Here is a NEW Open Thread for you to detail that bias! The floor is yours….
START THE WEEK OPEN THREAD….
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir Dec 26, 01:31
Christmas 2024
Diversity is…strength. Yep, we all feel so much stronger than we did 20 years ago don’t we ? I know… - atlas_shrugged Dec 25, 22:58
Christmas 2024
Stew It is kind of like being stalked/harassed online all in one go. Each direction you turn it is leftist… - G.W.F. Dec 25, 22:51
Christmas 2024
The King’s Speech. Communities of all faiths and none come together - digg Dec 25, 22:34
Christmas 2024
I totally believe the BBC has gone totally Muslim and is working to project Islam in the UK. - digg Dec 25, 22:31
Christmas 2024
QI has just rolled out about 5 anti-Christian or anti-Santa segments in a row. What is driving these W1 luvvies… - StewGreen Dec 25, 22:20
Christmas 2024
@emilyhewertson tweets Switched on Doctor Who. Heard the word “mansplaining.” Switched off. - Sluff Dec 25, 22:02
Christmas 2024
Re all the above HS 2 photos. No- one is actually doing any work. And you wonder why the project… - Sluff Dec 25, 22:00
Christmas 2024
And in tonight’s ’you can’t make it up’ competition………a drag queen has won Strictly Come Dancing Christmas special. Beyond parody. - Flotsam Dec 25, 21:05
Christmas 2024
Should I be surprised that Charles didn’t mention the awful Southport murders? Far too political I guess and extremely inadequate…
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
Ref Cameron re-negotiations on EU reform :-
“Can someone remind me again why, having lost so many of our own soldiers in two world wars defending Britain from domination by a foreign power, are we are now in the position of begging unelected bureaucrats and foreign leaders for permission to govern our own country as we see fit?”
Unfortunately I cannot claim any credit for the above, copied verbatim from Guido Fawkes. I thought it explained the crazy situation very well. We really need to take some pitchforks to London and fill the Thames with MPs, as a start.
Sadly those servicemen (and women) and those killed on the home front took a massive wedge of British DNA with them, it would appear that progeny of the pacifists and white feather brigade now run the country…
Rather liked the tweet from https://twitter.com/sceptic_eu which said:
With apologies to #JohnLewis, the slogan which describes the British people’s experience of #EU “#reform” is:
Always knowingly sold-out
“we are now in the position of begging unelected bureaucrats and foreign leaders for permission to govern our own country as we see fit?”
We are not even doing that much. Not even close. We are begging unelected foreigners for permission to have a tiny, almost irrelevant 4 changes to the EU. Even with those changes, the EU will still end up running this country more than our own elected Parliament.
We should stop begging, and vote leave and take back the power to govern our own country as we see fit.
Yes, why do Donald Tusk & Angela Merkel have such power over so many people who never voted for them? Goodness I would love to see the (not particularly far right) FN in France gain power & us in Britain voting to leave the EU. The trauma of these for the FarLeftBBC would be terminal!
Heard that Tusk was an ex-Polish PM or such.
That tells me that he was a grandiose windbag and suckup who only found his Euro “passions and dreams”-once he`d been booted out of office and was a flatulent irrelevance in need of refurbishment and money for his sad old vanities to be maintained.
Roy Jenkins set the (wine) bar very high for the rest of the gravy boatmen that waved a gay oar in the direction of Fatcatt Harbour…Brittan, Kinnock, Mandelson and Ashton. Clegg and Ashdown all waddle to mind…deadbeats, unelectable flotsam who think they`re Jetsons.
Tusk?…maybe we could get a Boko Haram thickie to tattoo on him the idea that there`s ivory to be found on a fat pachyderm in Brussels…clearly more a Duck than a Trump!
No wonder the eastern European leaders hate the idea of Cameron’s proposed 4-year rule for foreign workers claiming benefits. As things stand we are not only solving their unemployment problem for them but also giving their ‘migrant’ workers enough in benefits to send back home to boost their useless economies.
So much for the principle of allowing these countries to join so their economies and general prosperity would be raised to match the rest of the EU. Instead it’s just another form of wealth re-distribution, as if there wasn’t enough of that already.
The Front Nationale in France have a range of policies which are entirely socialist. They are a far left party, not a far right one. They are much closer to the BNP than they are to UKIP.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-35027049
Man stabbed to death in Abingdon Poundland store
What the BBC isn’t telling is the Twitter reports that this was a Muslim who grabbed a couple of knives, yelled Allahu Akbar and stabbed the guy to death.
Not the first time this would have happened, as it closely mirrors the Ikea killings in Sweden.
Not the first time this would have happened, as it closely mirrors the Ikea killings in Sweden.
And the murders of several Israeli Jews by Palestinian and Israeli-Arab terrorists over the past few months.
And of course the attempted knife murder at the underground station in London, where a bystander shouted, “You ain’t no Muslim, bruv.”
The BBC is naturally interested in that disclaimer. It was on Dan Damon’s World Update this morning. He interviewed a guy from the Quilliam Foundation who grabbed the opportunity to claim that violence was not inspired by the Quran, which is a lot like claiming that Tyson doesn’t know how to box.
Dan Damon didn’t contradict him, sticking grimly to BBC PeeCee rules.
Here it is, from 48:17 minutes in, for anyone who can stand it:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p039mhsf#play
Quilliam take another step back … time for Nawaz,(the only slightly reforming influence) to move on
I agree totally. Nawaz, a reformed jihadi, appears to have very little support among Muslims, even in his own organisation.
I wonder whether The BBC will be reporting this story concerning a Muslim convert scumbag?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3349803/Muslim-convert-faces-jail-threatening-bomb-MP-s-house.html
If this despicable turd were Christian, it’d be placed with high importance in the BBC news.
Funny how when the Fascist left are hounding everyone else there isn’t a peep out of Labour, but as soon as they end up in their sights they start squealing like stuck pigs, and the BBC ever eager report it like it’s some great wrong. Funny how they don’t seem to want to report it when the Fascists are doing it to those whose views they don’t share.
In the latest news Simon Danczuk has received two more death threats and poor Pat Karney Labour leader of Manchester council has claimed he & the mayor were jostled and barracked by UKIP people.
The thing is that the people who were there say that it didn’t happen, and that they were angry because Karney used the Lights switch on as a photo op when they never see him any other time of the year.
Never heard much from the BBC when the Fascists were outside the Tory conference throwing eggs & spitting – until it affected a journalist.
Biter bitten !
…poor Pat Karney…
The arrogant, authoritarian Pat Karney or is there another one?
This is what I don’t understand about the gay community and wet-wipe lefties; they support Muslim fascists yet they’d be the first to end up as kebab meat if they ever lived under harsh Islamic rule.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/12/07/university-feminist-and-gay-societies-stand-in-solidarity-with-gay-and-women-hating-islamic-society/
This type of lunacy demonstrates that lefty-progressiveness is a form of severe mental illness.
Coignitive dissonance is a distinguishing trait of a true lefty. It’s what makes them so difficult to argue with sometimes.
Thanks Demon, been reading about it for the past hour. It explains a lot. This is why the frustrated screaming, spitting and shouting begins, as they try to balance the inconsistencies of their beliefs and values in their tiny minds.
I mean ‘a feminist and gay society supporting a woman hating and gay hating society’ is gonna take some cognitive gymnastics. Or are they totally and utterly brainwashed.
Evidence turkeys do vote for christmas!
I agree with comments here. I am a gay man myself and I should LOVE political correctness etc but I don’t. I loathe it. I never felt part of the gay community, preferring to spend my drinking time on with straights. Kylie Minogue and Madonna? Couldn’t stand 97% of their stuff.
I’m fully aware that if we allow Muslims more elbow room, they will not show the same tolerance towards those who allowed them the elbow room. Even moderate Muslims (if they exist) will ‘prefer’ (I’m trying to use a kind word to give the benefit of the doubt) that those around them would convert to Islam. It makes sense and is a natural human trait – to live amongst those who feel the same way you do and believe in the same things you do. I wonder how many Muslims support multiculturalism.
DaveR, good post.
However, what I don’t understand is why are the LGBT groups so quiet when talking about the Muslim faith. Why do they not march, take to the streets and protest against the anti gay Qu’ranic ideology in this country? If I was gay I would definitely take part.
Same goes for feminists but I see that group as just a pathetic bunch of big mouthed, mangina cowards.
I agree, Wronged, but I’m afraid I can’t answer for my so-called ‘people’. The Gay Community is, as far as I am concerned, a misnomer. I never felt part of it and haven’t been out there for fifteen years. It’s no more a community than, say, if you went into a disco (that word dates me!) and thought, ‘Ah, these are my people, this is my Straight Community.’ Some of the most obnoxious, opinionated and downright rude and aggressive people have been other gay people. And you should meet the men! I could give you a list of my experiences with some of these prats but your eyes would droop and I rather recommend finding some wet paint to watch it dry. I should balance my comments out by saying I’ve met some very splendid gay people too – but they tend not to reappear on the ‘scene’ very much, as though they too have sussed it and decided they don’t particularly like it either. And gay people, of course, don’t have the monopoly on obnoxious and rude people.
Great story Alex-Breibart is a must-read these days as an antidote to the libleftlabcrap of the BBC.
The bit about Patels taqqiya scam-moaning at the gays for wondering about his Sharia views, without the Prince Alberts to do anything to stop him made me laugh-and then get all confused.
Must be so hard to be a clueless gibbering Unibummer these days-maybe that`s how the gays and Muslims can share the PHOBE prefix…one group confuses it with a rectal examination, the other thinks its the blonde piece from Friends.
I`ve never heard the sound of tumbleweed doing a handbrake turn before…but when Islam meets Gaydom..it`s always a hoot to heal the squeals of pigs tails being tweaked and peckers being plonked.
I`ll ask Tyson Fury which one of these two whining, nasty little groups of privileged white/women /jew haters will preveil shall I?
