Hi all. Monday morning comes early and this is a NEW Open thread for you to detail the bias. The BBC have spent the last few days salivating over the Obama visit so I took some pleasure when I was on BBC5 Live on Saturday night pointing out that no one with any sense would pay attention to this has-been Brit Hater, deployed by Cameron in a desperate effort to scare us into staying in the EU. I also think it interesting to read that Andrew Neil has discovered that there is NO queue of any Nations seeking to obtain a free trade deal with the US.
START THE WEEK OPEN THREAD…..
Bookmark the permalink.
Another sad loss to the world of music.
Not sure the highest rated comment on their FaceBook post about this was quite what the BBC was hoping for:
“Not Papa Wemba why God Why????? For the love of humanity!!!!! Seriously R.I.P I have no idea who he is though”
Guest,
Influential in W. African music, but not one of the stars. Pretty much unknown in the West. In the same way that Western musicians are pretty much unknown in Africa. But, hey , some teenage Beeboid has heard of him ! Prepare yourself for the death of Youssuf N’Dour, not that I would wish it on him. In the meantime, listen to Ismail Lo. Beeboids would hate him. He does not blame Africa’s troubles on the white man. What a bastard !
As I recall, many journalists cut their teeth covering the obit pages on the local rags.
It made sense having such pages, partly as public information, but also community service and a little bit of audience maintenance. It was likely a friend or relative to a fair few.
However, this latest manifestation seems more geared to offering teenager Beeboids something to do. Cheap, quick, easy. With the added benefit of training in editorial integrity with precious time and space on who makes that cut… and of course who does not. There be dragons with that last. Does one sense outrage stirring in the Kabuki community that one of their own was not accorded the same global mourning when the inevitable happens?
I hear Fi Glover has run a piece on all the grieving ‘we’ are engaged in currently.
Along with taxes and BBC licence fees, I suspect passing on will always be with us.
Lucky the BBC Editorial Guidelines offer a cut off for celebrity hospital or funeral home stalking, or there would need to be 3.5 billion BBC trainees, at a pound a pop.
I think this very sad occasion calls for some pedantry, Grant. If I recall correctly, Congo is not West Africa. I realise it is currently very trendy to distort geography and the world map, turning – say – the west and north-west frontier of the Indian sub-continent into ‘south asia’ but I think the correct term is being overlooked with reference to Papa Wemba. The correct collective description for the country of Congo and its near neighbours is, I understand, not West Africa but Francophone Africa. I hope my corrective will be taken as a meaningful tribute to someone from a country that I have never been to and whose music I have never, knowingly, heard. RIP.
Up2,
You are right, of course, it is Central Africa. My only excuse is that some people in W. Africa do listen to his music, but that is not quite the same thing !
PS. Of course, it raises the question of whether the BBC are going to report the death of every popular musician throughout the world. They may have to set up a separate website.
Indeed, Grant and yes. How long before well-known musicians from ‘South Asia’ without a hit to their name in their native north Korea are given news of death coverage by the BBC? After all, only today they have dug up David Bowie – again – and there can only be relatively few opportunities for that & subsequent re-interment before things start to really fall apart.
For the listener, that is.
Ta for the tip grant.
Ismael Lo is on YouTube, and his music is as good as the best of the rest in Africa…
That said, my own hero is Johhny Clegg-white Rochdale lad who moved out to S.Africa and did a Paul Simon before Paul did in 1986.
Professor of Zulu or suchlike in the Cape…but does(and did) songs like this one.
Well remember the Lefty muppets trying to get us to boycott his show in 1987, as they shouted at us when going into the venue…but they were clever enough to scoot soon afterwards, because the joyous crowd who saw him and his band Savuka would have lynched them on the way out.
No mugs these lefty hypocrites.
PS-don`t let the unfortunate resemblance to Peter Sutcliffe put you off-a great man!
chrisH,
I shall check out Johnny Clegg. Thanks for the tip !
ChrisH – Johnny Clegg is great. I first listened to him when his band was called Juluka, with great songs such as “Old Eyes.’
He was one of few whites committed to total integration and friendship with blacks in those apartheid days. And it took a great deal of courage to go against the white regime in that fashion.
Billy Paul. And 3, 2.. 1…
David,
Point well made. Obama’s opinions are irrelevant. All that matters are the views of the next presidential candidates. Hilary’s opinions are predictable and, assuming that she is not prosecuted , and becomes the next President, we can expect more of the same Obama crap. I am not sure where Trump stands. I hope he makes his position clear soon .
Grant – ‘Hilary’ is what her friends at the BBC call her. Don’t fall into their trap!
johnny,
LOL ! How do you know that I am not a friend of hers ? The problem is that, if I call her “Clinton”, people might think I am referring to Slick Willie !
“Hitlery” would preserve the distinction.
Describing US political candidates by their first names and often by affectionate contractions is so much part of the American scene that it is pointless worrying about it. Hillary , Bernie (not Bernard) and the Donald. It didn’t start with them Harry (not Harold) Truman, Teddy (not Theodore) Roosevelt. I’m sure with a bit of thought I can find other examples.
The campaigns encourage it presumably in the belief that the resulting loss of gravitas will be balanced by increased personal identification with the candidate. Donald Trump is a billionaire – Hillary Clinton is a multi millionaire . Yet they both appeal to the ‘little man’.
Obamas quacks are those of a lame duck awaiting his bath in a bowl of broth with herbs in it , and trying to prise him out of his duck house is not worth the bother.
The scrawny necked, lamest of lame ducks hasn`t had an opinion now since 2009, and as Sarah Palin said-he`s written more autobiographies than he has laws.
A feathered nest of dead downy fluff with mislaid eggs blocking his cloaca…and a supreme irrelevance to all but the liberal poster boys…maybe a picture of him scratching his arse as he looks for a golf ball might be the poster once he`s been stuffed and tarred as the biggest global wastrel since Bez of the Happy Mondays.
But less dance steps…
As the BBC are so keen on makeover programmes, why did they fail to ask O’Bama a nice simple makeover question. It is as follows ‘ When you took over the Oval Office, you de-cluttered it by removing a bust of Churchill and replacing it with one of Martin Luther King. In your quest to de clutter, what other busts did you remove and not replace?’ They had one reporter on his plane eating his sweets, and another with an exclusive interview, with agreed questions. But no questions about the office makeover. Shame on you, BBC, traitors one and all.
At Least now Obama has pissed off to go and tell the Germans what they should think, I should get an opportunity to flush out my vomitorium – I have had to use it a lot this past weekend.
What a treat this last weekend has been for lowlifes!, We have been treated to the site of two politicians helping eachother like a couple of old diseased whores sharing tricks at a party hosted by a (non binary gender) Judas Iscarriot – Both whores so befuddled with smack that in their conceited imaginations they are both still at the prime of their attractiveness to all and sundry. They are both in a rush to pull as many tricks as possible (and we even get a twin floorshow) all this before syphilis finally gets them both!
As for Aunty Iscarriot she isnt even charging them rent for floorspace – its free! – I think she must have her own agenda…………
Now where the hell did I put that mop!
Oaknash – that’s brilliant.
‘why did they fail to ask O’Bama a nice simple makeover question’
Particularly odd since just this weekend I witnessed a BBC News Editor making a fulsome justification of Nicholas Witchell’s question to Prince William – “are you a workshy prince?” The BBC man went on assure us that politicians and others in the public eye would never be able to veto difficult questions in any BBC interview.
Seems on the contrary, Obama gets the free pass on difficult or embarrassing questions.
Dumb and Dumber on the BBC TV sofa this morning announcing that they will be speaking to “opera star” (who has never sung in an opera) Katherine Jenkins who, surprise surprise, has a new record coming out.
Free publicity once again to those who don’t seem to need it, and we have to pay for it.
Florence Foster Jenkins?
I understood it!
A good advertisement for Auto-Tune.
http://www.antarestech.com/
With apologies to whoever was responsible for the original:
Katherine Jenkins – A stupid person’s idea of what an opera singer is like.
Katherine Jenkins has never described herself as an opera singer and it’s hardly her fault if others describe her as such. She is a classical singer, or more correctly a classical-crossover singer since she also sings non classical songs. As for the ‘free publicity’ comment above, what celebrity, or business person wouldn’t take advantage of such. In my view, there are better classical singers than she, but she does have much talent and I have been to see her in concert several times, and I can vouch for the fact she is a very pleasant person. Also, she has done much work without payment for the armed forces charitable organisations, British Legion and Help for Heroes. She is also an ambassador and advocate for the 2016 Invictus Games. In her own words, “Supporting the men, women and families who serve our country has always been an important part of my life, and I am extremely honored to serve as an Ambassador for the 2016 Invictus Games,” said Katherine. She is sincere in her commitment to the armed forces. Feel free to criticize Katherine Jenkins if you can find good reason for it but don’t do it out loud in front of our veterans or servicemen and women and their families.
She has never made any attempt to correct the “opera” title. In any case, the technical requirements for a classical singer, as she calls herself, are pretty much the same as those for an opera singer but performed in a concert hall instead of an opera house. Whatever semantic games she chooses to play, it seems clear that she wants to play with the big boys so she must be judged accordingly.
She delivers bland, undifferentiated performances with the aid of a microphone and reverberation to mask the flaws in her technique and to smooth out the unevenness in her voice. Some classical technique! As an opera singer explained: “She “covers” her voice, artificially manufacturing a tone that is too heavy and clumsy to project past the end of her nose. It’s what I call a “pretend” opera voice, like people use when making fun of opera singers, but she is making a career with hers.”
