Having been off grid for a while it is comforting to know that some things never change…one if them being the BBC narrative.
When I left the BBC was pumping out the usual sympathy engendering pro-immigration propaganda in the shape of a sad tale about a missing migrant boy whom the BBC set out to find…..though you rather suspect that they were hoping they had another ‘dead baby on beach’ type tale….preferably a dead boy kidnapped and killed by Zionist neo-Nazis to be harvested for his organs….when I returned 5 days later the story was still on the frontpage. Why?
Sadly for the BBC it turns out it was the boy’s own family that took him…to Germany. Still, the BBC turned it into a triumph of investigative journalism…the boy was ‘safe’.
‘Missing’ Syrian refugee boy Azam found in Germany
Now this is a very minor human interest story in the scale of things so why was it literally front page news on the BBC website for a week?
No one is really interested in a lost boy who wasn’t lost.
Oddly the BBC shows no interest in the thousands of migrants who are quietly disappearing from migrant centres to go who knows where…..
Die Welt is reporting this.
Thousands of refugees leave accommodation on their own
“They are simply not there anymore” – daily many refugees disappear from the first reception facilities without giving notice. This is a serious problem for the authorities.
Thousands of refugees leave accommodation on their own
“They are simply not there anymore” – daily many refugees disappear from the first reception facilities without giving notice. This is a serious problem for the authorities.
From the initial reception facilities in Brandenburg, refugees are increasingly heading on their own to relatives in Germany or abroad. Several hundred people disappear each week since the beginning of september without signing off, Ingo Decker, the spokesman of the Potsdam Ministry of the Interior said, answering an inquiry. “Eventually, these refugees are simply not there anymore.”, the spokesman said, and that sometimes they would come back or they would be picked up by the police.
At least 7000 people left without registration.
Why the lack of interest in a story that doesn’t tug on heart strings but instead raises many serious questions about what is going on in Europe right now?
Does the BBC have a deliberate editorial policy that only endorses ‘good news’ or sad stories about migrants? It would seem to be the fact.
The BBC reported the ONS report about migration swamping the UK but it hardly hit the headlines and vanished soon after. A curious lack of interest in a significant and important story…From the Mail….
UK population set to rocket by 10million in just 25 years as high birthrates and migration make Britain Europe’s most populated nation
The BBC quotes…
The overall trend is “very similar” to past figures, said Prof Christian Dustmann, director of the Centre for Research and Analysis on Migration at University College London.
“What we see in many European countries, in particular the larger economies such as Germany, is actually a trend in the opposite direction,” he said.
“Population is decreasing in Germany, as it is in Italy or Spain. That puts these countries in a very difficult situation.
“[When] populations are decreasing, you’re dealing with a shrinking working-age population, which basically has to be confronted with an increasing ageing population which is not productive any more.”
You may remember that Prof Christian Dustmann was in fact one of the architects of Labour’s mass immigration policy….
Prof Dustman runs the Centre for Research and Analysis of Immigration…CReAM for short…. a pressure group for immigration.
Prof Dustman also runs the Norface Research Programme on Migration
In 2013 it organised the Migration: Global Development, New Frontiers…Interdisciplinary conference on migration.
Interesting who not only turned up, not to report on it, but to actively participate in the conference…That’s right…as an active speaker at the conference rather than as a reporter…the BBC’S pro-immigration Mark Easton….
Love this final blast from the BBC blaming government cuts for the pressure immigrants put on services…nothing to do with over 300,000 a year swamping the country then?….
Dr Jo Michell, of the University of the West of England, said the population rise would increase the pressure on public services.
“It will have an impact on public services such as health and education, services which are already under pressure because of cuts in government services and cuts which are planned for the next five years,” he said.
“So the government should consider whether these cuts are appropriate at such a time.”
And what of ‘Dr Jo Michell‘? As you might expect an extremist lefty in the Corbyn camp. Curious how the BBC fails to define the politics of those it quotes from….highly relevant to know such information one might think…the BBC is usually pretty keen to label someone as being from a right wing think tank or ‘pressure group’ as the BBC prefers to malign them, so why so coy about the leftie’s cedentials?
Has the BBC made the slightest effort to report the words of ex-Oz PM Tony Abbott?…From Cranmer….
Tony Abbott on Europe’s migrants: “All countries that say ‘anyone who gets here can stay here’ are now in peril”
Tony Abbott was robust in his Christian belief that the imperative to “love your neighbour as you love yourself” ought not to mean that “anyone who gets here can stay here”. With millions living in poverty and peril throughout the Middle East, there is no logical end to the waves of refugees who would prefer to live in the West. And the moment they reach safety, they all become economic migrants by definition “because they had already escaped persecution when they decided to move again”.
The more you preach peace and security to those in regions of poverty and conflict, the more will risk their lives to reach the shores of prosperity, and so the more will drown in the process. What moral clarity, political maturity and complete common sense.
Odd what the impartial BBC filters out of the news….odd what it doesn’t want you to know. A trustworthy, honest and open organisation or one that shapes, manipulates and manufactures news stories to suit its own agenda?
