Time for a new OPEN thread for you to detail the bias. The floor is yours….
MIDWEEK OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir Nov 16, 01:49
Weekend 16th November 2024
In 1987, Kennedy founded the Environmental Litigation Clinic at Pace University School of Law, where for three decades he was… - vlad Nov 16, 01:36
Weekend 16th November 2024
I only watch the BBC news on very rare occasions when I can’t sleep. Last night I switched on wondering,… - Zephir Nov 16, 01:33
Weekend 16th November 2024
All those “mass protests”against a country that offered to wipe out their debts and give them a trade deal, oh… - Zephir Nov 16, 01:13
Weekend 16th November 2024
Bit like the insurrection in Ukraine where their democratically elected president was usurped and exiled and Zelensky put in his… - Nibor Nov 15, 23:25
Weekend 16th November 2024
Dear Brissles, As a lorry driver I note : That every Summer the traffic increases It doesn’t decrease in autumn,… - BRISSLES Nov 15, 22:44
Weekend 16th November 2024
Nibor … .Being long retired I generally avoid the ‘old’ generally recognised rush hour on the roads. In more recent… - Nibor Nov 15, 22:36
Weekend 16th November 2024
Economy not doing as well as Rachel Reeves and Labour expecting it to do? Hold on! It should be stratosphering.… - pugnazious Nov 15, 22:17
Weekend 16th November 2024
Odd thing but diving into the swamp that is X, apparently, and I’ve never yet come across any of this… - Emmanuel Goldstein Nov 15, 22:12
Midweek 13th November 2024
My mistake. Each boat stopped saves us about £3 million every year.
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
Just had misfortune to hear PM with Eddie Mair (I now try to avoid BBC in all forms these days). Mair introduced a report on the Rotherham child abuse scandal. The report by a Chris Ballance, it was quite a long report, maybe 5 minutes, mainly filled by interviews with victims families. However not once in the introduction or whole report was the ethnicity or religion of the gangs of perpetrators mentioned.
They had one poor lady saying “this is going on all over the country” – I’m sure she was referring to the Islamic gangs, but by editing she appeared to conform to the now standard BBC message that child abuse is just by men everywhere. Scandalous really for the BBC to further exploit victims by misrepresenting their views and suppressing their stories. Organised child abuse will NEVER be solved if our fearless national broadcaster won’t even report the facts to the people. Scrap the BBC.
Can the BBC still use the word “men”? I thought it was banned and the phrase “non gender specific bipedal mammals” was to used instead.
The only exception to this new phrase is when describing criminal Muslim men then the correct phrase is “non gender specific bipedal Asian mammals”.
Tabs , LOL !!!!! It is only a matter of time before there will be a genocide of men. Problem for the teenagers at the BBC is that some of them are maybe , genetically, men !!!
Genetically maybe, Grant, but they self identify as transgender. You sound transphobic to me 🙂
“non gender specific bipedal mammals”
But that would discriminate against people with bits missing.
How about “Non Gender Specific Naked Apes”?
The “apes” bit may offend Christians and Creationists so that would be allowed, and encouraged, at the BBC.
They certainly can, as in ‘Rotherham men’.
Yes, I too usually avoid ‘PM’ and Eddie Mair but did hear these interviews: plenty of emoting and the usual BBC misdirection too, with no mention of Islam. See my remarks about the creation of false “constituencies” near the end of the last open thread (the linked article by the Czech doctor from Sheffield about Islamicisation in the UK).
I agree with you about the phrase “all over the country”; there seemed to be an attempt to create another partly false constituency (of all victims of child abuse nationwide) when the real issue here was the Pakistani Muslim grooming in Rotherham and other towns in northern England. Faced with unending bad news about Islam in the UK, the BBC and other MSM resort to omission, distortion and even falsification of truth to try to finesse away the unwanted information.
There is a trilogy for Lord Reith to be proud of: omission, distortion and falsification!
And, while I’m at it, the reporter Chris must be just about the only ‘Balance’ in the BBC these days.
I think your ODF is a brilliant summing up of 21st century BBC. As you say ,so far away from Reith’s intention that he must be spinning in his grave.
Please don’t scrap the BBC – just their news and current affairs arm. My take is that in doing this the health of the nation, particularly that linked to high blood pressure, would be radically improved.
The trouble is all aspects of their broadcasting are suffused with agenda setting, from wildlife programmes to dramas. Note those attending the notorious 28gate meeting even included the head of children’s programming.
johnny,
Absolutely right.
ANY platform can be utilised to push an agenda. It doesn’t have to be overt either.
In fact, the less obvious the better in many cases as too candid a propaganda line is usually spotted for the BS it is.
It all has to go before any improvements can be made.
Nuke it from orbit…..it’s the only way to be sure.
Just so that one was beginning to think that Rotherham was an anamoly
Northumbria Police have charged 20 people with sexual offences as part of Operation Sanctuary
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/northumbria-police-charged-20-people-8587632
The Mohammed and Hussain count is high.
Muslims are the only immigrant group that will lie and cheat to enter a non-Islamic nation, and once here, start the Jihad. No other group does that. Not one. Nada. Zero.
BBC breaking news…
Northumbria Police congratulate the Muslim community for integrating and mixing with the community. 20 Muslim men in particular showed exceptional effort to chat, meet and socialise with local youngsters outside of their own Muslim community.
Ah, those type of men. And I thought the cops were investigating 20 ageing Christian Rock stars with BBC staff cadging a ride in their helicopters..
Not only does the BBC try its best to suppress the news about Muslim rape gangs all over our country , they are trying to get us to let more of these vile people into our country. They are a disgusting organisation that seems dedicated to doing as much damage to the UK and its people as possible.
Is there a possibility that Muslims misinterpret “integration” as integrating physically with young non-Muslim girls.
I believe that the number of girls raped by Muslim men is around 10,000 to 30,000. Assuming a very conservative ten Muslim men to a girl, we have some 100,000 to 300,000 Muslim men who have “integrated” with White girls. This is virtually the entire sexually active Pakistani Muslim male community. It stands to reason that virtually all imams knew this was going on, and said nothing. Couldn’t possibly, because what the Muslim men were doing was doctrinally Islamic.
Finally the authorities – they knew what was going on – what can only be truthfully termed as a major war crime, and they did nothing. They are now pretending that they ignored this wear crime for ostensibly a good reasons – not wanting to appear racist.
War crime – Islam is at war with all other religions. Rape is one weapon in the war. That the authorities allowed this to happen. In peacetime. On their own. There is no precedent for such an event in all history, anywhere. Period. No wonder the establishment is doing everything to brush it under the carpet. Therefore, the vast majority of rapes oe 99% of them will never come to court.
” There is no precedent for such an event in all history, anywhere. Period. ”
There is, however, an extremely important precedent in terms of a trial for dealing with it.
I gather that you don’t like ’em very much.
The BBC? No, I don’t.
Pair arrested at Heathrow Airport over FGM offences. No national interest in this story: the bBBC is at it again, hiding it away under ‘London’. Nothing to see here, move along now.
Deutsche Bank and UBS lose bonus tax case
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35761706
On every single report of this news item the BBC has seen fit to give high prominence to the fact that the Tory Business Secretary Sajid Javid was working at Deutsche Bank during the period.
“A spokesman for Mr Javid said: “This is a matter between Deutsche Bank and HMRC.
“Sajid Javid was paid with all tax deducted already. He received no benefit whatsoever from this scheme and all taxes due have been paid.””
It wasn’t a tax evasion scheme and noting the absence of Police involvement no crime was committed by anyone either, so why the need to smear someone, unless it’s because you don’t like their political allegiances
Thoughtful, there’s a good reason for flagging up Javid’s employment and involvement because he was the one, apparently, who talked Osborne into cutting the top rate Income Tax band in half “in order to get more in.”. He was all over the BBC afterwards trying to justify the cut at a time when those on lower incomes at a time of economic difficulty were not enjoying the same sort of benefit.
In the reference to this on the news that I heard yesterday, no-one at the BBC was sharp enough or had a good enough memory to make the link to the top IT rate cut nor the contentious front page article concerning the tax raised in the Times newspaper last week.
True, it was not evasion. It was an attempt at (aggressive) tax avoidance via a scheme that may or may not be legitimate. Yes, there was hypocrisy on the part of the BBC, some of whose employees and contractees have been caught doing the same. But they really should have held Javid’s feet to the fire on that one. And then called in Ed Miliband or Margaret Hodge for an intensive grilling but I can’t see that happening with present bias levels at the BBC.
You would have thought that in pre-Budget week the BBC would have been all over that story and continuously, too. Lucky for Dave & GO that they had that Sunday Trading hoo-hah going on.
Let the fanfare trumpets sound out as Jeremy Corbyn has asked his 100th question at PMQs !!
Why on earth the BBC should think this minor waymark newsworthy can only be explained by their utter love for the Labour party & its leadership. I cannot think of any other political opposition leader Labour or otherwise where this has been even considered for passing comment, let alone a news item !
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35765254
Except thoughtful, that it wasn’t, like many of his other questions, HIS question. It will have been from some marxist tom, dick or harry from the BBC journalist pool.
BBC Online News:
( From the section Beds, Herts & Bucks)
“” Luton police officer ‘trawled Facebook for teen sex'””
“”Mohammad Arshad, 35, of Luton, groomed underage girls online and pestered them for sex, sometimes paying them, St Albans Crown Court heard.
He raped a 14-year-old victim on the back seat of his car.
Arshad was convicted earlier of 17 charges relating to 12 girls and was warned he faced a substantial jail term when sentenced next month””.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-35766686
The BBC have reported this accurately, but have buried it away under a county section.
The crime is extremely serious, particularly as it involved a police officer in a position of trust.
Why did they bury the story? The recent case of the footballer and a consenting 15 year old girl springs to mind, and that was covered by the BBC almost daily.
..
Dover, It was not a white Christian police officer ! But we all know the answer to your rhetorical question. Good one for Scott/Marvin/Jerrold though !
John Longworth, the man defenestrated from his job as the boss of the British Chambers of Commerce by Europhiliacs led by No 10, has revealed something very pertinent about the BBC.
From the Mail tonight:
“He revealed: ‘The German embassy have been running a series of dinners. They have invited sympathetic politicians, people they believe they can persuade, editorial directors of the BBC. And the tone of the dinners has been how can we collectively persuade the British public to stay in.’
He says the dinners started before Christmas and Mr Longworth was among the guests. Of the dinners, he said: ‘It’s definitely a co-ordinated effort. But there is a fine line to be drawn between feeling loved by our European partner and interfering in the internal affairs of another state.’”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3483278/Anti-EU-business-chief-knifed-Downing-Street-gives-angry-revealing-interview.html
No doubt the usual suspects will be along soon to lie to us that we can’t believe a word of it because it appeared in the Mail.