Worse still, like Russell Watson, she tends to play the class card when criticised: “I’ve always faced prejudice. I’m a working-class girl from Wales”. Humble origins were no problem for Thomas Allen, John Tomlinson or Joan Sutherland. She likes to stress that she was trained at the Royal Academy of Music. In fact she received a music teacher’s diploma.
Covering herself with the Union Flag should not confer immunity from criticism. Opera singers are booked years in advance. I suspect that KJ is a little more available.
I think it’s a shame that people are being deceived into thinking they’re getting the real thing and real opera singers, who train long and hard, are being neglected by dumbed down organisations like the BBC. They run the Proms and should know better.
Maria, she isn’t trying to deceive anyone. I suppose the bottom line is that she is an entertainer – and a very good one – and lots of people like her voice, me included. Personally, I would never go to an Opera but I love some of the music of many opera singers but not all of it. I love lots of classical music – but not all of it. I and many others are not interested in the technicalities or techniques of singers or musicians – we just like the sound they make. As for “covering herself in the Union flag,” rather she gives unstintingly of her time and talent to support our armed forces and their charities – so that’s more than fine with me and many other people. We shall have to agree to disagree but I respectfully suggest you vent your ire on those who, unlike Katherine, thoroughly deserve it and goodness knows there’s a bloody lot of them.
“Maria, she isn’t trying to deceive anyone.”
Yes she is. She calls herself a classical singer but she can’t handle the classical repertoire, she can’t perform her excepts live, and she couldn’t stand in for the real thing. She’s an inverted snob who misleads over her training. She could call herself a crossover singer but she doesn’t. In short, a phoney.
It’s all about furthering her career, nothing more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3558647/Katherine-Jenkins-snubbed-Palace-informing-plans-feature-Queen-new-album.html
I’ll “vent my ire” anywhere I please.
I hate to have to say it but, so far as Europe is concerned, it seems to be a British thing. I worked for years in Germany and still do occasionally. They don’t understand the appeal of people who seem to make a virtue out of being third rate.
I heard her career was foundering anyway.
She’s a singer, not Florence bloody Nightingale.
BBC Breakfast haul the red sofa down to Wales for a masterclass in what I would term ‘Bias by Inclination’
Retail Politics
The public provide the BBC with the much favoured vox pop – a litany of gimmies – I want more: childcare; help for the disabled; further education…. you name it. The picture the BBC paints is one of infinite demand for public sector largess – and surely anyone asking who is to pay for all this is just a tight wad tory?
Acedemic Lefty Bias
Lady Prof from Liverpool Uni (specialist in Devolution, no less) comes in to explain the strength of UKIP in Wales – don’t worry it’s just the funny partially PR electoral system, bach. Reassured to know the Welsh aren’t really more swivel-eyed than the rest of us our Lou-Lou Mincing flies the kite as to popular enthusiasm for these elections ‘People we met are really fired up’ (or some such) – already as a viewer I’ve got my doubts – just a week ago the BBC presenter assured us that in Ulster the burning issue on the lips of everyone they met was Panto Marriage. Sure enough Lady Prof has to prick the BBC bubble on this factual: ‘turnout for Assembly Elections has been low’
BBC Political Commentator Bias
Talking head Beeboid enthuses about the Labour leader in the Assembly “Looking Presidential”
It must be lovely to be a BHS employee at the moment with the BBc running it’s speculative story every half hour. And now that the stores are in administration . Pretty pointless holding back the staffs briefing untill 11:00.
I’ve been on the end of this to a lesser extent in the civil service where the media has run a story and the management have had a mid day embargo to tell us. Used to result in a morning of telling punters that we didn’t know.anything about it.
No surprise that BBC Newspapers review last night featured John Stapleton repeatedly rehashing immigration ‘red herring’ that EU immigrants put in far more to our economy than take out!
Absolute lie!
The man could not repeat it often enough even though this was challenged by Esther McVey, the ex-Conservative minister who lost her seat at the last election. But the presenter quickly moved on of course.
The evidence is now well proven:
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefingPaper/document/269
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10693022/Immigrants-cost-Britain-3000-a-year-each-says-report.html
But just the back of a fag packet calculations which can be easily done by anyone, explodes this migration benefit myth right out of the water:
Government total spending from taxes and borrowing/debt =£760 billion:
Divide by 64 million inhabitants:
= £11,875 tax required for every man woman and child (immigrant or not) living in our country.
How many people/organisations do you know that each pay £11,875 tax annually?
56% of Government income is from Income Tax/ Corporation Tax & National Insurance i.e. £6,650 for every person, (man, woman or child in UK) if we all payed the same.
The rest comes from all the other taxes likie VAT, Stamp duty booze and fags etc.
How many immigrant families, mum, dad and 3 kids who pay nearly £60k for the family in taxes annually do you know?
Exactly! Roll on when we can change the BBC properly to reflect honest reporting.
Notwithstanding the top 1% pay 28% of the total amount of Government spend.
‘But just the back of a fag packet calculations which can be easily done by anyone, explodes this migration benefit myth right out of the water’
The calculation is easier than that – if mass-immigration is so tax-beneficial – how come we’re still running a huge deficit!
Oh dear, I am in a bad place today. Another correction, I fear, Charlatans, this time coming your way. If I recall correctly, the top 1% of earners now account for 31% of Income Tax receipts, not total taxation. You used, I’m afraid the distortion beloved of politicians of Right, Centre and even the Left (especially the Left who are the Party of the rich now) that the top 1% pay a high proportion of total tax. It’s not – it is Income Tax.
Your excellent b.o.a.f.p. calculations demonstrate the more correct position, rather than the political spin position.
There is some other supporting evidence that inward migration costs rather than contributes, Charlatans. The Leader of Kent County Council was on BBC Radio at the end of 2015/beginning of 2016 observing that it costs the county £100,000 per annum to support an immigrant child under 18. Local Authorities were allowed to increase Council Tax by 2% for the current year with an extra 2% (if required) for social (elderly?) care. This rather indicates that there is a tax drain on the economy.
If I recall correctly, there was also the fact, only briefly covered by the BBC, that any ‘illegal’ immigrant over the age of 18 is restricted, by current legislation, from working for two years until his or her claim has been assessed and he or she has had an opportunity to appeal any refusal. During that period, they have to be supported totally by the State.
This rather supports your calculations, Charlatans.
It doesn’t help that many of the immigrant “children” look as if they are over 25, however much they like to pose with teddy bears.
Yes and we still give ‘aid’ to nations that often don’t deserve it. 0.7% of our entire national income gets creamed off when Osbourne has had to increase the UK debt to £160 billion to pay for more UK benefit ‘asylum’ claimants (thanks to the EU). Utter Cameron madness, we are borrowing to pay this stupid target that Cameron thinks is a ‘good idea’. I now quote from the Taxpayers Alliance: (TPA) ‘while the respected cross-party Public Accounts Committee published a report on Wednesday criticising DfID’s handling of humanitarian aid.’ TPA policy analyst, Harry Fairhead, responded to the report on the BBC local radio – (click link to listen).
https://audioboom.com/boos/4456744-should-we-stop-ringfencing-the-foreign-aid-budget?mc_cid=32d79c3aea&mc_eid=e87189a5ad
Aid
The only aid we should give is bags and bags of contraceptives .
Most of the hunger in the third world is due to overcrowding .
Every night, thousands of people – many of them ex-servicemen – sleep rough on the streets of Britain.
Every winter, tens of thousands of pensioners – forced to choose between ‘eat or heat’ – die of hypothermia.
Hundreds of thousands are waiting for medical treatment and hospital appointments, or denied treatment on the basis of cuts and costs.
Millions of people are living in damp, crowded and sub-standard housing.
Whilst any Briton is hungry, homeless or in pain, the giving of foreign aid – any foreign aid – is an obscene, moral outrage. It is an abuse of government, a misappropriation of funds. It should be considered a criminal offence.
IDS owned John Humphreys this morning on Today about 10-15 minutes ago.
At the end, after IDS had pointed out that Obama might not be in full possession of the facts and then spelt out the amount of UK trade and investment in the US….without a trade deal between UK and US or between US and EU.
Humphreys then invited listeners to, “check the reality of what we`ve just heard…not that I`m suggesting there`s any doubt about that reality but that`s for you to decide…you might want to check on the BBCs EU facts section on our website….”
Thanks John, I`ll try the US governments website: https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c4120.html
which shows roughly 8 billion dollars in trade in either direction in the first 2 months of this year…without a trade deal.
Back of the queue…? what queue?
Blimey, that’s blatant.
Get utterly trounced on facts, so bluster away afterwards pointing at your own version of truth on your own website?
Unique, even.
Meanwhile, the BBC seems inordinately girly that Obama allowed one of their own for a ride on his airyplayne. Guess that’s how you get exclusives. It’s a Clinton thing.
Guest,
Great film , by the way !
It’s another one they couldn’t make now. Free speech has really gone down the toilet hasn’t it?
Rob,
Thank God for DVDs, but I guess they will try and ban some of them if they get a chance. Stock up now ! The next step would be to make possession an offence.
Embolden
I’m with you 100% but there is another side to the website reference.
The bBBC are ALWAYS plugging their website – check out the end of the weather bulletins.
They use our money to plug their own website service and then justify why they should spend so much money on it (crowding out all other websites which have to earn their own living) on the grounds of its popularity. Insidiously in this case, they refer to it claiming it as a sound reference source.
