Another open thread to kick things off……I imagine it will fill up fast as the bias is coming thick and fast with immigration, militancy, the Tories and UKIP tearing themselves apart [Labour apparently not so much] and lots of people being eradicated for not being Muslim….oh, and Trump of course! The BBC has a lot to manage as it spins its narratives for that lot. Watch out and report in.
This might come as surprise to you but animals do not have passports and are inclined to roam about. So if you stick miles of barbed wire over borders, there are unintended consequences. They can’t roam about, mate, reproduce or eat.
To then equate that fact with the suggestion that the BBC reporting it shows support mass migration suggests you have a degenerating neocortex.
LDV – I think your Vans Trophy competition is a bag o’ shite.
And you`re a crap manager as well!
Sorry but my cat has a passport.
And my two cats (owners) with spaces for their photos , when we left the UK we could have exercised them in a special area at the Chunnel along with any dogs or ferrets that felt like playing with them. For that privilege we paid £18 each, we were going the wrong way so saw no gimmiegrants or bears or deer.
Just sent following email to Head BBC News:
” BBC Radio 4 News headline, 2 pm, stated something like ‘no British Minister was attending Tata Steel Company (India) meeting about production in Wales’?
You then negated that headline with a response from Government that no Government Minister received an invitation?
That is clear then, the reason no Minister attended was that no invitation was received and therefore why was this misinformation elevated to a news headline?
My question is: Why would the BBC be broadcasting as its headline that a British Minister was not attending a meeting he has not been invited to?
Could you please reply since, if I heard that news headline correctly, I wish to inform others about this form of broadcasting. “
Earlier, at a news meeting in the Ministry of Truth.
‘What’s on the agenda today, boss?’
‘Well, we’ve done some freedom of information stuff on libraries – number closing down, librarians being made redundant – y’ know, nastytorycutz to blame an’ all that. Avoid mention of local authorities though, an’ especially don’t interview ‘em else they might let the cat out of the bag that they make the decisions about these closures, not the government. Goes without saying we steer clear of government spokesmen too. And usual pack drill in case you need reminding: don’t ask ‘em if they think cuts are optional or – heaven forbid – what they suggest should be cut instead.’
‘Anything else boss? What’s today’s climate change angle?’
‘Glad you mentioned it, we’ve got a good ‘un today. Climate change is helping the British wine industry to thrive and the French are even coming over here to make their Champagne. Don’t even need to mention warming – it’s taken as given now thanks largely to our efforts. Steer clear of any mention that Britain used to have a thriving wine culture in Roman and Medieval times though – especially Medieval as we don’t want to call Michael’s hockey stick into question.’
‘Who’s Michael boss?’
‘I’m disappointed you had to ask that. Didn’t your line manager cascade the message down from our meeting with the world’s top environmentalists – I mean, scientists? I’ll have to look into this’.
‘What about regional, boss?’
‘Well the libraries story is a biggie – so hammer that home in whichever regional news programmes you can fit it in. Make sure we get people on from The List who are going to blame it on government cuts and keep repeating the message. Keep the list well cycled so viewers don’t twig it’s the same ones we’re using over again. How’s the new Northern Ireland bird shaping up for today’s North West News weather?’
‘She was practising earlier, Boss – got a snatch here if you want a listen’ (loud guffaws from male employees whilst red-faced producer gets his sound sample ready – plays: ‘And there’ll be shors later this afternoyn, so moynd hoy yew go if yore oyt and aboyt’.)
‘Perfect’.
‘And you’ll love the North West News report on the first black actor to play Shakespeare, Boss. Got it backed up by a report from a Manchester theatre doing a black-led Shakespearian production’.
‘Black lead? Is that for colouring up – I mean, to give the impression of a Person of Colour? Not getting good vibes here’.
‘No, no – I mean it’s being led by black actors and producers’.
‘Ah, got it’ (lounging back with a mixture of relief and contentment). ‘Should be a good day’s work’.