GC, none of this surprises me. The EU and their fellow travellers in UK are running scared. But I cannot be bribed to sell out this country. Because Eurocrats and Cameron and the others are so corrupt, they assume that we can all be bribed. It is inconceivable to these wretched people that some of us will do what we believe is right out of principle and not for money.
For sure they all want us to stay as we are the second largest contributor to the EU. Should we leave, and I certainly hope we do, they will have to cover our contribution themselves. Having said that Merkel seems to find billions down the back of her sofa to pay whatever the Turks are demanding.
True – though I have ever worked out how she manages to find so much of our money down the back of her sofa!
GC , LOL ! Merkel seems a bit quiet now. Post Menopause or is the long-time slumbering Wehrmacht going to wake ? Difficult to predict which way the wind is blowing in Europe.
It’s the Turkish situation that really scares me. We have an unstable country led by an Islamist dictator using Moslem invaders to hold us to ransom. The only people apparently unable to see the risk are European leaders like Merkel and Cameron.
Once the imbeciles who favour Turkish admission to the EU get their way, we will have an even bigger Trojan horse within the walls than we already have with Moslems from the Indian subcontinent.
At that point, a dystopia seems to be on the cards. I cannot understand why these fools are letting it happen.
I have only spoken to two people who said they would be voting to remain, everyone else I talk to about the referendum says they will be voting to leave; and many of them say that most other people they know will be voting out too.
I hope to goodness we prevail, because if we don’t – I can’t see any path back for our country; and we’ll NEVER get another one.
I wish I knew such sensible people! Even some members of my own family are influenced by Project Fear. None of them likes the EU a jot, yet they seem terrified of the sort of independence which made this country great. I suppose that is what exposure to socialism does to you. We are not the people we once were – our self-confidence has been greatly eroded by the worms.
This is why the BBC is so dangerous – it is preying on people’s insecurities, which, of course, it has done so much to create in the first place.
The stakes could not he higher and your family members must understand that this is an existential matter. That we have no choice but to go and soon.
The opposition knows just how high the stakes really are. We go and the EU is finished as an oppressive power. Not only that but the whole cultural marxist hold over the people starts to weaken. Break the power of the EU and we start to make a future for our children.
Anyone who puts their prosperity and comfort before the need to leave is a traitor .
It is that simple.
I ‘eavesdrop’ on an online group of Expats who are campaigning vigorously for the UK to remain IN the EU, and purely for their own selfish reasons. To a man, or woman, they have no intention of moving back, but feel they have every right to vote for the UK to stay in, just to protect their cosy little lifestyles elsewhere in the EU. The sense of panic on there now is laughable. They are convinced that they will be driven from their homes the very minute the vote to leave is confirmed, and that they will lose all their benefits and pensions. If I try a counter-argument on there, I am shot down in flames. They are not interested at all in any form of debate. One of my great pleasures, if the vote is for OUT, will be to post on there and gloat!
I ask people how countries like Australia and New Zealand survive out in the “dark”.
Essentially European countries in origin (I’m making no apology for that description), stuck on the edge of SE Asia and, increasingly, not lacking in self confidence.
Could also mention Japan. Admittedly much closer to its neighbours culturally, but isolationist in many respects. Does OK.
I totally agree. I think this is our one and only chance to get Britain out of the EU. I am still getting over the fact that David Cameron actually wants the country to remain, but I am grateful that he at least gave us the referendum. If the vote is to stay in, then that will be the end of the UK as we know it.
Echo that, BritGirl. Think my mind has been made up this month, helped – not least – by the ridiculous ‘Scare Campaign’.
My mood varies on the subject but this morning, in a slight burst of gloom, I wonder – again – whether the UK still has the guts to vote ‘Out’? I think the spirit of the people has been thoroughly squashed over the last five decades. Doubt that our national broadcaster will want to help revive it anytime soon.
Cameron and Merkel can see the danger no doubt but through fear and a natural desire to appease cannot begin to contemplate what really needs to be done. One is paralysed by past imagined guilt and the other ? Our Cameron. Well he is nothing but a bully and like all bullies a coward at heart.
He is just a dodgy ‘used car salesman’
Shwmae taffman.
I’ll settle for Pr@. PREVIOUSLY I helped to get him elected (best worst choice).
Rhif Saith (Number 7)
A bit like Essexman ? Understandable, but next time vote Brexit or Nigel Farage .
BTW, why is Nigel Farage not appearing on Al Beeb or MSM of late – Is the ‘free world’ censoring him ? Or are they focusing on one or two ‘stalking horses’ who will conveniently change sides at the last minute ?
Nothing like EMan!!!
Last 3 votes have been for “others”!!!!
It is not surprising that Merkel the Mad is not quite so chirpy as she used to be. “Refugee” reception centres are now being attacked at the rate of three a day. There has been a rapid upsurge in the popularity of the AfD, the Alternative for Germany before the three state elections this Sunday. The polls predict one in five will vote for the AfD in Sachsen-Anhalt.Their popularity is also in double digits in the other two regions. Unlike UKIP, the AfD will get representation in the state parliaments commensurate with their standing. The German media is panicing about the collapse of Schengen and the slow death of the “European project”. “What has happened to European solidarity?” “What has happened to our community of European values?”. It’s news to me that there ever was a “community of European values”. What drivel! The sooner we leave the EU bedlam the better.
While there is a big plan to swap ‘illegals’ for Syrian refugees being proposed by Turkey. I smell a rat, whereby our ‘used car salesman’ tries the biggest magic trick since Paul Daniels pulled a rabbit out of a hat .
As rumours abound in the western parts of our island of plans to build refugee camps, a reminder of the pre election promise …
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prime-minister-pledges-to-control-and-reduce-immigration
Pembroke army training camp?
Too close for comfort .
Don`t worry Taffman , I ,along with most of Essex are for out, but can you deliver PC & Labourites , to vote out . I will still be voting Conservative in other elections ,however.
Essexman
I am sure that we are all glad to have you on board!
I wish I could ‘deliver PC & Labourites , to vote out’, but I am trying .
One minor point , if the leader of the Conservative party was a ‘Dodgy Used Car Salesman’ or a donkey wearing a Conservative ribbon would you still vote for them ?
Of course , they would be a wheeler dealer, & know how to manage an economy better.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35777274
A parthian shot from Obama ?
The first thing the Wehrmacht should do, is what it should have done in 1934, and get rid the insane German leader.
Will there be another “Night of the Generals”?
Fraternising with another state to undermine UK sovereignty.
Isn’t that called treason?
Last night on one of the freeview channels we watched a ‘Yes Minister’. Lots of laughter from the studio audience. Still not sure if it was genuine but different ladies and men with different types of laughter, although it did sound as though somebody was switching it off as suited. If you listen to what passes for comedy now on the BBC a general hum starts, lasts for several seconds and then is switched off. If the current laughter was genuine it would be clearer than the older sound track. It isn’t. The BBC can’t even be honest about its audience.
Deborah
Its known as ‘canned laughter’
Al beeb have been at it for years as they ‘don’t do’ comedy any more but they pretend they do .
Its for their ‘tick box’.
Canned laughter
Modern BBC comedies are targeted at the minorities and intellectually challenged. I’m sure next week will see the return of Russ Abbott! I’m sure he will challenge the grey cells as he slips on a multi-cultured banana skin.
See what you did there, AL, clever! ” I’m sure he will challenge the grey cells as he slips on a multi-cultured banana skin.” 🙂
An apalling affront to freedom reported as wonderful in the Manchester Evening Lies. A primary schools is indoctrinating children in political correctness, a couple of parents object – mildly, and largely about their young children being subjected to gay sex education without their permission.
So the Fascist Tony Lloyds Political Correctness Enforcement Squad are called into action to tell these parents that they are not allowed to intervene in their childrens indoctrination.
It really is like a story we used to be told about oppressive dictatorships and how lucky we were to be free. I’m sure it won’t be long before the BBC are trumpeting this from the rooftops as a good thing.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/wigan-headteacher-stands-up-homophobia-11017202
Wonderful to see how swiftly Manchester’s finest swung into action; just unfortunate they weren’t so sedulous in investigating and prosecuting the members of the Islamic rape gangs, who preyed (prey) on female, British children within the area covered by GMP.
Can you imagine what the reaction would have been, if they had tried to put such a “production” on at a school where the pupils were predominantly Muslim?
I wonder, if a school ever dared to do such a thing, how differently the police and the media would treat any outraged Mohammedan parents who spoke out against it?
This is far from a minor point. I suspect we all know the answer. This is how freedom dies. One step at a time by intimidation and a certain self rightousness that is the more dangerous because it comes from the very institutions of the state that should be on the side of freedom,
Dave S
And state that should look after its own indigenous population.
The government throws money away on so called foreign aid while our own people go without .
Over to you Marvin etc or anyone else ‘on night shift or duty’ at Al Beeb who cares to answer…
This is what I can’t understand – the BBC is pro-Gay and pro-Muslim. The two don’t reconcile, so how would it explain that ‘gay workshop’ to Muslim parents? Or has apartheid already reared its ugly head? One thing I do know is that, if the UK becomes fully Islamised, the BBC directors and staff will find themselves the first to be thrown from the top of BBC HQ. Can they not see that?
“the BBC is pro-Gay and pro-Muslim. The two don’t reconcile”
They don’t need to reconcile. The BBC is defined by what it is against, not what it is in favour of. So long as the BBC’s stance is against everything traditionally white and English (and I mean English, not British), that’s fine.
For once I concede to the BBC. They are in tune with gay, lesbian and feminist opinion. For years I have argue that muslims oppress women, gays etc. and have been accused by gays and feminists of my Islamophobia and bigotry. Islam apparently has a place for them, and they are in the streets defending Islam. Show them videos of stoning women, raping women, hanging gays; it has no effect. They are against our traditional society composed of ‘far right bigots’.
I will never speak out against Islam in defence of gays, and certainly not in defence of women who tell me that wearing the burka is a matter of choice.
Know the enemy – they are embraced by the BBC
This is exactly right. The Cultural Marxist’s game is to oppose anything that forms a core belief of ‘bourgeois’ society. It doesn’t matter if their ’causes’ are self-contradictory because the aim is to bring the entire system down so that they can rebuild the ‘perfect’ society from the ashes.
Pol Pot showed us how well this works.
The typical CM foot soldier – in other words the average BBC Leftie – wouldn’t recognise these aims and has no idea that she or he is part of a plan. They just have an oppositioinal mindset instilled in them during their time at university and by the cultural programming from the ‘approved’ media sources whose output they consume. They are like robots or pawns – just dumb players in a long term strategy.
> A primary schools is indoctrinating children in political correctness
It’s not political correctness to teach children about the world in a way that means they won’t be full of irrational hatred. I realise that you were denied that opportunity as a youngster – but your reliance on hatred, and lies to back up that hatred, as a means of publicising yourself on this site is a clue to the rest of us why a little education can go a long way.