A vast seedy self-perpetuating monster. And of course its full of all the bias.
BTW I’ve found that when you want to search for data on something random, let’s say actual wheelchair use, American data is often much easier to find. EU data is often hidden by reams of explanations of how the data was obtained, rather than the data itself. Exception – Eurostat is quite good if you can work out how to use it.
How The BBC Works #598: Political Activism Posing as Religious Programming
Changing the Climate
Something Understood
Sunday | 23:30 | BBC RADIO 4
Mark Tully asks if climate change offers an opportunity for us to improve our lives – not just by consuming less and respecting nature more, but by finding a deeper relationship with nature and each other.
Tucked away in the late-night limbo of a Sunday evening, almost concealed (one might think) from prying ears, is this, the latest offering from the self-indulgent, insufferably self-important Mark Tully. This programme, posing as a religion ‘strand’, has long been subverted by Tully (a sacred cow himself within the incestuous halls of the BBC upper-echelon elite) to serve as little more than a mechanism for delivering his socialist sermons, usually by half-heartedly clothing his sneering missives in some vague notion of spirituality (any spirituality, any flavour, all are welcome, because – to Tully – all are equal).
Last night’s episode was a shameless exercise in pro-CAGW climate change idiocy that one feels ought to be saved for the nation as a sober reminder, once this madness has passed, of what can happen when the state broadcaster encourages its worker drones to Keep Drinking The Kool-Aid. As things stand you’ll have just 28 days left to hear Comrade Tully intone his completely unchallenged, entirely biased, unevidenced, unscientific, wholly one-sided climate catastrophism to a grateful nation.
Comrade Tully, who presumably never uses electricity, never takes a flight anywhere, never drives a motorcar, never partakes of any of the wonders a fossil-fuelled world has to offer, wants us all all to forgo the wonders of fossil fuels and instead ‘return the planet to its natural wonder’. Um, I think I know where this is leading… but just just in case I wasn’t yet sure, Tully wheels on a fully paid-up socialist crazy to extol the virtues of ‘going back to nature’, replete with warnings that in the end mankind will have to be ‘forced to give up’ stuff (only in a socialist paradise, comrades!). Things like always-on electricity or a reliable public energy infrastructure, or perhaps the unforgivable, inexcusable luxury of simply owning and running a refrigerator or a motor car.
And so the program plods on, ever-more Malthusian, ever more menacing as the minutes creep past.
Tully’s message – never once opposed or questioned – is that something he calls ‘climate change’ will – somehow – catastrophically destroy this world ‘for our children’ unless ‘we do something’ now to avert such a fate. Tully says that recent tropical storms are ‘proof’ of this trend, but he fails to offer any evidence to support this ridiculous claim (when in reality, he could have just looked on the UN’s IPCC website and discovered for himself that even the ‘world’s foremost scientific authority’ on ‘climate change’ doesn’t think that so-called ‘extreme weather’ events have any proven link to ‘climate change’, but hey-ho). Tully sees ‘climate change’ at work in everything – from the quality of the air we breathe (environmental pollution, not climate change) to forestry and logging excesses and mismanagement (exactly what it says it is, not climate change) in the foothills of the Himalayas.
I forced myself to listen to this utter bollocks rather in the same way an unwitting passer-by is somehow forced against their will to stare at a car crash: it’s an involuntary action, provoked by morbid curiosity and a growing sense of unease. Tully was pontificating on a subject about which he clearly knows next to nothing and about which he has nevertheless decided to advocate. He offered no contrary opinions, no ‘debate’, no scientific critics, no competing narratives.
Trigger warning: If you have the stomach for entirely biased ‘environmentalist’ advocacy masquerading disingenuously as ‘religious’ programming here is the i-Player link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0783m43 – but be warned: it’s a full half hour of entirely ‘on-message’ ‘climate change’ virtue signalling from a true believer, who sneers bellligerently all the way.
The BBC: This is how they spend our money while they think we aren’t listening.
I’ve got out of the habit of listening to Mark Tully. I used to enjoy many of his programmes. I will have to start listening again via iPlayer to see if his broadcasts, like so much at the BBC on Radio 4, are in decline. It’s important to remember the religious and geographical locations that he has spent his life in. He is also now very old. This colours many of his programmes and, if I remember correctly what he has said in the mid-to-distant-past, he has been open about his biases.
Better that than pretending to be neutral while being anything but.
Andrew Marr’s Start the Week has recently finished and there was an interesting ‘wince’ moment. Physicist Lucie Green made reference to the cooling of the sun and the effects of ultra-violet emissions on winds around our planet. I expected Marr to jump in with support for global warming or to, at least, utter the phrase “in addition to man made climate change” while underlining it three times in red.
Amazingly (as Brian Cox would say), he did not.
Bald heads under a relentless Indian sun beating down on the bonce must surely take its toll.
Mark reminds me of the Bishop in Father Ted who gives up the priesthood on meeting Fr Dougal McGuire…and off he goes to Katmandu in a VW with a load of hippie chicks.
But got out in Goa or Delhi en route.
Lucie_green is a Blue Peter-lite kid who I once heard speak at a “isn`t science cool” kinda event?
Usual digs at the Daily Mail type-an utter pointless poppet but telegenic and full of beans.
The Billie Piper of science.
Oh-science can`t be cool can it-aren`t we about to boil instead?
What a good post!
I wonder how many listeners stopped to ask themselves the ‘poison pill’ question when someone like Tully starts on about ‘global warming’ and the need for socialist policies to ‘solve it’? Is it possible that ‘global warming’ was created, seized on and hyped specifically to justify those policies, which had pre-existed it for decades?
The answer, of course is ‘yes’. AGW is simply the latest excuse for socialism.
Exactly, GC, taking small (but rapidly increasing) amounts of money from the low & mid-paid masses to enable low taxes on the high earners and to fund Socialist (think the capital S is called for here) projects. Blair was quick to turn Global Warming into Climate Change and we are now starting to know why.
Just over 50 degrees indoors before the heating kicks in of a morning. (That’s F not C, btw!) It’s the end of April 2016. Yes, I do know weather is different from climate and not necessarily the same as GW. But just to remind folk, the firm predictions – believed by our Governments of three supposedly different political colours – were that at mid-decade, ie. end of last year, we would be starting to fry at 2 degrees above the norm. Some enviro-mentalists had that happening at the end of the first decade of the 21st century, ie. 2009. Seem to recall – in the UK at least – that it got rather cold and snowy back then.
If this goes on and GW and/or significant CC do not turn up, I wonder at what point the mass of people will wake up. 2020? 2025? After that, how long will it take for the people to get very angry and start demanding their money back? Ten years after?
Up2snuff, if I recall correctly the ostensible reason for the change from calling it ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’ was because global warming could actually cause cooling in the UK in some way – melting ice cooling the gulf stream or something. But it’s pretty obvious to me the real reason was that ‘climate change’ covers every eventuality. It’s an old ‘heads I win tails you lose’ trick used by religions for centuries. Whether the change in terminology had any official sanction or thought behind it I don’t know – it may just have been from the ground upwards as individual scientists got fed up with people not believing their predictions of doom.
No this is how they spend our money! The BBC have been caught (again they never learn) of spending the license fee on ‘trend spotting’ ‘’£20m on “consultants” over the past three years, but won’t tell us why’. Here is an interview on LBC about the BBC ‘consultants’ and why they should try to hide the fact! Of course the BBC likes to present it own ‘fact findings’ as being superior to more independent (and more politically impartial) sources. That the BBC are more than willing to pay ‘right on’ progressive ‘consultants’ to influence the BBC news channels that puts the entire BBC under close suspicion that it can hardly claim to be ‘independent or impartial’ is entirely false….
Thanks to Andy Silvester (TPA) for this audio clip from LBC. (3.26 mins long).
https://audioboom.com/boos/2365876-andy-silvester-discusses-bbc-consultant-fees-on-lbc
Oh no horror as sloths run story on faeces found on food in KFC in Birmingham . Wild guesses anyone.
Oh good Jenkins is on now flogging her new record the sloths are fawning and I’m reaching for the remote.
Birmingham. An eatery? Must be a cultural thing.
BBC in shock race row after labelling French born footballer `African`…..
BBC radio 5 live joyfully announces the news that Leicesters Riyad Mahrez is the Professional Footballers Association player of the year……”The first African player to win the award”.
O.K. so he`s scored 18 goals for Leicester as against the runners up (Vardy 22 and Kane 27) but football is about so much more than goals these days isn`t it? boxes to be ticked, womens football to shoehorn in, noses to be rubbed in diversity…….
It`s that word “African” that surprised me….He was born in France….so that makes him French…or is it European? or is he African after all….I guess that`s how the patriots of the Front National would view him and he plays for the Algerian international team….
so well done BBC on this occasion…ethnicity trumped both birthplace and religion in telling us the glad news, or, alternatively……BBC in shock race row after labelling French born footballer `African`.
Behave yourself Embolden, the BBC are just pre-empting for the time when Africa will be another territory within Europe – after this Summer’s predicted Mediterranean migration, that day won’t be too far away.
For lovers of irony.
I see the BBC radio 4 is in full far leftist mode this morning
This is my truth
Journalist Lynsey Hanley’s personal exploration of the experience of class in Britain over the past four decades.
“Changing class is like emigrating from one side of the world to the other, where you have to rescind your old passport, learn a new language and make gargantuan efforts if you are not to completely lose touch with the people and habits of your old life, even if they are the relationships and things that are dearest to your heart.”