Turkeys and Christmas come to mind. We are living in a time of madness.
Pick a skyscraper…….
More like this?
These guy’s n’ gal’s are more than welcome to attend the annual gay pride march in Tel-aviv. Don’t know about the same in Mecca, Cairo, Baghdad, Kabul, Tehran, Gaza etc, etc. Yet you hear the same people demonise Israel in the most vicious ways.
They do have a gay march in Raqqa. Its just that the gay is marching to his gruesome death
The BBC is actually a real existing version of Comrade Bala’s mind machine Jackie. No rational person can fathom why the BBC believes in its quasi-religious tenets: Islam is the religion of peace, there are no drawbacks to mass immigration, the poor are morally superior to the rich, Farage, Le Pen are in league with the devil etc. any more than he can understand the views of Comrade Bala. Anyone who dissents is sought out for ritual humiliation by media. Whenever UKIP is on, say, Question Time, what is really being staged is a mini-show trial or heresy court. The heretic is to be pressured into a public recantation of his views , humiliated and his credibility destroyed, in other words turned into a non-person as far as a media presence is concerned. I’m watching an excellent example on Sky News at the moment. The Two Old Queens on the Press Review are responding to Trump’s call for a ban on Muslim immigration by criticising his hair. Le Pen’s election success is apparently a new Machtergreifung.
I am finding the BBC’s exasperation at Trump to be highly amusing. What makes it amusing is that no matter how much they are shocked and outraged by Trump’s common sense policies, his popularity is increasing. The liberal idiots at the BBC just cannot understand why?
If I were to take a jar of jellybeans into the BBC studios and tell them that a random 20% of them are poisoned, do you think that they would help themselves to jellybeans? This is exactly the same logic with Syrian immigrants. It is an indisputable fact that amongst those immigrants, are ISIS terrorists with deadly intent, and nobody knows what percentage of them are terrorists it could be 0.01% or 50%. HOW can the liberal idiots not understand that there needs to be something done to stop the terrorists? Or do those liberals really want to see more terrorist atrocities take place and more innocents killed on our streets?
On this issue, I completely agree with Trump.
It is pendulum politics at its most grotesque, with the BBC about as much to blame for the swing past rationality to a new extreme with their crack-handed cover up attempts in face of realities.
Trump’s pronouncements are daft, but will resonate, and serve only to polarise away from more sensible concerns and measures.
With a culture for whom lying is a lauded technique, banning anyone for what is in their head will be a tough measure to enact, especially where free speech is so valued.
However, facilitating suppression of indigenous culture at every turn to accommodate hostile imports seems to have worked out poorly.
Calling something “daft” is not a rational response to a suggestion which prima facie seems highly sensible. Japan has no problem with Muslim terrorism because it has a minimal Muslim population. This is a desirable situation to be in. What possible reason could anyone have to increase the Muslim population anywhere in the Western world?. Opinion polls consistently suggest that 30% of Muslims support the aims of IS.
Politics, at least the variety seeking to effect sensible change, is about recognition of realities and compromise. Idealism and rationality are sweet and all, but seldom practical.
I stand by ‘daft’. Maybe our definitions of what is rational differ.
You use language in the same obscurantist way as the BBC. No one is advocating change that is not “sensible”. All you are saying is that you disagree with Trump’s suggestion. You have not said why you disagree with Trump’s suggestion. Joke Oburn on Daily Politics is looking po-faced and mildly irritated by Trump’s “outrageous” remarks. But Joke Oburn’s mindless gurning and outrage are not a relevant objection to Trump’s suggestion. I don’t care about Joke Oburn’s sensibilities. Some object to Trump’s suggestion because it “might offend Muslims”. I dare say atheists offend Muslims. Does that mean all atheists should embrace Islam ? Will Muslims compromise on their core beliefs?
‘All you are saying is that you disagree with Trump’s suggestion’
Clearly incorrect.
And as this is being dragged out and OT from the BBC’s role from the point you decided your beliefs trump mine, and my means of expression trump the point, here ends our engagement from my side.
As usual you avoid the point. The Japanese government has no problem in controlling Muslim immigration. It does not spend a fortune trying to track hundreds of Muslims on the off chance they may commit the atrocities they threaten. I know which policy is “daft”.
Re control of migrant labour.
The US could consider looking at Saudi practice, with a view to reciprocation or emulation.
The city of Makkah is out of bounds to non Muslims period, no ifs, no buts.
There are signs on the highways near the city limits directing non Muslims on to a by pass designated the non Muslims road.
Passports are removed from migrant labour and replaced by internal travel documents known as iqamas. Failure to produce on demand means arrest, investigation and possible punishment for the employer and deportation of the migrant.
Travel outside the province where the migrant is employed is forbidden without a covering letter of permission from the migrants employer, including details of reason for travel and return to work date.
Trumps idea could be operationalised with sufficient will without losing the benefits to US society of all that talent coming from the Islamic world.
If I can jump in here …
While I agree Trump’s proposal has some merit, it is impractical. It can not be done in any sensible way. How can you tell who is a Muslim and who is not? Someone only has to say they are Christian and how can you prove otherwise?
What would make sense would be to say “A temporary halt on immigration from Islamic countries”. At least that is simple and implementable.
However, the sub-text to his proposal (almost completely ignored by our beloved propaganda machine, the BBC) is the suggestion to have a debate about Islam, and the benefit/threat of Islam to our countries, and ways to ensure that any Muslims coming into the country are not a threat to our way of life.
Regrettably, I cannot see how anyone can determine or prove that any individual Muslim is not going to become more Islamic – and hence a threat – at any time? But that is another issue, in theory non-dangerous Muslims are not a problem, as far as I can see.
It does seem as if Trump is not that clued up on Islam, but at least he has the balls to acknowledge Islam as a problem in itself. I don’t see many other politicians saying anything this (thinking of you, Mr Dave).
I agree that Trump is a bit daft, but at least he’s not afraid to open the debate.
Never said he was, but thanks for the rest. Don’t disagree with any of it as this was a major aspect of my original argument.
I might add that the BBC Today Show was quick to run this:
One imagines a few other allies may have similar personnel. And media keen to run it.
Hence my original point.
And whatever my feelings on Mr. Trump’s plan, they pale besides my loathing for the inevitable tide of BBC dross that has poured out on every single they operate outlet since, to the exclusion of almost all else.
And it has not gone un-noticed. The BBC has actually succeeded in garnering sympathy for him by behaving like the knee jerk, social engineering bullies they are.
And what on earth is all this hashtag activism aimed at achieving?
Re Donald Trump.
The BBC confecting yet another liberal souffle in the hope that they`ll be able to serve up his head on a platter on the same salver before too long.
Odious, non-news and so bloody obvious with the loathsome liberal left.
That said_avoiding the BBD today, I`ve been struck by Independent Radio slobbering along behind the BBCs lamp-posts, and sniffing the agenda-before squirting it back to us.
Thought that commercial radio might have a mind of its own-but no, they headline with Trump hopefully losing some honorary degree from Aberdeen or some other wild celtic shore of liberal BS.
Why the heck I need to care seeing as it`s Scotland, and I`m here in Wessex is beyond me-yet the local independent radio goes all BBC and leads with this crap.
Given Harry Clarke, helicopters they can`t fly. the Forth Bridge shambles and the like-I`d have thought that Tyson Fury etc would be the least of the SNPs issues.
But hey-competence and the left don`t work together-far better to nurse imagined grievances until the trolls extract the Bru money…ILR turn out to drink from the same septic swamps for “news” as do the BBC.
Just a note Guest Who, No ill will involved.
I think you may mean cack-handed?
I believe its derivation comes from the times when one (right) hand was used for eating and the other involved in your ablutions. Hence if you ate with your left hand you were cack handed.
E. & O. E,
None taken.
And I note the two attempts to tell me what I mean with all due respect due them.
It is true that Mr. Trump seems to be articulating what many feel, and that is seeing an upward spiral of popularity.
However this seems in frustrated reaction to the less than smart (see what I did there?) actions, cack-handed propaganda, censorships, phobia-accusations, etc of the political-media classes in trying to solve a real, growing issue by screwing down the pressure cooker valves even more. The appeal to the non-muslim black community in the US will be interesting, and doubtless will see the BBC in major Top Trumps (yay!) manoeuvres. Without invoking Godwin such see-saw political efforts have rarely been enacted without poor historical precedent.
I would simply want a different champion to face the daughters of Obama Disasta. Purely in practical terms Don’s suggestion seems at best tricky to implement, based on measures of ‘muslimism’ to relations with other countries unlikely to follow suit. The global reaction to SA apartheid would suggest stopping Baroness Warsi at JFK may not work out well.
And it simply hands the majority of global media a handy big stick with which to then bash anything not conforming to continuing their failed policies. Many reading this will guess my stance in a few areas. That of Mr. Trump, as reported, is not one that persuades. So it has lost me. Now you can argue with me, fine. But tell me I am wrong and what I need to think to be right sets us on a whole new path. A split in the ranks one is sure Jezza, Hilary or the BBC will simply adore.
Plus it ignores what is already in place and cannot be undone. Like Labour boosting the civil service population by several hundred thousand to gerrymander beholden votes still further. Redundancy costs, civil disobedience, etc make this nigh on possible to rectify.
Now, a unique collection of around 20,000 on market rates due to their value to an ad or subscription-based industry screaming for their skills on the other hand….
Yes, it’s noticeable that the bBC makes the negative reaction the main story, not the fact that an increasing number of people are agreeing with him. Whether the bBC likes what Trump has said or not, they are supposed to be IMPARTIAL and to report in a BALANCED way. It was quite humorous the way the bBC reporter asked folks on the street for their reactions and, of the news clips I saw anyway, the only two broadcast agreed with Trump. Couldn’t the bBC find even one to say something negative about Trump? Oh yes, sorry, they did – it was some member of a Muslim council or something.