> It really is like a story we used to be told about oppressive dictatorships and how lucky we were to be free.
No it’s not. It’s about teachers preparing children for the real world, and a sad old duffer objecting to the possibility of people growing up to be less bitter and twisted than they are.
Yet again you completely miss the point Jerrod – just like the Fascists in Rotherham did, determined to make their crazed ideas work in the face of truth & reality, which they regard as ‘hate filled’ ‘vile’ and every other ‘ism’ you care to mention.
Dismissing a mid 30 year old white male as a sad old duffer just shows what a vile hate filled racist you are ! (see how I did that Jerrod – it is supposed to work both ways you know, or is it your belief you can’t be waycist against white people?)
The guys point is not the fact that of content, it’s the age his children where exposed to it without his consent or knowledge.
For expressing that he got a visit from the Political Correctness Enforcement Squad and accused in the Manchester Evening Lies as a Homophobe.
Is it the fact that you believe everyone who expresses an opinion different to yours needs to be treated as a criminal Jerrod? Can you not see the oppression in doing that? I guess you think Hitler’s Germany and Stalins Russia were shinning beacons of how a country should be run.
How long will it be before you start advocating the state murder of those who don’t share your views? Believe me you are already on that slippery slope, whether you can see it or not !
Calling people Fascists doesn’t make them so. Just like calling yourself “Thoughtful” doesn’t make you a great thinker.
You’re overreacting to someone else being put out that their overreaction caused a reaction in others. And you’re upset that future generations are being taught in ways that will mean fewer people will grow up to become misanthrophic, fear-fuelled, nasty little hatemongers.
You want to suppress education, because it doesn’t fit in with your own bigoted views. And you call other people fascists because you don’t have the honesty to admit what you are yourself.
Jerrod, you’re very selective to the posts/people you question/attack, avoiding those that you know are an inconvenient truth, ie they don’t fit with the ‘right on’ pink fluffy world view of Jerrod/Scot.
What have you to say on the subject of Dover Sentry’s post above and the BBC’s avoidance of the negative reporting on such subjects?
If Thoughful was to call you a sad old Qu%^n would you consider that acceptable?
> Jerrod, you’re very selective to the posts/people you question/attack
I don’t have time to sit on here all day, responding to everyone.
> avoiding most that you you know are an inconvenient truth that don’t fit with the ‘right on’ world view of Jerrod.
That’s your opinion. But as you’ve previously claimed that things must be immoral if you can’t explain them to your children, and that the BBC must be committing fraud because the Sunday night Strictly results show is recorded on Saturday evening and you have difficulty understanding that, forgive me if I don’t place a whole lot of trust in your ability to judge situations and motives.
> What have you to say on the subject of Dover Sentry’s post above and the BBC’s avoidance of the negative reporting on such subjects?
I don’t want to engage with Dover Sentry any further. Anybody who thinks that being called a hypcorite is “abuse” is clearly someone who’s having trouble engaging with other people, so why should I make the extra effort to no avail?
You’re a sad old sod, obviously with nothing better to do than keep a record of what people here have said in the past.
And by highlighting previous subjects we have locked horns on, proves once and for all that you are the previously banned Scot…
‘I don’t have time to sit on here all day, responding to everyone’
If you say so.
Your move.
Its Scott , AKA Jerrod .
Jerrod
You don’t want to contribute. You only want to disrupt. The fascist Left like to throw stones, but all you can do here is bash your keyboard.
You see us all as the enemy because we do not conform to Political Correctness or support mass uncontrolled immigration.
Stick with your own forums where you belong.
Ok, everyone, picture this….
A group of people gather regularly, and discuss many things, mostly related to current events and news stories, and how they are reported by the BBC (or not). People like, for instance, D-D-D-D, Thoughtful, Mustapha, GWF, Doublethinker, Up2snuff, Dover Sentry, the Deborahs, Mrs Kitty and like-minded others (apologies for not naming the other innocents). Their discussions range far and wide, and are, at times, robust.
There’s often a bit of banter, some ribaldry, and occasionally a bit of strong language. These discussions are not held in secret – perhaps you can imagine them taking place in a corner of the pub, but they don’t interfere with, or otherwise affect, those around them. Nor does the group seek to impose their views on others; they’re merely an exchanges of views amongst a group of people.
Then, into this group arrives, uninvited, a stranger (we’ll call the stranger Jerrod, or Scott, or Man with the Clap, or Dez, or perhaps Marvin).
Now this stranger, using the latest topic being discussed, interjects and starts insulting the group, calling them “bitter and twisted” and “sad old duffer” and saying things such as “but your reliance on hatred, and lies to back up that hatred, as a means of publicising yourself”, and “misanthrophic, fear-fuelled, nasty little hatemongers”.
It’s quickly noted that the interjections are personal insults, and add nothing to the discussion, and are being used as a means to try and prevent the topic being discussed further.
How would the group react to this unwarranted intrusion, do you think? How should the group react? And, how likely is it that the said stranger would have the courage to walk up to the group and start bad-mouthing them in person?
> How would the group react to this unwarranted intrusion, do you think?
By making up stories and pretending they were morally superior, all the while ignoring their own pernicious behaviour?
By pretending that past behaviour by Biased BBC members doesn’t exist as soon as a new HTML page is loaded?
By pretending that it’s okay for them to abuse all and sundry, but as soon as someone uses their own tactics in ways they don’t like they squeal, howl and play the victim?
Yes. Exactly like that.
‘I don’t have time to sit on here all day, responding to everyone’
Clearly.
This really does prove a point, doesn’t it? No-one is “making up stories” to my knowledge, and I can’t see any “moral superiority” being displayed ( except yours).
I don’t recall any past behaviour by Biased BBC members being notable, except the disruptive behaviour attempted by those “strangers” I referred to in my earlier post, and who is abusing all and sundry? And who is playing the victim? Please enlighten.
By making up stories and pretending they were morally superior, all the while ignoring their own pernicious behaviour?
Teaching minors that buggery is normal and perhaps even a lifestyle choice for them – all without their parents’ consent – now that’s pernicious.
> Teaching minors that buggery is normal and perhaps even a lifestyle choice for them – all without their parents’ consent – now that’s pernicious.
They wouldn’t have even mentioned sex. At that age, it’s talking about love and feelings. I think the obsession with what some gay men do in bed is more in your head. I notice that it’s male sexual behaviour you’re particularly interested in, rather than the bedroom habits of female same-sex couples. Why is that, do you think?
You’re mischaracterising teaching in a way that makes it easy for you to be outraged at your own fictionalised version of events. Like “Thoughtful”‘s attempts to sound moralistic, it’s a lazy, bigoted approach that deserves to be laughed down.
I notice that it’s male sexual behaviour you’re particularly interested in, rather than the bedroom habits of female same-sex couples. Why is that, do you think?
Buggery.
You really are slow on the uptake aren’t you?
Jerrod, Scott, Marvin or whatever you wish to ‘dress’ yourself up as , why do you post on this site called ‘biasedbbc’ if as you say, you continue to be abused .
Are you a masochist?
Ignore the little troll taffman – his mum’s probably switched of his light by now (and taken the batteries out of his torch and laptop).
Always nice to see Biased BBC’s usual coterie of commenters revealing that they have no intention of even pretending to be intelligent adults, isn’t it?
You ask that question a lot, taffman. So much so that it appears you, as with others who misclassify people who disagree with them as “trolls”, are afraid of people exressing opinions on Biased BBC which don’t agree with yours.
And your turgidly repeated question has, in fact, been answered by me and others in the past. It’s not my fault if you can’t be bothered to exercise your memory.
Like BBC Editorial of Integrity, when you can find the time to answer and when not intrigues. Clearly on a roll currently.
“I think the obsession with what some gay men do in bed is more in your head”
Oh Jerrod, this really takes the biscuit, those of us with memories longer than 5 years will recall a time when “don’t ask, don’t tell” was the standard around which the public discourse around all sexual behaviour was built. (with discreet, private outlets tolerated for those with more exotic tastes)
The gay obsession with self publicity, and it’s politicisation and consumerist aesthetic of “Pride events”, “Gay villages”, books and journals to promote the lifestyle and rub our noses in it has generated a reaction, as was inevitable.
“Don’t ask, don’t tell” wasn’t enough for the militants who decided it was “homophobic”.
Future generations will be aghast at how in a time when people struggled in parts of the world to meet their basic needs for food and water, some in the west agonised over the promotion of sexual lifestyles of interest to 2-4% of the population.
“I think the obsession with what some gay men do in bed is more in your head.”
Heterophobic twat. Consensual buggery is practised by more heterosexuals than gays. Does stereotyping give you some sick pleasure, Jerrod?
> The gay obsession with self publicity, and it’s politicisation and consumerist aesthetic of “Pride events”, “Gay villages”, books and journals to promote the lifestyle and rub our noses in it has generated a reaction, as was inevitable.
>
> “Don’t ask, don’t tell” wasn’t enough for the militants who decided it was “homophobic”.
I think you’re confusing a homophobe’s obsession with gay sex as a way of trying to discredit teaching about relationships, with people want to be able to talk about relationships in an open manner.
Or maybe just a trolling idiot, like Aborigine Londoner, who’s letting his (presumed) heterosexuality act as a substitute for being a reasonable, intelligent human being.
> Future generations will be aghast at how in a time when people struggled in parts of the world to meet their basic needs for food and water, some in the west agonised over the promotion of sexual lifestyles of interest to 2-4% of the population.
Future generations, like the present ones, will have a majority of people who are capable of understanding that people can be concerned about more than one thing at a time.
But future generations (and the present ones in future) will also, hopefully, have fewer people who obsess about other people’s sex lives as a substitute for something lacking in their own.
Jerrod , Scott, Marvin ,
Thanks for your polite reply .
I am afraid I missed it ? Possibly because we, you & or “others” work a different shift pattern?
Could you kindly give the answer once again on behalf of the so called “others” whoever they are , why do you or ‘them’ post on this site ?
A succinct reply would be most welcome .
I’m not over reacting at all! Nor was the father who was vilified for daring to question school policy.
Do you actually seriously believe that everyone who doesn’t share your world view is a “misanthrophic, fear-fuelled, nasty little hatemonger”?
That is exactly the way Hitler and Stalin justified their extermination of their favourite hate group.
The post has nothing to do with ‘education’, you simply prove the point that although you are capable of reading you lack the skill of English comprehension!
The post is about a parent objecting to the age at which his child was subjected to the ‘education’ and what the state did as a result of his objection.
Obviously if this ‘education’ is not indoctrinated by the age of 10 a child is completely lost into the bleakness of free thinking !
To twist that into “misanthrophic, fear-fuelled, nasty little hatemongers” just shows that the misanthrophic, fear-fuelled, nasty little hatemonger is in truth the person in your mirror !