Class is a subject we’re all aware of but rarely talk about – aside from the insidious line that ‘we’re all middle class now’. Hanley examines class aspiration and social mobility through the lens of her own life; providing a fascinating insight into what it took to leave her home in Chelmsley Wood, a vast council estate near Birmingham, and make her way against the odds through sixth form college, university and on into the world of professional journalism.
Received wisdom tells us social mobility is an unequivocally positive phenomenon, for individuals and for society. Yet changing class can be a lonely, anxious, psychologically disruptive process, which leaves people divided between the place they left and the place they have to inhabit in order to get on.
Just an excuse for a constant attack on the Tories and anyone who dares see the world in a different way she does. No surprise she writes for the Guardian & the New Statesman!
It’s followed by Moaners Hour – perpetually Left wing, and then the Lionisation of another Guardian columnist Jack Monroe. The bias is strong with them this morning, for certain !
What Lefties never do is examine “class” in other countries. I have lived in two overseas countries, Turkey and Gambia. In both countries, “class” is much more prevalent than in the UK. As for India ……….. !
The BBC’s sub-Marxist obsession with ‘class’ (ideally pronounced with a South Yorkshire flavoured ‘a’) is obsessive. It needs treatment.
I would recommend closure.
GC
And of course the irony is that the student Marxists who make up the bBBC newsroom wouldn’t be seen dead near anyone who was working class with the a pronounced as you have described. They did actually work, and the welfare state created for them assumed they would work, and that the welfare made available was a safety net.
The working clarss the bBBC newsroom prefer include single mother immigrants with children, all living on benefits while campaigning for a bigger council flat, and if one of them is LGB or T then so much the better.
Very true. The contempt for real working class attitudes is often on display from the ‘elite’ – as Emily Thornberry so perfectly demonstrated when sneered at the Union Flag being displayed on council houses.
Even worse, it was St George’s flags. The people were white, working class English, the lowest of the low as far as Lady Nugee is concerned. There’s no snob like a Labour snob.
10.18 am Monday 25th April 2016 – it is snowing in North East Angus.
Hooray for the Royal Bank of Scotland, the bank that nearly broke Britain. RBS display their progressive credentials by ignoring the public vote and going with their idea anyway:
“Scottish novelist and poet Nan Shepherd will feature on the Royal Bank of Scotland’s new £5 note when it comes into circulation later this year…….Scientist Mary Somerville had already been selected for the £10 note, which is due to enter into circulation next year…..Ms Somerville had already been chosen by the bank, despite finishing second to Thomas Telford in a public vote.”
And three cheers for the BBC to remind us how antediluvian we South of the border are :
“On Friday, the Bank of England revealed that artist JMW Turner and his painting The Fighting Temeraire will feature on the new design of its £20 note, to enter circulation in 2020……The choice means all but one Bank of England bank note character will be men.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36111759
I really don’t mind if all the bank notes in the Kingdom are adorned with notable women. But BBC do you have to keep poking us with your shitty stick on any and every issue. Yes, I know. Scots – good. Welsh – good. Irish – good. English – very very bad.
How about we put the visage of Diane Abbott on the legendary nine-bob note?
If I’m not very much mistaken, I believe that every bank note since 1953 has had a picture of a woman on it, a lady of German descent.
Obama’s beaten them to it. His Treasury Secretary has announced that President Andrew Jackson will be replaced on the $20 bill by some obscure 19th century woman of color. I cannot remember her name, but she seems to be some sort of American Mary Seacole, whereas Andrew Jackson was just a dead white male. I am sure John Humphrys would splutter with indignation if anyone asked whether Obama’s “Kenyan blood” had anything to do with this decision.
Rob in Cheshire, it backfired on the fool. Harriet Tubman was a gun totin, Second Amendment supporting Republican.
http://www.youngcons.com/meme-shows-why-putting-harriet-tubman-on-20-bill-is-great-news-for-republicans/
Many ex-slaves did indeed need guns to defend themselves against the KKK etc. That is why “gun control” started in the South, by Democrats, to disarm the Negro population. Gun control is always about disarming the weak. Condoleeza Rice remembered her father having to use a shotgun to defend the family in the 1960s. The likes of Obama would have left them to die. So would Hillary Clinton, but then she didn’t even lift a finger to help the US Ambassador to Libya did she?
Well said Rob. BBC and lefties have been taught to see Dems as the good guys defenders of blacks and the enemy, white racist red neck Republicans.
I believe that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican. That fact rarely gets a mention.
Lobster ,
Good point ! And it was the Democrat ” Copperheads ” who, even 2 years into the Civil War still fought against the Emancipation Proclamation saying that it would lead to ” Nigger Equality “. When it comes to racism, slavery and equality, the Democrat Party and their antecedents have dirty hands . I wonder if that wanker Obama even knows a little bit about the history of the USA ?
Why should he, it’s not his country!
Cut Hillary some slack when it comes to guns. Don’t forget, that poor lady came under fire from snipers in the Balkans or somewhere. It left her so psychologically traumatised she frequently has trouble recalling events accurately.
And said niner could be used to pay the licence fee, by those (still?) paying it…
Well I’ve never heard of Nan Shepherd.
Nor I, and I write as someone of Scots parentage. Google ‘famous Scottish women’ and the list is pretty paltry, but I would have thought Sophia Jex-Blake (one of the first women doctors) would have been a better choice.
“How about we put the visage of Diane Abbott on the legendary nine-bob note?”
Just get some hyper inflation Zimbabwe notes with pictures of Robert Mugabe on. Then crayon some longer hair on him………..hey presto a Diane Abbot bank note.
Rob,
That is a very, very, funny comment!
SJ
Stalin admits it: ‘I am always right’.
An advert for the VD show on the BBC website gives the unsurprising ‘news’ that 2/3rds of students believe that the National Union of Students is right to have a no platform policy. Originally, the policy was to prevent racist and fascist speakers at universities, but has been progressively extended to include anyone who dissents from the race/gender/globalist/immigration/global warming agenda. But don’t worry – it’s not only compatible with free speech and debate, it actually enhances them.
Of course, only a small number of students were interviewed – 1001, presumably NUS officers or activists. And here’s the real detail: the data was ‘weighted by course year, university type and gender’. What does that mean? Simple: suppose the question is ‘Should people who are not transgender fanatics be allowed to speak on campus?’. Five people say yes. One person says no, but that person self-identifies as non-binary so their opinion counts for more and is weighted by, say, a factor of 10. Hey presto, twice as many people support a ban as those who don’t! It’s exactly the same methodology that was used in the General Election polls last year, which is why they (BBC, Guardian) got it so badly wrong.
On the wider point: remember, a liberal is just a totalitarian who hasn’t yet come out.
Ian, this just points to the much wider problems we have regarding our media and the way the mainstream media manages (or should that be stage-manages?) what it quaintly calls ‘the news’. BBC News, Channel 4 News, Sky News…even ITN, they are all hopelessly liberal progressive in outlook and agenda. None of them divert from the prevailing orthodoxies of liberal regressive narratives regarding immigrants, climate change, the EU, etc. They are all cheerleaders for these socialist agendas and all reserve their sneers for anyone who is clever or resourceful enough to get past the ‘meeja’s self-appointed gatekeepers and express a contrary opinion on air (an increasingly rare occurrence).
All of Western media is captured by the liberal progressive agenda- the attack on opposing narratives is constant and unyielding. The BBC now actively campaigns on behalf of progressive causes (from climate change to immigration), barely able to contain its glee at the powerlessness of the state to prevent it from propagating whatever it wants, whenever it wants – all on the public dime!
We will stay in Europe primarily because that’s what the progressives in the msm want, so that’s what they will hammer home relentlessly from now until the referendum. They know this and I think they know that many of us know this, too. But it’s a done deal – just like getting Abbott out of power in Australia was a done deal, or parachuting Justin Trudeau into the Premiership in Canada (just in time for the Paris Climate Jamboree) was a forgone conclusion.
Corrupt, totalitarian and rotten to its core, doesn’t even begin to describe the pitiful state of our so-called media…
News : 163 page super complaint about systematic BBC Global Warming reporting bias* has been put in by a UK Skeptics team including 2 serving politicians.
Signatories comprise : Piers Corbyn, Richard Courtney, Philip Foster, Alex Henney, Paul Homewood, Lord Christopher Monckton, John Whitfield, Rupert Wyndham
Plus the politicians : David T C Davies MP and Roger Helmer MEP
(nowt to do with me) .. see Paul Homewood’s blog for a summary and links.
* and constant pushing of greendream magical thinking, I guess.
…Oh hang on a new statement from a top BBC source :
‘the BBC has got it about right…’ has been used more than once. But not for ‘Global Climate Change’ which nobody at the BBC has got right for several years. Claiming they have it ‘..about right ‘ is nonsense scare mongering of the worst type of news reporting, and even when the collective ‘amnesia’ from BBC trustees is highlighted (again) of its BBC failures to adhere to the BBC charter that they have obviously NOT GOT THE RIGHT. But the truth remains they (BBC directors and journo/presenters) like to ban those who legitimately ‘question’ the validity of ‘why’ a public paid corporation, ‘paid for’ by compulsory license fees is ‘censoring’ scientific debate. Or as the BBC also claims (being a collective expert) on behalf of the IPCC ‘the science is settled’ (on climate change) . Its patently obvious that it isn’t.