On the latest edition of Laurie Taylor’s Thinking Allowed, broadcast from 00:15 today on Radio 4,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06kdyw3
Prof Taylor interviews John MacNicol, Visiting Professor of Social Policy at the LSE, on his new book ‘Neoliberalising Old Age’. Talking about the increase in cohort size of those reaching retirement age, Professor MacNicol ascribes ‘probably’ about 50% of this increase to immigration (at 07:33). Taylor does not follow this up, perhaps because the main discussion is about the central topic of the book which is the ‘re-emergence of age discrimination’ alongside what is said to be the neoliberal re-assertion of a definition of old-age based on disability and defunctness. MacNicol states that while there is a problem of increasing numbers of retirement-age elderly in the population, the problem is politically exaggerated – for reasons which are not further explored in the programme.
Thinking Allowed is a rather hole-in-the-wall programme, despite its award-winning history, and Taylor appears to have been shunted from the mainstream recently. Nevertheless, it is part of the influential wall-paper of the BBC, doing its bit to casually pillory the opinions and beliefs of a significant part of the population the BBC should serve. The diversion of sociology from a much-needed sober analysis of the actual effects of mass migration on the societies it targets, and the societies it abandons, forestalls any genuine ‘debate’ on this issue among the general population. It is unfortunate that this programme does not appear to have ever been used to bring a spotlight on the issue, with the exception of pathologising and marginalising the widespread concerns about it.
The most objectionable thing about Thinking Allowed is the insufferably arrogant title, suggesting that only bien pensant sociologists are capable of thought.
As anyone with even a passing knowledge of them and their bogus subject will know, nothing could be further from the truth. They are little more than the channel through which Cultural Marxism is pumped.
The Left always use language to disguise what they are saying – because they know that if people understood what they were saying they would reject it.
As a rule of thumb the exact opposite of what they say is what is actually going on – so “Critical Theory” is uncritical Marxism, the “Labour Party” is an operation for funding middle class idlers (supported by unions which create restrictive elites (via intimidation) which create unemployment for everybody else, and which relies on the votes of people who live off the State) “Public Services” are run to suit the people employed by them not the customer, “Social Justice” overrides any consideration of justice by redistributing money taken away from those that earn it to the above mentioned clients of the State in order that middle class Leftists be kept in the lifestyle they see as their entitlement, “Equality” means more power (and wealth) to…………….anyway you get the idea.
“Thinking Aloud” = slavish adherence to whatever Leftist crap is currently fashionable and intolerance of all other views.
Well said , Wild.
Wonderful! I keep thinking ‘Evelyn Waugh, thou shouldst be alive today’. Never mind, we do at least have Roger Scruton – I’ve just ordered Fools, Frauds and Firebrands: Thinkers of the New Left; looking forward to reading it..
On the Today programme we had Hugh Fearningly Wittinghall or some such name talking about food waste and what to do with it . Apparently we waste a quarter of all food produced (how that’s computed is not said ) . A lot of food is wasted, the BBC presenter and guest opined with no other experts in attendance , because the supermarkets are so strict and don’t want uncomely produce on their shelves .
Now the link to immigration.
The two at the studio observed that if we threw away less food , we would use less resources which the guest said were in short supply and not so much land would be needed , it could be used for hedgerows and other bucolic delights .
MORE LIKELY IT WOULD BE USED TO BUILD HOUSES ON to accommodate the huge immigration that has not been in the Labour, Liberal or Conservative Manifestoes .
Sod it . I’m not going to eat ugly food to make space for invaders that shouldn’t be coming here .
Here’s a couple of incendiary quotes
“We do not need you here. This is our country.”
“Get out of our house! Go home.”
Taken from this article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34680564
Now I’m being more than a little disingenuous here as I don’t think for a moment to equate the indigenous population of Hawaii’s situation with those of the indigenous people of Western Europe. But regarding the comments there is none of the spitting venom, bile and BBC fury that would be directed to a Western European expressing similar sentiment.
Simon Bates on Radio Devon this morning had more of the Calais type sob stories. This time a BBC reporter, Bob Dale, had taken the ferry to Dunkirk and discovered that there were up to half a dozen other such camps springing up in that area. The inevitable concerned C. of E Reverend and a woman from Portsmouth, who quickly filled her car with humanitarian needs and got the ferry over as well, were given air time to express their horror. Medicin sans Frontiere were interviewed about the alarming development that they were now operating in France. A couple of the poor afflicted were also interviewed and one complained that he only had a shower every two days and the water was cold. Another that he had made 125 attempts to get into the UK.
This piece was aired at about 55 mins in. After the news it was followed by a report that 2,000 children in the South West are homeless or in B and Bs because of lack of suitable accommodation. Obviously they made no correlation as to why this state of affairs exists and why there was little funding for indigenous families.
Correlation seems to be a weak point with the BBC when it reports on lack of housing, demands on social security, the NHS and of course projected population increase. Exactly the same problem when it asks the question – why did Labour lose the last election? The forthcoming answers (in various broadcasts) usually contain reasons which include supposition that the public didn’t trust them with managing the economy, worries about the SNP and of course Ed Milibands failure to gracefully eat a bacon sandwich. No mention of the fact that the public (in my view) didn’t trust Labour with controlling immigration and voted UKIP or Tory instead.
A message to the so called ‘Trustees’ of Al Beeb who often read this site ……………….
‘You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time’.