a non-crime hate incident… - StewGreen Nov 15, 00:17
Midweek 13th November 2024
Police breaking the law again. They cleared someone 2 months ago But only decided to tell her tonight Yes #TheProcessIsThePunishment… - JohnC Nov 14, 23:48
Midweek 13th November 2024
University cash crisis to get worse despite tuition fee rise, BBC told https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c14lv7e61d3o [img]https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/cpsprodpb/c006/live/66b8a290-a27e-11ef-9881-317cd05de9c4.jpg.webp[/img] By one of the BBC’s own… - Guest Who Nov 14, 22:28
Midweek 13th November 2024
https://order-order.com/2024/11/14/guardians-self-deplatforming-post-420-times-more-popular-than-average-tweet/? - non-licence payer Nov 14, 22:01
Midweek 13th November 2024
Zephir, how times are changed. This was the sort of advice that was printed in the Socialist Worker. It is… - vlad Nov 14, 21:58
Midweek 13th November 2024
After woke Welby, next woke Francis maybe? (Any non-Catholics, take it from me: he’s just as bad.) - Nibor Nov 14, 21:56
Midweek 13th November 2024
Taffy, Make friends. I’m a moaner and complainer and haven’t paid the telly tax for 20 years, and other taxes. - vlad Nov 14, 21:55
Midweek 13th November 2024
I’ll be a Socialist for 1 night. Nah, too high a price.
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
I’m not defending the actions of the taxi drivers involved here,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-34674173
But I will pull the BBC over the “refused taxi twice in three days” part, in the first instance the taxi driver made what I assume Mr. Charles interpreted as an unreasonable demand- payment upfront. The implicaton is that Mr. Charles chose not to make payment upfront and so declined to ride in the taxi, the article is not entirely clear on that point but that’s how I read it, it’s not quite the same as being refused as stated in the article. I do wonder what cause the driver felt he had to insist on a change to the usual contract, maybe the BBC could track them down and ask?
It seems a bit fuzzy. The article admits: “taxi fares must be prepaid for all trips between 22:00 and 05:00”. So pre-payment is a normal nightime practice there, the only dispute is over the time, which Charles says was 21:00.
With his shaggy appearance Charles also looks like a homeless person, so if the driver didn’t recognise him then it is more reasonable to expect that he doesn’t have the ability to pay.
I just checked the BBC Website. Still no hint of any doubts about Shaker’s credibility. All one way traffic. Despicable and totally unprofessional reporting. Just what we would expect from the BBC.
That answer is easy … Shaka Aamaa, doesn t have any credibility,
the prescient issue at hand … is when on the BBC are you going hear it, the balanced view, the objective facts?
or from the No10 traitors.
You have to laugh when he checks in with his team of lawyers, before his family on his return, smell the money eh!.
Chief f-ckwit … Andrew Mitchell is wheeled out, to prove what a traitor he is, as the Henry Jackson Society rep had rained on the No10/BBC parade yesterday, over this poor disenfranchised chap by giving a rational view.
He of course poured scorn on the HJS, and said they should be careful what they say …
… WHY?.
Old Shaker … Who incidentally, should be in Saudi, not here, left for Afghanistan … preferring the Taliban, than here
with all his family if I recall correctly.
Oh yes, “charidee” work you see, wanted to build a school, as he knew how the Taliban loved them … etc etc
Yep! … the old Revival of Islamic Heritage Society, The Al Qaida Sanctioned one, as noted by the UN list.
Click to access Britains-Last-Guantanamo-Detainee.pdf
Nogginator, exactly. The BBC simply don’t report anything they do not want you to know. Anything which does not fit in with their political agenda. At the end of the day it is really stupid, as people can get news from so many sources now. Yes, Shaker has no credibility and neither does the BBC.
Not only do they not report what they don’t want to, they report ‘their version of events’ over a myriad of platforms, what other organisation has 40+ radio stations, a host of TV stations and a mega website?
Most by day, either in the car at home or work are exposed to BBC Radio output of one form or another from which we get hourly news (why on a music station?) which without being critical can sway and influence ones thinking, especially when repeated ad infinitum every hour on the hour…..
Geoff, good point. It is the “drip drip” effect !
“It is the “drip drip” effect!”
They hope.
Radio 4 news at 7am ran an item on female genital mutilation and about it becoming compulsory for hospital staff to report any evidence of it on young girls to police.
It ran for a couple of minutes and not once was there any mention of Muslim or Islam.
It wouldn’t surprise me if, like their reporting of Islamic terrorism, we soon hear such reports accompanied by a disclaimer that FGM is ‘Nothing to do with Islam’.
I thought FGM was mandatory if females wished to become males, or the in-between stage known as ‘Trans’?
George Orwell meets Monty Python meets Franz Kafka
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3297734/Death-free-speech-Germaine-Greer-branded-transphobic-student-feminists-academic-attacks-self-righteous-zealots-censoring-history-literature-crushing-debate-universities.html
C.S. Lewis once wrote: ‘Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.’
Omnipotent Moral Busybodies eh? BBC – check, EU – check, UN – check
Excellent article. Just one of the many depressing examples he quotes:
At Harvard last year, some students on a law course complained that lectures about the legal status of rape covered ground that was considered unacceptable to them.
One student even argued that the very use of the word ‘violate’ was traumatising. How on earth, I wonder, would she cope with real victims of crime?
It is utterly absurd to pretend that students can be wrapped in a cocoon and be protected from the truth, but that is exactly what some universities are doing with their pathetic talk of ‘safe spaces’ free of anything offensive. In fact, some educational institutions have given physical manifestations to this infantalised concept of the so-called ‘safe space’.
At the Ivy League’s Brown University in the U.S., there is a special room set aside for students, who feel they have been ‘triggered’, that contains, wait for it — cookies, Play-Doh, and videos of puppies.
This is no way to equip young people for the adult world.
What’s more, my fear is that this kind of thinking will soon leach insidiously outwards, both into schools, and the wider society.
I just shake my head and laugh when I hear this kind of thing. I recently read the excellent book ‘Whicker’s War’ by the late Alan Whicker. As a 19 year old 2nd lieutenant in the army, he was forced to intervene, alone and unarmed, to stop a mob of Italian civilians killing a small group of SS officers who had been discovered hiding in a building in Florence after being cut off from their retreating unit. Can you imagine a 19 year old today doing something like that?
16 -year olds in the trenchesin WW1. 14 -year olds fighting in Nelson’s Navy ! And in the American Civil War !
I look at my nephew who is almost 30, and he still acts like a 16 year old ! Sadly today’s generation have never been allowed to ‘grow up’ – staying in educashun until they are mid 20’s and playing with Xboxes and suchlike, oh yes and listening to “boy bands”, no wonder they never become ‘men’ and mature until they’re almost middle aged. Wimps the lot of ’em.
Sad but true.
Re Greer being hounded-or should that be transbitched- by the chix wiv dix brigade?
Who`d have thought that Pop Will Eat Itself would become a cultural prophecy made real-and not some airhead name for a pop group way back?
These transfatties and desperate daniells are gerontophobic-they seek out and destroy older ladies-real ladies-as a matter of policy…and the Marxislambs smile on with tombstone teeth.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34686984
“Mr Aamer was first held by US authorities in Afghanistan in 2001 shortly after the 9/11 attacks but maintains he was in the country doing charity work.
….
The president of the charity Hostage UK, Terry Waite, who was himself held hostage for nearly five years in Lebanon, said it would take Mr Aamer time to readjust.”
So Shaker Aamer has been promoted to a hostage, by the charity Hostage UK. And Terry was held hostage by?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/terry-waite-hope-through-hostage-6347489
“Terry, 76, was held hostage in Beirut for almost five years after being kidnapped by an Islamic militia group”
So they are equal. BBC equates Terry waite to Shaker Aamer. This is how they kill opposition.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3081364/BBC-fire-reporter-Mark-Easton-compares-extremist-preacher-Anjem-Choudary-Gandhi-Mandela.html
http://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/david-keighley-bbc-bias-knows-no-end-now-toksvig-compares-farage-to-hitler/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/09/03/bbc-says-free-speech-advocate-is-radical-compares-her-to-islamic-hate-preachers/
Newsflash:
The BBC is being renamed the Islamic Broadcasting Company (IBC). There may be a few changes.
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’.
It’s about time this scumbag was sacked. He’s got lots of previous undermining and mocking what Britain stands for.
Just reporting on Sky that “this morning Shaka Amana wakes up for the first time in 14 years on British Soil; and is now in talks with his lawyers in starting proceedings against the British Government and possible the American Government ” . Don’t you just want to throw something at the telly ? No doubt number 10 are wishing they’d left him there, I certainly do. Will they take off the compensayshun the amount of the private plane flight and the benefits paid to his family – which poor thing, he hasn’t seen for over 10 years. The bleeding hearts are in fully decrying mode, but in the same breath asking why he was in Afghanistan directly after 9/11.
I would not be upset if every bloody Muslim in this country was kicked out – and yes, that includes doctors (who invariably get struck off anyway for misconduct and misdiagnosis), the Mohammed who has fathered 11 kids because he was told too, and lets have our country back to the way it was 40 odd years ago. Rant over.
I too want my country back but it’s been destroyed by big business, politicians and the BBC.
I can only see one opportunity in the near future to get it back in part at least. Vote out of the EU.
I heard Roland Rudd say on the radio that most out voters are of the over 58 age group. I believe that with age comes sagacity. Too many younsters are lacking respect for opinions of their elders. They need to shut up and listen a lot more.
That would be an age group who have learned from experience and are wise enough to understand what is going on.
I hate comparing anything to the Nazis but ;
In 1945 when the Allies had to start the deNazification of Germany they were aware that the younger ones had never seen any life outside of the Nazi straight jacket and had the glories of that system drummed into them as part of their education . Plus la change
If the shoe fits… I wouldn’t worry about Nazi comparisons Nibor, our great and good find them a constant source of inspiration.
Michael Heseltine is making a right ass of himself on any Questions on Radio 4, attacking UKIP and promoting mass immigration.