So the BBC back peddle and claim they have ‘equal’ complaints. No they don’t. Science is Science and has to be proven or it is a theory which again has to be proven or discarded for another theory. That which cannot be proven in real life (rather than computer simulation) is not proof but a theory amongst (many other equally valid theories) which have shown then BBC does NOT have the expertise or have shown any inclination to get it ‘about right’ .
For once I had to watch a bit of VD, and it was an eye opener. Peter Tatchell and Julie Bindel, both uber progressive, left wing, anti-racist, gay activists, are “no platformed” by the NUS on account of some seeming doublethink crimes they have committed. You could not have two more painfully right-on people, and yet the NUS treats them as if they are card carrying members of the National Front. Germaine Greer is, apparently, so beyond the pale that her name cannot even be mentioned. I assume the NUS officers are Harry Potter fans, they are certainly childish.
The left is beyond parody. It eats itself. It always does, from the French Revolution, to the Russian Revolution, to the posturing middle class revolutionaries of the NUS. I have always thought this, but it is nice to have it confirmed before your eyes.
Left wing politics are a form of mental illness, and the NUS are a bunch of spoiled children with too much time on their hands.
Rob,
I was at Uni. in the 70s and the NUS was pretty bad then. But most students just ignored it.Now it is just unbelievable.
When I was there we studied all day, revised and drank in the student or hall bar at night, watched cheap concerts in the gym, chased the opposite sex, had fun, graduated and got good jobs.
There was student uni but it was a joke occupied by arts berks who the doctors, scientists, engineers, lawyers, etc ignored. Except the girls, if they were pretty. Have to admit, the engineer girls were not. So the arts guys who were not ‘artistic’ stood a chance.
But then, it was a different time.
Guest,
Same here except the opposite sex always seemed to run faster than me ! The beers didn’t escape so easily !
These days the Beeb’s favoured opposite sex have three legs so maybe they run even faster now :p
What is rather amusing is that the BBC probably think this is a ‘good news’ story about the NUS. One that will take attention away from the fact that the NUS has recently elected their first ‘black’ (-ish, ever so slightly), female, Muslim chairman, a person with views that some would describe as forthright and honest and which others would describe as downright anti-semitism.
Ian,
Ironic that they have elected a racist, but I don’t suppose Jews count as human beings in their eyes. Reminds me of a little man with a moustache who caused a few problems some years ago. Overall, in the UK today, we are seeing the Fascism of the left, fully supported by the odious BBC.
Grant,
“Ironic that they have elected a racist…”
But… but… “Judaism isn’t a race…”
I believe she is from Morocco, and I rather think that most Moroccans would be mortally offended to be described as “black”, as if they were from sub-Saharan Africa. Not that they are racists of course, they just don’t like blacks (except as slaves).
Except Shakespeare’s Moor (ie from Morocco) is always played by a black man and woe-betide anyone suggesting that anyone other than a black man (except maybe a black woman) should be allowed to play the role. However, any non-black role (except Iago who is evil) can be played by a black actor/actress.
Demon,
“However, any non-black role (except Iago who is evil) can be played by a black actor/actress.”
And do they generally put on “white face” makeup and pretend to be “White”?
zero – an appropriate name as your comment shows zero relevance as always.
Rob,
I can tell you from direct experience that Arabs have contempt for black Africans. I am the opposite . I have great love and respect for many black Africans ( biased because I am married to one ! ) and total contempt for most Arabs. And I could fill this website with personal first hand examples. I think the reason is that Arabs are aware of their inferiority to other people and use black people as a sort of scapegoat. Enough said !
Grant, I see a lot of what these days would be termed ‘racism’ amongst my friends from Malaysia (can’t stand the Indians), Thais (can’t stand the Burmese), Caribbean (can’t stand the Africans) and so on. I’m always slightly alarmed by this. I was raised to believe, courtesy of our progressive msm and spineless governments, that as a white, English male I alone could be considered racist if I ever – ever – misspoke about ‘foreigners’ in a less than complimentary way. ‘People of colour’ (I dunno; is that racist?) simply cannot be considered ‘racist’ even if they speak extremely disparagingly about other races, other ethnicities (and they, do, believe me). It’s a white man’s burden, after all, isn’t it?
And yes, perhaps I’m biased, too. I have a Thai partner (but I’ve also had Malay, Chinese and Filipino partners over the years, as well as a few black Caribbean partners; oh, and a few white ones, too! – I’ve calmed down now, btw).
Obi,
Blimey you have been busy ! In my younger days I travelled in Thailand and Malaysia and can echo what you say. In my experience , the least racist people I am aware of would be the British. I would add to that Gambians ,although, with good reason, they do not like the Lebanese in Gambia and neither do I Typical Arabs, treating blacks like shit ! So I guess that makes me racist.
The strange thing is that the Left and BBC never call Obama racist, even though he has been a cheap third rate race hustler most of his life. Strange that !
Grant,
“Ironic that they have elected a racist…”
“Arabs are aware of their inferiority to other people…Typical Arabs… So I guess that makes me racist.”
Yep, a racist posting on a racist web site describing other people as Facist. What an amazing revelation!
zero – “a racist web site”. Oh, you wish it was. Then you would have an excuse for your bigotry.
Demon,
“‘a racist web site’. Oh, you wish it was.”
Haven’t you heard; racism is a good thing. Alan says so! To pretend this web site isn’t over populated by racists takes a degree of myopia I’m not entirely familiar with.
zero, what a comment from an out-an-out supporter of the party filled to the rafters with unrepentant anti-semites. You are hilarious.
zero,
But at least I am honest about my anti-Arab racism. When are Corbyn and some of his fellow travellers going to be honest about their anti-semitism ? That is what I mean about the Fascism of the Left .
Demon,
From the point of view of Leftist racists, my racism is ” the wrong kind of racism “. They are such hypocrites !
Here`s hoping that the likes of Tatchell, Bindel and Freer will now finally find common cause with Boris, Nigel and Geert…as well as dear Tommy in Luton
If they don`t-then they deserve to be hung by their own petards…if they do, then free speech becomes the common currency to unite us all.
Good story by Peter Hitchens about his no platformed hate audience in Blackpool-his opponent Howard Marks chose to walk off the stage with him.
To my mind, this meant that I did not slag Howard off as I would normally have done re last Word hagiography…in that moment alone, Howard became “square with the House” and is now helping Prince out with controlling the opiate intake…
RiC 11:-04
“The left is beyond parody. It eats itself”
“BRAVO! THE WOLVES DEVOUR EACH OTHER,” declared Rubashov’s prison neighbor, No. 402, an unrepentant monarchist.”
Darkness at Noon.
More cannibalism please.
The BBC is an orgy of left-wing propaganda today, at least where I am (Indonesia).
On the front page I am offered:
* US ex-senator, 90, to marry a man http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36127215
* A viciously one-sided condemnation of Trump’s ‘evict illegal immigrant’ policy http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36114246
* Anzac injustice – about how Australia formerly (but no longer) had a ‘dont be gay’ policy and how terrible this is http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-36108560
* BBC women’s footballer of the year http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/36102460
* Syrian migrants taken in by granny on a pension http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36127051
The BBC and Trump goes beyond reason.
Speaking of which:
http://order-order.com/2016/04/25/is-it-racist-to-call-obama-kenyan-american/
Meanwhile, with power speaking unto, or close to, or really not very near truth…
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-odds-idUKKCN0XM0J7?
What’s not to like about BBC TVL or Chicago-style ‘or else’ policies?
If I were a horse near a vocal Brexit support I would sport a leatherneck.
‘Giles Farthing •
is it racist to say West Indian mothers would go to the wall for their children and white people love to play divide and rule?’
Not enough to get booted out certain BBC green rooms.
Apparently.
Have to say, the establishment threatening the wrong kind of democracy on the line is not working well in this house.
After 48 hours of BBC headlines about an hypocritical American extolling the virtues of the UK remaining in the EU you would think that there was nothing to report on the referendum looking at the front page of the BBC. No headlines about some of the Brexit speeches and counter arguments being put this morning. No. The most important story for the BBBC is that two other Americans, who I had never heard of before the US election campaign started are getting into bed together to stop another American, who I had heard of, becoming a nominee for President. You know what BBC I don’t really fucking care about that or them. Now can we have some unbiased reporting on the EU campaign – stuff that matters to me.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news
For the BBC there was not much on the Queens Birthday but full praise to ‘Prince of pop’ on ‘purple rain’ (?) musical interlude for his ‘death’ spot. (As it later transpired he died of a drugs overdose.) No surprises there at all. The BBC are ‘into’ illegal drugs (its a human right they would say, like euthanasia). And then its straight over the to the new ‘songs of praise’ of the new Muslim Messiah OBHAMA. Muslim (tick), Black (tick), Left wing agenda (tick), praise the EU (tick). No surprises there. And then the Royal Welcome (Obhama is clueless without a briefing sheet from Cameron (as Joker in the pack). I bought the Spectator (for the first time) – as the front cover says it all. Cameron, and that Royal welcome. The Queen made to feel like a poodle. The BBC liked that. Nobody else did. The Queen included.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/magazine/
It’s quite possible that Prince’s drugs were legally prescribed. If you have the money, in America you can usually get a doctor to prescribe very strong opiate painkillers. Americans are more addicted to these than any other nation on Earth, which makes the whole “War on Drugs” business seem even more futile than ever.
Rob,
You would hope that the MSM , including the BBC, would use the deaths of drug-taking celebrities as an example to young people. But I suppose, in the case of the BBC , it would be hypocritical !
http://order-order.com/2016/04/25/not-the-first-time-whittingdale-has-enjoyed-the-perks-of-the-job-a-little-too-much/
Another whose impartiality is in their DNA, if located often by CSI:Westminster with an ultraviolet light.