“Well, we’ve done some freedom of information stuff on libraries…”
Speaking of libraries,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35724957
Interesting selection of pictures, I wonder if BBC staff with brains that haven’t been washed ever wake in a cold sweat fearing for their jobs, “Must tick boxes Must tick boxes Must…”
Save the libraries, use the money that we waste on this instead …………..
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/125692
Currently at 142,348.
By their own definition it has to be considered.
In the words of RSM Williams (Ain’t Arf Hot Mum):- Oh dear, how sad, never mind.
Champagne Socialism
I’m not entirely sure but I doubt producers of English sparkling wines are permitted to call their product Champagne – the BBC news feature today on this fledgling industry neglicted to highlight this rather crucial issue – I fear the worst since this would be a typical area of EU authority and the BBC are loath to criticise their paymasters.
Anyway we learn the English bubbling white wine industry is on the up and up with ambitious vineyards looking forward to a sparkling future – what I found depressing at the close of the short report were a line or two about ‘government plans’ for the industry.
Does central planning really have to intrude on every aspect of commercial actitivty? On the BBC it does.
If we left EU would they be able to call it Champagne then? :p
Cheddar Cheese?
“Dear Mr. Height,
This is the biggest threat to the BBC so far. John Whittingdale, the minister who’s deciding our BBC’s future, just announced he wants the government to choose the people who run the BBC. [1] It means our most trusted broadcaster could be left in the hands of a government that wants to see it fail.
Whittingdale sneaked out his devastating plan at the weekend, to a newspaper that’s behind a paywall. [1] He knows that another scandal might put a stop to his plans to undermine the BBC for good. [2] So he’ll be hoping that 38 Degrees members aren’t paying attention.
We’ve got to act fast. If enough us sign an emergency petition demanding the BBC stays independent, 38 Degrees members will deliver it to him in person early next week. And exposing his plans in public will shine a light on his real agenda to dismantle our BBC.
Please can you add your name to the emergency petition now?
The way decisions are made in the BBC is under review. [3] But John Whittingdale’s using this as an opportunity to push his anti-BBC agenda and put his people in charge. They would have the power to decide news coverage and which BBC programmes are made. [4] It could mean the end of the BBC as we know it.
Whittingdale’s feeling the pressure right now thanks to a series of damaging revelations on his plans for the BBC – including being caught lying about reading responses to the public consultation. [5] If we turn up the heat now, Whittingdale will have no option but to back down.
If thousands of us sign this emergency petition, then deliver it to him in just a few days, we could make Whittingdale realise that he’s fighting a losing battle and leave our BBC alone. This week could become the turning point in our people-powered campaign to protect the BBC.
Can you sign the emergency petition now? It’ll take less than 2 minutes:
Thanks for being involved,
Lorna, Bex, Laura and the rest of the 38 Degrees team”
The biggest threat to the BBC is the BBC. As more and more people realise that al-Beeb are setting the agenda rather than reporting the news the grave they are digging gets deeper.
” As more and more people realise that al-Beeb are setting the agenda rather than reporting the news the grave they are digging gets deeper.”
Are you sure about that? 233, 995 signatures so far.
How many IP addresses?
You forgot this:
https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/keep-the-BBC-free-from-government-control
Marvin.
Agreed , let it pay for it self . It has been a parasite living off poor people for far too long .
Privatise it .
Simples.
Marvin , Marvin ?
Where did you go ……….?
I saw the Glastonbury lineup today. I must say it’s not what you’d call diverse. (by my reckoning maybe a dozen acts out of 75) I hope we don’t get all the usual dross of society coming out of the woodwork and complaining. The BBC will ruin it of course by having the usual ex-blue peter twats trying to be cool and commentating on it like its the Olympics.
Maybe having the Syrian National Orchestra will make up the lack of diversity. How will they get there? Is Glastonbury by the sea?
I`m hoping that the Daniel Baremboing Duwali Orchestra get the coveted Sunday afternoon slot.
And play for hours, until the BBC beg for mercy.
The tuning up will take longer than the performance …and the “MigrantsWelcome” brigade need to hear what music is coming…but don`t be surprised if the Orchestra is as big as the audience…and will reduce to a trio by the encore.