He has agreed more with the Labour and Guardian Columnist Zoe Williams than with UKIP. Goodness knows why he ever joined the Tories, he fits in far better with the Fib Dems or the Labour lot.
You seem surprised; the guy’s a cunt. I can’t wait to dance on that treacherous fucker’s grave.
Heseltine was always was seriously mentally unbalanced. Why on earth is he on “Any Questions” anyway ? He is history. Or was he the only socialist pretending to be a Tory who was free that day ?
I was most amused when he revealed that he used to run an employment agency for workers of colour. It is no wonder then that the cunt is a millionaire as he seems to have been a trail-blazing pioneer in the field of driving down the wages of indigenous workers.
Hezza’s daughter Caroline, is a muzzie convert, married to an effnick muzzie, never liked him since he stabbed Maggie in the back. Wow what a woman, what a leader.
Not sure you have that right !
“Heseltine married Anne Harding Williams in 1962. They have three children together: Annabel, Alexandra (b. 1968) and Rupert (b. 1967), and 12 grandchildren.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_Heseltine
Ok Catherine, not Caroline, I made a mistaka, did not check it.,but have seen her on Tv, plus heard her on the wireless.
The name issue isn’t really the point. Heseltine’s daughters are Annabel and Alexandra not Catherine or Caroline so it would appear although the surnames are the same, she is not his daughter.
An employment agency for workers of colour? Wouldn’t that sort of thing be, erm… racist?
Only transparent workers would be excluded
Did he actually say ‘workers of colour’?
Dancing to the PC brigade’s latest sick tune if he did.
Why is ‘coloured workers’ racist, but ‘workers of colour’ acceptable?
There is no reason, it is merely a way of controlling the use of language. That is why Benedict Cumbertwat was so embarrassed when he got it wrong, but he has managed to regain his leftist credentials by campaigning for the islamifaction of the parts of Britain he doesn’t live in.
ROFL when he trotted out the erm “sophisticated chancellor” … 😀
Don t what these Tory dipsticks are smoking, it was entirely Osborne s fault they got stuffed by the Lords this week, and his economic plan??? … .. .which one 😀
… How sophisticated is it have the national debt doubled, from £850 billion to £1.5 trillion inside 5 years, these economic buffoons are clueless.
Osborne is an idiot. He has screwed up the UK tax system even more than Brown. Doesn’t understand economics, business, finance or banking. Perfect qualifications for Chancellor !
Osborne was educated at independent schools: Norland Place School, Colet Court and St Paul’s School. In 1990 he was awarded a demyship at Magdalen College, Oxford, where in 1993 he received a 2:1 bachelor’s degree in Modern History. While there he was a member of the Bullingdon Club. He also attended Davidson College in North Carolina for a semester as a Dean Rusk Scholar.
In 1993, Osborne intended to pursue a career in journalism. He was shortlisted for but failed to gain a place on The Times trainee scheme, and instead did freelance work on the Peterborough diary column of The Daily Telegraph. Some time later an Oxford friend of his, journalist George Bridges, alerted Osborne to a research vacancy at Conservative Central Office.
History degree, chosen career in Journalism? Perfect background for running a countries finances !
He chose his name ‘George’ himself, originally Christened ‘Gideon’ which apparently means ‘The Destroyer’ !
So Osbourne hasn’t done a hard job in his life .
And what’s your economic plan then Noggin? John McDonald wants a little helper, you could be Noggin McDonald in a clown suit. Incidentally I have, A level economic ‘s, Brown wanted to buy votes, until the banks & economy collapsed. George is clearing up his fucking mess, but it’s a long hard slog for sure. But hey its Autumn, & the money tree is full of fruit (cash), but unfortunately you are not getting a cut, neither am I, but that’s life.Off to watch RWC now,enjoy.
George could make a start in cleaning up Gordon’s fucking mess by undoing some of the hideous complexities brought in so he could say he hadn’t raised the rate of income tax. But no, he adds extra layers of fucking mess, such as abolishing higher rate tax relief on loan interest for buy to let, or increasing tax on dividends.
That’s part of clearing up the mess. No politician can please everyone all of the time.Unfortunately some taxes are necessary,Brown fleeced me out of £50,000, when he was in power, but I hoped it was my contribution to a Trident sub,new aircraft carrier or Typhoon fighter. Anything else put me in a rage.
This is exactly the problem. Almost none of our politicians are professionally or academically qualified ( or qualified by experience ) to do anything of importance. Osborne is just one example. Cameron is another. Any cabinet minister with any background in science or the military ? I doubt it. Brown, degree in history , 2 years lecturer in politics at some college in Glasgow. I could go on but losing the will to live !
Osborne … Which plan? which strategy? … Consider the strategic goals he has set himself over the past five years. He has missed each one of them, the guys not fit for the job.
The real issue is, same as the whole shower of Tory Traitors in No10, his/their motives are ideological, and obsessively self serving, nothing to do with the good of the nation or its population … incompetence, division and sell off, can t run the economy, can t support whats left of our infrastructure, can t control immigration, spineless foreign policy, doctoring stats and figures
lie after lie after lie … the perfect analysis after their election win.
… “never underestimate the power of lies and money”
Sshhh! Quiet chaps – be careful! Ed Balls might hear and come back over the Atlantic waving his Oxford PPE Degree and pointing at the ‘E’-bit. That’s something I do not want to happen.
Actually, IIRC, Osborne did time (summer hols or part gap year?) in the family business as a bookkeeper, an eminent qualification for Chancellor. But I’m not sure he’s got much of ‘a plan’ other than to cut the deficit sometime. Trouble is he’s going to have to prise the UK’s cheque book out of Dave’s grasp, ‘cos Dave likes spending money here, there, everywhere.
To be fair to Osborne, I think, like Dave (who had Steve Hilton go AWOL) he’s lost an advisor or two in the recent past.
Up2snuff, LOL ! I mean “PPE”, that is 1 easy subject per year for 3 years. Sort of A-levels with knobs on, so to speak.
I don’t think anyone said taxes weren’t necessary. Your deflection to something that wasn’t said makes you sound like a politician. What is also necessary is fairness. And taxing buy to let on non-existent profits rather than admit the rate of tax isn’t high enough doesn’t meet the fairness test.
The reason he is often on BBC Any Questions, Question Time, Daily Politics, et al is because firstly, he hated Thatcher which makes him an immediate BBC idol and secondly, he is a lefty at heart wearing a veiled blue skin which makes him a member of their traiterous anti British club
Doyle you are very wrong, he is worse than that.
Quite right – and the same is true of that other throwback to the Ted Heath era – Ken Clarke, another ‘must have’ for any BBC programme pretending to show balance.
Yes, funny how none of the real Tories from the past ever seem to appear on the BBC. Bias ? Surely not ?
If they had Norman Tebbit on Question Time the programme would be one long howl from the UAF plants in the audience.
RJ, even now, Norman would wipe the floor with them !
Ken Clarke and Heseltine are of the stripe that think democracy is OK as long as it is tempered by the great and the good making the decisions ( and money) but letting the plebs think they are in charge .
Btw Heseltine as usual talked more about himself than answer questions directly . A mini History of Heseltine is always broadcast when he is on a show .
And he feels at home in the BBC and Question Time audience .
He also claimed today that he rebelled against his Party in the 1960s. I seem to recall – but my memory could be faulty on this – that his first rebellions were in the 1980s against the Margaret Thatcher, PM, that he surprisingly praised on the programme.
Can anyone help out on this: Heseltine as a 1960s Tory rebel?
I also recall that his big money came from his 1960s publishing empire which he didn’t mention today. I wonder why?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34684652
Shaker Aamer: What happens now?
Dominic Casciani Home affairs correspondent [him again?]
“The 5,017 days of detention were not only a real point of tension in the critical transatlantic relationship; they also soured and compromised attempts by the government to reach out to some of the hardest-to-reach Muslim communities.”
Which hardest to reach muslim communities are these exactly? The dangerous one? The plotters and extremists? Because I can’t think of any other group he could be describing. The Rotherham muzzies, sorry the victims of them horrible white, valueless underage girls, who threatened to boycott the police/not help them with their enquiries more like?
Why does our government feel the need to reach out to hard to reach muslims? The homeless are a hard to reach group. Many English people with mental health issues find themselves on the streets for a multitute of reasons. Reach out to them please!! F*ck the hard to reach muslims, they don’t want to be reached. They are fine without your interference believe me.
In fact Mr Dominic Casciani, you go out and report on the vulnerable english on the streets before worrying about comfortable muslims playing political games, and making veiled threats. You are English, aren’t you. Yes, a BBC English traitor, who doesn’t give a f*ck about anybody really.
“….to reach out to some of the hardest-to-reach* Muslim communities.”
Instead of taking it as a given the c*** should ask himself first why they are hard to reach and second how that situation has been allowed to develop.
*BBC-speak. Rough translation = ‘No-go’
Q. Shaker Aamer: what happens now?
A. Compo.
No comments enabled.
Likely wise.
I do notice there is a panel with Dom’s tweets.
Guessing any replies that don’t suit see the spirit of transparency at the BBC embraced with a good blocking.
Unlikely, I know, but should you require further evidence of the pettiness and spite which motivates the BBC, access the sport text pages – part of the overall news service – and discover that the rugby world cup result is not deemed of sufficient significance to appear among the headlines, though there is some cursory information under the rugby union section.
I expect it’s sour grapes by the BBC. Good to see BBC pariah John Inverdale back centre-stage with ITV’s rugby world cup coverage. It’s the selective “one gaffe and your out” approach that’s done for John, though I believe he is allowed back in under supervision. Good job by ITV though.
Since the implementation of “The Gender Balance” plan at the BBC, its sports coverage has become feminized. Whether it’s presenters, pundits or performers there seem to be women everywhere! Not a bad thing of course. Yet, when I hear flirting and giggling in the Test Match Special commentary box, and when I hear shrieking reporters stationed around the grounds on Saturday’s Final Score, and when I hear simpering presenters on 5Live it kinda makes me switch off.
John Inverdale, also does ITV ‘s French Open coverage. The female player, who he made the remark too, is also a pannalist, & co commentator. ITV & her have no problem, with it.{ forgot the females name, think it’s Marion B.something }.The BBC are PCBC at all times.