Commenters so far feel he is a BBC hater. Not convinced.
I sense they have who they want, just where they want him.
I take it that Prince is well known for more than just Purple Rain ? a career of over 30 odd years and all we’ve heard is that one offering.
Purple Rain? Is that a result of Climate Change?
Prince wrote some great songs, including, lets go crazy, kiss (covered by Tom Jones), when doves cry, nothing compares to you, which he wrote for Sinead O’ Connor and many more.
I was a big fan of his, but he fell out of favour with the “liberals” of late due to his Jehovah’s witness activities and his anti Gay Marriage stance.
He also donated a lot to charity, but unlike Bono and Geldorf, he didn’t use it to further his career he just got on and did it.
Shelly, you’re quite right: Prince has an amazing back catalogue of work – truly impressive and it’s very likely we’ve never heard the bulk of it, as he recorded a mountain of material he never got around to releasing – he was tremendously prolific.
It’s looking increasingly likely that he died from an accidental overdose of painkillers. If this is true, this is a sad end to a unique talent, regardless of what one might think of the man himself (I personally think he was a preening egotist and poser – but an unimaginably talented musician and writer, so hey-ho). But the msm’s liberal goggles never allow them to be critical of their heroes, even one as politically ambiguous as Prince (or Bowie). Yes, there may well be a message and a warning about drug dependency in the sad end of Prince, but all is forgiven by regressives and no lessons are to be learned because in regressive circles the important subtext is that: 1. Prince was black, 2. Prince had an all-woman band, 3. Prince flirted with issues of sexuality (although he was an avowed heterosexual in private) and 4. Prince ‘crossed boundaries of race, ethnicity and gender’ (this last one is the most important and wins the full house).
So long, Prince, and thanks for writing ‘The Ballad of Dorothy Parker’. I always liked that one the best, even though it was never a single and most people have probably never heard of it.
Sky were actually worse (yet again) over the death of Prince, the Morning sofa jockey who confessed he’d never really known any of Princes music, declared, quite self importantly, that he was going to download Purple rain and have a listen. Then there was a lot of head shaking, and clichéd nonsense from the paper reviewers. I’m sure a million viewers were probably thinking the same as me, that the bandwagon jumping was strong on this death, not quite Bowie-esque but utterly confounding.
I liked his music but never felt like going out and laying a purple wreath on the nearest set of railings. But then I’m not a great one for emoting, especially over the demise of someone I never personally knew.
No disrespect to the deceased but how long is this Princefest going to run ? It is beyond belief !
There must be a BBC Guideline Chart (FOI exempted) that accords grades.
DeathCon 1 is a Mandela extinction event, Bowie a 3… we’ll have to see where Prince rates, but it will for sure be purple. I dread to think what will happen if Pink suffers an early demise.
Is there likely to be another DeathCon1 to rival the Mandela extinction event in our lifetime? I can’t think of anyone, currently regarded as a living god by the BBC, whose demise the national treasure would devote its entire output to. The closest I can think of would require a bus carrying Eddy Izzard, Stephen Fry, Jo Brand, Jeremy Corbyn (complete the list with other left-wing twats as required) to go off the cliff at Dover whilst carrying much needed aid to the jungle camp.
Could deathcon 2 be Emma Thompson (please).
Fidel Castro would be a candidate for DeathCon 1 I should think.
Here’s another thing. The BBC have been caught (again they never learn) of spending License fee money in secret deals; ‘’£20m on “consultants” over the past three years, but won’t tell us why’. Here is an interview on LBC about the BBC ‘consultants’ and why they should try to hide the fact! Of course the BBC likes to present it own ‘fact findings’ as being superior to more independent (and more politically impartial) sources. That the BBC are more than willing to pay ‘right on’ progressive ‘consultants’ to influence the BBC news channels that puts the entire BBC ‘independence’ under close suspicion – that its NOT independent from media manipulation… (That is crystal clear from this LBC radio broadcast about three months ago). Thanks to (TPA) for saving this audio clip for replay. (3.26 mins audio clip).
https://audioboom.com/boos/2365876-andy-silvester-discusses-bbc-consultant-fees-on-lbc
I wonder how many of these “consultants” are friends and family of senior BBC executives?
RiC 14:10
Personal experience, about two years ago.
I was the recipient of a small government grant. A consultant was appointed to decide how the money was spent.
I live in the Midlands, the consultant chosen was from North Yorkshire, he was also useless.
I investigated the “consultant”, he had recently received a, very nice thank you, redundancy package from local government.
He then started his own business.
Because of his public sector work he went straight to the top of the list of “consultants” selected by local government to administer the wastage of your taxes.
A quick search showed four companies within a fifteen mile radius better qualified than this hopeless ex local government clown. These companies did not need to make a 350 mile round trip and spend a night in a hotel, but they were not even considered.
P2 13:20
This is public Sector policy,
Hire staff at mouth-watering salaries and perquisites, using the “you have to pay to get the best people” excuse.
The people thus hired know SFA about anything expect socialism.
So the idiots now paid a king’s ransom cannot select a consultant independently. What happens? They choose a lefty consultant who also knows SFA. Result wrong decision made, more hard working people in the private sector, have part of their lives stolen to pay for this nonsense.
Close the public sector. Our heroic, underpaid, underfunded, under-equipped military are the only thing worth saving.
Thatcherrevolutionary
Had to laugh at that Martine Croxall’s appearance on BBC news last night – there was a screen grab of her advertising some show, and the photo was of a slim, pretty, blue-eyed girl. It then went back to the studio where she sat there with a face like she had sucked the piss off a jaggy thistle as she was mentioning Trump. Limp hair, dressed like a 60 year old, and about 5 stone heavier.
Sums up our BBC quite nicely.
Thanks………. its comments like that, that the ‘suits’ in broadcasting deem it their responsibility to keep the ‘older’ woman off the tele ! God help Holly Willoughby and her ilk if they deign to age into 60 year old crones ! Yet Huw Edwards IS ONLY 54 (yes 54 !) and I’d put HIM well into his 60’s !!!!! On the other hand Gavin Esler is ten years older at 63 and has still got what it takes ! People age – we have to deal with it – some better than others.
http://order-order.com/2016/04/25/blundering-bbc-broadcast-hillsborough-verdict/
Envy of the world, Ma!
Well, to Glasgow’s SNP Nick Robinson fan club bloc, a few million extra angry Scousers will surely not affect the unique funding top up?
Liverpool fans have got form when it comes to storming barriers and climbing over walls – something Dalglish commented on in his autobiography.
Having quizzed Dalglish about what he had described in his autobiography as fans ‘bunking in’ to watch the 1986 FA Cup final against Everton at Wembley, John Beggs QC, representing some of the police officers involved, then drew the court’s attention to Home Office reports of ticketless and drunken Liverpool fans at the 1989 FA Cup final, the month after Hillsborough.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2880604/Kenny-Dalglish-arrives-Hillsborough-inquests-former-Liverpool-manager-prepares-evidence.html#ixzz46r6XE7QH
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
After Wembley, Beeb Towers should be a piece of p***.
jtf 17:05
Heysel Stadium 29 May 1985.
For all who believe Liverpool football supporters are redder than the driven snow.
Morons !
Anyone else getting sick and tired of the number of imbeciles that can’t make up their so called minds because no-one has spoon-fed them ‘the facts’, A position reinforced by the BBC and media as being too complicated for us little people to decide. In this day and age when people don’t even have to get off their fat backsides but need simply to press a few buttons on a computer or phone. Look …. thousands of facts. The UK/EU trade figures over the years, the UK/US trade figures, the invented list of countries waiting to do trade deals with the US that we’ll be at the back of, how long it’s taken for the US not to reach a trade deal with the EU and the reasons, how long it’s taken the EU not to reach a trade deal with other countries, the construct of the useless EU Parliament, the names and histories of the spend thrift EU Commissioners, the amount of every countries contribution (or lack of) to the EU, the number of years that the EU’s corrupt accounts have not been signed off by auditors, the number of countries available to trade with outside of the EU and their primary products, the numbers of legal immigrants, the lists of EU legislation, the Common Agricultural Policy, the Common Fisheries Policy, the numbe rof coal fired power stations being built by Germany, France’s employee working hours, and on and on and on. The truth is these imbeciles will never make up their vegetative minds based on facts …. they want some Almighty Being to tell them what to do. Here is one fact that may get through to their infantile minds.
‘Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation’. Jean Monnet one of the architects of this European monstrosity ! Jean Monnet Founding Architect of the EU Project. He may have been nuts but at least he was clear about it !!
Ace,
Quite right. How there can be any “don’t knows” on something which is so clear on a matter of principle is beyond me. If some people are trying to calculate it on the effect on their personal finances , what was the point of our ancestors fighting for freedom ? Freedom has no price.
Morons !
Anyone else getting sick and tired of the number of imbeciles that can’t make up their so called minds on the EU because no-one has spoon-fed them ‘the facts’, A position reinforced by the BBC and media as being too complicated for us little people to decide. In this day and age when people don’t even have to get off their fat backsides but need simply to press a few buttons on a computer or phone. Look facts …. thousands of them.