….And then there was the time the BBC wasn’t so happy about the Filth’s Wrongthink Squad interrogating the families of school children:
> Do you actually seriously believe that everyone who doesn’t share your world view is a “misanthrophic, fear-fuelled, nasty little hatemonger”?
Nope, not everybody. But you? Oh yes. And that’s based not just on this post, but your history of twisting stories to fit your own agenda, accusing others of fascism because they don’t behave the way you want to. And let’s not forget, in the past you’ve resorted to blatant lying in order to make it sound like your points had validity.
Now if you’re going to be prepared to not behave like a misanthrophic, fear-fuelled, nasty little hatemonger, I’m prepared to stop calling you that. But if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc, etc…
“But future generations (and the present ones in future) will also, hopefully, have fewer people who obsess about other people’s sex lives as a substitute for something lacking in their own.”
LOL Jerrod, this line is always trotted out at some stage when discussing homosexuality, this and the “you protest too much you repressed homosexual you” line.
Here`s the thing, some sexual practices, prevalent on the gay scene, notably anal sex, BDSM practices which draw blood and promiscuous sexual behaviour under the influence of drugs (“chemsex parties”) are inherently more risky and are likely to provide a vector for the transmission of HIV and Hepatitis B and C with resultant human suffering and the financial costs usually transferred to tax payers.
These practices should not be encouraged on health grounds. Speaking to kids in a way that encourages sexual experimentation and plays on their curiosity and vulnerability especially when the teaching materials are produced by interested parties such as Stonewall, should be discouraged in any sensible society in which declining birthrates are having a significant economic effect.
> Speaking to kids in a way that encourages sexual experimentation and plays on their curiosity and vulnerability
But it’s not. It’s about educating them about relationships, their own and others, in a way that fosters and encourages respect. And that will lead to healthier relationships as they grow into adulthood, which tends to lead to healthier sexual relationships.
I’m truly sorry that you feel that respect for themselves and others is inappropriate education for children. I can only imagine how distrustful one must be of others to think that educating children to have respect for other people is in any way harmful.
embolden,
“Here`s the thing, some sexual practices, prevalent on the gay scene, notably anal sex… These practices should not be encouraged on health grounds. Speaking to kids in a way that encourages sexual experimentation…”
Go back to the original report:
“The comments, posted by a “small minority”, came after a theatre company performed a fairytale where two princes fall in love.”
Thoughtful described it as; “young children being subjected to gay sex education”, which is laughably, ridiculous hyperbole. Unless, of course, you consider “Sleeping Beauty” to be top shelf material.
Meanwhile…
Goldilocks encourages sexual experimentation not just with bears, but with baby bears [Paedo-beastiality playing on the curiosity and vulnerability of prepubescent children]. Therefore the Goldilocks fairytale should be discouraged in any sensible society in which declining birthrates are having a significant economic effect.
…Yet you seem completely unconcerned?
Zero
And what about AIDS ?
The class dunce writes: ” sad old duffer”
Ageist scum!
“bitter and twisted” Oh the irony!
What are the requisites to being classified a bigot I wonder ? someone who dares to voice what others are thinking ? (remember the Gordon Brown debacle); someone involved in marching protests about old statues ? (reversed bigot (!); someone commenting on the disproportionate ratio of ethnics and mixed race marriages in advertising ; someone over 60 voicing their opinions on subjects they find offensive but appear to be the norm for those under 40 !! If I’m classified as a ‘bigot’ for my views, then I’m really too old to care what other people think anymore – they are the ones getting into a right old paddy, not me.
Bigot used to mean someone with irrational prejudices. Now it just means someone who doesn’t conform to mainstream liberal/left opinion.
Hi Jerrod,
I too was ‘denied that opportunity as a youngster’, yet I have no prejudices whatsoever when it comes to the LGBT community. You’ll find plenty of racism in my comments, which strangely enough I was educated about, and told was a ‘bad thing’ in History and Modern Studies classes.
I’m with Jonathan Rauch on this matter of enforced tolerance: “It does not reckon….the cost of denying the agency of the listener, who, after all, can choose how to react to the maundering of haters.”
It can in fact be counterproductive. But more than that, it won’t stop the different types of awful human behaviour that always emerge (Sub sole nihil novi est) despite the hand-wringers’ attempts to stifle it.
Jerrod,
the problem isn’t with “preparing children for the real world”, it’s about at what age you introduce them to social or political issues that might be unnecessarily and/or misleadingly influential in later life. I’ll get castigated for posting this here, but I am against faith schools for the very same reason – young minds are easily shaped by those who teach them. Children believe everything adults tell them.
These are primary school kids being exposed to real-life dilemmas, stuff they shouldn’t be exposed to until they become more rational in their thinking so they can deal with the challenges life throws at them.
There’s nothing wrong with teaching young kids about diversity and respect for others. But this looks to me like an exercise in promoting homosexuality to primary school kids, which is plain wrong.
Thoughtful at 9.47pm
If you look at the statistics (ONS) for civil partnerships and gay marriage, compared with straight couple marriage, then the preponderance of gay people is around 2 – 3% (about 6000 out of 250000 per annum). Obviously at the bBBC it is much higher!
How many other 2-3% minorities get the air time in our schools and for that matter media that homosexuals get? Fulfils my personal Politically Correct definition of excessive focus and resources on small minorities. It’s pretty clear to me that straight people are ‘under-represented’.
I’ll believe in full equality when a. gay people are proportionately represented and b. two gay men can have sex and produce a child without any external intervention, and ditto for two lesbians. Until then, I’ll carry on believing in equality about 95% of the time and tolerance for the remainder for that relevant 2-3% of the population.
Sluff, I would guess that the number of regular churchgoers in the UK, in the Anglican communion if not all denominations combined, is probably around the same figure. Imagine if the media had the same level of news about Christianity and the church as it does about gays, lesbians and ‘trans’ issues. In fact about the only time the media DOES mention Christianity is with reference to gay vicars etc…
Did anyone see 34 hours in A and E tonight. Endless immigration good , let everyone in.
Unbelievable
You got an extra ten hours more than me!
I’m sure most here have seen this, (broadcast last May) but I only got around to watching it today. This hatchet job by the BBC on Churchill is bloody despicable, whereby they allow a Marxist activist (Dave Douglas) the opportunity to savage the Greatest Brit ever (as voted by the British public on a BBC TV program), likening him to Boris Johnson and claiming he was ‘pissed out of his brain’ when he gave his greatest speeches, he speaks with great authority as though he was there as the time (21 minutes in)
I stood it for 25 minutes, absolutely f’ing disgusting….
http://dai.ly/x2rkvsw
Geoff, I mentioned this appalling programme on bBBC at the time it was broadcast. As you might imagine, no-one contributing here who saw the programme had a good word to day about it. The presenter’s Wikipedia entry tells you all you need to know . No doubt he’s been too busy being a pro-Corbyn entryist to the Labour Party to make any more programmes for the BBC since last May.
Geoff, I didn’t watch it so I can’t comment on the programme, however Churchill was drunk (to some degree or other) for a great deal of WW2; there are many senior officers and politicians who remark upon it in their private diaries and Roosevelt privately referred to him several times as a “drunken bum”. Mackenzie King, the Canadian PM, also commented and wrote about his drinking as did Joseph Kennedy (U.S. Ambassador) and others such as Anthony Eden.
“Roosevelt privately referred to him several times as a “drunken bum””
But, unlike Roosevelt, Churchill was loyal to his wife and I suspect he might have been able to put together a wittier form of words.
Towards the end of PM’s question time Cameron was at his Flashman best when dealing with a question about women and progress under the Tories.
He listed the fact that there’s no longer a pay gap for women under the age of forty and went on to demand that labour stop dealing with misogynists who demand to have their meetings segregated. Sadly, he didn’t mention who these misogynists might be.
All good rousing stuff for the feminist BBC and Sky channels you would have thought …. But no. On neither news channel’s political page is it mentioned. Though both heavily feature Corbyn’s supply teacher questioning as if they were Churchilian speeches.
https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/the-public-supports-the-BBC?
‘The public’ supports the BBC. Apparently.
Now I know most MPs are not the sharpest tools in the box, but they may wonder at the desperation to maintain the compulsion element to the unique funding, were this the case.
Maybe I will mention that to my MP.
Another leading question from that “unbiased” organisation 38degrees.
In all fairness they did run this ………………
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
But what happened to it now ? Anyone know ?
There is a very good comment on its ‘Reasons for signing’ by Jordan S., which is well worth repeating here ………..
“I literally watch nothing made by the bbc, it’s much like paying car tax without even owning one.”
I got loads of emails asking me to support leftie/green claptrap.
Rhif Saith
I tend to get the same, having being a signatory to the ‘get rid of the licence fee petition’ .
Henceforth, I just ‘junk’ the rest of them .
Did anyone see the appalling Victoria Derbyshire show this morning? In the pantheon of BBC biased reportage, this one takes the biscuit.
20 minutes devoted to a piece “discussing” (in the light of the Junior Doctors strike), if public sector industrial action was a successful strategy for the workers. The contributors consisted of: an “analyst” who summarised all the concessions that the likes of the RMT and NHS unions have won in the past, a TFL worker who gloated about how they have won an above inflation pay rise every year for the next 4 years, and a rabid BMA activist who protested that the strike is about patient safety and not about money/flexibility for Doctors to pick and chose when they work. (strange, because if I recall correctly, the only final stumbling block in the failed negotiation was Saturday pay rates). Each was given a non-critical platform accompanied by the usual whimpering right-on encouragement from Ms. Derbyshire.
I then waited for a spokesperson from the government or employers’ side to give counter arguments or clarifications for balance. Nothing. Basically just a 20 minute propaganda exercise celebrating how public sector workers have successfully held the rest of us to ransom, and promoting support for the current BMA case. There was no glimmer of a discussion about whether these strikes/concessions are fair to the vast majority of private sector workers who depend on their services to get to work/stay healhy and pay their salaries but have born the brunt of stagnant pay/redundancies since the 2008 crash.
The BBc have given up even the pretense of a balanced report these days. They decide if it’s balanced which now consists of a one sided discussion and possibly one presenter asking another presenter questions.
Dave, yes, spot on !
Dave666
Their good at it , its called ‘role play’.
They have been at it for years, Al Beeb presenter discusses subject with an Al Beeb reporter and act out the way they want to slant the story.
Ask Scott, Gerard or Marvin . At least one of them will be the ‘Duty Officer’ on shift tonight (usually reserved for junior employees ).
I was watching the BBC Six News the other evening. It rolled around, as it always does, to the nightly NHS report. Behind George Alagiah the three large TV screens prominently displayed what could only be described as a wall of pro-Junior Doctors propaganda: everything from a large ‘Save Our NHS’ placard to various images connected with the JD’s strike – no competing messages, everything pro-strikes.