I posted this at the end of the last thread; but it is a superb quote from John Derbyshire, from an article of his at http://www.vdare.com, about Muslims in the West in light of the recent Jihad atrocity in California.
“The first generation of immigrants find themselves in an Aladdin’s Cave of glittering plenty and opportunity: work easy to find, land cheap, welfare abundant, the natives gullible. They’re happy.
Then comes the second, native-born generation. Drawn from a low-IQ population that’s been accumulating genetic defects via a tradition of cousin marriage since the Bronze Age, and raised in a religion totally at odds with Western ideas of self-actualization, they are fidgety misfits. They come to hate the country of their birth, and in extreme cases act out the hatred like this.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06r6z4b/bbc-news-at-six-07122015 at 25mins 30 secs
Not so much bias but sheer stupidity. I don’t think Ed Thomas will be getting Reporter of the Year award for this piece of brilliance. Standing outside a house in Carlilse that is flooded up to the downstairs windows, he asks the occupant who is leaning out of the upstairs window “What’s it like inside?”.
Cue tumbleweed, tolling of church bell and sound of desert wind.
BBC refuse to use the ‘Terrorist’ word again:
“”California attackers had target practice””
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35032025
What is an attacker? Can someone be convicted of ‘attacking’? Is it a position on the football field?
The murders have been called Terrorism by Obama himself. Who are the BBC to downgrade the terrible seriousness of this Terrorist slaughter?
Just what right do the BBC think they have to do this?
..
Yes, the dishonesty and unprofessionalism is staggering. They are quite content to mislead the public and mangle the English language by steering clear of the dreaded T-word, no matter how richly deserved.
They are even happy to misquote spokespeople who have clearly used the taboo word.
And all because they prostrate themselves before the god of PeeCee and believe everyone else should do likewise.
Well, more and more people are becoming wise to their slick tricks. And this fine site is really helping to expose them.
Hello! I’m new here. I’ve been lurking for weeks but aligned. Expect passion. Expect opinion.
Welcome to the site. Look forward to the passion especially!
I’ll get the wife to read your posts, she needs to develop some passion, would you mind writing your posts around bedtime! We usually have our milky cocoa drink about 11.00 pm.
Hello Wronged. I’m a bit uncomfortable writing to Mrs W.
Don’t worry about it. All of us contributors could write to her in a group and get her warmed up nicely for Mr wronged. Passion is something I can do rather well.
Tell me how these young immigrants are going to work to pay taxes that go toward my pension now that they’ve been jailed?
http://news.hec.su/item/383916/teenage-robbers-jailed-following-violent-rampage-across-east-london
They should pay a prison tax. Any monies earned or handed in benefits post prison should be heavily taxed for a very long time. Prison is not pennance.
NB Make them jump from an aeroplane without a parachute in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.
Never mind the Religion, feel the Ideology
This is an unusually frank commentary on modern islam
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/rashid-razaq-islam-has-become-a-convenient-excuse-for-the-disaffected-a3131376.html
Several sentences are worth quoting as they ring true and are unlikely to be voiced by the BBC
‘…at this particular point in history people keep killing in Islam’s name. It doesn’t matter how many times we say Islam is a religion of peace or that these people aren’t true Muslims. What’s more important, though, is how the killers view themselves’
‘The very idea of a moderate, average Muslim has changed drastically in the past 15 to 20 years. In Britain, and around the world, Muslims have become more devout. It’s visible in the greater display of hijabs, niqabs, long beards and foreign dress.’
‘In part it is due to Saudi Arabia’s exporting of the most backwards and reductive form of Islam’
‘Most of the Muslims in this country, such as me, have roots in Pakistan and Bangladesh. In the space of a generation we have jettisoned a shared Asian identity with Indian Hindus and Sikhs in favour of one exclusively defined by religion’.
Islam has been a religion at peace for a whole 14 years out of the last 1400. All the other years, Islam has been expanding in wars of conquest, or been beaten back in retaliation. Over that time, Islam is responsible for over 200 million innocent dead.
AISI
“a shared Asian identity with Indian Hindus and Sikhs”
The one problem with this statement is that it is a lie.
This “shared identity” was not evident for the 1000 years before the Raj when Muslims were murdering Hindus (Sikhism was not “a religion” for most of this period) in God alone knows how many hundreds of millions, destroying their temples. Destroying temples, another permanent feature of the Islamic mind, Bamian and Palmyra in the recent past, destruction is what they do best.
It was also not present in 1947 when the partition of India caused millions of deaths, and 15 million people to move due to ethnic cleansing.
It was also not present in 1970-71 during the creation of Bangladesh when approximately seven million Hindus were killed by, I forget now, you can look it up, but they were killed by some peace loving group. 95% of the Hindus not killed moved to India in a most peaceful manner with all of their belongings and civil rights intact, well intact-ish, well . . .
It is not present today in the disputed Kashmir where Muslim violence, and Hindus reprisals have been ongoing since 1947.
So yet again when you examine some, apparently plausible, statement by a Muslim it turns out to be 100% lying bollox. Lying which is a permanent feature in the history of the scumbag Muzzies.
It is also not present in Islam during the 1300ish years since the great Islamic schism which continues to this day between the main sects. With much quiet contemplation and rational discussion between the adherents, with no murders at all, well not many murders, OK many murders.
“Shared Identity” hilarious.
One more thing. The Islamic “Golden Age”, stressed by liberal twats like Wikipedia. However golden it was, most of the Golden people were Christians and Jews (many forcibly converted, Berbers, Persians and others from Central Asia, the number of “golden” Arabs was small
It must be difficult to be a Muslim because everyone hates and despises you because of your nasty and stone-age,
childish beliefs.
‘Most of the Muslims in this country, such as me, have roots in Pakistan and Bangladesh. In the space of a generation we have jettisoned a shared Asian identity with Indian Hindus and Sikhs in favour of one exclusively defined by religion’. AISI s history is FALSE.
BBC delenda ests history is the more accurate one!
Deobandism (a form of Islamic fundamentalism adopted in the sub continent and its emigre populations in the west) was founded in the late 1860s.
The State of Pakistan (West and East the East now being Bangladesh) was founded specifically as a homeland for the Muslims of British India.
embolden
AISI was not the originator of the quotations, he was offering them as a somewhat unusual alternative to the standard lies AlBeeb feeds us with.
I merely tried to show that even this “breath of fresh air, honest, Islamic realism” is still the same Islamic mendacity.
Which is probably why the BBC love Islam, as experienced liars themselves they admire untruthfulness in others.
Thanks for correcting my error. Apology to AISI for misunderstanding the origin of the statements quoted.
I do think it is important to note the history and origins of deobandi fundamentalism, and its continuing base of support.
It sometimes gets lost in the current emphasis on Arabian Wahabbism.
Well I’m taking a risk with post #1. Don’t worry – climate change will be next on the agenda…
What’s the difference between Islam, Islamaphobia, Islamist and a Muslim. And no, it’s not a joke – it’s a very simple demonstration of how far down the slippery road of political correctness we have gone in the west to so fundamentally fail to understand, or even attempt to understand the critical distinctions between these words. It’s no surprise that it is the BBC that has helped us on this journey.
The west’s failure to apply any kind of thinking time to understanding this means that we are easily led by the mainstream media and a political elite with a Marxist agenda. So let’s put political correctness to one side and consider them for a moment.
Islam is a political ideology dressed up as a religion.
Islamaphobia is a ridiculous made up word used to suppress criticism of Islam and Islamists by branding such commentary is bigoted or, even more bizarrely, racist (Islam is not a “race”).
Islamist – a hard right Islamic group (predominantly but not exclusively led by Wahhabi Sunni Muslims) seeking to push through the fundamental tenets of Islam is defined in the Qu’ran. Leftists apologists, naive liberals and useful idiots around the world can seek to deny that the Qu’ran dictates the true Muslims have a duty under Allah to carry out these dictats but they are denying reality. There are not “moderate” and “extreme” Muslims. There are practicing and non-practicing Muslims. And all it takes for what in our society is considered wrong – for example, execution for blasphemy – is for the majority to not act. In the 18th century an Irish political philosopher, Edmund Burke, said “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing”. Just because every Muslim in Bradford might not today be running around the estate with an AK47 does not mean that they are not a part of a movement that with a democratic majority will threaten our secularism, legal governance, freedom of speech and society for they surely will. They will be as cowed as any other part of society into accepting the will of practicing Muslims. Remember that there were a handful – only 8 visible, only a few tens at most invisible behind the terrorist attack in Paris. And a very large percentage of ordinary “non-practicing” British Muslims (one in five according to one survey) that have either some (14%) or a lot (5%) of sympathy with ISIS.
Muslim – a person who chooses to follow an ideology. In reality, like most people, their “religion” is chosen at birth by their parents. It takes a particularly determined person to renounce the religion that they were born into. For Islam where aposticism is punishable by death you can multiply that determination by 1000.
What to do? Well being practical the west will never expunge Muslims from secular society. It won’t happen so however much the far right might like to stir up the passions of the ignorant, it’s a non-starter. But if we allow the definition of Islamist to replace Islam then we could at least start to make headway. It is our lack of backbone as a society to stand up to politically correct bullshit with practicing Muslims setting the agenda with their victim culture that prevents us from calling a spade a fucking shovel. Islamists are everywhere in western society among the non-practicing Muslims. The non-practicing Muslims don’t even recognise that they are part of the problem. Western society needs to take back ownership of our culture and way of life and demand from its governments an end to the progressive Islamification of our countries. How does Saudi Arabia prevent Christianity taking hold as a mainstream religion in the country? Intolerance. The west needs to develop a far keener sense of intolerance to what is alien, toxic and dangerous to our society.
Great stuff. I prefer reading then commenting.
But what we could also do is instead of referring to the Arabic word ‘islam’, use the true English translation, that is not denied by any muslims.