The UK/EU trade figures over the years, the UK/US trade figures, the invented list of countries waiting to do trade deals with the US that we’ll be at the back of, how long it’s taken for the US not to reach a trade deal with the EU and the reasons, how long it’s taken the EU not to reach a trade deal with other countries, the construct of the useless EU Parliament, the names and histories of the spend thrift EU Commissioners, the amount of every countries contribution (or lack of) to the EU, the number of years that the EU’s corrupt accounts have not been signed off by auditors, the number of countries available to trade with outside of the EU and their primary products, the numbers of legal immigrants, the lists of EU legislation, the Common Agricultural Policy, the Common Fisheries Policy, the number of coal fired power stations being built by Germany, France’s employee working hours, and on and on and on. The truth is these imbeciles will never make up their vegetative minds based on facts …. they want some Almighty Being to tell them what to do. Here is one fact that may get through to their infantile minds.
‘Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation’. Jean Monnet one of the architects of this European monstrosity ! He may have been nuts but at least he was clear about it !!
Completely agree, AFP. All the observations you made there (and more) about the EU have been in plain view for many years so if people are still undecided, they don’t deserve a vote.
According to Guido the ‘world class broadcaster’ has breached the court restriction on publishing the jury’s verdict at the Hillsborough inquest.
Oh dear. That could get expensive.
http://order-order.com/2016/04/25/blundering-bbc-broadcast-hillsborough-verdict/
Perhaps zero might like to pop in and explain how this example of gross incompetence was, oh, I dunno… Murdoch’s fault?
GC,
Apart from the bias, the BBC are totally unprofessional in all other aspects. It is to be expected from a bunch of teenagers who never grow up but their amateurism causes big problems for many people. The BBC are , indeed , the pits.
Proof that selling Socialist Worker on university campuses does not provide qualifications for a national broadcasting service.
Time for sackings at the BBC
G’W.F. 18:49
Sacking, singular.
As in pillaging and destroying.
G.W.F. 18:49
Sacking, singular.
As in pillaging and destroying.
I have just listened to the Food Programme (BBC R4, 3.30pm onwards) and struggled throughout to keep my recently eaten lunch in its proper place.
I often enjoy the food programme or the fragments of it that I might catch when it is repeated. NPI, btw, but if you want or need a chuckle, go ahead. Be my guest. 🙂
Today the programme featured its home base, Bristol and from the outset was so hypocritical, condescending, contradictory, virtue-signalling and political correct that I am sure it contained 111grammes of sugar for every 100g serving.
Yuck!
I do not know where to start picking it apart although the opening lines might be a good place. Sheila Dillon using Licence Fee Payers’ money to create man-made climate change by travelling to and around Bristol when there are perfectly capable presenters from BBC South West who could have taken care of that edition of the programme.
In catch up mode I noticed in the last Open Thread that Jerrod had slipped and slithered his presence back into the hallowed confines of Biased BBC with a relatively innocuous little contribution.
I’m sure he thinks we’ve forgotten why he went AWOL 3 weeks ago.
So just to remind him, it was because he was presented with the inconvenient Biased BBCesque opinions expressed by the black former head of the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission, Trevor Philips, about the failure of multiculturalism and the unacceptable practices of the RoP. The going rapidly got tough, so Jerrod went shopping.
Once again he has proved able to break taboos which too many liberals in the UK are keen to continue enforcing in the face of all available evidence.
In other words, Philips articulated the same fears about Islam that have been expressed countless times on here – views for which Jerrod comes up with such scintillating counter-arguments as ‘obsessed little bigot’ and ‘prejudiced little worm’, in other words continuing to enforce the very taboos that it seems only Philips is able to break – basically because he’s not white.
So, Jerrod, may I take this opportunity to ask you again: what kind of obsessed little bigot and prejudiced little worm is Trevor Philips?
Sorry I can’t bear the Food Programme. I just find Shiela Dillon intolerably smug, I have to hit the off button before I hear her voice.
Dillon really is a vile creature, I agree. I had to hit the off button before I choked to death on the propaganda. The Food programme is often one of the most political programmes on R4 some weeks – and I’m sure Dillon and her comrades would take that as a compliment.
Derek Cooper would do a better job and he’s been dead for years!
johnny,
I wonder what Jerrod went shopping for ?
Lefties have a problem with black people. In the Lefty mind, Black=Good, White=Bad. Muslim=Good, Christian =Bad. It keeps things simple for their little minds. But how do they reconcile that with the dedicated , genuine , traditional Christianity practised by many black people ? That is a bit of a bummer.
Beeboids think all black people are the same. But , let me take Gambia as an example , close to my heart. Many black W. Indians and Afro-Americans visit doing the “Roots thang” . Kunte Kinta is in Gambia. Leaving aside that the book is fiction, the “Western ” blacks treat the native black Africans like shit and lord it over them. The native Africans despise the “faux-Africans” but are too polite to say anything to them . Maybe the BBC could do a documentary ” Black brothers under the skin”. On the other hand, maybe not !
Jerrod’s response?
Dont be a meany Lobster – Hes gone looking for a sense of reality!
Hes looked under chairs, hes looked under tables, hes tried to find the key, To aunties fifty million fables!
I dont think he will get to get what hes after – til the day he dies!!!!
Give it up Jerrod it might be a long wait otherwise!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-34517434
Who is behind the Bangladesh killings?
It seems some group are murdering people who don’t fulfil Islamic goals but the BBC is lost as to who these murderers might be.
Difficult isn’t it?
Scribbling,
It is very difficult for the teenagers at the BBC to work this out. Their “thought processes move very slowly ” and never progress. For them , the problem is that the real world is a bit different from a cafe in Islington.
Yes, quite a mystery.
This morning I was watching the prissy little children in the NUS having a fit of the vapours because Peter Tatchell had somehow offended their LGBTQ house rules in some minor and inconsequential way, while in Bangladesh they just hack you to death. Not much chance of a safe space there, but the self-important little NUS commissars can’t be expected to focus on things like that can they? Not when they can be busy “no platforming” gays who disagree with them in the slightest way.
The thought that these ponces will be Labour MPs in a few years is truly chilling.
Rob,
By the time that they are MPs, it will not matter any more . Let they play while they are young.
The scary thing is that they could also become Tory MPs, given the way that party has lost its way over the last few years. The Cathedral ‘establishment’, virtue-signalling, box-ticking philosophy could easily apply to both major parties nowadays.
I hadn’t thought of that, but on reflection you are quite right.
The BBC were always going to have a problem if the paths of some of their flagship projects somehow became intertwined. Today it seems just that has happened. Probably the biggest 2 of their projects – muslims and gay/lesbian/etc have collided head on.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-36128729
“Bangladesh LGBT editor hacked to death”
As a layman in all these things I would have thought that in a majority muslim country being open about ones (and others’) sexual ambiguity was not a particularly wise thing to do. And it appears that Xulhaz Mannan and another have paid a heavy price.
The BBC have tried hard to keep the genie in the bottle – this story about the LGBT editor is very careful not to point the finger at muslims extremists – this would never do at the BBC. But a link asking who is responsible leaves little doubt that it is islamist extremists are behind a series of killings of bloggers and such like.
This is a very interesting piece about South Africa; and illustrates what the consequences of high levels of immigration from Africa into Europe may possibly be.
http://www.amren.com/features/2016/04/the-war-on-afrikaans/
Anyone listening to Radio-2 this afternoon would have, like me, had to endure the smarmy, sycophantic & desperately unfunny Paddy [fuck me an oirishman on the BBC] Kielty, fawn to the old lefty hag Mary Beard. Talk about an interview with an agenda. This haggard bitch is being allowed to re-write history, totally unchallenged by her lefty friends in the BBC production department. Not only does she claim that the Roman Empire embraced the free movement of people, she now puts forward the idea that the Rome was so successful because it put immigrants in positions of power. Apparently the term “illegal immigrant” would have been an alien concept to Romans. How the fuck does she know? We even had a favourable comparison with the EU with it’s single currency and free market. What a load of left-wing garbage.
Beard was recently on the Jeremy Vile show pushing this very same agenda, but we now have to have it regurgitated on TV, unquestionably timed with the EU referendum. These bastards will stop at nothing!
The only people who mattered in ancient Rome were Roman citizens. They could be from anywhere in the Empire, but to be a citizen you had to speak Latin, wear Roman clothes and worship Roman gods. The Romans demanded total cultural assimilation as the price of citizenship, a concept that we seem to have forgotten. I don’t suppose Dr Beard was asked if she thought this was a good idea?
Indeed, when in Rome….
Instead of comparing with the EU, perhaps she should have compared the success of the Roman Empire to that of the British Empire – both enslaved the people who they conquered, and both brought civilisation to the savages, who would otherwise still be running around barefoot chucking spears at one another. What have the Romans ever done for us and all that….
To claim that Roman society was a shining beacon of multiculturalism is farcical, yet the BBC not only go along with it, but have their man ask clearly scripted leading questions to facilitate her agenda. The whole lot was so obviously staged, and I only hope that the ‘average’ listener saw it for the transparent propaganda that it was.
But we all know how it ended.
The same as all empires, including Tesco – a classic modern example.
Perhaps Ms Beard should be encouraged to compare the faults of the EU with those of the Roman Empire and doubtlessly come to the only conclusion that the first ended in tears and the second is well on the way to the same end!
Quite! Dr Beard should think some more about the collapse of Rome and why it happened.
At least some on here give her the courtesy of being called Dr or Ms, as opposed to the derogatory remarks of “lefty old hag” and “haggard bitch” !! ….. I think I know who I’d rather have on my quiz team and looks don’t come into it. (regardless of views, just imagine someone calling your Mum, Sister or Wife those names, how would YOU react ?)