The BBC is also rewriting British history and removing any recognition of my heroes.
Apparently Joseph Priestley did not discover oxygen:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04bdqsz
Edith Cavell was just propaganda and not a heroine:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-34401643
Is there anything the BBC won’t do to promote their view that mine is an inferior race and must bow down before the invaders?
“Apparently Joseph Priestley did not discover oxygen:”
Could you elucidate? The link goes to an hour long programme. A timestamp of the contentious comment would help. I mean, it looks like an interesting programme to watch in full, but that makes timely conversation a bit tricky.
“Edith Cavell was just propaganda and not a heroine:”
That article doesn’t say that. It says that after her death, her execution was used as part of a propaganda drive. Which was, you must admit, true.
I’ve also been listening to the Home Front drama series on podcast. Mostly trite, melodramatic nonsense, but its gimmick of setting each episode exactly 100 years ago to the day means that the topic of Edith Cavell has come up several times. She’s never been presented as anything but heroic, and her death never more than galvanising British determination.
“Is there anything the BBC won’t do to promote their view that mine is an inferior race and must bow down before the invaders?”
One does get the feeling that whatever they do, you’ll find a way to twist it to suit your own paranoia. Try being a little less tightly wound – you may find life a little easier to bear.
Actually I’ve watched most of that programme now.
It spent an awful lot of time on Priestley’s discovery of “dephlogisticated air”, as he called it. but also talked about Scheele and Lavoisier, and noted that each had a valid claim to have “discovered” oxygen.
The presenter expressed a personal preference for Lavoisier to receive the label of “discoverer”, as he understood oxygen as well as observing it. Personally, I don’t see why there has to be a single point, a single scientist, who gets that sole label. But even if there is, the rapid progression from no knowledge to oxygen’s discovery – and Priestley’s huge place in that progression – was covered well. Certainly no need to worry.
“Edith Cavell was just propaganda and not a heroine:” I look forwards to the BBC programme which confirms that Mary Seacole was not actually a nurse, and was only one quarter black.
Edith Cavell not a heroine ????? well that’s my childhood ruined then ! she was one of the 4 houses in school – Florence Nightingale, Grace Darling, Elizabeth Fry and E.C.
Hard to reach !?
They seem to have mobile phones ans use the internet.
I bet the PPI claims companies , Our Records Show Your Accident Is Due To Compensation and The Readers Digest grand draw reach out to them .
Or can you be a tax exile but never leave these shores by being a ” hard to reach” muzzle ?
BBC – Tucked away in Manchester news
Oldham IS supporter Atiq Ahmed jailed over ‘brutal’ videos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-34683887
“He would “talk constantly” about Islamic State (IS) and watch its videos on his laptop and mobile phone. When police were called to a domestic incident at his home in Copster Hill Road, Ahmed told them: “Now you are here I am going to raise the black banner. The IS flag will fly… I will not let you live.” As he was being handcuffed, he threatened one officer, saying:
“I will kill you like an Israeli. If I get the chance I will behead one of the police.”
Jailed for … two-and-a-half years?
“Judge Michael Topolski QC said: “Many of them (video s) are deeply disturbing, truly horrifying
… and bear no relation whatsoever to the true practices and principles of the ancient venerable religion.”
A judge speaking from a position of unique ignorance. surely not.
Is it wilful, that he has not read any of the erm “practices” detailed in the Quran or Hadith? or that he has and chosen to ignore them?
The “… and bear no relation whatsoever to the true practices and principles of the ancient venerable religion.” is just the company line which is repeated ad nauseum whenever a public figure or official has to comment on Islam. I don’t think anything can be read into it anymore, and it probably does not reflect the personal views of the person saying it.
I think this particular propaganda piece is backfiring on the establishment, as in ” are you going to believe what we tell you or the evidence in front of you”. Once people in numbers start to cotton on that our officials are lying through their teeth about the nature of Islam hopefully they will start to wonder what else they are lying about.
BBCs Flagship Moral/Religious Programme,( we want your views, we want to here from you) – Sunday Morning Live changed this series
… no more public votes
Now we have selected erm “tweets” that twitterfarties are sending in, a selection screened by Tommy Sandhu
Control re established? … after hour long luvvie fests fail miserably.
Great to see Owen Jones finally get some airtime on the BBC, what an intellectual giant – more please, much more.
nogginator
That was a first class find . I remember that being broadcast. That didn’t go as per script .
Thanks Nogginator, a great link. Owen Jones spluttering and in auto-gob mode. He didn’t earn his fee that morning for al-BBC!!
I have just read the spoiler for tonight’s Strictly. Well let me just say that the producers got their way. The over/under marking and the comments of the judges allowed me to predict who they wanted out or perhaps more who they wanted in. Yes the dancing was part of the equation, but so was gender etc etc (I am avoiding more details as the programme has not yet been broadcast). Honesty at the BBC? Forget it.
I’m guessing all the BBC luvvies are still in then!
I don’t know who won yet, and don’t particularly wish to – I do hope killjoy Geoff doesn’t prove he has no class by revealing it as he did last week, the poor man. It must be so tough watching TV with him, I feel quite sorry for his family.
But back to your assertion, Deborah, I don’t see how whoever goes could be proof of dishonesty at the BBC. In fact, there doesn’t seem to be any way you could prove such an assertion, save for “I don’t like the BBC, so I’m going to accuse them of this and think that should be enough”.
I do hope that’s not your thought process, because that would be the reasoning of an idiot, and I’m sure you’re not one of those.
TR = TROLL Do have fun whilst you’re here. And you might learn something about the BBC.
I’ve replied to your other comment using exactly the same wording.
I must say, it’s quite amusing that someone who copies and pastes personal attacks thinks somebody else is a troll.
Your phrasing and mode of personal attack are are somewhat familiar….
Yes I revealed the result, but only demonstrate just how deceptive the BBC are, such a thing shouldn’t be possible, especially with its flagship program. What else do they deceive us over?
“but only demonstrate just how deceptive the BBC are, such a thing shouldn’t be possible, especially with its flagship program”
This makes no sense. I’m not talking about your grammatical slip, anyone can make mistakes and your intent was clear enough. But as I’ve said multiple times to you, there is no deception. A live programme goes out on Saturday, a recorded programme goes out on Sunday. Nobody clams the Sunday show is live – there is no deception.
Everybody else who watches can understand this. I really don’t understand why it’s such an issue for you. I know you’ve said you feel you watch the programme under duress, but that doesn’t explain your blind spot here.
“Everybody else who watches can understand this.”
Everybody? You know that for sure? Now that’s not true, friends, family and colleagues don’t realise, especially when the presenters carry on the pretence that its Sunday night, I’d also wager that a lot of OAPs don’t realise.
The problem I have with this, is that the BBC are unfairly chasing ratings using licence payers (our) cash because they can and are not answerable to market forces.
Incase Taff or others think I am TR, I am the one & only. Man of the Fantastic County of Essex. TR could be from Clapham Bus Driver, defunct man.
Come, come now Essexman you are getting a bit paranoid about Welshmen.
TR is a troll (or trolls ) who is trying to distract the contributors to this site from the real topic of Al Beeb’s Bias, you are just a ‘dyed in the wool’ Conservative who contributes to this site constructively, and in an honest manner .
“Your phrasing and mode of personal attack are are somewhat familiar….”
So don’t get sucked in by it.
Sage advice.
But it can be justified.
There was I, minding the BBC’s business, and along comes this rum cove who speaks for ‘everybody’ who is not interested in anything bar the fact that I had located something silly the BBC had devoted significant energy to, and highlighted, and who had gone off on a massive research exercise around the BBC not to find what was actually there. Then tried to get of that hook by snagging a whole new set.
For any not familiar, and genuinely here to discuss BBC inaccuracy, lack of objectively, impartiality and an unhealthy dose of nothing the least bit vital, it can be of value to see such attempts at distraction shown up for what they are.
It’s also fun on a wet Sunday, truth be told.
“this rum cove who speaks for ‘everybody’”
Nobody said that, did they?
“who is not interested in anything bar the fact that I had located something silly the BBC had devoted significant energy to, and highlighted, and who had gone off on a massive research exercise around the BBC not to find what was actually there”
Well, I’ve contributed to many other posts as well, but you think that it’s all about you if you like. And yeah, you made a comment about what the BBC’s priorities were, and I looked to see if the evidence supported you. It didn’t as much as you’d like, so you got on your high horse. Well, I say “got on”, I get the impression you’ve superglued yourself to the saddle.
“it can be of value to see such attempts at distraction shown up for what they are.”
It’s amazing how far you will delive into that fantasy would of yours to dismiss people who disagree with you. I’m sure you’d much rather just have everyone nod sagely at whatever you have decided is the truth. Sorry I didn’t oblige.
TR, given that you are keen to address substantive matters, because you are not a troll, how about addressing the post that “Thoughtful” made in response to your defence of the television license fee?
TR November 1, 2015 at 3:09 pm
“this rum cove who speaks for ‘everybody’”
Nobody said that, did they?
TR November 1, 2015 at 10:18 am
Everybody else who watches can understand this
If you say so.
It not being about you… ‘contributing’ all day long.
Your dominance and power of argument in engagement in persuasion of what is the truth during this period also duly noted.
If, however, very little so far on actual topic, disagreement or otherwise.
As I recall, I teased about a BBC news Facebook page you then arrived to claim was difficult to find and that was of no importance. Which was ironic. Especially as it was not hard to find at all and the BBC clearly felt it was worthy of elevating to a selection of ‘news’ over the weekend that trumped all else.
Lucky the mods here don’t operate as they do on a BBC HYS.
I am reliably informed that BBC staff have not been successful as regards deceiving outsiders about placing bets on who will win.
BBC on Facebook this morning maintains its usual entertainment value.
For some reason, perhaps on a tell it often enough basis to justify the investment, they are still pushing John Sweeney’s personal quest to rival the Madeline Met in spending eye-watering amounts of money on one case in hope of an awwww-factor happy ending. And, in this case, with the added benefit of a BBC propaganda coup on top.