They could bring back previous Glastonbury performer and BBC fave Rolf Harris. Oh, wait a minute….
taffman, I agree- throw them to the market and see how many advertisers want to be associated with their bullshit.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-35866032
Birmingham man who killed wife in decorating row fire jailed.
She obviously didn’t fancy his Koran wallpaper.
Ah seismicboy you must realise that this had nothing to do with the Koran, and everything to do with whites.
He used ‘white spirit’ to set her on fire so it’s obviously the fault of ‘whites’ !
Anyway, you are surely rushing to judgement by assuming Muhammed Hammad is a Muslim.
I was listening to BBC Radio WM this morning – they had a phone in about Donald Trump, and as you would imagine the majority of callers were anti-Trump (it was the BBC after all) but I thought one call in particular stood out. It was from some random American woman in Scotland who was vehemently opposed to The Donald. – that’s right, someone from Scotland calling a radio show which broadcasts only to the Birmingham and West Midlands area. Not terribly plausible is it?
That’s it folks! Its all fucked. Its pointless to continue the fight anymore. Its over. I have witnessed something so indescribably warped and soul destroying that I am currently gnawing through a switched on plug socket to end the horror I have witnessed on the Al mujahideen Beeb webshite.
“US election: Donald Trump aide charged with assault” reads the headline
“Donald Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski has been charged with assaulting a journalist at a campaign event.
Mr Lewandowski is charged with simple battery over his encounter with former Breitbart reporter Michelle Fields.
Police allege that on 8 March after a news conference in Florida, he grabbed her arm when she tried to ask Mr Trump a question, leaving a bruise.”……
It then gives us a link for us to watch the incident. This is going to be utterly horrific. Body parts everywhere. Blood, screaming, limbs torn completely off…. God have mercy on my soul! I can never put into words how ridiculous the video is. You just have to watch it to see how bad things truly are at the Al Beeb. What is the point of coming onto this site to highlight bias when they produce an article like this. Please watch the video and read the comments on YouTube. God truly has abandoned our people
Just to help you to loosen you all up for you Tom Daley style triple somersault in front of a passing train tonight, please read Anthony ‘scumbag, I want to destroy my own people’ Zurchers review of the incident
“Now Mr Lewandowski has been charged over his manhandling of a female reporter during a rally”…..
YOU’VE SEEN THE FUCKING VIDEO YOU LYING BAST@RD!!!
OK trains on its way folks. See you in hellfire
This an interesting Pat Buchanan article re Trump, the U.S. and NATO:
“America First”: Is Trump Right About NATO?
I am “not isolationist, but I am ‘America First,’” Donald Trump told the New York Times last weekend. “I like the expression.”
Of NATO, where the U.S. underwrites three-fourths of the cost of defending Europe, Trump calls this arrangement “unfair, economically, to us,” and adds, “We will not be ripped off anymore.”
Beltway media may be transfixed with Twitter wars over wives and alleged infidelities. But the ideas Trump aired should ignite a national debate over U.S. overseas commitments—especially NATO.
For the Donald’s ideas are not lacking for authoritative support.
The first NATO supreme commander, Gen. Eisenhower, said in February 1951 of the alliance: “If in 10 years, all American troops stationed in Europe for national defense purposes have not been returned to the United States, then this whole project will have failed.”
As JFK biographer Richard Reeves relates, President Eisenhower, a decade later, admonished the president-elect on NATO.
“Eisenhower told his successor it was time to start bringing the troops home from Europe. ‘America is carrying far more than her share of free world defense,’ he said. It was time for other nations of NATO to take on more of the costs of their own defense.”
No Cold War president followed Ike’s counsel.
But when the Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Empire, the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, and the breakup of the Soviet Union into 15 nations, a new debate erupted.
The conservative coalition that had united in the Cold War fractured. Some of us argued that when the Russian troops went home from Europe, the American troops should come home from Europe.
Time for a populous prosperous Europe to start defending itself.