SUBMISSION
I agree Ray f, this was an interesting read, I would suggest that the sentence beneath does require a further look as it is open to misinterpretation. The word sympathy is not the same as support. Sympathy could mean, I feel sorry for Sadam’s ex henchmen renamed IS as they have lost their country or, I feel sorry for these idealogicised brainwashed idiots. Had the question in the survey included the word ‘support’ instead of ‘sympathy’, then the response would have been better delineated.
‘And a very large percentage of ordinary “non-practicing” British Muslims (one in five according to one survey) that have either some (14%) or a lot (5%) of sympathy with ISIS.’
I’m not completely confident in the numbers or the terminology. I’d need to check – it was the recent survey commissioned (?) and conducted (?) by The Sun. It could be that the word was “support”, which now applying some thought seems more likely than “sympathy”.
I understand, and agree with the word being open to misinterpretation. But that seems only to apply to non arab speakers. And I researched the interpretation carefully before using it, honestly. But this is the islamic interpretation from
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D8%AA%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%84%D9%85
تستسلم (istaslama) means literally to ‘give in’. that is the google translation. It is no more that a standard verb. I don’t think there is any confusion in the arabic world. I think there is a claim it translates to peace, but the word for peace is salam.
On an arabic translation site i got these other definitions as alternatives
‘Subservience, submission, deference, obedience, submission, delivery’.
All these alternatives ultimately have the same meaning. There is no true or logical argument against its meaning. I spent a long time checking the word out on arabic translation sites and wikipedia before using it.
I think muslims add the ‘to god’ bit, so it becomes ‘give in to god’, but the verb is basically to ‘give in’.
It would equate asking a christian what ‘to follow’ means, and he answered ‘to follow jesus’.
I agree, sympathize and support are two very different verbs. You can sympathize but not support, or you can support but not sympathize.
Ray – good objective analysis there. To add my 50p worth (inflation isn’t it)…
We infidels insist on wilfully or ignorantly applying an Anglicised interpretation to the expression “religion of peace”. To westerners it suggests that it does not advocate violence or conflict. But “peace” in this context, as I understand it, means a successful outcome to ‘struggle’, that struggle being in forcing the submission of an alternative faith. There cannot, by definition, be “peace” without total domination of Islam.
Correct.
The percentages are meaningless anyway when one considers the Islamic duty of taqiyya. So 15% have sympathy? The remaining 85% are most likely lying.
I cannot trust ANY moslem. Especially when you watch the “Norway peace conference” when the speaker addresses the notion that “death for apostacy or infidelity or homosexuality is not an extreme or radical view, but is actually the view of ALL moslems. ALL moslems believe these things”. Those are his words, not mine.
So when moslems are speaking to other moslems and state what they really believe? That the lethal punishments for hypocricy, apostacy, adultery, homosexuality etc… are the most perfect punishments, because they are the punishments described by Allah through his messenger Mohammad (pbuh), then I believe that ALL moslems are more than sympathetic with ISIS. They ALL agree with them, and lie to the “lower than cattle, the worst of beasts” kuffirs about what they really believe.
Solid post soyel – I’ve always liked Christopher Hitchens description of “Islamophobia”:
‘..a word created by fascists and used by cowards to manipulate morons.’
Christopher Hitchins – a giant. RIP. Though like him, I’m an atheist so that is nonsense.
How many took to the streets to protest against Paris or San Bernardino?
Apparently there was a demonstration by moslems in Paris against ISIS. About 40 moslems turned up for it.
http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/alan-yentobs-resignation-only-makes-him-less-accountable-at-the-bbc/
Less accountability seems quite the thing at the BBC.
BBC’s Nick Bryant frothing on the News at Ten about Trump wanting Muslims banned from the US.
“Some people regard it as the politics of the gutter”
Apart from yourself Nick, name the other ‘some people’. BBC bureau staff in the US don’t count.
I think more Americans share this view of Muslims and Islam, following the latest contribution by its adherents to the quality of life in the Golden State, than Nick Bryant’s.
“There is one indisputable fact about Wednesday’s shootings in San Bernardino: if the family of Syed Rizwan Farook had not been allowed to immigrate 30 years ago and if he had not been allowed to import his fiancée Tafsheen Malik from Pakistan in 2014 as part of the ongoing “family reunification” scam, they would not have been able to murder 14 innocent Americans in 2015.” Peter Brimelow.
I do sincerely hope Trump goes all the way to the W.H.
Ted Cruz’s popularity is increasing. He is the biggest challenger to Trump. However, it has been rumoured that whichever of those two gets the nomination, will appoint the other as their running mate. Either way, I hope they both make it to the whitehouse.
erm Hilary Clinton, John Kerry, Barak Obama, all of the Southern Poverty assholes, CAIR, and Katty Kay of course !
Completely OT and nothing BBC related, but I was wandering around youtube and stumbled across a guy who was talking about the muzzies. Amongst his uploads was this little gem:
Saw Camoron on Al BBC visit flooded areas after draining the spending on flood defences.
the guy literally has no shame
Ridiculous comment Nogginator. Once again it’s all the fault of the Government and all that is required is to spend billions that the country does not have …. where in the list does this come as a priority …. NHS, Education, Immigration, Welfare, House building, Roads, Defence, Police, Social Services, Local Government etc, etc. Every program I have watched on these issues the Left’s answer is always ‘investment’ or in normal language – spending. If you build houses on flood plains then sooner or later, with the right conditions, don’t be surprised if those plains … erm … oh yes …flood.
…. and when it comes to snow later in the winter, blame will need to be apportioned for there not being enough grit.
Or maybe, if snow doesn’t come, they will be castigated for having bought and stored too much grit.
Impossible to get it right.
AFP you left something out of your list of choices:
The foreign aid budget?
… and these clowns are to build “however many” 100,00s houses, no concern where they are
… and allow going over the heads of councils to do it.
I hope the desperate rush to create a “housing bubble”, to hide the economic lunacy is worth it.
I live in Cumbria and have seen where all that money was spent. Massive flood defences all along the river in Cockermouth and Keswick. There has been no shortage of flood defences. There needs to be rational analysis of how the rain worked its way down off the Fells, and overwhelmed the extensive flood defences which have been put in place. It is possible that some flood defences made the situation worse, by funneling more water down to where flooding took place.
Were there any attempts, Geyza, to dredge the water courses, clear any obstructions, smooth out corners, keep them free of debris, especially leaves & branches after the autumn fall?
I appreciate what you have witnessed Geyza but I still believe more could have been done for my fellow citizens in Cumbria.
This government and previous one’s have had the money to prevent this, build higher defence walls better funnelling,clear obstructions,etc. But and here’s the BUT…..
This government prefers to pay for other countries flood defences such as in Chennai where this year alone, we will be giving India 280 million pounds in Foreign Aid. Some of this could well be going on this country’s perceived areas of need. Yes bloody India, the country with a space program.
Hello, wake up Tories. Wakey,wakey
Un ring fence Foreign Aid. Vote Tory = Vote Anti Britain.
Charity begins at home did you hear that you Tories,
CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME!!! IS THAT LOUD ENOUGH FOR YA!!
Yet the Environment Agency isn’t exactly short of employees.
http://order-order.com/2014/01/03/uk-environment-agency-massively-over-staffed-arguably-worlds-most-bloated-quango/
I wonder what they all do with their day?
What do they do? Prepare climate change literature and ecomentalist bullshit mostly. Our environment agency is bigger than Canada’s, France’s, Germany’s and Spain’s combined.
I agree with you that flood defences in this country should be a higher priority for our government than in other countries
Yes. I have spent a good while stuck on country lanes behind machinery dredging ditches.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34903577
I’ve only just seen this, but if this is Al Beeb’s attempt to rubbish Trump then I think it’s sure to backfire. Of the 21 beliefs that they think will shock and outrage us, all but a couple seem very much mainstream to me. It just goes to show how totally out of touch they are, not only with their domestic audience, but also with the right-thinking people of the US. Trump may come across a not your regular politician, but he’s every bit as qualified as Mobama is to run the country, much more so in fact.
The BBC won’t like this, either – Trump’s latest pronunciation is very controversial, at least in the BBC staff canteen, even if it draws resonance with a large section of the American population: See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35035190
Much moreso. At least Trump understands business, as in a competitive business which supplies a demand in a free market against competition. Obama understands corporatism, or the state handing out tax-payers money to corporate cronies to guarantee a profit for his buddies, in a way which destroys competition, rips off tax-payers and increases corruption.
I am genuinely interested in a debate and a cross section of views on the true background and motivation for the particular biases perpetuated at Al Beeb. I’m also interested, more in fact, about the true behind the scenes motivations in western governments.
My starter for ten. I’m generally inclined to the view that there is a Marxist agenda in play and, with somewhat less supporting evidence, that Media Studies is a soft subject at university to which sandal enthusiasts are attracted. I’m not convinced by conspiracy theories about New World Orders. Perhaps I should be more willing to embrace the fringe views. And I do wonder how this vast organisation manages to keep its conceit in-house. I mean, not even Jeremy Clarkson has spilt the beans on the way the BBC machine works.
“I mean, not even Jeremy Clarkson has spilt the beans on the way the BBC machine works.”
Not yet, but give him time. He couldn’t spill the beans the moment he left because that would have made him unemployable. Even Jezza has to put his career first.
Anyway, the reason the Al Beeb is like it is is because it’s gradually been infiltrated by minority groups, predominantly ethnics, sexual deviants & disabled (not that the latter should really be classified the same as the other 2, but it’s true nonetheless). I’m not convinced that there has been a deliberate effort from the top to make this massive swing to the left, but they have done nothing to stop it. Once an organisation employs a critical mass of such groups then we see a tipping point and the bias becomes self-perpetuating. I think the education system, from nursery to university, is mainly to blame. The education system is crammed full of green-haired, bean-eating lefties who are indoctrinating our kids. What can we expect when our impressionable young people leave uni with their media studies ‘degrees’? But sadly it starts long before uni – one of my kids is forced to learn ‘ethics’ at secondary school. Needless to say, she learns all she needs to know about ethics from her parents. It’s up to us, the parents, to take responsibility and educate our kids in life skills. Leave the teacher to do the 3 r’s.