I remember looking at it and thinking ‘they really don’t hide their bias these days, do they?’ I mean, it was just so blatant-in-yer-face stuff. One could almost admire their aggressive disdain for their Chartered remit for impartiality.
A total joke at our expense – and these belligerent frauds are getting away with it.
The easiest way to Save *OUR* NHS (not theirs; they don’t own it, they just work for it), would be to pay doctors less so the money goes further.
The truth was that
YOUR OPERATION WAS CANCELLED TODAY BECAUSE OF YOUR DOCTOR’S GREED.
Hopefully Derbyshire will get a Kidney Stone on a Saturday Afternoon
It’s not that often I can recommend anything Beeboid but they caught me out!
“Jonathon’s Six Nations Quiz” on BBC Wales was proof that they can do true “tongue in cheek” comedy. Lots of genuine non PC banter and genuine humour.
The quote of the night had to be Gareth Chilcot’s (ex Bath and England prop) response to being asked if he had been taken off from an international with a bruised testicle – “Yes….But I’m not sure whose it was.”
Well worth finding on iPlayer.
Yes there are some occasional gems on iPlayer that I will miss when they start charging for it. Tonight I found Life of a Mountain: A Year on Scafell Pike. Wonderful photography, nice music, and some normal rural home-grown native characters too!
You have to look under Science and Nature, then under A-Z to find it. Or try this here link..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04y4gd7/life-of-a-mountain-a-year-on-scafell-pike
The visual imagery of ‘Life on a Mountain’ is the sort of thing the BBC does well but, for myself, I am forced to watch it with the sound muted – as also in much of the other BBC output. I have walked to the top of Sca Fell Pike several times, and indeed on every ‘top’ in the Lake District, and have never heard music played. So why the hell does the BBC overlay such programmes as these with a glutinous blanket of ‘music’? What I want to hear are the natural sounds – the wind in the grass, the creaking a tree branches, the babbling of a stream, the ‘swip swip’ of pipits, a curlew call, perhaps a distant baa of the sheep, and where the reporter is moving, the sound of footfall and stones moving on the path. In this way, a fuller picture of the countryside is gained, and indeed it makes it a more authentic experience. What I do not want is to have to listen to someone else’s choice of ‘music’. However, I do recognise that some people tolerate or even like the music, and longer term I am sure the solution would be provide viewers a choice to mute music but not other sounds. Technically, surely this should be easily done, given the will to do it
I am pretty sure that this is ground breaking news for our national security but I have not seen anything on Al Beeb about this? Perhaps they have a few skeletons hiding in the cupboard ?
http://news.sky.com/story/1656777/is-registration-forms-identify-22000-jihadis
Or perhaps they have far more important things to report such as this to bury it under ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-35761464
All over Sky News.
The Beeboid tea lady is probably more interested in another tranny “coming out”.
“Hold The Front Page”.
Another one is BBC Wales’ current series on the River Taff.
No link – I watch it through BT. Try a search on “River Taff”.
Just about every programme on BBC radio yesterday was propaganda for migrants with their useful idiots pleading on their behalf. Here’s the gist of of all the BBC pro-migrant broadcasts encapsulated in one photograph:
http://www.thewhatandthewhy.com/is-the-eu-talking-turkey-on-the-refugee-deal/
Of course, it may be better to rely on the ‘analysis’ that only the BBC can provide, with a staff of 20,000 and an enforced budget of £4Bpa.
Tough call.
That’s just another wolf, in sheep’s clothing…
A ‘pack’ of ‘lone wolves’ ?
Looking at the picture reminded me of that dreadful old lefty Roger Waters (of Pink Floyd fame) and some very unintentionally prescient lyrics he wrote way back in the 70s (when musicians actually made an effort) for a song called Sheep on the Animals album…
Have a read and see if you can join the dots to Europe’s current crisis…
“…Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away…
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air…
You better watch out – there may be dogs about!
I’ve looked over Jordan, and I have seen things are not what they seem
What do you get for pretending the danger’s not real?
Meek and obedient you follow the leader
down well trodden corridors, into the Valley of Steel
What a surprise!
A look of terminal shock in your eyes!
Now things are really what they seem
No, this is no bad dream!”
It’s actually quite chilling, tbh.
Right old car crash and train wreck and shipwreck, all together now, on Radio 4 and the TODAY programme this morning.
Am wondering whether the actual working requirements for the programme, getting up regularly in the middle of the sleeping night to get to work & make decisions, affects the whole team, not just the presenters.
Shortage of memory and ability to think independently and quickly very apparent this a.m.. Murdoch, The Sun, Leveson, Global Warming, Standing Charges, Green Tariffs, and more quickly forgotten and apparently no longer relevant. Bizarre.
Sexist BBC?
Only two days after International Womens Day we have photos illustrating the defeat of the Government on the Sunday Trading extension which show only women shopping.
Not only that but buying very little and extremely light objects which they then do not combine in one bag but burden themselves instead with three yellow paper box-type carriers (in today’s photo on the w/s Home Page) plus one other all in addition to their handbag. Yesterdays illustration was even better with seven – probably empty – paper box-type carriers, being waved around by a woman walking down a shopping street. Proper hazard she was, to other pedestrians
You would think with the BBC’s proximity to Oxford Street that a Picture Editor could go there with a freelance photographer and get some equality related pictures of shoppers buying some goods of substance and value.
I can think of no worse waste of time than fighting the crowds in Oxford Street to shop at Primark! Research says that 80% of all household shopping is done by women. Probably buying decent bags when the Primark kill a tree bags burst in the rain after they’ve bought pink razors and lobbied their MP about the price. If we had true equality there might be less waste. How about women can only control 50% of the household budget!
Meet the Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus supporting Trump
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-35758156
Well, well, an article regarding those who support Donald Trump.
But what’s this? The pictures in the middle of it appear to be unconnected with the article itself:
Sikh American Arish Singh describes what is was like being removed from a Trump rally
Rabya Ahmed and other Muslim protesters were asked to leave a recent Trump rally in Kansas
The Muslim woman making a silent protest was ejected from a rally in South Carolina
A black woman was seeing being pushed and shoved until she left the Trump rally
That’s a fairly ‘special’ collection of imagery to complement that headline.
Here’s another from the archives (hope the link works):
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=activist+ejected+from+labour+conference&prmd=nvi&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiS4aGn2LXLAhUGPBQKHS00AKgQ_AUICSgD&biw=768&bih=927#imgrc=j5BY0O67oVqZoM%3A
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=980&bih=1183&q=bbc+security+staff&oq=bbc+security+staff&gs_l=img.12…0.0.0.4156.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0….0…1ac..64.img..0.0.0.aSlemF36GPc#imgrc=fH_zQEdufry37M%3A
Must be tricky fir security assessing who is a threat to self, to others, or beyond…. especially with a photo editor ready to,pounce.
I see Sky TV news have been leading on the hand over of detailed recruitment data covering tens of thousands of Daesh joiners from all over the world. This is probably the most significant development so far in the destruction of this evil organization.
The news broke yesterday afternoon and naturally Sky are Cock a Hoop. But why have the BBC TV news chosen not to cover this in today’s 8am news headliners? …. Is this news embargoed? Or is it sour grapes getting in the way of proper news reporting?
Surely the BBC news management are letting their audience down here They lead with shopping on Sunday, Rhinos and Electricity costs – not a mention of Daesh.- why?
“But why have the BBC TV news chosen not to cover this in today’s 8am news headliners?”
Well, it could be that famous BBC ‘watertight oversight’, where facts they don’t like need to be checked for so long they can be forgotten about. Or it is, simply, ‘not news’ (c) A. Newsroom Tealady
Maybe Daesh are a benign charity like Bowen’s account of the Muslim Brotherhood
Are Sky going to be prosecuted for letting ISIS know they have the information? Not much different from a newspaper in WW11 headlining ‘Hey Adolf, we’ve cracked Enigma.’ Glad I’m out of the UK.
Why Sky and not the BBC you say?
Well, the BBC would have kept it under their long dresses, and told Anjem about it all in advance, so he could kill the story.
The BBC are working for Islam…have been since that disgraceful 9/11 Question Time.
It`s not as if they actually have to KNOW the consequences…they just want those pictures, those emotions and the thrill of stepping out with a transgender copper so they can get the thrill of the chase…such as it is.
No-if the UK Government were any good they`d be giving the BBC gleeful titbits, knowing that IS would swallow it all whole…and then our security forces could drain the swamp.
Spiderman
Maybe, just maybe, it was in the interest of the security forces of the UK to release it that way ?
Maybe, just maybe, the person who released the info was a British operator . But then who are we to know ?
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/03/how-britain-deports-the-wrong-people-and-only-the-wrong-people/
I am warming to Rod.
Of course a major reason is that the BBC could care less about some people, but will throw the full weight of its cubicle gardens and Stuart Hughes’ social media campaign expertise if just one member of staff’s Uncle looks like being held to account.
Hence how the political establishment responds.
GW : “I am warming to Rod.”
Reminds me of a Melanie Phillips phrase: “a Liberal mugged by reality.”
🙂
I read Liddle online this morning too.
Given his current, trenchant, fairly longstanding now views on the threat of Islamism, PC attitudes and paedophiles, often interlinked issues, I feel that it is a bit harsh to continue to hold his former editorship of Toady against him given his acerbic prose against these interests.
Repentant sinner and all that!
Harrowing program on the 20th anniversary of Dunblane, BBC2, last night which concentrated on the agonies suffered by the bereaved – so perhaps it was not the best time to reveal that armed crime has risen 89% (2009 figures) since the successful Snowdrop Campaign achieved a total ban on handgun ownership.
Thomas Hamilton, also perhaps understandably, got little coverage. But might it not have been relevant to add that despite a partial relaxation of the 100-year embargo on the paperwork in 2005, the first four files will remain hidden and secret until 2096, by which time of course everyone involved in the cover-up will be long gone.
Surely that would have raised questions worth asking?
http://www.scotsman.com/news/who-does-the-100-year-ban-protect-1-545863
http://paulmalpas.com/paedophilia/
Thanks for the links No7, interesting reading – though sadly no surprise to me. The figure of 89% is queried by some, and there are those who suggest that the rise in illegal use of handguns, as opposed to firearms in general (which for legal purposes includes shotguns and airguns) is closer to 400%.
The total and utterly shameful dereliction of duty by the Strathclyde police in allowing Hamilton to retain his FAC despite 20 years worth of complaints against him is just part of the ‘justification’ for the 100 year embargo. There are strong beliefs that Masonic protection played its tragic part too.
Twelve years earlier, in Hungerford, Michael Ryan was also able to illegally keep firearms – including a 7.62 Kalashnikov and Beretta 92F pistol – at his home, despite being only a provisional member of a firearms shooting club in Devizes. If the law had been properly enacted, those guns would have remained locked away at the club.