Sadly for them, the reaction of the public could be going better.
Crikey, they are good value today.
The latest exciting ‘news’ story is about one Terrell, who by all accounts is ‘Britain’s first male basketball cheerleader’. He also ticks a few other BBC boxes too, as a plus.
Again, the public in the comments seem less enthused.
Vital.
Good for him. Neither basketball nor cheerleading are of much interest to me, so it’s not the sort of story I’d ordinarily notice, but I thought I’d have a look on the BBC site to see what egregious error they’d made in prioritising this over other news. It took me a good few clicks on the BBC news site to find the story you were talking about. In the end I had to search Google News to find a link to it at all.
I suspect the BBC isn’t placing as much importance on this story as you seem to suggest.
‘I suspect the BBC isn’t placing as much importance on this story as you seem to suggest. ‘
TR, I suspect that if the BBC are employing people to place any importance on this story at all then they are employing too many people – are you one of them? Otherwise, given your disinterest in basketball and cheerleading, what’s your interest in commenting?
No, I don’t work for the BBC.
I commented because I read Guest Who’s comment, looked to see what news report he was talking about, and noticed how difficult it was to locate.
Are there other hoops I need to jump through to be able to comment? Any obstacles you feel you need to place in my way? That’s not really the behaviour of a reasonable gentleman, is it?
TR = TROLL Do have fun whilst you’re here. And you might learn something about the BBC.
Troll? For disputing somebody else’s version of events?
Do you not think that by misusing a word like that, you devalue its proper usage?
Or maybe you’re so afraid of different views that you have to resort to name-calling. Either way, you’re behaving far more like a troll, my friend. Be a little less abrasive, and you may find your enjoyment of intelligent discussion increases as your blood pressure decreases.
‘Troll? For disputing somebody else’s version of events?’
TR, I hesitate to engage with you because I believe you are a troll – but here goes – at least three times you contradict observations of others (which is fair enough) but three times you can’t resist some sort of ‘people like you’ parting shot. So, cards on the table, how much would you like people like us to pay in BBC Licence Fee?
Very well, even though it’s off topic and succumbing to someone who clearly feels he has the right to impose discussions on other people. Feeling inadequate in the real world, by any chance? That’s the usual reason why people become jerks online…
I’m happy with the current value of the licence fee, but not happy with the fee as a mechanism for payment. However, nobody seems to have come up with a viable alternative that allows for universality of broadcasting with zero interference from politicians. Right now, the licence fee is the least worst of several unacceptable options, and I would like part of the BBC’s charter review to place a compulsion upon them to develop an alternative funding structure for when the charter is further renewed in 2026.
Bit touchy about being asked where it is exactly you are coming from in debate?
‘….Feeling inadequate in the real world, by any chance? That’s the usual reason why people become jerks online…’
QED, TR you are a troll. Over and out from me forever. What was your phrase again….? ‘Gentlemanly’ something or other….
“QED, TR you are a troll. Over and out from me forever.”
Fine, don’t believe me when I say you’re behaving like a jerk. That’s your right, of course; it was advice freely offered, but I won’t take offence if it’s not accepted. Still, I look forward to never being called a troll by you again, as you’re out “forever”.
“you’re so afraid of different views that you have to resort to name-calling.”
Presumably you aware of how you write. Have you heard of the term “projection”?
Why do you keep returning to this site under different names? You say the same things in the same style (like most of us) and so are easy to recognize, so why do you change your name each time?
“Presumably you aware of how you write. Have you heard of the term “projection”?”
Yes, it’s a phrase people fall back on when they can’t cope with people calling them out by using the same techniques they use themselves. Like people who live in glass houses who complain when people throw the stones they’ve lobbed back at them… oh no, wait, that would literally be projection. But you get the idea.
“Why do you keep returning to this site under different names?”
Are you referring to when “taffman” accused me of being “Man on Clapham Omnibus”? He was so proud of his detective work there, I didn’t have the heart to correct him.
“Are you referring to when “taffman” accused me of being “Man on Clapham Omnibus”?
Here is a straightforward question for you. Have you posted on this site before under a different name?
“Here is a straightforward question for you. Have you posted on this site before under a different name?”
Yes, a fair while ago, I must admit. Have been trying to give people a chance to prove that this can be a place for straightforward discussion, but its regulars seem more intent on labelling any and all dissent as “trolling” in order to never actually have to admit that other people’s views may be valid.
Here’s a question for you: How many names have you used when posting to Biased BBC?
Another: Have you ever posted under multiple names on the same thread in order to make it look like people agree with you? I haven’t, but I know some people have – are you one of them?
And a third question, if you’d be so kind: Why do you and others revert to calling people trolls when they disagree with you? Why are you so afraid of different opinions that you have to come up with disparaging labels in order to avoid them?
Treat that last one as the same question split into two sentences, if you like.
“Right now, the licence fee is the least worst of several unacceptable options”
So you’re quite comfortable with around 200 000 of the poorest people in society being criminalised simply for not being able to pay for this behemoth?
Quite happy that the BBC is now accounting for 70% of news output in the UK?
Quite happy that the whole rotten edifice is completely unaccountable, and that there is no adequate way to complain about it?
“I’m happy with the current value of the licence fee”
I could here go into the budgets of several TV companies around the world and the quality of their output, but lets just look at HBO which has produced some amazingly successful shows with around 10% of the budget of the BBC, and without criminal compulsion to fund it.
Even ITV has produced the spectacularly successful series ‘Downton Abbey’ which the BBC clearly HATES with a passion, and leftie ‘commedians’ sneer at it on the BBC.
Where is the massively successful BBC box setted series? Where are the dramas people fondly remember and yearn to see repeated, because all I see are the past glories, carefully vetted for PC compliance, like Dads Army, & only fools and horses (which they didn’t want to make because it wasn’t left wing enough). No repeats of ‘It ain’t half hot mum’, or ‘Love thy Neighbour’ which don’t meet their ridiculous left wing propaganda agenda.
Then there’s the compulsion element. Why am I forced to pay for something I don’t agree with and don’t watch simply so I can watch other channels?
You see good value only because others are forced to pay to subsidise it for you. Without the forced contribution you might be paying over £250 pa – not such good value then!
The over ambitious management trying to squeeze out all competition, and be all things to all men have spread themselves too thin to be able to produce anything of quality. The licence fee should be quartered, free output halved, and a subscription service started. I doubt this will make any money at all as no one will pay for a constant stream of left wing propaganda.
[“Here is a straightforward question for you. Have you posted on this site before under a different name?”]
“Yes, a fair while ago, I must admit.”
Thank you for admitting that, as I say you (as we all do) tend to say the same things in the same way over and over again.
“How many names have you used when posting to Biased BBC?”
Just the one.
“Another: Have you ever posted under multiple names on the same thread in order to make it look like people agree with you?”
No.
“Have been trying to give people a chance to prove that this can be a place for straightforward discussion”
Nobody reading your posts would get that impression.
“its regulars seem more intent on labelling any and all dissent as “trolling” in order to never actually have to admit that other people’s views may be valid.”
Now that is your style! Sanctimonious, disingenuous, and projecting your own bigotry.
“Why do you and others revert to calling people trolls when they disagree with you? Why are you so afraid of different opinions that you have to come up with disparaging labels in order to avoid them?”
I think that David Brims is a racist, but I would not say that he is afraid of different opinions, or would even reject the label of being a racist, I think you are confusing fear with contempt.
TR, the best option for you would be to vote here …………………..
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
That would help solve all your problems and save you and the rest of us a bit of money at the same time.
Thoughtful: “So you’re quite comfortable with around 200 000 of the poorest people in society being criminalised simply for not being able to pay for this behemoth?”
No, and I never said anything approaching that. Nobody has so far actually suggested better payments systems that cover the universality aspect as well as ensuring complete independence from government, and that don’t throw up their own faults.
And quite frankly, if you’re going to start your whole screed by putting words in someone’s mouth, you’re less likely for people to take the rest of your comments seriously, or want to discuss anything at all with you.
“Nobody has so far actually suggested better payments systems”
Why should I have to pay for the BBC just because you like it? If you like it you pay for it.
If 50% of the population like the BBC then let the 50% who like it pay for it. If you read The Guardian and get your jollies from hearing people denounce Rupert Murdoch and Daily Mail readers that is your choice.
Wild, name calling is the most graceless act of admitting you’ve lost the argument.
‘Nobody has so far actually suggested better payments systems that cover the universality aspect as well as ensuring complete independence from government’
At risk of your claim you never said it, at least that ‘Nobody’ is a neat balance from ‘Everyone’.
The payment system of a voluntary subscription has been one supported by many, however.
It certainly addresses independence, as those who want it can pay for it and be duly served by those who share their views on news and entertainment. Seems fair.
As to the ‘universality aspect’, this seems more a vague term to try and get around the current of notion of getting others to pay for what you and fellow travellers want based on ancient history, outdated tradition and a massive sense of entitlement only pension pots of £6,000,000 and rising can engender.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourbeeb/sylvia-harvey/digital-dreams-and-open-skies-universal-service-and-bbc
Not keen, personally. Her article really inspired the public to discuss the issue, didn’t it?
David Brims,
I was not intending it to be an insult. It all depends how you define racism of course, but from reading your posts I assumed that you a racist. By this I did not mean that you like to go around in a Klu Klux Klan outfit. Most humans are racist aren’t they to one degree or another. I am not accusing you of a thought crime. If by racism is meant discriminating against people on no grounds other than their race (as opposed to making factual assumptions however right or wrong about different races) then if you reject being called a racist I withdraw the description.
As regards TR saying “No, I don’t work for the BBC” It seems that TR could be a troll employed by Capita at Darlington. It seems that the trolls work at the Licensing office in Darlington rather than with the monitoring people in the Belfast office of BBC Audience Services. Otherwise I could find out who it was.
“Nobody has so far actually suggested better payments systems” = Voluntary Subscription
“that cover the universality aspect” = BBC to be told to sack all those Labour party place Men, and replace them with people with real experience with operating a Media service, such as Richard Desmond
“as well as ensuring complete independence from government” = The Privy Council will free the BBC from all future Charter obligations, and the Government will set the BBC free by repealing the “Communications Act 2003”
‘looked to see what news report he was talking about, and noticed how difficult it was to locate’
The extent of BBC News on Facebook this weekend:
Can I be buried next to my Jewish husband?