Instead, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush began handing out NATO memberships, i.e., war guarantees, to all ex-Warsaw Pact nations and even Baltic republics that had been part of the Soviet Union.
In a historically provocative act, the U.S. moved its “red line” for war with Russia from the Elbe River in Germany to the Estonian-Russian border, a few miles from St. Petersburg.
We declared to the world that should Russia seek to restore its hegemony over any part of its old empire in Europe, she would be at war with the United States.
No Cold War president ever considered issuing a war guarantee of this magnitude, putting our homeland at risk of nuclear war, to defend Latvia and Estonia.
Recall. Ike did not intervene to save the Hungarian freedom fighters in 1956. Lyndon Johnson did not lift a hand to save the Czechs, when Warsaw Pact armies crushed “Prague Spring” in 1968. Reagan refused to intervene when Gen. Wojciech Jaruzelski, on Moscow’s orders, smashed Solidarity in 1981.
These presidents put America first. All would have rejoiced in the liberation of Eastern Europe. But none would have committed us to war with a nuclear-armed nation like Russia to guarantee it.
Yet, here was George W. Bush declaring that any Russian move against Latvia or Estonia meant war with the United States. John McCain wanted to extend U.S. war guarantees to Georgia and Ukraine.
This was madness born of hubris. And among those who warned against moving NATO onto Russia’s front porch was America’s greatest geostrategist, the author of containment, George Kennan:
“Expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the post-Cold War era. Such a decision may be expected to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking.”
Kennan was proven right. By refusing to treat Russia as we treated other nations that repudiated Leninism, we created the Russia we feared, a rearming nation bristling with resentment.
The Russian people, having extended a hand in friendship and seen it slapped away, cheered the ouster of the accommodating Boris Yeltsin and the arrival of an autocratic strong man who would make Russia respected again. We ourselves prepared the path for Vladimir Putin.
While Trump is focusing on how America is bearing too much of the cost of defending Europe, it is the risks we are taking that are paramount, risks no Cold War president ever dared to take.
Why should America fight Russia over who rules in the Baltic States or Romania and Bulgaria? When did the sovereignty of these nations become interests so vital we would risk a military clash with Moscow that could escalate into nuclear war? Why are we still committed to fight for scores of nations on five continents?
Trump is challenging the mindset of a foreign policy elite whose thinking is frozen in a world that disappeared around 1991.
He is suggesting a new foreign policy where the United States is committed to war only when are attacked or U.S. vital interests are imperiled. And when we agree to defend other nations, they will bear a full share of the cost of their own defense. The era of the free rider is over.
Trump’s phrase, “America First!” has a nice ring to it.
“Great Britain First” has a nicer ring to it ………………
“A bill passed in 2015 required the Government to spend a fixed 0.7% of gross national income on foreign aid. UK handouts will rise from current £12bn to £16bn by 2020. ”
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/125692
That’s a good analysis, properly researched. BBC take note (but probably not).
Thanks for sharing it with us Al.
Yurr Tizz.
http://order-order.com/2016/03/29/trump-campaign-manager-charged-with-battery/
BBC Bias and Lies:
“”Bank of England warns of EU referendum risks””
“”The report referred to risks of a period of “heightened and prolonged uncertainty”, but It doesn’t say explicitly that it has in mind the period after a vote in favour of leaving the EU…..But that is the most likely scenario the Financial Policy Committee (FPC) is referring too””
(Says who? Who says it’s the most likely scenario being referred to? A ‘creative’ BBC NEWS editor?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35918471
So there you have it. The Bank report says there may be financial uncertainty due to the existence of a Referendum. But the BBC decides that the report is likely referring to financial uncertainty if there’s a BREXIT vote to leave.
How does the BBC get away with it? The Bank’s report is clear. But the BBC twists it with lies to smear BREXIT.
Mrs G watching some BBC1 drama called the ‘A Word’. Seeing past the obligatory (most unlikely) mixed race couple and ‘expert’ Asian doctor but it now seems necessary that a British produced drama, set in Britain and being broadcast in Britain courtesy of our funding has to have subtitles so we can understand what the workforce of the featured Northern brewery are saying…
Surely English spoken in Eastern European accents would suffice to remind us of the wonders of cheap labour and the EU?