Sometime ago I read an article directly linking Robertson to Hamilton including undue “Lobbying” of the Police WRT his pistol licence – far more difficult to obtain, at the time, than a rifle or shotgun ticket.
Unfortunately I no longer have the bookmark.
It was typical of the BBC to avoid the real issue there – what really went on – in favour of using a tragedy to further their own banal agenda.
Beltane, a very minor correction, which in fact supports your point.
The original embargo on the Dunblane papers was 100 years. It has since been extended – 100 years was deemed to be insufficient..
Our so-called national broadcasting organisation is going big on the allegations publicised in that despicable Sunny Rag that HM might have vaguely said something about the EU. Whether she did or not and whether someone said or didn’t say this or that to whomever, IF the thoughts of HM lean towards Brexit, I am not surprised because she, above anyone else, is far more in touch with her people that any politician!
Campaign Fear is up and running and it is awful – as bad as what happened in the Scottish Referendum. The people want facts, not fear. Like others here, I have yet to meet someone who wants to remain in the EU. My bottom line question to anyone is this: if we were not members right now, looking at the EU and how ineffective it is, would you want to join now?
….and not even a hint of a blush from Sarah Montague at the hypocrisy of the BBC wittering on about how the headline in the Sun was misleading and not really backed up by the material in the subsequent report….
They have very short memories at the BBC, and a long history of headlines which are designed to create one impression, and disguise the truth. Remember this one from just last October, Sarah ?
“Palestinian shot dead after Jerusalem attack kills two”
That’s one really twisted BBC headline to announce that a Palestinain terrorist had killed two Israelis and wounded others (a woman and a child) before being shot by police.
Hypocrisy rises daily to a higher and higher level at the BBC – and they just can’t see it because their mindset won’t allow them to.
That’s the sound of Zero ignoring specific examples of bias from his bosses.
On the “Today” programme Justin Webb appeared to relish including the queen in the category of women over 60 without a university degree. That cohort has been identified by YouGov as being strongly in favour of “Brexit”.
Stupid old women? Or are they less concerned about their or their children’s income than the identity of the country in which their grandchilden will live?
It’s just another lazy piece of hackery, derived from dodgy ‘research’ undertaken by fully paid for polling organisations – the sort of ‘researchers’ who shone so brightly at the last election!
Among those I know who are backing Brexit are academics, a couple of journalists, scientists, engineers and an airline pilot. Sadly, none of them appear to have degrees in David Beckham studies from a former polytechnic, mind you…
It is, as you write, lazy hack journalism. I’m surprised that Webb didn’t include the information that Mrs Windsor lives in an £x million mansion in Central London and that she married a naval officer in the 1940s.
Excuse me, that is ‘world class’ lazy hackery, surely?
From the ever professional, impartial, objective national treasure broadcast monopoly.
http://order-order.com/2016/03/10/bbcs-tv-debate-revenge-on-no-10/
‘Sources say the BBC made the deliberately provocative bid as “revenge”
Sack of rats activity at its woeful best.
http://isthebbcbiased.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/keeping-tabs-on-newsnight.html
‘The trend (so far) seems pretty clear, doesn’t it?’
Consistent at least.
Be funny if TSHTF on purely factual ‘balance’ and they ended up having to drop their team from debates as things go to the wire.
I didn’t hear the programme, but I bloody well hope it was brought to light that those of us ‘over 60’ who don’t have Yuni degrees, was because we were around when you had to be of near genius intellect standard in order to get to University ! Myself and many of my fellow students in the A stream at school in the 50’s and 60’s were not lacking in intelligence per se, but by God you had to have that ‘extra something’ academically to be in the top echelons of university standard. Not to put too fine a point on it, most of us would be of Professor standard compared to those graduating today !!! (2 Yuni students on todays Pointless were voted off twice in the first round – couldn’t name a U.S President with 6 letters or less, and were stumped with easy knowledge of Shakespeare ! – heaven help us !).
You’re not wrong there Brissles. At my school about 75% of the kids left at the end of the 5th form leaving only about 60 in Lower and Upper Sixth. Class sizes in the sixth form were often in single figures so there was no hiding place!
Agree FB, and B. Sixth form were rarely in double figures and at 15 it was made clear to me that I was not up to it. So I left and worked in factories and building sites and got a real education. But I did part time studies and after 8 years arrived at University, getting a First, a PhD, and a chair. Now we admit dummies and read reports on why their lack of basic intelligence – or cultural differences – entitle them to a better grade.
More Trump bashing from the BBC
“What will Americans do if Trump wins?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35763569
The BBC journalists have been working hard flicking between Facebook,Twitter and Pink News websites to create this bit of “journalism”.
Jesus! £4bil a year for the BBC to produce cut and paste social media crap like this daily and report it as “news”.
I look forward to a BBC article consisting of tweets from concerned Europeans living close to the Calais Jungle, the Macedonian border, Cologne, etc etc.
or some tweets from here
https://twitter.com/tvlicensingblog?lang=en-gb
On Facebook BBC News is pretty much Trump every other post. And it is getting noticed. Even groupies think they are obsessed.
What will the BBC do ? Close all their offices if it is President Trump no doubt. That is if Trump has not kicked the whole bunch out as undesirable aliens.
The BBC is sometimes beyond parody.
Surely the BBC’s ‘comedians’ will be quite happy if Trump gets in, as they can recycle all their old material by simply substituting the word ‘Trump’ in place of ‘Bush’.
What about Romesh Ranganathan? He hasn’t got any material to start with!
So what will US liberals do if Trump wins? As the BBC indicate, they are talking of moving to Canada, presumably to escape Trump and his racist wall. So far none have tweeted their intention to go to Mexico.
On Toady this morning, a story about the electricity price investigation.
Cue full-on emoting interview with a (rather aggressive I thought) female (of course) ‘victim’ of this who couldn’t always feed her kids a hot meal.
But wait. One of the children has Special Educational Needs. What a co-incidence!
With amazing ‘random’ events like that, I should think the bBBC reporters must be queuing up to buy lottery tickets this week.
Every time the BBC drags up these people for interview, we have a single woman who is struggling to bring up her brood, despite no doubt being in reception of various benefits.
The inconvenient truth is that the prime cause of poverty is single parenthood and the welfare state has encouraged this by rewarding bad behaviour. The sooner we move to a contributions based welfare system the better. What you get out should be based on what you put in, not how irresponsible you have been.
There are two big problems with single mothers. The majority are not feckless women who chose pregnancy and benefit but, women who previously had husbands who very often left them or who women left because of the husbands bad behavior, alcohol, violence or cheating.
The other is that while feckless women choosing to breed at the expense of everyone else clealry dont deserve to do so, withdrawing benefit will mean children suffering greatly. Many would find jobs, but there would always be a percentage who for whatever reason, fail to do so. Being a single parent with a child makes it harder to work when you have no support. There is no easy answer.
A look at a BBC researcher’s contacts book would be interesting, wouldn’t it? Single issue pressure groups, ‘charities’ (fake), trade unions, activists, the Labour Party, eco-loons… Enough to give one nightmares!
What does such emotive vox-pop add to the public’s knowledge of this issue? Nothing, of course. It’s just an emotion-larded, “cry me a river” piece to support the part of the Narrative which comprises those wicked Tories grinding the faces of the poor. I – and I don’t think I’m alone here – would have been more interested to know why the Competition and Markets Authority is advocating price controls as an interim solution to (apparent) shortcomings in the prepayment meter market. IMHO state-mandated price controls are not a part of what is generally considered “competition” or “markets”.
Moreover, price controls once imposed are incredibly difficult to remove (eg rent controls introduced during WW1 were only finally removed in the 1980s). The long-term solution proposed by the CMA includes the wonder of “smart” meters: basically ration books for the 21st century. Did we hear Roger Witcomb, chairman of the CMA’s energy market investigation pressed on these matters? Was an advocate of an alternative view/solution brought on Today – or was an alternative even mentioned? Is the Pope Catholic? (Actually, on reflection, I’m not convinced the Pope is Catholic.). OTOH – if the running order is correct – Lisa Nandy, Labour Shadow Energy Secretary was brought on later to give an impartial opinion.
I hope but have no faith that the BBC will avoid a Marxist, anti-imperialist diatribe against its own country when it ‘celebrates’ the centenary of the 1916 Irish Rebellion. We have the pleasure of no-doubt impartial views of Brendan O’Carroll ( he/she of the foul mouth disguised as comedy) and Saint Bob Geldof ( foul mouth comes as standard). I just can’t wait!
Some people say that Saint Bob Geldof is about to house a Syrian refugee family in one of his homes. He told the world that he would do this back in September whilst imploring us all to do the same.
He’s a very honest and a very, very rich man. There are those who say that he is worth £30m.
He’d never break a promise now would he? Would he??
..
I seem to recall, vaguely, that a previous Archbishop of Canterbury housed an asylum seeker in Lambeth Palace several years ago. Or perhaps it was York, or both.
Anyway, if I remember correctly it was a carefully selected doctor and his family. Can’t have just anyone, can we? Tokenism is all we’re likely to get from that loud mouthed
boIrish person.Not bad for a man who has claimed non Dom status for tax purposes! When he’s spend the £15 Million of his fortune he would have paid had he been like the rest of us he can perhaps claim he’s actually doing something over & above !
Some playwright or other, William somebody, died in 1616 and I have heard he was quite good.
Googling this along with BBC I discover that…..errr…….his grave was radar scanned recently.
Even The Independent has noticed this marked lack of attention
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/features/shakespeare-400-whats-wrong-with-showing-the-actual-plays-a6835286.html
But googling BBC Easter Uprising 1916 brings no such reticence.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35090298
So that’s IRA 1 England’s Finest 0 in the bBBC PC league.
I suppose the Bard just reflects a failed mono-cultural, Christian religious time totally at odds with today’s right-on diverse and enriched world.
“Some playwright or other, William somebody, died in 1616 and I have heard he was quite good.”
Maybe we’ll get a special production of Lenny Henry V.
Shakespeare is allowed if it is ‘pushing boundaries’ in some way, ie, twisting the play to fit the latest fashionable political/racial/sexual agenda.
A lot of that is going on outside the BBC too. I have copied this from a programme for the Nuffield Youth Theatre.
The Odyssey
‘Odysseus is fighting for his right to belong in his own country. He is being held in an illegal immigrant detention centre, side by side with the Trojan settlers he helped to defeat.
…….. This modern adaption takes an ancient story and places it right at the centre of today’s humanitarian crisis, where people are fleeing from war torn countries to protect their lives and the lives of their families, only to be turned away. Its the perfect adaption for our time.’