>“I mean, not even Jeremy Clarkson has spilt the beans on the way the BBC machine works.”
Not yet, but give him time. He couldn’t spill the beans the moment he left because that would have made him unemployable. Even Jezza has to put his career first.<
He's also probably confidentiality bound for a while. The longer they bind him up the less resonance any comment of his will have as time passes. They can just pass it off as out of date sour grapes.
It is not so much a case of believing in conspiracy theories, more a case of understanding the driving forces in the World. The divisions of Left and Right, capitalist and socialist, are largely illusory or at least outdated and misleading. People are nationalist – believing in nations with their distinctive customs, cultures and histories – or globalists, believing in some form of world government and control. Ordinary people tend to be the former, the elites tend to be the latter. Globalists have differing and sometimes overlapping motivations. They may be motivated by money and greed, viewing humanity as nothing more than producers and consumers to be exploited. They may be motivated by power and the thought of absolute power over humanity, creating a permanent distinction between them as rulers and the masses. They may have religious motivation – brotherhood of Man ideas etc. They may be universalist, considering that distinctions between humankind based on nationality, race, gender and so on are inherently wrong. Together these groups constitute a coalition of nastiness and regardless of motivation they have a common prescription: global governance. In broad terms, this comprises as a handful of large, supra-national states (of which the EU is the prototype) under the auspices of the UN, with supporting structures to enable unrestricted monopoly capitalism and control political dissent. This leads to mass immigration for a free flow of workers, secretive trade agreements e.g. TTIP, the removal of national armies, mass surveillance and censorship. To break down resistance of the masses, history, culture and tradition have to be undermined. To motivate the masses, an apparent reason for global governance needs to be created – global warming. Understand these things and the role and behaviour of the BBC becomes very clear.
Ian – thanks for those thoughts – very cogent. Nationalist vs globalist in particular explains much.
I’m also of the view that the west is largely obliged to follow the US in political direction because of its dominance as the world’s current superpower (notwithstanding that we’re seeing the beginning of the transition to China). And Saudi Arabia, as the world’s largest oil exporter, holds the keys to the Petrodollar. If the US fails to tow the line SA can terminate the US economy in a heartbeat by ending the Petrodollar arrangement set up by Nixon in 1971/2. So the world’s leaders (not China or Russia which explains their ability to display a more maverick politik) are enacting a hidden Wahhabi agenda defined in Riyadh.
Or something.
The British lawyer who last week called for introducing international laws through the United Nations which would make it a crime against humanity to question the reality of man-made global warming has close ties with the Club of Rome – the ultra elitist organization which openly bragged of how it invented the climate change scare as a means of manipulating the global population to accept world government.
http://www.infowars.com/club-of-rome-behind-eco-fascist-purge-to-criminalize-climate-skepticism/
and
On page 75 of their 1990 publication entitled The First Global Revolution, the organization outlined how they would manufacture ecological scares in order to manipulate the public into accepting the imposition of a dictatorial world government run by them.
“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…. All these dangers are caused by human intervention… The real enemy, then, is humanity itself,”
http://www.infowars.com/group-that-admitted-manufacturing-global-warming-threat-still-pushes-same-hoax/
And thus UN Agenda 21.
O/T.
With BBC bias at an all-time and incompetently delivered high, climate alarmism in Paris, Islamaphobiaphobia terminally virulent providing symptoms on all outlets 24-7; with block voting and Rotten Borough’s; Labour’s meltdown; Muslims killing people; Muslims raping children; Tyson Fury enjoying the joys of a stoic victory and his right of free speech; safe spaces being subjected to a diversity of opinion; flooding in Cumbria (is that in Italy?) and that’s before the tricky issue of the EU, mass migration and the escalating war in the ME – its rather hard to keep up with logging the ignorance, bias and narrative. Did I mention Israel? The BBC is struggling through though comrades! Arbeit Macht Frei? No?
Corbyn (J) is playing to the sheeple with his honey coated leftist rhetoric and his #votelabour approach to politics, now that politics only exists in the Twittersphere. From a recent speech:
Running like a golden thread through Labour’s history is the struggle for equality.
And rampant inequality has become the great scandal of our time, sapping the potential of our society.. and tearing at its fabric. Jeremy Corbyn MP.
It’s not gonna wash Mr Corbyn. Socialism fails. Always. And people die. Venezuela anybody? Some of us want our country back and you have nothing to offer but empty old words.
I prefer #voteUKIP
Running like a golden thread through Labour’s history, is the struggle to ensure a fair days pay for a man’s labour with provision for a man’s wellbeing and potential prosperity. Spreading like an aggressive cancer through Labour’s history, is the scourge of Marxism and moral relativism: and rampant cultural Marxism has become the great scandal of our time, sapping the potential of society.. And tearing at its fabric. Ang Ryman Upnorth.
#labourisdead – It’s purpose is served. Vote UKIP – Common Sense, not Common Purpose.
An excellent commentary from Anne Marie Waters:
http://www.shariawatch.org.uk/articles/west-not-defending-its-values#.VmYx6r-N08I
Is it not incumbent upon an impartial informative national broadcaster to give air time for the discussion of such views of national importance?
Scrap the immoral License Fee.
Not seen that article before. An excellent read.
Radio 4, at 9pm, today, Tuesday: All in the Mind:
Tackling Climate Change with Psychology
(1) Could be an admission by the BBC that its all about Brainwashing?
(2) But last time it seemed to be about putting Astrophysicists, Atmospheric Physicists and Solar Astronomers is the loony bin, if they disagree with a Psychologist on Global Warming, and whether it is still happening, or if its caused by man-made carbon dioxide. So I expect its
(3) Political Abuse of Psychiatry by eco-psychiatrists. Professor Stephan Lewandowsky, Chair in Cognitive Psychology at the University of Bristol, believes that Climate scientists who disagree with him on Climate science, should be classified with a “mental disorder”
Lewandowsky and the University of Bristol have added Britain onto the list of countries that have: “Political abuse of psychiatry”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/01/mann-and-lewandowsky-go-psychotic-on-skeptics
Also they are going to talk about “Trigger Warnings” for English Literature students. I think its about providing fragile female students with “smelling salts” as a precaution against the politically incorrect literature of past ages.
Fortunately, Lewandowsky is widely regarded as a crank and his so-called ‘research’ has been debunked as laughably flawed. It is a tragedy that a university of Bristol’s (former) high standing can have slipped so far.
Lewandowsky is a dolt and a religious fundemantalist in the church of mann-made-global-warming. As GCooper states, his research does not measure up to the rigourous standards required of the scientific method. It is so massively flawed, that his methodology would fail in an 11 year old’s first year’s beginner’s science class.
I once spent 4 hours reading about two thirds of an article which exposed the many and massive flaws in his research, such was the extent of how piss poor it was and I am a fast reader.
It is shameful that he should be allowed to use the term “scientist” when what he practices bears no relation at all to what is recognised as science.
I had the radio on in the jalopy today and so I picked up the first part of “Beyond Belief”, devoted, in this instance, to discussion of a papal bull, issued in 1965, which succeeded in placing Catholic-Jewish relations on a far better and more secure footing than hitherto. Not being religious, I doubt if I’d have carried on listening, for any reason other than to break up the tedium. I did stay tuned, however, while the initial segment discussed the background to the 1965 story and aspects of Jewish-Catholic relations through history.
I didn’t doubt that, somehow, islam would miraculously become a dominant element in a beebyanka story about Judaeism and Catholicism.
Waddyaknow… After about five minutes, we got the old canard about this wonderful dhimmitopia, where Christians, Jews and muslims lived in blissful harmony: a place which never existed. The clear implication was that only under the umbrella of benign islam can other religions co-exist.
Owen, never before has a radio broadcast been so aptly named.
The only time that Christianity, Judaism and Islam have peacefully co-existed is when a region was run by a brutal secular dictator, such as Saddam Hussein. even then inter-islamic conflicts have been a constant undercurrent. Countries run by Islamic theocracies have never had peaceful co-existance with Judaism and Christianity.
Christians and Jews were able to live as dhimmis in lands conquered by muslims. They had to pay a special tax, and were liable to having their children stolen for sex slavery or service as soldiers. Sounds good doesn’t it? Welcome to life as a dhimmi in the religion of peace.
You refer to Jizzya. That is the fee you pay to moslem overlords to be allowed to live as a slave in Islamic lands.
I watched the last episode of London Spy and I am struck by the infantile mentality of the Left. There were no grown up relationships, they were all either sentimental or heartless. No loving parents. No children looking after the old. Just endless whining and relentless narcissism.
Its vision of our security services was grotesque. Back in the real world there is real evil, but the BBC are not interested. Nor are they interested in adult virtues, just endless Mummy and Daddy issues, and by extension hatred of anything or anybody with any authority; together with complete ignorance of (and lack of interest in) the world.
It is tempting to say it is sick, but it is just infantile, and sanctimonious. It is as if the BBC is full of immature adolescents. No wonder Newsnight is so bad.
It lost me as a viewer after the no holds barred unnecessary explicit gay orgy scene, with the guy who writes Doctor Who for our kids (Gatiss). Glad I didn’t bother.
The essential premise of our security services (a whole team standing around monitoring him and ensuring his death) suffocating their brightest code breakers (because he was going to go on holiday without permission) was not enough for them. They had to have his mother witnesses it, and his lover injected with HIV. It is like being in the Second World War and the BBC broadcasting a drama about how our security services were rounding up Jews and killing them in gas chambers. I notice the BBC does not do a drama about television personalities (or Liberal and Labour Party MP’s ) abusing children, or Muslim gangs going around Tower Hamlets attacking gays. I notice the director is Flemish. No film about that Dutch film director having his head hacked off in the street by a Muslim because he wrote a book which was critical of Islam. No lets make a drama about homophobia in MI6 instead.