I don’t recall subtitles in Friday Night Saturday Morning…
Nicky Morgan’s scaremongering is not likely to have much effect on young voters if Clive Bull’s LBC show is anything to go by.
This will sound extremely patronising, but having just listened to the opinions of younger voters on Brexit, I think they are lucky the older generation is around to make important decisions for them.
To be expected, most younger callers want to stay in, and I would respect their opinions if they could have given more cogent reasons why.
Specific reasons were along the lines of “cheaper flights” to being able to bring back more cigarettes.
Callers generally in their late teens and twenties wanted to stay in because “we’ve always been in Europe” … “the world should be more united” … “we’ve got friends from all over” … “young people want to look outwards and not be closed off” … blah blah puke puke. In other words, they hadn’t bothered to learn much about it and weren’t very interested in their future anyway.
“What about our sovereignty?” Bull asked one caller from uni.
There was a pause. (He knew it must have something to do with the Queen.) That was the “least important thing” for most young people, he said – apart from one friend who was studying politics and would be voting Out.
You can blame this fluffy thinking on our soundbite media and years of “emotion over reason” leftist indoctrination, but there was also a distinct feeling of apathy from young callers. Many would probabably not bother to vote because they “hadn’t been told much about it” and didn’t think it would make much difference if we were in or out. In any case they changed addresses frequently so probably wouldn’t be registered.
One caller said the In campaign would lose a lot of votes because it was at the same time as Glastonbury where thousands of In voters would be, and that takes priority. Well, obviously.
All this would be extremely depressing and a sad indictment of our education system if it wasn’t such good news for the Out campaign, where most voters would cast their vote if they had to drag themselves to the polling station from their sickbed.
Patronising as it sounds, it may be up to older people to protect the young from themselves and rub their noses in democracy.
It is worrying alright.
Reckon it`ll be down to how many who went through Blairs educational factory can be taught something about the EU.
These oafs think that “No” to Europe will bring in World War Three -because only the EU has kept the peace.
And Netto hardly look like they`ve done anything to stop the war and hate maan!
They also think that all their cheap flights will disappear, and they`ll have to pay a fortune to fly-like Whicker and Frost did, before Ryanair came in thanks to the EU that supported them.
And let`s not look at any history that suggests otherwise…be racist or picky to do that.
Totally conditioned in all liberal thinkings, just as Blair and his advisers(Crick, Grayling, Adonis etc) intended…and tomorrow was intended to belong to them, much as the charity sector does.
So I`d pretty much expect anybody under 40-teacher, public sector, no family or childless to vote to stay in, in case we get Donald Trump as UN Prez.
Hopefully they`ll all be doped out, blasting out Wonderwall and will forget to get involved.
Otherwise this demographic look to me as the dopey druggy dependent answers to spooky vibes as put out by Emma Thompson or Chris Martin.
God-they are thick-very much the “where were you when we were getting high” generation of Mullah-lite Muslims we`ll see in the next few years.
If we don`t vote to leave anyway.
Sadly I’m not convinced that the over ‘older generation’ are that clued up either.
Being an over 40, I struggle to get my head around how many of my peers, some I went to school with seem to have changed their views beyond belief in their adult years. Even families, mine included seem to be divided.
My sister, in her 60’s and her husband, an educated ex national sales manager for a well known company will not allow anything to be said about immigration and are both very pro the EU, blinded by cheap holidays and the wonders of foreign food and culture. Relations have been very frosty since a fall out on those very subjects over Christmas.
My point being is that we can’t take it for granted that such age groups will vote out, IMO the referendum will be decided by late Baby Boomers/early Gen X’er’s, those of us still with 10/15+ years work left to do, not guaranteed good pensions, haven’t yet benefited from high property prices, but are old enough to clearly remember British life pre 1990.