An illegal rave in London ends in clashes with police
Sonny Bill Williams: All Black gifts winner’s medal to young fan
Almost six million workers in the UK are paid less than the living wage, a study by KPMG suggests (I bet that was a no brainer, BBC sources close to me suggest)
Egypt says Islamic State militants weren’t responsible for the flight KGL9268 crash
The victory viewed from either side of the Tasman Sea #RWC2015
China: Guangzhou warns zombies to stay off metro
“We got the job done.” #RWC2015
Meet the zombies in the “scariest haunted house in America” #HappyHalloween
Cuba’s ration book has provided basics to residents since 1959.
Almost 2,000 Vodafone customers ‘open to fraud’
Sinai plane crash: No survivors on Russian airliner KGL9268
1987. 2011. 2015. #RWC2015
Two major airlines – Lufthansa and Air France – have suspended flights over the area until there is clarity about the cause of the crash
Happy Halloween – you (and your pets) have been busy http://bbc.in/1KMiesk
The people preparing for the end of the world
Obit – He appeared in the hit sitcom as the owner of Arnold’s Drive-in, where the main characters would gather
Happy birthday Bohemian Rhapsody! 40 today
Instead of adulthood, they’re entering “wait hood” (image choice garnering comment there)
Sinai plane crash: No survivors on Russian airliner KGL9268
Bat species discovered at Natural History Museum after 30 years (panned in comments for the Halloween obsession)
#Halloween weather for the UK
Sinai plane crash: No survivors on Russian airliner KGL9268
Love this! Qantas and Air New Zealand in rugby World Cup final wager
Bucharest nightclub fire leaves Romania stunned
Chile seizes erotic version of Little Red Riding Hood
Pride, goodbyes, and pure emotion in the #RWC2015
Turkey goes to the polls on Sunday – for the second time in five months.
US police officer was fired for throwing a student across a classroom but what do other countries do for school ‘security’?
Will you miss Facebook’s ‘other’ inbox?
and….
Terrell Lawrence: British basketball’s first male cheerleader
Learn more: bbc.in/1kY0Ago
No commentary, but Terrell does seem to have captured some hearts. It is to be hoped this coverage will persuade them to let him attend away games, and a whole new BBC sports squad can be created to film it.
Top comment: Kelly Nelson Guess I didn’t know British sports had cheerleaders…or much basketball…learned 2 new things.
There are some other funny ones.
So a fair bit on the plane crash, Rugby… a lot on Halloween… and our Tel.
If that is the full extent of coverage of the nation’s broadcaster, I would not be the least bit surprised, but I do ‘suspect’ a little selection did creep in too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/search?q=cheerleader
Tricky? If you say so.
You are, again, welcome.
Isn’t basketball Dwarfist and should thus be excluded from any mention on the BBC except for those campaigning to have ALL baskets lowered to 5ft 4?
Your suspicions on what ‘seems’ to you are duly noted, TR, along with your appearance, tone, focus and volume of of disgorge. Even the immediate double tick approval.
You could try BBC Facebook, which is where the BBC seems to prioritise its dissemination of news. Which is what I was talking about. Along with the comments where interactivity is allowed. I can see how this may be an area you are less keen on.
This was all mentioned above. Guess your ‘search’ didn’t extend as far as actually reading what you decided to weigh in upon. Odd given the effort expended elsewhere.
But fair comment on the value of the BBC search function at not finding anything.
A career as a market rate editor clearly beckons.
“You could try BBC Facebook, which is where the BBC seems to prioritise its dissemination of news.”
Silly me, I thought the BBC news site was its priority. After all, that’s the site where they can prioritise their articles, Facebook only publishing links and other posts in chronological order. Therefore, it’s a bit tricky to distinguish what they are truly prioritising, as the only priority on FB is based solely on time.
What you think again duly noted, along with the immediate double tick.
I had not realised that everything the BBC creates everywhere ends up on Facebook. It always looks like editorial integrity does display its hand a wee bit in what is and is not ‘news’ ((c) A. Newsoom Tealady)
Interesting premise that what large numbers of BBC staff are paid to produce and share across its broadcast estate is too trivial to comment upon.
Plus rather damning what the satirical output of the BBC can locate as targets.
That will go down well in the canteen over coffee.
Silly you indeed. Bless.
Off now. I do hope you will still be here later. I ‘suspect’ you may be.
“along with the immediate double tick.”
Are you seriously ascribing some sort of attribute to how many people click those thumb things? Wow. Hadn’t realised people took them so seriously.
“Plus rather damning what the satirical output of the BBC can locate as targets.
That will go down well in the canteen over coffee.”
I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say here. Could you rephrase in language the rest of us can understand? It does seem as if you’ve got a string of catchphrases which make sense in your own head, but which you’ve neglected to explain to the rest of us. Thank you.
‘Are you seriously ascribing some sort of attribute to how many people click those thumb things? Wow. Hadn’t realised people took them so seriously.’
I take very little seriously, and you offer excellent opportunity not to do so. However, your doubly seriously question may be better directed at the BBC staff who created the BBC HYS threat ratings, up and down, and clearly are more than keen on them. Do share how you get on with that.
“I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say here’
Oo, as a now admitted old friend and not one of those ‘I just came here to bathe in BBC bias in its purest form, but all I could find was white homophobic male racists and I’m so disgusted I am off… again’ types, I really think you do. However, in case not…
‘Could you rephrase in language the rest of us can understand?”
Sadly, not, as articulating anything at a level you appear to operate in is one I feel unable to stoop to.
“It does seem as if you’ve got a string of catchphrases which make sense in your own head, but which you’ve neglected to explain to the rest of us.’
This ‘us’ of whom you speak, so often, and indeed claim to speak for… would it be the nation by chance?
‘Thank you’
You are, as always, most welcome.
“Sadly, not, as articulating anything at a level you appear to operate in is one I feel unable to stoop to.”
I think we’re able to agree that you’re unable to articulate yourself clearly, even if we disagree on the reasons.
‘I think we’re able to agree…
Again with that presumptive ‘we’? Tsk.
See you are still on station.
I, sadly, must attend Sunday lunch and then family duties.
Laters…
“Again with that presumptive ‘we’? Tsk.”.
By we, I meant you and I. As in you said you were unable to articulate something clearly, and I agreed with you.
Apologies if the simple matter of a correctly used personal pronoun caused you any difficulty.
‘By we, I meant you and I’
Ah, there you may be right*. I doubt anyone else is bothered any more.
However, here I am, dipping in as you stay here all day on what seems a very long duty roster.
*Sorry, correction. I don’t agree either. I know you don’t like that unless it is you doing it, so no difficulty at all.
Making it just you. I think you are best left to your own devices now. Everyone seems to have drifted away. Now, what kind of poster seeks to effect that rather than addressing the topics?
It’s not as if anyone who loves the BBC will be shocked
BBC tv newspaper round up this morning and the viewer is asked to welcome guest reviewer Rev Sally Hitchener
Who she, one asks? And, what, no Sundey service to do?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10968977/Rev-Sally-Hitchiner-is-accidentally-outed-on-live-show.html
‘Sally Hitchiner has a natty dress sense and easy-going charm that has long made her a popular commentator on current affairs programmes’
In other words she’s a flavour of the month box-ticking acceptable face of leftism. Blimey, I’m old enough to remember when Camila Batmanandrobin was still some sort of go-to tv guru.
So, pray (in a non-sectarian ecumenical – or should that be in an ecuwimminical sense) do tell us what newspaper stories have caught your discerning eye, Rev?
“Women in trades unions…. it’s like the 1980s but instead of the miners it’s the midwives…”
I’m none too sure what effect the withdrawal of their labour would have on the nation’s…. labour…. but I have a feeling productivity in that area has been so high lately that even if we lost some growth to our european competitors in that area we’d cope well enough. I joke of course, without midwives nature would still take its course.
Next up, Sally wants us to forget 5th November – “A very controversial” festival (apparently) and have Halloween “surplant” it.
I’m actually pleased the BBC has given voice to this idea in an explicit way at last because I’ve been convinced that this replacement has been policy for some time now. Sally is here to tell it like the BBC wants it: “If we can try and twist it slightly” There you are BBC bods… there’s your mission statement…. go out and twist!
So to the Living Wage, and if anyone out there still wants to believe that lefties can do economics, you better look away now because Rev Sally drops an almighty clanger.
“If we want people to have a living wage we have to get used to paying more in the shops…. we have to get used to paying more for our eggs and milk” – And the recipiants of the living wage… will they get used to the higher prices too? Or does Sally – “anyone who loves me won’t be shocked” – Hitchener for a moment believe she and her elitist pals are indeed on a higher plane than the hoi polloi and that the great unwashed shop in a different economy?
I don’t know why some people , very often on the liberal/left and BBC , want an end to cheap energy , food and clothes . As though the working class should expend nearly every penny of their wages on those items with a few farthings left over for a sup of ale up at pub .
Nibor, the liberal/left/BBC don’t give a damn about ordinary working people. It is all a charade !
If the working class are impoverished they’re more likely to join a trades union and vote labour. If they are aspirational they won’t, so their faces have to be ground in the mud by low wages, high taxes and poor education. And of course low wages and high prices will leave them dependent on Tax Credits and lock them in as a part of Gordon Brown’s client state.
BBC’s job done.
Next up, Sally wants us to forget 5th November – “A very controversial” festival (apparently) and have Halloween “surplant” it.
You can dislike Bonfire Night for any number of reasons but ‘controversial’?
I suspect it’s a tad too heavy on the British tradition for our Sally and like anything else to do with our culture needs to be banned and, as she suggests, ‘surplanted’.
I get a whiff of thin end of the wedge type zealotry here so I wonder what could be next on her list.
Al Beeb attempting to ‘air brush’ British history again ?
I think we should celebrate Bastille Day. My late father , who hated the BBC even more than me, suggested this about 20 years ago !