GWF, to an extent, it’s always gone on with Shakespeare – viz, the use of Henry V as propaganda before the Normandy landings, and the performance of Henry VIII after our present Queen’s coronation. It’s just that since the cultural revolution of the 1960s, Shakespeare seems to have become the sole property of the left. If there isn’t time for the Royal Court or the Tricycle Theatre’s hacks to act like Ernie Wise and type out a play in ten minutes on some topical ‘ishyoo’, they’ll adapt Shakespeare instead!
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016/03/10/did-alan-johnson-lie-on-the-andrew-neill-show/
Good question.
Seems an FoI can work with the House of Commons Library a lot better than any such thing with the BBC.
Given Brillo is so on top of his brief, and the BBC so committed to not simply handing propagandists a pulpit unchallenged, I wonder if they will be following up on this? Discreetly, of course.
There are some people who seem to delight in putting everything they have on the line for the libel lawyers to pick apart !
The highest burden of proof in English courts ‘absolute proof’ is reserved for perjury cases, and for good reason.
Two people witness a robbery, both are independent, both are honest. One says the robber was wearing a blue coat, the other says the robber was wearing a green coat.
Obviously one must be lying right? wrong! For it to be a lie the person saying it must have the intention to deceive, and without the proof of that then it’s simply a mistake.
Alan Johnson was a postman. He became a union member and rose through the ranks until he became an MP and as Labour ones go he’s probably one of the more reasonable ones.
Cut the guy some slack – he made a mistake, and reading the article it’s not unsurprising. You also need to remember that there are people who don’t always tell the truth to MPs when there’s a case they want to present and repeating a lie, whilst no knowing it to be so, does not make one a liar.
About 5 minutes in, Alan Johnson, MP, interjected that the House of Commons Library had confirmed to him that afternoon that 97% of climate scientists say “that climate change is real, that it’s happening and that it’s man made”
The Commons Library say they didn’t.
He told a deliberate lie.
I think that can be confirmed as a Gotcha from not………nowthat.
Just remembered on Toady this morning, lots of airtime to an interview with a woman who was ‘abused’ 20+ years ago when she had a relationship with an undercover police officer who was infiltrating the left wing activist group of which she was a member. 25 or so years later, she tracked him down to Australia where she was horrified to discover he was Course Director at a Police Training facility.
I don’t particularly support the relationship forming but ‘abuse’ ? How was this different to any of many relationships that make and break down? Does it not take two to tango? Anyone heard of divorce? Or bereavement? Or having an affair? Are these defined as ‘abusive’ by their inherent nature? And does the ex policeman not ‘deserve’ the second chance that the Far Left so often extol for, for example, ex-offenders?
The woman is entitled to her views but to give her an extended open platform, uncontested, uncritical, with soft balls lobbed gently to her shows the inherent left-wing feminist bias by the wannabee student activists in the bBBC newsroom.
‘Soft balls’: apt for any BBC activity, and even from the men.
And she ‘tracked him down’ eh? Unaided? Around the world? Maybe she has a career as a detective ahead?
In any case, the BBC have rendered ‘abuse’ as meaningful as all the other outrage du jour punts they selectively enable vs. all the things they run out of time to cover.
Yes, I heard that strangely presented story too, she said she’d been to New Zealand as “part of my search” and made the claim that the object of her hunt had been resettled to Australia implying that this had been funded by the Met.
I couldn’t help thinking that if this had been a bloke searching for a woman we’d have heard the word “stalker” deployed.
The BBC said that the ex cop concerned had “declined to be interviewed”…..I’d love to have heard that! The fact that we didn’t suggests that the BBC weren’t wholly sure of their ground.
‘Abuse’ is just a mot du jour, that is used skilfully as a method of attack. Don’t get too bogged-down with it being a slight misnomer, Sluff. It’s the nasty practices of the Special Demonstration Squad that are in focus. No matter how much I think of myself as a realist when it comes to the necessarily sordid business of retaining control and power, I so often experience a spark of gleeful hatred when the veneer of this green and pleasant land cracks. Maybe it’s their incompetence I despise. Thick pigs.
The Special Demonstration Squad were active at a time when there were suspicions that Britains leftist-environmentalist milieu was being used by agents of the USSR and other Eastern Bloc intelligence agencies to subvert the UK and its relationship with NATO.
There were also links and sympathies between the British left and armed groups such as PIRA, the Baader-Meinhof gang, the Red Brigades, the Angry Brigade and various Palestinian terrorists.
Astrid Prolls case may be of interest, and she was not the only Baader Meinhof terrorist to find a safe haven in London leftist circles.
The Police, it appears, successfully infiltrated these groups. I suspect we will never hear the full story of the late Cold War period and the operations that prevented the tyranny of the USSR from subverting the UK at a time when the Reagan-Thatcher alliance was crucial in facing down the nuclear armed threat posed by the USSR and Warsaw Pact countries.
The evidence is that Met were not quite so “thick” or “incompetent” as their subversive targets might have wished.
Some on the left were and are not as cuddly and innocent as they like to present themselves and as the BBC portrays them.
I do try my best to be a realist, so I know what had to be done. But yes, I think I was perhaps a little too quick to insult the police there.
Uh oh…looks like the BBC’s Outrage Bus has had a breakdown. Why might that be?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/12189795/If-you-support-Trident-you-must-be-mentally-ill.-Ha-ha-ha.html
Mr Jones has also suffered mental illness at points of his life. Unlike a lot of people in that situation, he’s spoken about it publicly, talking about his depression in the House of Commons and elsewhere.
Here’s how BuzzFeed reports Mr Hardy talking about Mr Jones and Trident:
“I would have thought you could hazard a guess that if someone supports nuclear weapons, if your view of existence is so bleak you’re prepared to help with the extermination of the entire northern hemisphere, that kind of suggests depression, don’t you?” joked Hardy.
Comes under the BBC’s ‘Views their own’ category. Move along now, nothing to see….
Being a cynical brexiteer i have come to the conclusion that on the day of the referendum notwithstanding the in out a consideration (PLEASE BE OUT) There will be a jo moore moment
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Jo_Moore
what it will be i have no idea, i just know there will be one or more.
BBC PM Radio 4 and the art of missing out the main piece of the story.
The Apple iPhone which has data on it the US intelligence wants Apple to unlock, belonged to a ‘man’ who shot several people.
No mention that the ‘man’ was a Jihadist who motivated by his evil religion murdered several non Muslims whilst yelling Allahu Akbar!
Now apparently the ever trustworthy Edward Snowden has claimed that if the FBI wanted they could be in the phone within minutes and that this is a ploy for them to get the information from others – which they would then use to …………. Well they don’t say that because the reality is that they would use that information for the protection of innocent citizens and arrest those ‘men’ before they carry out Jihad.
Typical pro Jihadi bias – which obviously has nothing to do with Muslims, or Islam or anything like that, and don’t you say it does or I’ll emit a bully word !
> BBC PM Radio 4 and the art of missing out the main piece of the story.
>
> The Apple iPhone which has data on it the US intelligence wants Apple to unlock, belonged to a ‘man’ who shot several people.
And Apple has already provided the authorities with the iCloud backups they had in their possession which dated up to six weeks before the attack. The phone wasn’t backed up after then – the auto backups kick in when it is charging and connected to a previously used Wifi network.
Unfortunately, the FBI (or the man’s bosses, under the FBI’s instruction) remotely changed the iCloud password connected to the account, probably in good faith – but because of the way the iCloud authentication works, it means that a new backup (which Apple could then have passed on) can’t be made, as it needs the password to be confirmed on the phone, and the phone is locked.
What the FBI wants is for Apple to build a special version of iOS that allows a phone’s passcode to be entered via the digital connector, rather than being typed manually, that allows it to try multiple variations per second and, crucially, overrides any pre-existing setting in the phone that would wipe the phone’s data after a number of tries.
Apple has strenuously made clear that it works with the authorities as much as it can, but it feels the use of an 18th century act (designed for judges in a country which was still establishing its own laws to make judgments in areas where the Senate had not ruled) is an overreach, and that there is legal statute protecting Apple from being forced to make the software the FBI wants.
And that’s a good thing, because if that cracking software existed it would not only be law enforcement officials who wanted it, and it would not be confined to governments in countries with strong civil liberty protections.
> Well they don’t say that because the reality is that they would use that information for the protection of innocent citizens and arrest those ‘men’ before they carry out Jihad
Well, we’ve already got state prosecutors (such as NY’s Cyrus Vance) saying he wants this same ability to be able to crack any phone involved in any crime, not just terrorism.
Now, I haven’t heard the PM piece, but I’m betting it’s a whole lot more appreciative of the legal complexities than you have been here.
Errr Nope! That’s the first time I’ve heard that, & I can assure you that the BBC article contained none of it.
I remember a while back that the MSM were putting it about that the encryption Blackberry were using on their devices was too sophisticated for the U.S. and other security services to crack; needless to say that was a load of b@ll@cks and they could access them no problem.
I don’t believe the U.S. government, or any government for that matter, would allow the sale of phones or other devices in their country which its security apparatus were unable to monitor or access if the need arose – the risk would be too great.
Eddie in nothing to tell mode here.
Forever blowing its own trumpet about how they are the world’s “leaders in news” it comes as no surprise that they would seek to downplay and denigrate the successes of someone else.
Remember when Tripoli was about to fall to the Libyan rebels. What was the BBC doing? What they do best. Carefully angled shots of their ‘journalists’, flack jackets on and wearing helmets posing and pontificating from 20 miles behind the front line and if you looked very carefully you could see puffs of smoke in the far distance. How very butch of them. They flooded the country with staff but few if any were anywhere near the front line, and then up pops a mother of four, microphone in hand, talking to camera in Green Square, Tripoli and very much in front of the front line. No wonder Alex Crawford and Sky News scooped all the awards, as they do every year, leaving the BBC in their dust. Naturally the BBC were apoplectic over this. The excuses followed thick and fast followed by overt sneering at Alex Crawford.
Now wind the clock forward and Sky news have done it again with what could prove to be the intelligence scoop of the year.
An ISIS individual has handed over to Sky a memory stick with the identities of 22,000 ISIS members.
The BBC’s reaction?
Downplay Sky at all costs. “The files obtained by German and UK media are said to identify IS recruits from 50 countries.”
Now as the files were handed to a British journalist working for a reputable British news organisation you’d think that the BBC would have emphasised the UK side first. In earlier reports Sky was described by the BBC as a ‘media outlet’.
Funny that, the foremost and most reputable news gathering organisation in Britain is described by the BBC as ‘a media outlet’
For more on how and why journalism is dying out in the BBC see Rod Liddle’s article in The Spectator.
On another note I can’t help sniggering over the BBC’s gushing bollocks over the trip of Canada’s Boy Blunder to the White House. I don’t know of anyone where I am in Western Canada who views the idiot as anything other than an embarrassment to Canada.