I also have a theory that Common Practice teachings are creeping into the private sector, especially in higher management positions, such that those working in the private sector are beginning to think like public service employees. Its the only way I can explain an unwillingness to discuss or debate such subjects, often with an air of aggression in their arguments and an inexplicable change in their views and demeanour…
Borrowed a book on comedy, and a couple of quotes stood out for me-which is why I borrowed it.
As I think of Ben Elton, Mitch Benn, Jeremy Hardy, Rhona Cameron, Punt Dennis, Brands and Howard-then I will remember these
a) The fun is in the story situations that make an audience feel sorry for the comedian.A funny man needs to make himself inferior to..
b)Let a fellow try to outsmart his audience and he misses.
The rest of the rare interview speaks of the comedian needing to be made small, pitied to be laughed at-and that compassion has pity at its heart, and must never be confused with being felt sorry about or condescended to.
It`s very rare to read Laurel and Hardy think anything philosophical or world-changing in their act, and this is as close as we get.
Along as there`s a chuckle muscle and a screen worldwide…these two will ALWAYS be the gold standard for many of us.
As for all those BBC agitprop luvverlies like I list…not ONE of them has any pity or compassion…just a big house and a soapbox from which to impress each other.
We are out of the loop…so I`m glad Stan and Ollie gave me the formula for great comedy
ChrisH, you make a good point. Laurel and Hardy are funny because their humour is timeless. They also use the very old formula of the two stupid men, one of whom thinks he is cleverer than the other, but the audience knows he isn’t. A typical BBC comedian, by contrast, seems to think most people are stupid and only he (and his immediate audience) are clever.
chrisH, So right. And, of course, Tommy Cooper was a master of pretending to be stupid !
Saw a recent DVD of the 70’s Comedians program as they are now, Roy Walker, Dougie Brown, Mick Miller and Stan Boardman. All still very funny, yet absent from our TV screens for one reason – Political Correctness, let it not be forgotten that Boardman disappeared from our screens overnight for his ‘racist’ Fockle-Wulf joke.
LOL ! Wouldn’t get on the BBC these days. Mick Miller is great, with his friend Gordon !
Maybe it`s just me , but I feel that the death of Black(Colin Vearncombe) the day before Bowie in January ought to be better known.
Thoroughly nice and unaffected scouser, who only needed that “Wonderful Life” song of his to get a few years fame, glory and money-and , in pop, that`s as good as it gets in the main.
I get pissed off at these BBC shows that mock the one hit wonder…if it`s San Fransisco, Spirit in the Sky, Story Of The Blues or-in this case, the sublime “Wonderful Life”-then you`ve made your contribution and will have my respect for as long as is needed.
God Bless you and your family Mr Vearncombe…and thanks for that song.
Last Word won`t bother their arses I`d say-but will give us Doreen Masseys puff piece if they`ve been primed to it by the radical hags of Goldsmiths.
But Black changed many lives-Massey just changed liberal nappies for a public sector conjob.
He also had a hit with Sweetest Smile. Beautiful song.
Good post Chris, but to be pedantic Wah had a couple more hits apart from The Story of the Blues!
Radio 2s playlist is pretty dire and predicatble, their new music playlist seems to just consist of Sam Smith and Adele wannabes and they’re more than enough.
At least dear old Brian Matthews trys to bring us some obscure stuff and anecdotes from the 60s whereas, all we seem to get from its 80s cousin is Take On Me, Don’t You Want Me and is anecdote free, as its ex Radio 1 laddette presenter wasn’t there….
Ah now Geoff!
Not pedantic at all-Pete Wylie a true great to me-and,as it turns out; a good friend and collaborator with Colin way back.
I`d say “Story Of The Blues” is pretty crap compared to other songs of his-“Better Scream” “Remember” and his opus “Don`t ever lose you r dreams”-one of the best songs ever done…from 1991.
Now though-back to pedantry…safe to say that the above songs would all have been Wylies-but were they “The Mighty Wah”…”WAh!Heat!” Shambenko Say Wah”…or endless variations on that theme?