BBC Radio 4 Sunday news programme at 9am wildly out of step with its audience as usual. All – yes ALL – three news commenter guests were pro the Gitmo Git and unworried about him fleecing us all for £1 million or so. That simply cannot be a national view – it seems to me the opposite of the majority view.
Plus a jolly item on the BBC’s latest obsession – transgender folk. Do we really have to be having this on Sunday morning ? Yuk would be the attitude around most breakfast tables.
As Enoch might have said-those who God hates…He first makes them mad-literally mad.
He was wrong in thinking that Matthew wrote the earliest Gospel-even though his scholarship torches anybody elses in the round-but he was right in virtually everything else.
Oh? Why was he wrong about Matthew?
Mark was probably the earliest canonical gospel. Matthew (& Luke) draw some information from Mark, some from the lost ‘Q’ source, and some from elsewhere. John was a bit later than all of them and quite a bit different.
Thanks – of course, I’d forgotten all that stuff – how odd of him to get something so well accepted in NT scholarship wrong?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news
The BBC have pinned their hopes on the non-involvement of IS in the downing of the Russian Airbus over Egypt. Flight MH17 was downed by a missile over Ukraine not so long ago. Is is beyond the means of these terrorists to acquire such weapons, given their backers? Is it so unpalatable to the BBC that muslims could do be responsible for this latest loss of life that they dismiss it out of hand?. Do they expect us to believe that there are no surface to air missiles in the whole of the Middle East that IS can procure? In my view, until proven otherwise, the idea is emminently feasible. Why do the BBC latch on to an Egyptian who couldn’t run a bath, let alone a country, and take his word as the truth? Could it be that even to suggest muslim terrorist involvement goes against the BBC’s pro-muslim charter?
Seismic, the BBCwill be hoping it was Israel !!
If Israel hadn’t returned the Sinai to Egypt, the BBC would be moving heaven and earth to try to blame the Israelis for that crash.
TrueToo, They probably will still try and blame the Israelis !
From BBC (NOT) News FaceBook (TM… R):
Gareth Wolstenholme it was either the israeli secret intelligence service ( isis ), or an on board bomb.
Got a lot of ‘likes’ so far too.
And a few comments too. Bet the BBC mods are wishing they could ‘deal’ with them.
From the extent to which the debris is apparently spread across the desert, the likelihood of a ‘mechanical failure’ seems rather…well, unlikely.
I think the idea that a SAM brought this plane down is unlikely. The missile which brought down the airliner over Ukraine is the size of a telegraph pole, and is fired from a vehicle like a tank. The IS ragamuffins in Sinai do not have weapons like that. However, a bomb placed in the cargo hold at the airport at Sharm el Sheik is much more likely. The fact that this was a Russian plane is unlikely to have been a coincidence. This may well proved to have been an atrocity similar to Lockerbie.
IMO if terrorism, more likely an onboard device, I have read that security is not what it should be @ Sharm el Sheikh.
As far as the video claim goes, if not fake could it not be the case that the device was detonated from the ground whilst someone stood by to take the footage?
this might be interesting:
The Egyptian Prime Minister is saying that analysis of the black box data would show that the aircraft suffered ‘technical difficulties’ It’s remarkable that he knows what the black boxes contain before they have been analysed. He’s in the wrong job.
Hahahah like it they’ve got a list to use for these type of events they are all gutted they can’t use No.1 It was Putin.
Here’s the best thing about America:
Just been listening to the GOP debate hosted by moderators from CNBC. Senator Ted Cruz blasted them for their biased questions, contrasting them with the “fawning” questions they’d put to the Democrats.
Made my day, just after 30 minutes in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHUmhGs1b7A
Would love to see the BBC publicly blasted for their ‘liberal’ bias with that degree of passion.
“Would love to see the BBC publicly blasted for their ‘liberal’ bias with that degree of passion.”
To be fair people point out the Leftist bias of the BBC as regularly as the BBC sneers at Daily Mail readers, the key difference being that people who buy the Daily Mail do so of their free choice, whereas the BBC is paid for by a compulsory tax.
Ta for posting this up tootrue-and for pointing me to the Ted Cruz bit.
He deserves great credit for this-and we really could do with the BBC getting such public calling-out over its residual lazy unthinking reflex bias.
Yet to see anyone on the British Right though who would do it so openly and clearly-and the audience response to his views prove how popular such honest facing down of the liberal liars in the media, proves to be.
There is more media competition in the USA. Because of its tax funded dominance any writer or actor or television journalist in the UK who criticizes the BBC is committing career suicide. This is also true to some extent of politicians. The BBC are a cancer in our democratic society.
Thanks for posting that TT.
Dream ticket – Trump for president, Cruz for vice-president.
Geoff et al,
this is still an open ended story. that part of the world is not renowned for adverse weather at that altitude. Modern aircraft do not fall out of the sky for no reason. The fact that the Egyptian PM has dismisssed terrorism out of hand and that the Russian govt is remarkably quiet thus far on everything bar the grief to me means there is more to come.
Nigel Farage is on LBC tonight. 10pm till 1am they gave him a show pass the message.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34691954
BBC – “The UK’s last Guantanamo Bay detainee Shaker Aamer wants an apology from the US government, his lawyer has said.
Clive Stafford Smith told the BBC he would sue the US for compensation”
“Mr Aamer is believed to be in line to receive compensation from the UK government after deals were made with previous detainees. Prime Minister David Cameron has already asked the government’s Intelligence and Security Committee to investigate claims of UK complicity in rendition and torture at Guantanamo Bay. Its new chair, Dominic Grieve QC has said he wants to hold a substantial inquiry, describing it as his longer-term priority.”
UK s Detainee? he s been resident of Saud for 25 years! You do have to wonder why a Saudi citizen, arrested in Afghanistan, held by the Americans, in Cuba also becomes a “British problem” and not a Saudi one?
The man who took his pregnant wife and 3 young kids from safety of UK to live under the Taliban, and felt he needed a false Belgian passport to do his erm “charidee” work in Afghanistan in 2001.
Didn t Al BBC and CAGE fave M Begg say he was a recruiter for Al Quaida?
…and apparently used a forged Belgian passport to enter Pakistan. I hope I’ve got that correct – at any rate the Aamar person used a forged Belgian passport somewhere in his murky career. You are right – the problem is not ours. And neither was the Ethiopian Mozzam Begg our problem – but he got a cool £1m. We are truly ruled by madmen.
Damn. The BBC have managed to miss another development of Islamists enriching our culture. How are they so busy?
The Sunday Times reports that Prison studies since 2011, home office spokesmen and prison officials are concerned by Islamists extracting a tax from non muslims whilst locked away in HM prisons. This tax is called jizya and is paid in Islamist states by the unbelievers to the Muslim overlords.
No doubt the BBC hopes we will all be paying this jizya tax sooner rather than later so why bother considering it to be news?
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/Crime/article1627291.ece
(paywalled)
Exactly. Why are these ‘British’ problems? Why do we have to chase these ‘British’ terrorists or Jihadis as the BBC prefer to call them when they go to Syria to live out their terrorist dreams? Let them go, I will even chip in for their flights. We spend enough on resources inside the UK fighting these terrorists, are we now to expand this to include Syria?
I seem to remember one family actually blamed the police because some of their familiy had gone to Syria to fight. I laughed so much my ribs cracked.
As an aside, I do remember the BBC reporter on the Turkish border with Syria actually showing the viewers which was the best place to cross, hahahaha, you couldn’t make this shit up.
A couple of weeks ago I complained that the panel of three journalists on the Sunday Politics had two members from the Guardian. I assumed , stupidly of course, that this was a one off and would not be repeated , after all there are plenty of newspapers and magazines to choose journalists from. Imagine my horror when I tuned in and found that the BBC had once again chosen the same two Guardianistas. Admittedly it is All Souls day just after Halloween and one of the members was Polly Toynbee, but I remind the BBC that ITV got into trouble for showing Dr J and Mr H before the watershed . Perhaps Polly would be best confined to Newnight which happens to be edited by another ex Guardinista. They do keep cropping up don’t they!
Seriously though isn’t it about time that the BBC had panels including plenty of folk from the Sun , Mail , Express etc. Why so many from the Guardian, after all even the BBC must recognise that the Guardian is not representative of the views of the British people.
On Dateline London they used to alternate been a left leaning British journalist and a right leaning British journalist (with a [very] occasional right of centre foreign journalist) on the panel each week, but these days they don’t even pretend to be politically balanced. Janet Daly once every few weeks balances out (in their eyes) the tank loads of Leftist crap they ship each week. The BBC is like a telephone conversation where you only hear one side of an argument.
The tax funded dominance of the BBC subverts our democracy – no wonder they ignored the attempt by the Liberal Democrats and the Labour Party to fiddle the constituency boundaries by refusing to update them in line with population changes. No wonder they love it when Labour and Liberal Democrat appointed peers override the will of the Commons.
The BBC are a cancer in our national life. They don’t even offer a begging bowl, they just take what they think they deserve.
Well, yes… but it represents the views of those British people whose views matter. That’s how the BBC types see it. In their perfect world, Daily Mail readers wouldn’t have a vote at all.
You can pick any colour you want, just so long as it is (public sector middle class) red. That is what their anti-English “rainbow society” amounts to – certificates of correct thinking issued by the likes of Yasmin Alibhai-Brown.
New from the BBC TV Licensing Blog this week:
– TV Licensing Summons Received Despite Inconsistencies and Language Barrier.
– Reader Letter: Allowing TV Licensing Access to Your Property.
Just watched “Points of View” . What a sop to the viewer. All trivial points , nothing about bias.
“Hottest UK November day recorded in mid Wales” bellows the BBC’s ‘News’ website among its headline stories.
Can anyone think of a reason why the Corporation might think is quite so important? I am quite puzzled….
Oh, but wait…
To be fair to them they did say:
The record temperature had been caused by the type of air currently being experienced, with “mild southerlies and lots of humid air”.
An El Nino year means all bets are off in terms of climate. The fact that a Modoki hasn’t formed should give us a mild time, until it does. If it does it could mean that January February are cold if not then it’s a mild winter. We won’t really know until the start of December though.