Remember a storyline on the afternoon soap, “Doctors” some months ago, which tackled grooming. “Asian” men were involved in that, but they had to have a middle-class white male as the head of the grooming gang.
I find Doctors to be very useful viewing. After a stressful day at work, it acts as a brilliant mind anesthetic to help me switch off.
Ref to London Spy
It lost me as a viewer on the very first episode on the bridge when the two men looked desirously into each others eyes. I decided then that I did not want to be entertained watching the inevitable (as it apparently turned out), of men gratuitiously bonking each other. So me and she ‘who must be obeyed’, turned over to watch a recording as we so often do when there is nothing to watch, to a recorded episode of Frasier followed by a recording of Dad’s Army. Life became instantly better and all became well with the world!
No men shagging,no swearing, no lefties,no muslims,no Giles Frasers
I have invested in an android M8 box. For all of a one-off 35 quid payment, It allows me to stream films and programmes from all over the world. I have no need of the BBC for entertainment at all. My current box-sets include iZombie, Mr Robot, Bones, Big Bang Theory, NCIS and I have access to just about any film ever released. I also watched Tyson Fury win his world heavyweight boxing title live, thanks to that little device.
Sounds like another vehicle for producers and directors to insert lovely young men into onscreen plotlines who no doubt are even more than grateful off set.
So long as the plot demanded it, and it was handled with sensitivity.
The whole thing was like a Nigel Wrench (remember him ?) wet dream. Typical BBC crap.
Wasn’t he a beeboid who got HIV cottaging, and then gave it to a chap who claimed he had been raped? I’m surprised they didn’t make him Director General.
Wild I commend your dedication in watching this tripe. I assume that you did so in order to look out for leftist bias which you would then report on this site and not as a source of entertainment. I salute you for dedication above and beyond the call of duty. I’m afraid that I lack your endurance. I thought the title was intriguing so I watched the first 15 minutes of episode one and soon realised it was just another BBC production aimed at undermining our country. Therefore, knowing a) that it would annoy me and b) roughly how it would end , I switched the rubbish off. I note that in the Telegraph this morning the BBC is complaining that ITV is cutting its output of high class drama ! Any organisation which produces tosh like London Spy and Cuffs , plus many, many other piles of rubbish , should not throw stones. To think 30 years ago this same organisation could produce Tinker Taylor and Smiley’s People and now produces such utter drivel, all at our expense . Just goes to show that ‘progress’ is not always better.
Last night, at 9.30, half way through ‘Strictly Come Spying’ I found myself wishing for the strength of character to turn off or over. I knew what the outcome would be so there was no point to sitting there exposing myself (mentally) to the illogical yet achingly predictable denouement such BBC ‘drama’ lurches towards.
At the same time I found myself wishing that I were clever enough to fully appreciate all those didactic subtleties but then, just like understanding the messages of Emin’s bed and tent (other than clarifying her status as talentless, total slapper) I have to recognise my limitations.
On the other hand, it was nice to see a Jensen again – although even that classic appearance owed much to Morse.
The drama was on about the same intellectual level as the Sex Pistols in 1977 saying God Save the Queen the UK is a Fascist regime. If they are so keen on having a revolution lets have one, starting with the corrupt self-serving BBC, from Alan Yentob fiddling his expenses to the politically biased trash that they call BBC journalists, who are about as reliable a source of information of contemporary Britain as Lord Haw Haw was of 1940’s Britain.
Doublethinker, the trouble is there was some quality there, some fine acting, some excellent cinematography, even the script had its moments of real emotion, as a Country we are full of talent, but it was all in the service of a notion so infantile it was almost offensive, that the REAL enemy are our security services. Well if you were a Stalinist fellow traveller in the Fifties that might be true, but for the BBC to put on that épater le bourgeois crap at a time like this shows just how out of touch they are – you cannot even call them Sixty-Eighters, because that lot are already living off their hefty tax funded some are more equal than others BBC pension.
Let’s look on the bright side – a crumb or two of comfort fall to us from the President’s fireside
‘Obama… finally admitting that Ft. Hood and Chattanooga were terrorist attacks’
https://ricochet.com/podcasts/three-martini-lunch-12715/
I’m not sure where the BBC now stands on these attacks. Many moons ago BBC reporting of the Foot Hood incident was the subject of a complaint that I made.
My objection was to the way that BBC on-line declared as if fact a story of racial bullying of the muslim US officer responsible for the killing spree. The article appeared to suggest racial discrimination was widespread in the US military – a notion not borne out by facts and heresay about which I felt the BBC reporter believed and passed on as a reflex attitude.
In those days BBC complaints systems were not set at quite such a distant remove from the BBC journos and I was pleased to get a direct reply from the writer. She resolved to amend the article to make clear that the racial bullying claims had been made by the relatives of the murderer. A resolution that I think was reasonable. However, I remained troubled that the initial dubious version of the report had been published and in effect approved by the BBC.
I think this a significant problem with the BBC – the journo wrote in a house-style she assumed to be BBC-approved. It of course included leftist notions and assumptions about events rather than clear factual reporting.
AISI : “However, I remained troubled that the initial dubious version of the report had been published and in effect approved by the BBC.”
Rightly so.
There appears to be an increasing fall in standards, not just of journalists & presenters at the BBC but of their supervisors, Editors & Producers. No one appears to be scrutinising, questioning, requesting checking or confirmation and so on. I can imagine old-school, well trained newspaper journalists and ‘back desk’ people looking on or listening with increasing horror. How long ago was Gilligan? What unbreakable promises were made by the DG and senior BBC people in the aftermath?
BBC standards appear to have declined in inverse proportion to the rise in salaries and the Licence Fee.
BBC going overboard on Trump, even wheeling out US “leading Islamic rights group” … CAIR?
for the uninitiated, that s the Hamas linked, terrorism funding case, money laundering CAIR,
I suppose they ll wheel out “honest” Ibrahim Hooper at some stage.
Oh! … Obama, (as always), took the same position as CAIR and the other Islamic lobby groups.
Has anyone worked out where Trumps hairline starts yet?
Funny thing about the BBC and its reporting of the initial stages of the US presidential contest. I recall when Obama and rival Hilary Clinton were aiming for the top post the BBC were all over them while virtually ignoring the Republicans – until Sarah Palin went for the vice-presidency. Then of course the BBC rolled up its sleeves and did everything it could to discredit her. A right-wing, anti-abortion, born again Christian in the opposing camp to their beloved Obama? The BBC’s hostility towards her was at boiling point.
The BBC is showing a remarkable renewal of interest in the Republican campaign now that Donald Trump has said he doesn’t want Muslims entering the US.
Bias? the BBC is positively pickled in it.
Hilary Clinton is aged 68, Donald Trump is 69. Does anyone test candidates for dementia? Their fingers are on the nuclear button but then,all of a sudden they may have forgotten the password needed to send the missile on its course at the vital moment! They are no spring chickens.
Ref to US election
In my opinion there is little point in prognosticating who will win the US election, the indications of Republican desperation is becoming increasingly clear with their fear factor soundbites. Manna from heaven to the Albeeb. Trump’s latest statements are testament to this. Trump is of my generation, where if we had a problem we dealt with it there and then, todays generation are more cowardly in their approach, they are frightened of being perceived of an an ‘ist’ in todays PC world. This holds them back. Shame really.
Sadly, the immigrant population and indigenous blacks -Democrats-will outnumber the white Republican voters.
The Left rely on heavy immigration for votes as was in evidenced in Oldhamistan recently. There again, what does that say about how stupid Cameron’s current immigration policy is? Not helping Britain’s future is he?
Well, let’s hope PeeCee idiocy doesn’t rule.
Maybe Carson will get in.
They fawned over Roosevelt, they hated Reagan. They fawned over Carter, they hated Nixon. They fawned over Kennedy, they hated Bush senior. They fawned over Clinton, they hated Bush junior. They fawn over Obama, they hate Trump. I cannot helping thinking the BBC has some sort of pattern here. Can you see what it is yet?
Donald Trump, US Presidential nomination candidate, repeatedly referred to as “this guy” by the ever professional and unbiased Evan Davies on Newsnight last night.
Dear BBC, please report the facts and let us decide what we think about them.
The liberals and multiculturalists have sown a whirlwind.
Nice bias this morning on of all things, Thought for the Day.
This was used to castigate Donald Trump for his Muslim prevention of entry policy.
The issue is not whether the policy is wise, workable, racist, impossible, or whether Trump is any good or not.
The issue is why the bBBC should express an opinion on it – and of course naturally against .
Mishals last question on some piece of Pollyfiller on Today was to get the “legal brains” to hopefully fit Trump up for a hate crime re his wanting to ban Muslims.
Good on yer Donald.
Typical ad hoc spontaneous BS from the Toadymenschen in the hope they`llfly a flg, set a rabbit off or generally get a soundbite to pass to Vera Baird, Keir Starmer or Lord Carlile…snitch and bitch-hope President Trump will lend us a small drone for Salford AND for B.H now!
Small drone? More like a couple of MOABs (Massive Ordnance Air Blast, aka Mother Of All Bombs).
Did anyone catch BBC R4 news at 8am?
The lead was a barrage of criticism against Trump’s call to halt muslim immigration “until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on”.
Note that what Trump wants is an examination and debate about Islam, IE so we can “figure out what is going on”.
But examining the real nature of Islam is precisely what the liberal left elite at the BBC and elsewhere don’t want. Because the truth is horrible; Islam is about intolerance, violence, killing infidels, enslaving women, permitting underage sex and more. Islam is not compatible with the Judeo-Christian values of western, liberal society and anyone calling for a debate to “figure it out” must be attacked.
But hilariously, later in the same news bulletin, we get a story criticising UK police for failing to tackle “honour-based crime”. “Honour-based crime” is code for; punishment for those who break islamic, sharia law. It can include abductions, mutilations, beatings and murder. More than 11,000 cases were recorded by UK police forces from 2010-14.