And-Wylie, like Rowland-only needed to get it right once or twice to shut the critics up-big mouthed apparent blowhards-but then out come the records, and we now know that they`re anything but!
Think “The Wylie Wah” would make a perfect half-hour programme on Radio 4, Saturday morning…and musos like us could debate how best to categorise Petes “ouevre”!
PS-Brian Matthew is a hero in this house, where we have to check he`s alive every Saturday before we worry about Phil “The Collector “Swearne holding him captive in a northern soul club…and, as well as Balen-be nice to know whatever happened to Roger “The Vocalist” Bowman!
I have just seen the oddest interview with Harvey Proctor on Newsnight. The interviewer was Evan Davis, but for once he was not the problem. No, it was the curious way the lighting cast a shadow from Proctor’s nose which made it look as if he had a Hitler moustache. Evan Davis was asking him if he was still “far right”, and the lighting made him look like a Hitler tribute act.
Harvey Proctor does not have an unusually prominent nose, and I don’t recall this happening to anybody else. Was someone having a little joke at his expense? He may have been falsely accused of child rape and murder, and had his life ruined by false accusations, but he’s still a Tory, so always fair game.
I don’t recall having any problems with reading comprehension at school but can someone help me with this from our national treasure:
‘Steel giant Tata is expected to put its loss-making UK business up for sale, union sources say.
The decision puts the jobs of thousands of UK workers in doubt.
The Indian company held a board meeting in Mumbai on Tuesday at which the decision was made to sell its UK steel operations.’
The above was cut and pasted from this article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35922046
So, has the decision to sell the steel plant been made or not? Maybe if the Eng.Lit graduates who report on Science and the Environment could be drafted in temporarily it could be re-written properly.
Having championed the global warming scam, and the consequent increase in energy costs, I doubt if the BBC will acknowledge its role in this sorry tale.
Well there are a lot of Welsh people worrying about their future thanks to the EU and its failure to prevent the Chinese dumping steel on us and the stupid carbon tax .
The only way out now is to vote Brexit
I suspect that rather than blame the EU the ‘Welsh’ will tend to blame England.
Farage comes to Wales and covers many of the subjects posted on this site, he has a go at the political class, the leader of Welsh assembly and even ‘Baron’ Kinnock.
Worth a watch from 41min on ……
http://livestream.com/grassrootsout/grassrootsoutnewport
Posted this right at the start of the thread
“BBC -Teachers warn extremism policy prevents open debate
” Teachers fear the loss of a “spirit of openness” in how students can talk about ideas Annual conference in Brighton heard warnings that the counter-radicalisation policy was stopping teachers from discussing “challenging ideas” with their pupils”.
Woah! you can almost feel a R4 Toady exclusive, or a Newsnight special coming on.
Any mention on that implementation of the Islamic history option, by the Dept of Education? given it preferential onus at all? … even over our own history
… which proves that Islam is a political force with a political agenda in our own schools. any mention of that? … that’s pretty extreme, and no discussion about it at all. No … didn t think so.”
Well … a little update
“A legal duty on teachers to promote so-called British values was passed two years ago after the “Trojan Horse” controversy.
However, teachers argue “fundamental British values” set an “inherent cultural supremacism, particularly in the context of multicultural schools and the wider picture of migration”.
The motion, which was passed at the NUT’s annual conference in Brighton, also calls for a campaign to promote “policies that welcome migrants and refugees into Britain” and called on members to “gather and collate materials on migrants and refugees” to be used in schools.”
Teaching children fundamental British values is act of ‘cultural supremacism – Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/12205810/Teaching-children-fundamental-British-values-is-act-of-cultural-supremacism.html
… any idea how the BBC would play it?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-35907831
Have these ‘teachers’ never heard of the word ‘treason’? I know they have a reputation for not being as bright as they used to be years ago, but I am flabbergasted at this latest news! Treachery and treason may not be a crime on the books just at the moment but to betray the tribe/nation has been held a very serious action indeed and the punishments, judicial and especially the not so judicial are severe. This has been the case since humankind began. It is not going to change.