Met office forecasts a freezing cold winter but dry in the main :
Friday, October 30, 2015, 16:01 GMT –
The Met Office said it sees an increased chance of milder and wetter-than-usual conditions and a decreased chance of colder and drier conditions for the UK this winter.
Given that the Met Office forecasts usual spectacularly the opposite of what actually happens that is !
Now, back to the nationally trusted broadcaster and its activities:
http://bbcwatch.org/2015/11/01/bbc-explains-why-it-cant-always-report-history-accurately/
‘Common sense would of course dictate that if indeed “there isn’t the time or resources available to cover every current or historical aspect of a conflict”, then it would be prudent to avoid featuring sloppy and inaccurate accounts which mislead the BBC’s “domestic audience” about its own (and others’) history so prominently in BBC reports.’
Ah, but that would make the BBC so much less ‘vital’ and ‘unique’, ‘not news’ ((c) A. Newsroom Tealady) -wise.
Accuracy is so last Charter requirement.
Click like if you’re sick, tired and utterly disgusted with the far-Left BBC’s pro-Islamic extremist grovelling. Their revolting pro-refugee bias is the most loathsome I ever did see. I would like to know how many ‘refugees’ these self-righteous, middle class prats are taking into their posh suburban homes; zero is the f***king answer. They’re all a bunch of sanctimonious tossers who read the Guardian whilst sipping herbal tea.
One of the very many problems with the BBC is that it is far too London centric. They all know when pontificating from Islington or Hampstead that NO migrants / Asylum seekers are going to be housed in the South East, they’re all going to other places in the UK, places which don’t and people who simply don’t matter to them.
It’s not going to affect their comfortable lives, so it’s easy when it’s costing you nothing to call for things which aren’t going to affect you.
BBC News should be moved to Luton or some such place which will be affected by their insanity, then we might notice a change.
You’re right and it’s a problem compounded by the fact that the people who make and appear in BBC programmes not only don’t live in areas suffering from high immigration but they don’t associate with anyone else who does, either. Not for nothing is the media world referred to as a goldfish bowl!
Remember when they moved part of the bbc to Manchester ? you’d think they’d been asked to go on an Arctic convoy to Russia.
David, LOL !
At 6pm on BBC TV there was a lengthy advert, sorry public announcement, as how to pay the Licence Fee weekly.
There were about fifty actors involved in varied settings. Half were white and the other half….you’ve guessed it…black!!
1. Why have half black? It’s not representative. But it embraces the BBC’s ideal Left wing world of engaged multi-culti, enrichment, diversity and other patronising terminology.
2. What did it cost the Licence Payer? How many units of Licence fees were used? Are we entitled to know? And how many times will it be repeated with repeat fees? Does the BBC care? At a time when the police can’t afford to police Remembrance Sunday, why are we paying for this garbage without any choice?
..
Here is a free advert for TR to take note of ………………………………
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
BBC News – Germany seeks to slow migrant flow
Hmm, Thought there were no adverts on the BBC? – Migrants, get bad weather discounts
Meanwhile in Merkel s utopia
German intelligence :
Germany’s Muslim population to quadruple in the next five years … 20 million Muslims by 2020
We’re importing Islamic extremism, antisemitism, ethnic conflict … we can’t deal with this or the reaction to it.
https://t.co/CmLeP6NXyT
As Thilo Sarrazin, the author of “Deutscland schafft sich ab” points out recently, the Islamists in Germany are rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of hundreds of thousands of additional Muslims to convert to their cause. According to Sarrazin, going on past German government figures, 80% of Muslim immigrants remain unintegrated into the labour market. This means a lot of disgruntled Muslims who the Bearded Ones will win over with their classic “charity” works. Sky News recently showed Beards from Bolton doing “charity” work on Lesbos a la Shaker. Still some media commentators in Germany won’t accept that any limit can be reached. One even opined that because Europe has won the Nobel Peace Prize (news to me) no “refugee” should be turned away as this would be a “betrayal of our Europe values”. Supposedly “fortress Europe” is the ultimate evil and talk of fences is avoided by the euphemism “doors with side extensions”. Any hint that the invasion should stopped with anything as crude as a fence has to be avoided at all costs. Truly beyond belief.
Jon Gaunt being a veteran of the BBC and has appeared on many discussions, made the point today that anyone turning up to appear on TV at this time of the year is offered a poppy to wear. Make note of those over the next week not wearing one….
The BBC has hammered the story of Jess Philips, the Labour MP who finds male suicide laugh out loud funny.
She had a Newsnight spot devoted totally to allow her to put over her story of how she had rape threats on twitter. The story ballooned until it filled the news spots.
But there is a slight problem. There were no threats, rape or otherwise, posted on Twitter. She actually cut and pasted unpleasant remarks about herself from two comments she uncovered on an unknown web site called Voat. The website had actually hidden the distasteful comments.
Jess Phillips then copied them on her own twitter feed before squealing about how terrible men are. I kid ye not. The BBC apparently didn’t have time to check her anti male story. One suspects that, like the hounding of Sir Tim Hunt, the BBC has no appetite to correct a negative view of men being pushed forward by a woman for whom truth is a distant memory.
Philip Davies the man about whom she appears to have lied is using twitter for what (I am told) it is supposed to be used for, ie shedding light on a situation. He is concerned about how the BBC has been so one sided in this matter and failed to contact him about what took place outside Ms Philips imagination.
The BBC didn’t show the clip of Jess Philips laughing at men’s problems nor did it reflect what the appalling lady actually did. Rather the BBC presented her case without any challenge whatsoever.
Disgraceful. When will it end?
https://hequal.wordpress.com/2015/11/01/bbc-bias-and-the-truth-about-jess-phillips-sexism-against-men-and-the-so-called-threats/
Rejoice all Kippers , your leader is om LBC now to 1 am.
And where’s your glorious Leader?
Here
http://order-order.com/2015/11/02/inside-daves-new-club/
Or in Istanbul negotiating the import of 75 million more moslems?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11283924/David-Cameron-I-still-want-Turkey-to-join-EU-despite-migrant-fears.html
Still as long as it doesn’t put tuppence on the rates that’s all right isn’t it .
Excellent post! The BBC caught bang to rights again trumpeting two of its favourite causes – loonie feminism and the Labour party.
The threading is broken again – my reply was to scribblingscribe – not Cameron’s fanboi.
I don’t kinow that it is broken threading. It’s just that Essexman got his reply in first, probably while you were typing, making it look like your reply went to the wrong person, when in fact you’re the second reply.
Thanks for the info on Jess Phillips. I didn’t realise who she was, and only caught the tail end of her on the Andrew Marr show. With all the transgenders in the news recently, and listening her go on about the troll twitters, I seriously thought she was one herself. Apologies to Ms Phillips if she reads this site.
Did Iain 33 ever get a reply?
Or did Ian Katz run out of time, or space, or integrity?
Again.
The bbc and the rest of the commie shit media probably think that we don’t care that 244 Russians were shots out of the sky by muslims but I for one do care and have a feeling of rage that these innocent LP lives have been taken by satan worshippers with little acknowledgment by the so called civilised world.
Sex attacker at large in S.London so why doesnt the BBC issue a description?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/clapham-sex-attacks-police-cctv-6729337
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/clapham-sex-attacks-sickening-new-6747211
“Mediterraean or Middle Eastern appearance”.
Were he of ethnic Briih appearance it would be stated at every opportunity.
It would be interesting to have an educated opinion from TR on this .
Over to you TR ………………………?
The BBC website states “In each case the victims were white women in their 20s and 30s and the suspect was described as having a Mediterranean or Middle-Eastern appearance with dark hair.” The second photograph in the article states “…the victim was again a young white woman”. The references to white women were added yesterday but the earliest version of the report did give the description of the suspect. In fairness it is difficult to see where the bias is in this case. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-34694478
Up above someone (taffman maybe ?) suggested a Trump/Cruz ticket for the Republican Presidency.
Trump has broken things wide open, has so far stuffed the top-down Republican establishment (shades of the Tories) and forced debate on the real issues that concern most Americans.
But I would prefer Ted Cruz. Here he is on climate change :
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/10/30/ted_cruz_climate_change_is_not_science_it_is_a_religion.html
I suspect that Trump would be flummoxed if interviewed on Global Warmism by that fraud Harrabin or his amateur BBC buddies. But Cruz would smack it right back – just like he did in the CNBC debate. He is a highly skilled advocate, in command of his facts. The Donald is great, he has already done the US electorate a great service. But Trump is better – and his campaign is now gathering steam.
“The essence of the scientific method is to make a hypothesis and then look for evidence to disprove it”
So he learned that from his parents, and so did Piers Corbyn, but not his dim witted little brother, and leader of the Labour party.
The computer models have the Arrhenius formula at their core. This formula can be used without the need of a computer. All that is needed to disprove the hypothesis at the core of this global scientific fraud is to use the black body temperature and actual surface temperature of Mars and Venus. Adjust for the distance from the Sun, and the albedo of Venus. And then calibrate the atmospheric carbon dioxide warming on these two Planets using Log Tables until you get a figure that fits. You will find that the sum for calibrating carbon dioxide warming on these two planets is wildly different, and therefore disproves the hypothesis. But do not worry, the hypothesis developed by Ned Nikolov and Karl Zeller solves all known problems, using the grey body temperature with pressure. Even solving all those problems with the dinosaurs by implying that the Earths Atmosphere must have been over twice as massive at two bar or over.
But as a UKIPer, the problem we have is that the only famous scientist in Britain that I know of, not ignorant of this development, is the communist brother of the Labour party leader. I know that Roger Helmer has been told of this, but the penny has not dropped. Probably because most sceptical scientists around him are limited to thinking about hammering the Arrhenius hypothesis to fit the Earths atmosphere, and therefore are unable to disprove the hypothesis.
Yes, ironic isn’t it. And yet, if we are to believe, for instance, Mr Patrick O’Brien’s excellent books, there were scientists communicating with each other across the warring national divisions at the time of the Napoleonic wars, at least. If this is true, then presumably they were able to distinguish between the universal search for scientific truth, and partisan loyalty. In their case it was a matter of nationality, but nowadays we are talking about ideologies clashing – it would be immensely reassuring to know that scientists could still place the truth (in this case, about global warming) as a priority above any mere political allegiance – and that politicians would admit that too.