Yes, TPO. I noticed an air of skepticism from the BBC in regards to the Jihadi admin scoop. ‘Do they seem authentic?’ Mair asked the reporter of the questionnaires.
I disagree with you about the faux bravery of comfy BBC reporting, though. Why, only today Radio 4 had a reporter ON LOCATION at Shoreham Airport, mere months after the accident. It was essential to report the findings of an investigation conducted elsewhere by the AAIB, from the Airport, when the location of Broadcasting House would have sufficed, because it would have been decidedly second rate otherwise. I think they should be admired for this. No expense is spared.
My local BBC news, South Today, also had their own reporter on location today for a live broadcast from…..wait for it…… the A27 road where the crash happened.
I guess it was fairly brave to stand on the grass verge and do a live report with the rush hour traffic rushing past barley 20 meters away. Hopefully that reporter and the numerous catering, make up, and other behind the camera staff will make a full day of it and pop into Brighton for a slap up meal, free bar and a nights stay at a top hotel all covered by the taxpayer.
Can’t disagree on the first part at all.
As a BBC regular, I wonder if George ever raises this notion with BBC Editors of Integrity?
http://order-order.com/2016/03/10/labour-mep-claimed-hawaii-scuba-diving-on-expenses/
At this crucial time in the Referendum count down, such things seem germane to the kind of folk who would be preserved in a cosy seat on the daily Gravy boat trawling between here and Brussels.
Just popping over to the BBC to see what their ‘analysis’ might be…
Nothing on the Home Page. Maybe News?
Nothing obvious. There is this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-35775653
Silly me. Wrong party. Maybe Politics?
Nope. But this is still there:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35765254
Let’s try ‘Search’:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/search?q=Peter%20Skinner
Nope.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/search?q=MEP+Expenses&sa_f=search-product&suggid=
And top of the naughty list is… from 2008…
The North West Conservative Euro MP Den Dover denies he has broken the expenses rules of the European Parliament
Unique, yes. Vital, no.
Den Dover? Isn’t his brother Ben a friend of Evan Davis …….?
Ah yes….Ben and his mate Phil McCavity.
I read that on Guido too. It’s so…..well, I’m lost for words, it’s just an utter utter disgrace.
This comment is not about bias but a reference to BBC crap.
Today was the first day of Crufts, the dog show, which once was a national institution covered with great ceremony by the BBC.
Perhaps there are memories of how it was covered, with an impression of inarticulate half witted members of the public doting over their mutts and an endless parade of BBC luvvies, celebrities, having a jolly super time indulging themselves in the company of dogs. Little was ever communicated about this national sport and one was given the impression that it was all about producing some ridiculous looking canine, frequently bred for an appealing deformity with a silly bugger mincing alongside it whilst an uninformed commentator spoke drivel.
I have an interest here as one of my numerous talents is a professional dog trainer – scent work, rescue work etc. – and an expert in animal welfare, who has assisted governments preparing animal welfare legislation, and in some way contributed to the removal of freaks from the canine exhibiting world. Not my main area, which is far removed from the world of dogs, but where a hobby takes on a professional dimension.
So today I tuned into You Tube Live Streaming of Crufts and was gobsmacked to be given choice of viewing numerous canine activities and training skills in the many arenas, with knowledgeable commentary and no silly posing by celebrities. Very professional coverage of a national institution.
So what is my point? Coverage of sporting events like Crufts, is best without the BBC, and from that I might dare to look forward to a time when the BBC bows out of just about everything it now has its incompetent hands on
Good point well made. It has long struck me that the organisers of major events including sporting events would benefit from providing their own televised coverage of their events over the internet or possibly cable/satellite so that they get their own “production values” rather than those of W1A. While events like Crufts, the Horse of the Year Show or Glastonbury may not have the resources to do that, there are plenty of independent production companies who could do a fine job.
Trouble is, since the advent of the bloody ‘pundit’ in football, or motor racing where they’ve all got ginormous mics (probably deliberate for Eddie Irving to hide behind), then ‘interviewing’ each other is now the norm (yawn!). So it has been with Crufts, where too little info is given about the dogs, and too much ‘fluff’ between Presenters.
Biased BBC yes – but quite literally insane..?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35774629
I quote:
Laith Khalaf, senior analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown, said the ECB was now “plumbing the depths of monetary policy in a bid to stave off the encroaching threat of sustained deflation in Europe”.
“It’s hard to see even lower rates and more QE in Europe as a positive development. The fact the ECB is still pursuing such extreme monetary policy paints a depressing picture of the European economy, and markets are beginning to question what central banks have left in the locker if the global economy slips back towards recession,” he said.
What’s that BBC, we should vote to remain you say? But the lifeboats are already in the water and the ship is going down. Sorry, but if you insist on keeping your fingers in your ears and shouting ‘La la la la la’ that doesn’t mean the ship will miraculously become buoyant anytime soon…
Heard the PM programme try to sell this notion of ECB “quantitative easing”.
Apparently it was a positive investment, and shows faith in the Euro project.
And there was me thinking it was a desperate effort to do a Zimbabwe and print money until the next crisis.
If only the BBC would give us the facts…had the Tories done this, it would be painted as a panic and a disaster.
But it`s the EU…so the usual lack of curiosity from our BBC business analysts.
It’s not on the BBC website. But it really needs no further comment as to why we need to get out of the EU.
Thanks for posting that MM; every time I see a clip like that of Farage speaking in the E.U. parliament, I realize why the LibLabCon scum were so ferociously determined to keep him out of Westminster, at all costs, at the last election.
Can you imagine how much of donkey he would have made Essexmanchild’s mate look in that place?
It is as James Delingpole alluded to in a speech someone on here kindly linked in the last week or so; everything Farage has said in relation to the E.U. – he has been right about.
MrMeggo
Anyone who follows this site or anyone who looks up its past ‘posts’ will know how far ahead of Al Beeb it is in getting the true news.
This site is a godsend for those who wish to see beyond the fog of propaganda and news censorship.
It is truly incredible given the reverence the BBC has for the EU, that one of the UKs most active MEPs receives such little coverage, who could ever forget the classic cure for the blues that was the Van Rompuy encounter?
This latest EU effort to choke the west on Turkey looks a little more desperate than the more calculated social engineering witnessed before the manufactured migrant ‘crises’.
Tonights new BBC archaeology series Digging for Britain , is presented by ultra PeeCee left winger Alice Roberts, now elevated from common o’ garden ‘Dr’ to Professor of Public Engagement in Science at the University of Birmingham. NO surprise there, Roberts being rather glamorous, ridiculously smiley, and ever ready to push the multikulti view of history. No surprise that she was on message again tonight, assuring us in a discussion about the bones of an Anglo Saxon warrior, that not only had Anglo Saxons invaded and been assimilated, but many others too had followed them and contributed to our ‘rich and varied’ history.
I think Roberts can be assured of many more BBC commissions!
Has The Archbishop ‘seen the light’ ? I wonder what the propagandists at AlBeeb will make of this ?……………
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3486397/It-s-fine-fear-migrant-influx-says-Archbishop-Canterbury-Justin-Welby-believes-absolutely-outrageous-people-voice-concerns-condemned-racist.html
I doubt it Taffman. The fact that he is styling it as a ‘fear’ i.e an attitude which we should maybe be challenging, overcoming, suggests to me he is simply trying to demonstrate his empathetic side, and willingness to understand all views, rather than changing his own!
This is not a’fear’, not an adrenalyn fueled emotion, it”s a considered, well analysed objection!
I think we need a new suffix instead of ‘phobia’ to add to certain words, to denote that a person has an objection to something. Phobia is just too useful a way to imply that the person is dysfunctional, and their concerns irrational.
Phobos is the Greek God of fear; hence ‘phobia’. Maybe something like hate would be more accurate. Erida is the Greek Goddess of hate, so ‘eridia’ might be a useful suffix. Of course, I jest. Jerrod would have an orgasm.
There’s a huge list here – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Greek_mythological_figures
Maybe someone could pick the best to derive a new, less shameful suffix from.
No not ‘hate’ either. Mot people dont ‘hate’ individual immigrants, and we have spent a long time challenging the meme that we do. Its a rational well considered objection. Whats a term for a reasoned objection, rational not emotional?
The real difficultly is that politicians always paint the views of the general public as irrational or emotionally immature. The general public are basically children or brutes; they react to the world in terms of fear, anger, frustration, anxiety, etc. Only the politician has the superior cognitive powers and freedom from prejudice to see reality as it is and to make wise and far-sighted plans for the benefit of all. German politicians and media have even invented the expression “Wutbürger”, for citizens who disagree with their progressive ideas. These are supposedly malcontents and inadequates left behind by German society who are always angry andon the point of lashing out about something, sullen, unthinking people who might on a whim burn down a “refugee” centre.,
As you say, it is not a questionnof hate or fear. People simplly want the democratic right to determine their way of life in their own country.
I’m pretty sure I made it clear I was joking about ‘hate’, Aerfen!
It’s a difficult one though, to be sure. The prefix ‘anti’ should really suffice, but it doesn’t quite do it, as I’m sure you would agree.
Roy ‘Chubby’ Brown show banned by council
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-35766394
This is Gloria De Piero‘s Labour council by the way, but no BBC mention of this fact. No mention of Labour at all. Wouldn’t it be so much different if it was neighbouring (Conservative) Broxtowe Borough Council that had banned this show? Anna Soubry‘s name would have been prominent and the story would no doubt subtly condemn the tory minister.
“It is “outrageous” to describe people who are worried about the impact of migration as racist, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby has said. There was “genuine fear” over the impact on housing, jobs and the NHS, he told Parliament’s The House magazine.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35781613
Wow! Any bets that will be relegated to the back pages before 9am? Can’t possibly have common sense prevailing over al-Beeb’s agenda.
You can bet that AlBeeb are at this very moment lining up a whole host of their nasty lefty marxist friends to appear on radio and TV programmes throughout the day to ‘explain’ how he is giving support to the right wing bigotted racists that all white Englsih men are. And you can bet there will be no challenge to any of their views
BBC now backing Donald Trump?
The BBC – the er, self-declared king maker of the US Presidential Election – appears to have done a U-turn and is now backing the ‘controversial’ Republican front runner. One of Mr Trump’s concerns is the large number of illegal Mexican immigrants in the United States, so much so that he wants a large wall built to stop them coming. In traditional BBC-Liberal-La-la-land, Mexican immigrants make excellent docile nannies, golf caddies and maids. But the grip of the drug cartels and other criminal gangs means there is a dark side to parts of Mexico – an aspect that Mr Trump would presumably like to prevent taking grip in the US. Cue the BBC with this extraordinary article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-24f59e49-1c7e-4f3d-8644-f97e9ec75bc7 describing how people are kidnapped and held to ransom for as little as $500 south of the Rio Grande. Right-hand, left-hand, BBC (as opposed to the usual left-hand, left-hand)?