We are living in dangerous times. The liberal western societies which we have are breaking down. What today’s lefties don’t understand is that we are in a temporary phenomenon and the way things are going we are not going to emerge into a multiculti paradise. The resistance is growing slowly but surely across Europe and the current establishments and anti-establishments ( Rentamob etc) have no answer other than more oppressive laws and shouting mobs.
True, the Pansy Left control the governments and the Anarchist Left the streets, but the cosy arrangement is doomed to come to an end soon. Accelerated by their own stupidity I must for point out.
What will replace it? What future for Europe? After a period of extreme civil strife it will either be replaced by a continent of tighter nationalistic (hopefully democratic) regimes or something much much worse. If the change comes about by the ballot box so much the better but if a long bitter struggle is involved expect to see grim retribution handed out and a lesson when the crime of treachery is considered by an angry people.
I should emphasize here that I am not condemning people for having opinions or expressing them. I am just concerned that people who actively promote and engage the destruction of their nation such as NUT teachers and BBC journalists and writers should be aware of the consequences, which could be dire. Has anybody told them? (Would they Listen?)
I am a constitutionalist and would like to think at least in Britain we can still maintain our civilized standards. And settle things through the ballot box but I am also a realist and see writing on the wall. And, to put it bluntly, it don’t look good.
And if the resistance fails to win what then? Then our future lies under the crescent moon. Don’t hate them. Their victory will have largely been aided about by actions and exhortations from people in our own camp. The sort of people
who sneak and open the castle doors to the enemy. Despised by by both sides. I am not saying don’t be a Leftie or a liberal or even a Cameron conservative but be aware in these times of the boundary between protest and treason and those who willingly cross it should be aware of the consequences if there is to be a breakdown of civil order.
For ‘balance’, if a slight dilemma within W1A…
I haven’t seen breakfast for a few days. I haven’t missed the inanity. UK health alliance. Who? http://www.ukhealthalliance.org/about/ Tell us we should make a “plan” for the consequences of global warming on health & the health infrastructure.
The BBc continues it’s campaigning against Trump. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35919863
The BBc continues to support statements from “charity” save the children http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-35917037
North West run a story of a vigil held for victims of the playground attack in Pakistan judging by the video footage they could have almost held it in a telephone box. Apparently people from all faiths attended.
I must make it clear that I don’t usually read the Guardian. However my attention was drawn to an article by someone called Jackie Ashley on the increasing likelihood of Brexit, in which the following appears, ‘ … because most of the newspapers are ideologically hostile to Brussels, and the BBC is paralysed.’
Clearly what is meant is that the state funded BBC is unable to take sides on this issue. Whilst many of us would dispute that the BBC is being impartial on the EU referendum, I think it shows that Guardian ‘journalists’ EXPECT the BBC to be on their side of arguments, which I take as being strong evidence for the view that the BBC is very biased to the left. Of course this isn’t news to any who visit this site, but it is interesting that the Guardian so casually assumes that this bias exists and takes the heavy left leaning of the BBC for granted.
Double, The BBC is blatantly biased if favour of the EU and is making no effort to conceal it.
A lot of the Remain arguments centre around the continuing existence of EU. I can see the whole EU collapsing and all current member states negotiating trade agreements and no freedom of movement when Britain pulls out.
Aborigine, Yes the EU is doomed to failure and collapse. The important thing is for the UK to get out before that and not be dragged down with the rest of them. The “remainers” are too stupid to see that.
It’s also possible Ms. Ashley may have an iron in a few fires as regards the BBC and EU, by virtue of a marriage certificate (tiredness and emotion fidelity exempted).
I believe Jackie Ashley is Mrs Andrew Marr. I think I am allowed to say that under the terms of the super injunction.
Apologies for not being directly on BBC bias, but this well written article discusses how to combat Jihadism and equally important, how to avoid the accusation – usually from BBC appointed Jerrodniks – that we cannot defend ourselves from Jihadists without denying Muslims the right to practice their beliefs.
Ten steps to end Jihad against the west
https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2015/11/ten-steps-to-end-jihad-against-the-west/