No, it was me JA – Cruz is good, but not as tough as Trump on immigration. He is the only one who proposes building a wall to delineate the southern border for example and the only one who spoke about the huge problem in the U.S. of the “anchor baby” loophole and the massive amount of serious crimes committed by illegals there.
I hope to God though, that whoever gets the nomination it is one of those two and that one of them prevails to be the next president – even more so now that Harper in Canada and Abbott in Australia have gone, we need a leader who is sensible on immigration and the climate nonsense somewhere in the Anglo-sphere – especially as there isn’t one here in the U.K.
I feel really deprived. The Russian air crash, looking more and more likely to be an Islamist bomb, is grabbing headlines,
So I am not getting my round-the-clock feed of BBC sympathy for the Gitmo Git. I bought three boxes of Kleenex so I could carry on weeping for him, a million-pound payoff is obviously not enough for him, he deserves a full-scale parade through every city in the land.
And a statue in Trafalgar Square !
Maybe the statue should be outside Westminster, near terrorist leader Nelson ‘I read the Economist and had a big bank account’ Mandela? If there is insufficient space perhaps the one of the naziphobic Winston Churchill could be removed?
It was rather cold and wet in my neighbourhood over the weekend, so that probably explained the absence of any street parties to celebrate the return of the Gitmo kid.
On Saturday night lots of people were wandering around dressed as blood soaked ghouls. Clearly they were celebrating the return of Shaker Aamer.
Our unelected unofficial opposition – the BBC and a motley crew of campaign groups – start early this week
BBC bod meets a female vicar (is there any other kind?) from the Living Wage do-dah.
Leading question from the BBC “Wasn’t it ‘cheeky’ of George Osborne to name his policy the ‘National Living Wage’?”
Well, what could the rev-ette say to a question that well pitched up for her? “Yes”
All very well for Unilever but was the pressure put on smaller employers mentioned? Well it was but the idea that this favoured the big ‘uns was just brushed away. I think that was a bit cheeky.
BBC Radio 4 Today decides that no left wing insanity is too mad to seriously consider. So they broadcast a speech by Jeremy Corbyn to the Communist party about how it is wrong to remember those who gave their lives in the Great war and subsequent ones.
To that on the bring on General Sir Richard Dannat, and then some lunatic woman Linda Smith from ‘stop the war coalition’ (also a leader of Galloway’s far left pro Muslim Respect party). She was allowed to speak last, indicating that the BBC supports her case to end our remembrance.
Of course the entire thrust is that it glorifies war, and it appears to be take wholly seriously by both the BBC and by Humphries.
If the BBC wasn’t quite so left wing then these idiocies wouldn’t even be considered as worth broadcasting.
‘…wrong to remember those who gave their lives in the Great war and subsequent ones…’
This weekend the BBC invited a lefty guest to spell out a policy which they have in effect been pushing – the replacement of the ‘very contraversial 5th November’ as a festival with Halloween. They may as well stretch the point and go for replacing 11th November too. It’s only a matter of time before we hear the formulation ‘contraversial Remembrance Day’
As soon as the left tells the BBC something is contraversial – suddenly it becomes so.
The Left has been playing politics with it since the Great War was actually in progress. Most notable was the period after the release of the atrocious Oh, What A Lovely War, which succeeded in painting the tragedy as little more than a dispute between two ruling elites in which millions died needlessly. This, of course, is still essentially the same message being taught in schools and pumped out by the media to this day.
Hideous as the Great War was, there genuinely was a cause and those who lost their lives did not do so in the vain pursuit of some minor disagreement between aristocracies. To suggest they did is utterly disrespectful of the terrible sacrifice they made.
I wonder why leftist women always have such annoying, droning voices? You can just tell by hearing them how they are patronising the little people who have unenlightened ideas about outmoded concepts such as patriotism and national pride.
“So they broadcast a speech by Jeremy Corbyn to the Communist party about how it is wrong to remember those who gave their lives in the Great war and subsequent ones.”
You are being played for a fool, Thoughtful. This is what Jeremy Corbyn actually said:
“…apparently next year the government is proposing to spend shedloads of money commemorating the First World War. I’m not sure what there is to commemorate about the First World War other than the mass slaughter of millions of young men and women, mainly men, on the Western Front and all the other places.”
He was speaking shortly after Cameron suggested the 2014 WW1 centenary should be like “the Diamond Jubilee celebrations”.
How strange the Daily Mail didn’t remind you of that little detail…
Jason can leap to Corbyn’s defence, but I regard Corbyn’s attitude as vile and disrespectful of the men who suffered in World War 1. My father travelled as a very young man from Melbourne to fight as an Australian soldier in Europe, after years of service he was wounded in late 1917 as well as being gassed and going through all the horrors of trench warfare. He was relatively frail and often unwell for the rest of his life.
Thoughtful and sad commemoration is exactly what those men deserved – the living and the dead. I knew Corbyn was a leftie idiot, but I did not realise his nastiness extended this far. The BBC has hardly touched on his remarks – which are an insult to all families whose relations – not that distant – fought in WW1. I now despise Corbyn more than ever – and regard his defenders in a pretty poor light too.
Jason, Paxman stooge that you are, Cameron didn’t say ‘the 2014 WW1 centenary should be like “the Diamond Jubilee celebrations”.’…implying he wanted a ‘celebration’ of WWI.
He said this, which is completely different…
‘A commemoration that, like the Diamond Jubilee celebrated this year, says something about who we are as a people.‘
He did not say it should be a ‘celebration’
Cameron’s speech was entirely respectful and appropriate…shame you try to lie about what he said on such a subject in order to make a cheap, and false, point.
Perhaps you could do some research and read the speech itself…
‘Speech at Imperial War Museum on First World War centenary plans’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-34695549
I see the BBC have covered the Australian withdrawal of Dames and Knights from their honours system. I can’t help thinking that both the BBC and the liberal Malcolm Turnbull have overlooked one simple fact of life. Some people stand out, some people go beyond the normal, are better than average – a highly controversial concept within the minority-loving, everyone is equal, liberal bubble. They might think Dames and Knights are a bit too colonial, a bit too elitist, sobeit. But not to put forward an alternative is tantamount to saying “you are not allowed to be better than the average” “it just won’t do”
Perhaps it would just be better to keep everyone in the category ‘offspring of criminals’ that way there will be no aspirations above their station, eh Malcolm?
And others give a lot of money to political parties, or are of the correct ethnic background to receive an honour, to the extent that the whole thing has become so corrupted the only thing to do is to scrap it here too.
The only reason those people who are “better than the average” or those who “stand out” are given honours is to lend some legitimacy to the corrupt who have been ‘honoured’.
I’ll agree with anything that prevents David ‘show us yer knickers’ Beckham getting a knighthood, and thus preventing his sulky wife Victoria “I really DO create my own designs” Beckham from becoming ‘lady’.
Sometimes the lefty mask slips and one of them lets on that they care not a jot for democracy
An EU in/out discussion over at the Fritatta (Guardian)
Well why would we want out of the EU, they ask? How about national sovereignty, someone suggests?
To which “Galaxina” replies:
“Greater national sovereignty meaning Tories get a free reign to implement any law they damn well please? No thanks.”
I always rather suspected the EU was a deliberate break on our democracy – seems the supporters know it.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/01/david-cameron-eu-negotiations-in-out-debate-tories
Galaxina would probably like an unelected, unaccountable, uniquely funded, in perpetuity system overseen by an entity called The EUTrust.
And if anyone keeps asking about the accounts, they can claim FoI exemption for the purposes of doing what they please, when they please, because they can.
Then ban all critics. The CiF mods would like that.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34697416
Sinai plane crash: ‘External factor’ caused crash
So much for the Egyptian PM claim that the black boxes would show technical fault even befor they were analysed. One thing I have learned over the years (I have worked a lot overseas) is never trust an Arab.
Changing topic slightly, well a lot really,
I am sick and bloody tired of the celeb lefty luvvies like Cumberbatch who at the end of his appearance of Hamlet criticised the government for not helping the migrants enoough. In his spiel he uses the f word and then buckets are passed around at the end of the performance.
Mr Cumberbatch has properties in London and New York valued at 15 million pounds. His personal wealth is considerably more. The government has just donated another milion pounds making 25 million pounds to a former enemy people. My message to Mr Cumberbatch is to
-put your money where your mouth is.
There is a saying ‘never feed your neighbours child and let your own child go hungry.’
Britain currently has 225,000 people looking for homes, 26,000 old people will die each year through poor heating, 2,600 men die of suicide as Labour politicians laugh at them.The homeless on streets is horrendous.
Tax evaders like Bono and hypocrites like Cumberbatch should be allowed to have their say but then be exposed or ignored completely.
BBC – Osborne: Britain and Germany ‘heart of Europe’ – Alloha Snackbar to that.?, as a “German Town Of 100 Gets Enriched By 750 Migrants.” – “Germany’s Muslim population to quadruple in the next five years: 20 million Muslims by 2020”
Hmmm anyway, the Al BBC is just relentless
BBC – Five stories from Lesbos
BBC – Migrant grief, cold and illness
BBC – Long winter ahead for migrant crisis, etc etc.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34576346
The MSM the true enemedia is just as bad
Independent – The Prophet Mohammed had British values –
so the only way to combat extremism is to teach more Islam in schools
Sajda Khan (a writer and researcher working towards a PhD on Islam)
https://t.co/QfS8edY30y
“Sharia law is a blight on the UK
Divorce, multiple relationships and domestic violence occur in many communities but the way in which sharia law may condone them is causing great suffering for many Muslim women in Britain.”
Baroness Cox
https://t.co/X9XxZn8uCp
Wholeheartedly agree it is, but sharia is not only that … is it?, there are a lot more “nastie s” than those in its domain
… AND Islam is sharia, sharia is Islam – Siamese twins … anyone going to spit that out? about blight on the UK.