But in the BBC narrative there’s no mention of islam. Just criticism of the UK police.
So in the same bulletin we have; a) An epidemic of abuse and crime and
b) Criticism of someone who wants to “figure out what’s going on”.
Absolutely bonkers.
By the way, the HM Inspectorate of Constabulary report on honour-based violence (HBV) is hilarious in the way in which it ties itself in knots to avoid blaming muslims for HBV.
The word islam doesn’t appear a single time in the report. Instead it used the word BAME (black and minority ethnic). However the report then explains;
“The crimes are, however, typically associated with specific BAME ethnicities. This is far from an ideal methodology, however, since there are many ethnic groups within the BAME population which are not at risk”.
In other words, we all know we’re talking about muslims and islam, but let’s refer to them as BAME, even though we admit it’s misleading and not true.
https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmic/publications/the-depths-of-dishonour/
And heard Today turning in its open sewer( its grave still needs planning permission) re the difference between a “Hate crim”…and “terrorism”.
A Muslim lawyer from up north and a Swedish academic trustie -with Mishal of course-managed to avoid ANY mention of Islam and Muslim-except for Mishal saying that Muslim =victim of course in one case-but did get pops in about those all too regular atrocities…white bloke stabbing a Sikh,Breiviv in Norway…the usual routine atrocities by whitey.
As for Islam…err, lets talk for five minutes and avoid its mention-like a perversion of Just a Minute
Reckon they want us to see that hateful baleful satanic crock of shite called Islamizzm as really being called “Islamophobia”-so we`ll let them rifle through Labours kiddies homes, and thank them for visiting.
We need some stats on how long before the BBC dare to use the word Islam…Muslim.jihad in any context where NOT to do so is dereliction…as well as how long before Murdoch or Climate Change get mentioned in any article to do with media and weather respectively.
Biased Corbyn Scumm…the lot of em in liberal latex land.
“As for Islam…err, lets talk for five minutes and avoid its mention-like a perversion of Just a Minute”
A brilliant observation chrisH, and so true.
If only a comedian would pick up that idea and run with it…
Hindus and Sikhs among others qualify for the BAME moniker, but seem to be ‘under-represented’ in terms of HBV, not to mention as perpetrators of 7/7, 9/11, Paris, Madrid, Sharm el Sheikh, Beirut, San Bernadino etc. You get the general idea. They should be all over the HBV report for quite unfairly being tarred with the same brush.
Krankie losing her cool a wee bit on BBC Scotland when quizzed about the length of time to make the Forth Road Bridge useable again.
Still in Paris posing with real world leaders, surprised she wasn’t asked about the additional C02 emissions and excess travelling that will be required in Scotland thanks to SNP/Scottish Parliament lack of maintenance on our major infrastructure…………………………………Never Mind – I’m sure the extra £12 Million she committed to the ‘Climate Justice Fund’ will be cheered on by the 55,000 Scots whose houses have been damaged by flooding this weekend.
I can’t help feeling the refusal to prosecute the Glasgow bin lorry driver really shows Scotland up for the statist, producer-led mentality it is. If that had been a Tesco or especially G4S or say HSBC lorry, the SNP would be crawling all over it. But it was a corporation bin lorry, so obviously that’s OK.
As for the Forth Road Bridge, surely this is due to ‘English under-investment’.
The wee dwarf sprang to action and gave the driver prosecution immunity within 2 weeks of the accident. Normally she obfuscates on every issue and ‘won’t rush to judgement’. There is a horrible bad smell about all this and the SNP snake oil Muslim lawyer Anwar was on Vine today defending the SNP position on keeping him out of jail. 3 of the families are commencing with a private prosecution but no word on that from the fat controller or Krankie. Something not right.
Something not right. Something big is stinking here and one day it will be investigated.
Camerons willingness to jettison his real thinkers like Gove and Paterson is now costing him.
He`s a shallow oaf, saved only by the fact that he`s not Corbyn scum like most of those he thwarts or is hounded by.
If he had principles-he`d be a leader-as it is, he`s a scientific and numerate numpty-so lets the likes of Truss, Rudd and Morgan, Miller and Mitchell gaggle along behind…the real thinkers are no longer to be found on the airwaves, presumably banished by the BBC and the Party machinery.
I think of Tebbit and Redwood, Boles and Jenkin-hardly Ridley or Lawson,, let alone Powell or Booker, Scruton or Murray…but there you go.
I only say this because Truss simply doesn`t KNOW how to squash the pipsqueaks of a Mishal or her ilk at the BBC.
We all knew that they`d turn floating presents and dogs on stretchers into a pop at climate change advocacy-much as they turned Millie Dowler into a staging post to ambush Murdochs family?
Does anybody but we sadsacks see all this?
How much is the BBC chucking into the Eden or Wastwater “oop norf”…as they rail at the Tories? Why the hell are their goons shouting up at pensioners about a ruined Christmas, when they very mention of Christ makes them break back into hives?…and press still further into the hope that Islam will prevent their thinking of a Godless shallow childless life that gets filled with media salaries and “time on`t telly”
To use Carlisles pensioners and white trash to further Common Purpose is despicable-and you can count the seconds until it gets blamed for the floods…yet when York was pounded under Labour way back-Tewkesbury 2007?…no pops were aimed at the heroic Comrade Brown or Denis Howell for the problems.
How many dinghies could we buy, and a few Swedish snow ploughs too?…if we jettisoned that f****in Liberal millstone that thinks it`s an anchor( a silent “w”?)-namely the grandstanding, Freisler of all things thick, costly and Islamic…the paedo paying Corbyn scumming BBC?
The liberal scum can no longer blame “Acts of God” for all this…let`s blame it on their refusing to repent shall we?…all three of the trinity are correct to piss on this nation, until the fires of Islam are put out…wonder if I`ll get THAT of Fort 4 Da Day?
How many reporters do they have in Cumbria feeding off the residents misfortune?
Al-Beeb doesn’t do reporters these days. They’re all climate experts and race relations consultants.
The answer is none. However there are a great number of BBC employees doing what you mention.
As many as they can shuttle over from the site of the last media disaster to fill hotels with customers who can pay vs. offering refuge to those who cannot.
Maybe Jon Don is flying over to donate a few litres of water? Sure that is a gesture that will be appreciated.
Weather ****** telling us as climate changes they expect more extreme weather. Blah blah blah.
Dave666. How right you are. The Cumbria floods is giving El-Beebo the chance to mention Global Warming as the excuse for almost every raindrop that falls, and there’s nothing like a good flood to get the reporter expenses flowing like water, just as a few days in Paris before Christmas ticks the boxes. So much easier than things like journalism and investigations.
Someone ought to then push them (El-Beebo) to explain why they have been claiming for years that the world is going to fry with Global Warming and everything will dry out, Venice included, and turn to dust.
As I’ve commented before – it’s not just the BBC’s clear bias, it’s the predictable, balls-aching incompetent bore-a-thon which masquerades as BBC “news”. For instance, last night we had the celebrations on BBC1 News at 10 concerning the 50th anniversary of the Race Relations Act. Right in line with the BBC instruction book, we had film of 1960s blacks apparently wandering round London looking disconsolate as they were rejected by white employers and white landlords, plus clips of a few whites being verbally anti-black. Fast forward to the present and we got blacks moaning that they’re still discriminated against. Then the BBC played the trump (whoops!!) card and dragged on Baroness (Doreen) Lawrence to do her race-hustling schtick. So predictable – so boring – so uninformative.
An interesting – even enlightening coverage – might have involved not just talking to the usual crowd, but talking (in a civilised, non-hectoring fashion) to those who thought and think that the RRA was a massive mistake and, in the end, made no difference to what it was ostensibly designed to combat. As it happens the major accomplishments of the RRA were to 1. generate a massive race relations industry (which, admittedly keeps loads of unemployable graduates of our Universities of Chav off the street and in council and other offices everywhere); and 2. exacerbate – by keeping it hidden, unmentionable and undiscussable – the political and other realities of racial difference. The RRA was not meant to get rid of “racism”: it was meant to drive a stake into the heart of the UK’s highly successful, effectively, mono-culture based on European Christianity and substantial social and, as it happens, racial homogeneity.
Unfortunately, the BBC neither informs nor educates: it propagandises its Narrative. Thus discussion on what exercises the little people is always constricted and held within the narrow constraints of “acceptable” discourse. For example, the genuine threat of Moslem terrorism here is never really discussed or even described since the first commandment of editing or broadcasting Islamic “news” is that “it’s nothing to do with Islam”. Even the ludicrous remarks by who exactly (and addressed at who exactly) at the Leytonstone Tube stabbings are exaggerated to exculpate Islam from this and other atrocities. The consequence is that, setting aside the direct efforts of our security services, little is or can be done. If it’s “thoughtcrime” and thus not permitted even to imagine that, say, terrorism and social discord may be closely related to the beliefs and number of Moslems here then you fall at the first hurdle of constructing an effective response.
Very well written. Bang on correct too.
As I keep telling everyone! It’s an El Nino year, and this time it’s a particularly strong one. No one knows what the weather is going to produce this year, and even the long range forecasters are saying that there are no previous similar weather patterns to use as a predictor.
The computer forecasts are all over the place with some forecasting mild others forecasting cold, and a couple in the middle ! The whole thing is driven by early snow cover in Siberia – which did happen, but then it melted and the ‘Midoki’ in the Pacific, which now looks like if it does happen will be too late to give us a severe Winter. When Polar air is warm we get a cold winter, this year it’s cold, so expect a milder one.
Expect more mildness, or at least above average temperatures into January, expect a severe drought and bush fires in Australia, and because of the South Easterly airflow, expect more rain for the UK.
This is not as a result of climate change, it’s the unusual effects of a strong El Nino so beware all those who claim otherwise, they’re either ignorant of climate, or worse fully aware & lying !
“or worse fully aware & lying !”
You nailed it.
BTW, after setting up the scenario by showing distressing scenes from the Northwest together with Shukman’s usual pack of lies and exaggeration, the BBC couldn’t wait to get “Professor” Slingo on the “news” last night to tell the little people that it (what ever “it” is) is due to “climate change”.
There is more sense and attempt at proper analysis in your one paragraph than a whole career’s-worth of outpourings from Julia ‘it’s most likely due to climate change’ Slingo.
I’ll give ’em credit, they certainly can give a lot of tongue in cheek.
The BBC of course being so trusted and transparent with facts, especially when it comes to its own survival.
Maybe ITV should simply send out a spokesperson to explain they are comfortable in their belief they got it about right, and their equivalent of CECUTT has agreed with them. And no point asking for proof of anything as it’s excluded ‘for the purposes of’.
If its true that the investigations have revealed that the BBC has received hundreds of complaints by scientists, who have all been fobbed off by the BBC’s ‘best scientific experts’ excuse. And 25 of these 28 experts, did not have any scientific qualifications. Then the BBC’s misrepresentation of the facts, was a lie. So this could influence the next royal charter, especially the use of this information to justify the replacement of the BBC Trust, and other undisclosed planned actions as regards the complaints process, and those people involved.
So the BBC are complaining that ITV have stated that BBC programming shows “lack of distinctiveness” and rejects it from a corporate rival and “lobbyist”… Yet this is the exact same criticism which was submitted by the BBC trust and Ofcom.
The reason the BBC shows a “lack of distinctiveness” is because they have volutarily wrapped themselves in many layers of liberal progressive politically correct extreme censorship. This has led them to abandon their charter obligations to entertain and educate and left them becoming nothing more than a propaganda outlet which relentlessly indoctrinates instead.
When you know exactly what the world needs i.e. more “liberal’ policies, and you already have thought of the solution why not set up your own “Commission”. Its sounds great, it sound official like the government appointed you, and you can pre-select your own “commissioners” who fortunately will think like you do. Don’t forget to include a titled somebody, as a touch of ermine goes a long way and of course the appropriate ethnic and gender balance. Also make sure your “Commission” has a long and grandiose title and don’t plan to make any recommendation for at least two years, because that way everyone will think you had many difficult, nay painful deliberations along the way. As you already know what your recommendations are going to be you only need set aside three or four weekends each year for convivial get-togethers with your buddies. Al Beeb and the rest of the rat pack are bound to be enthralled, and will make sure you get top billing.
Oh by the way, have you seen the recommendations from the most excellent Commission on Religion and Belief in Public Life ?
If you wonder why you are not hearing much on the BBC about Dr Ben Carson’s campaign for the Republican US Presidential nomination then a clue may be contained in this BBC web-site article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35037701
Bias?
Hmmmmnnnnn .. . . .
Probably not intentional but a simplistic bit of writing and slack editing based on some selective reporting and Carson is now tarred with the same brush as Trump in the eyes of the BBC viewing public.
Daily Politics today, pro EU Laura Sandys says ‘the jungle in Calais would be moved to Dover if we came out of EU’.
Not if they were made to swim the channel.
Of course they wouldn’t. You just have a government with some steel that says get lost and go back to where you came from!! Bloody easy!
Jeremy Vine does his bit re. Donald Trump’s suggestion that the USA stops importing Muslims until they have had a proper risk assessment.
Remarkably Ishtiaq Hussain from Northampton ‘manages’ to call in with his suggestion that his children might like to visit Disney Land or Yosemite, (or the World Trade Center or Boston?). I notice that ‘Dale’ from Pontypridd similarly has a hot line to Vine when the ‘Evil Toreees’ are on the rampage.
Shouldn’t we be told how these guys always seem to get through, or more likely, get called?
I heard that on Vine too JimS, but I thought the Englishman from Bradford (not often you get to write that) was good against the Northampton Mohammedan and made some good points; they gave airtime to that creature from the Guardian, Jonathan Freedland prior to that – what a total tw@t!
If people don’t like what Trump says: they won’t vote for him, that’s democracy.
Rumours of Trump’s imminent electoral demise have been numerous during his campaign for the Republican nomination, and have so far proved to be inaccurate to say the least; I believe the same will be the case with his statement about the votaries of the RoP.
The BBC is now running a story telling us that David Cameron doesn’t approve of Donald Trump’s arguably sensible approach, (the precautionary principle beloved of ‘the left’).
Of the 15 sentence/paragraphs only 7 relate to the story, the rest is just padding to tell us that ‘some’ people don’t like Donald Trump.
‘Some’ people, (500 million?), in Europe and North America are wondering why, following our contemporary ‘Pearl Harbors’, our politicians continue to support an open-door policy for the ‘Japanese’, but never make a case for it.
There used to be a rude expression in the IT world when the client kept making the same mistakes – “RTFM” – I suggest Cameron and his spokeswomen get a copy of the ‘manual’ and read it over the Christmas holiday.
‘The BBC is now running a story telling us that David Cameron doesn’t approve…”
What’s Clive Myrie have to say?
Seems ‘views my own’ don’t apply any more anywhere.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/police-greater-manchester-not-prepared-10564851
A new report shows that Police are not willing to investigate (Dis) honour killings and other crimes, and it’s for the same onld reason that the Police management are too frightened of being called that meaningless word – Waycist.
Despite this being a major story, it isn’t being covered by the BBC, and no surprises as to why!
Trump was the subject to a BBc report on the 13:00 BBc 1 news you can almost feel their dislike of him through the airwaves.
I did notice the Poundland murder story has vanished. It’s still on the web page which tells you not a lot.
Ref to Trump.
If we replace the word muslim with ebola, knowing that ebola is a killer. Should not the disease be cleared up before ebola is allowed to enter the country.
Add to this a strain of ebola that destroys one’s culture and annihilates social cohesion, then this new form of ebola becomes something to most definitely stop from entering the country.
This in essence is what Trump is saying.
Added to which the Left wing BBC is against Trump which further reinforces to me that he is right.
I think Trump is on the money, I’ll be watching his popularity polls.
The BBC writes Cameron’s scripts. Dave attacks Trump.
‘The prime minister’s official spokeswoman said Mr Cameron “completely disagrees with Donald Trump”.
Campaigners against Mr Trump’s golf course development in Scotland have submitted a petition to Parliament calling for him to be barred from the UK “for his continued, unrepentant hate speech and unacceptable behaviour”.
Mr Cameron’s spokeswoman declined to say whether he would be willing to meet Mr Trump or whether he could be barred from the UK, describing the questions as “hypothetical”.
Teresa will never allow him here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35037553
You literally couldn t make this sh–t up
Cameron, Obama, Clinton, May,
Mark Steyn rationalises the lunacy …
The more I see of Mark Steyn, the more I like him.
UPDATE RE SCRIPTS
Katty Kay’s piece appears to have been re-written. B-BBC influenced?
I’m off to check.
No, I think I’m wrong. The link I provided above was to a piece unsigned. My memory could be going! 🙂
http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/donald-trump-represents-the-views-of-millions-of-americans-does-the-bbc-not-realise-this/
They realise full well.
Like they care.
Mr. Trump is using democratic process to make a case. As an aspiring politician that is his right. And for the American people to assess and vote accordingly.
The BBC is supposed to report, and just report, objectively. As a Charter signatory that is their obligation.
That they have not, do not and will not with anyone they don’t like should set off alarm bells within the UK.
Mr. Liddle seems to understand how they work pretty well.
That would be funny if Trump became President then. One can only hope.
I’ve just watched Sky news running their anti-Trump agenda. The BBc did actually run his speech long enough for you to be able to hear the applause from the crowd, Sky cut it short.
Ref wronged’s post – Didn’t someone once (accurately) describe Islam as “ideological ebola”?
How is Jeremy Vine so consistently allowed to get away with the biased garbage that masquerades as a radio show?
Today we had Jonathan Freedland from the Guardian (where else?) coming out with the usual apologist, left-wing nonsense about how Donald Trump was sinister and evil because he dared to mention that the US needs to halt immigration until it can sort out what is going on with these islamic terrorists. Freedland then goes on to describe the murders (and attempted murder at Leytonstone) as “stupid acts”.
No Jonathan, Donald Trump is not sinister for wanting to protect innocent citizens, he is sensible.
And no Jonathan, killing innocent bystanders and trying to hack off their heads with a knife in the name of islam is not an act of stupidity, it is an act of terrorism.
Hang your head in shame.
I would only disagree with you to this extent: hacking off the heads of unbelievers is an act of islam. It’s all in the manual, dictated by allah to a psycho paedophile.
You are right. Cutting someone’s head off in the name of Islam is an act of terrorism and bloody murder. An act of stupidity, by contrast, would be saying that cutting someone’s head off in the name of Islam was merely an act of stupidity.
Generic Vine show:
12pm Biased News
12.05 Record – The Smiths
12.10 Carefully selected subject 1, discuss
12.12 Lefty contributor, often from the Guardian
12.20 Someone barely right of centre gives a smaller contribution
12.22 Record – Joy Division
12.25 Various callers and texters (normally the same ones) with a (selected) left view, often that loud-mouthed teacher who made an appearance on QT the other night.
12.30 Repeat for the next the three 30 minute segments, but add records by the Jam, Billy Bragg, Kirsty Macoll, Morrissey, New Order, John Lennon or the Clash.
2.00pm More biased news…
When Vine is unavailable, replace with cloned lefty (eg O’Connell, Feltz)
Ian Curtis had allegdly right wing politics .Morissey has made dumb xenophobic comments and controversial songs.
If he did play the Smiths and Joy Division (would that be likely with the 3rd Reich name reference) I might listen to his show, no not really.. As it is I can’t remember the last time I did listen to it
Quentin Letts has a good article on the Spectator website about the criticism levelled at his climate change talk on Radio 4.
http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/how-the-bbc-trust-found-me-guilty-of-heresy-on-climate-change/