I don’t agree with her politics but I once made a comment on one of her Guardian pieces and she was pretty good at replying to honest serious questions.
Anyone who colludes with the state propaganda machine to further their contemptible political agenda deserves everything they get. These people are the enemy within, and I have absolutely no respect for them, just as the left have absolutely no respect for anyone who dare to disagree with their twisted view of the world. Doctor? She is an utter disgrace to the title!
neilW,
Quite agree !
neilw,
Well , Roman slaves certainly had free movement into the Empire and the lucky few could be given their freedom and become Roman citizens. Quite a contrast with the UK today. I do not know whether Mary Beard knows much about the history of the Roman Empire but, as a Leftie, she will twist anything to fit her political views. Not to be trusted.
Mary Beard well known for being wrong then and wrong now. Who voted for her anyway? Exactly.
BBC NEWS AT 6 – SHOCKER
Reasonable piece about Theresa May’s speech, the George turns to camera with the REALITY CHECK on screen behind.
He turns to Daniel Sandford, Home Affairs correspondent. It runs for a short while with some immigration statistics.
“… well if the UK left the EU in theory migration from the EU could be stopped. However, at the moment of leaving we would want to do a trade deal with the EU and Switzerland, for example, had to accept freedom of movement rules. Now they have a higher proportion of EU citizens than we do. To get out of that they’d have to abandon their trade deal…”.
This humble viewer thinks he could have qualified that with “but of course we could get a deal without movement – it may be a lesser deal, perhaps, like all those other countries who just happen not to be in the EU and have deals”.
Isn’t it amazing that China manages to sell anything into the EU?
You know, everything from TVs to cut price steel. They just manage to do it.
Yet surprisingly, there are very few resident Chinese in the UK and those that are seem to work hard and their kids get excellent results in schools.
If only they were in the EU………they would do so much better……??? Errrr……….
Startling facts I found over the weekend. (1) There are currently over 100,000 mainland Chinese students in the UK (in 2013), in comparison only around 4,200 UK students are currently studying in China…’ and another letter caught my eye (a Professor) writing in The Times… (gist) (2) ‘Why should we kow-tow to the EU on Scientific research when there are NONE (zero) world class Universities in Europe! (3) that the UK has EIGHT World class internationally recognised Universities (whilst EU has none). When the pro remain lobby shout CERN, do they not know that CERN is in Switzerland and is NOT part of the EU, being independant’. Like we should be.
So to sum up, ‘What is the point of being IN the EU exactly? England is already an international player, (always was) and that is why the Chinese come here, and its not because of the EU bureaucracy. They (Chinese) are investing directly in the UK (ours and their own education) not the EU which is a failing entity.. We do need the Chinese more than the Saudis who are corrupting everything (with oil money laundering) in and outside the BBC and has the slight problem of being involved in a war they helped create and sustain.
Philip,
Yes !
The point for scientists is all the research grants doled out to them by the eu.
Certainly appear more industrious and entrepreneurial than we currently are, though with scant regard for greenery (steel) and subsidised post they have a good head start with production and shipping cost.
http://fortune.com/2015/03/11/united-nations-subsidy-chinese-shipping/
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/659627/EU-loaning-millions-Chinese-steel-companies-40000-UK-jobs
One feature of the BBC Homepage is the way some links seem to stay forever while others seem to disappear forever in hours. Can any top The Stig on You Tube?
The Stig gets behind the wheel of the Lamborghini Murcielago to see what it’s really capable of … Click on the link and you will discover it was published on Jan 25, 2015! The ‘disgraced’ team of Clarkson, Hammond & May. still being pushed by the BBC.
Yes deegee I have noted the same phenomenon. I can’t better your longevity example, but the shortest appearance on the BBC homepage must surely have been on St.Georges day, two days ago, when the one link to a children’s CBBC quiz disappeared within the morning, I then saw a spat on this blog involving an esteemed contributor and either Jerrod or Zero regarding this very issue, went back to the BBC website and it was gone. Red crosses on white backgrounds are very problematic for the BBC, as is English patriotism. Flush down memory hole asap.
I would not assume that any of this is planned. It is probably just another amateurish BBC teenage cock-up.
Cock-up or conspiracy? It’s always difficult to tell with the BBC. By the way Grant, I’ve been enjoying reading your posts. I agree entirely with your comments earlier on inter-ethnic racism and your valid claim that we British are some of the least racist people on the planet. Hope it’s not too cold north of the border tonight.
Newsnight. Unbelievable. Three brexit speakers spoke very well and coherently on defence and security – it will be as good or better if we brexit, and it will be worse if we remain. Three remainers spoke poorly and unconvincingly on why we should remain (europol, human rights and refugees sums it up). Eight spuds in the carefully selected non-biased ‘audience’ then proceeded to show unanimous hands for the……..drum roll…….remain side! They should be embarrassed to produce such a load of shit. Wake up people!
Looby,
It is the BBC. Shit is what they do !
£4 billion sure buys a lot of shit.
I saw a bit of that biased Bull…t .
In a nutshell
According to the euremainers, we Great Britain, should give up all our sovereignty so that the EU doesn’t implode?.
Well if the EU wants to survive it should change, not us, and get rid of its creeping control of our nation .
The debate was absurd.
Even worse is that ITV, and Tom Bradby’s Agenda in particular, are getting every bit as bad. IDS versus three left-overs (I’m going to claim that as a distinct improvement on remainers) shouting him down at the same time as Evan was fiddling his figures.
What with the Telegraph swinging transparently along government – as opposed to its previously conservative – lines, anyone would think there’s some politically engineered bias at work.
Radio Al Beeb early yesterday morning discussing the drastic housing shortage in Wales and the building on green belt areas .
They failed to see the ‘elephant in the room’ and link it to mass uncontrolled immigration. Not a mention !
Taffman. The BBC “failed to see”? I think we should say REFUSED to see the link.
They are after all Britain’s foremost reality deniers. I’m always amazed that in an overpopulated country like the UK people make no protest about adding huge numbers to the density.It seems to be a taboo subject on both right and left. Bring it up and people will say it is not really a problem. Pursue them and they will admit there is a limit. Ask them for an approximation of what that limit could be and they become evasive or respond aggressively with something like “what do you want to do sterilize everybody” “what do you want to do start killing people”. They won’t give a limit because there is no limit in their vision. They see nothing wrong in the whole of the UK looking like Hong Kong. The reason for this is generally stupidity.
However, in the BBC’s case it is not stupidity but their wish to see the British outnumbered in the their own country and replaced by people who care not one jot for Britain’s beauty or tradition. And I’m not impressed at all with those who say the British birthrate is too low ‘so we need immigrants’. That problem could be solved in no time if the powers that be had half a mind to think about it. (And half a mind would be a great improvement by our politicians across the board)
I hate seeing the beautiful Devon countryside that I grew up in churned up for the lunacy of EU policies.
I wish the Brexit people would make more of this issue.
Mass immigration is, in my view, welfare for developers and furthermore a crime against the people.
Look forward to Independence day 23 June 2016, when we can hopefully include the BBC in the renewal negotiations.
Kier Leftie Starmer, now a Labour Shadow Minister, turns up on Today for a patsy style interview by Nick Robinson. Starmer wants the UK to let in all the RoP illegal migrants who are ‘children’.
He is largely unchallenged by Robinson with one exception. Robinson asks Starmer if letting in such illegals won’t just encourage yet more to come by illegal routes. You bet it will! Many are clearly being sent by their families so that other family members will subsequently gain right of entry due to crazy ‘Uman Right’ legal judgements so beloved of by the EU. Just how do these children get the money to pay traffickers? How many are really children anyway?
Starmer recoils in moral outrage at Robinson’s question . He finds it deeply uncomfortable. He thinks all listeners will too. Just how out of touch this sanctimonious creep and his Let Em All In leftie allies are.
That interview was appalling wasn’t it?
“I think most people, most of the listeners of this programme will look in the mirror and say to themselves that’s not the kind of person I am.”
Well sorry Sir Keir, but this mess is in part, the product of the governments you served, breaking Ba’athist Iraq but then failing to do the long, hard work of reconstructing it before leaving, because, presumably “liberal intervention” couldn’t be seen to be “imperialism”.
What do you think when you “look in the mirror” as you lecture us about bringing more, then more, then more unaccompanied foreign children into a country who’s own children are already at the bottom of some international measures of educational attainment and contentment, and whose children’s social services and schools are straining at the seams?
Tell us what limits you will set to inward migration of unaccompanied children or the suspicion must be that there are no limits and it’s all about salving the consciences of people looking in mirrors, and a wider EU immigration plan, rather than what is right for this country, its people and the refugees themselves.
Robinson, the highly trained, professional and fearless BBC newshound could have asked those questions, couldn’t he? No, of course not. Always better to feel than to think when reporting the world of mass migration.
Embolden,
Yes, it is because of wankers like Starmer that we are in the mess we are in but they are too stupid and insensitive to realise it.
Grant I can’t decide is the liberal left elite are stupid enough not to realise what their policies are doing to our country, or whether they are all acting in concert to wreck our country deliberately. After all elites work by having a loose network where ‘acceptable behaviour ‘ is in an unwritten code like group think.
I some time watch in wonder at how dim some of politicians seem to be, quite unable to think about the obvious knock on consequences of their policies. But then I ask myself surely they can’t be that thick, they must know but simply think that the rest of us are too dim to work out these consequences, and of course, they can be assured that the BBC will do its best to cover up for them by its whole range of dirty tricks. Then some of them are daft enough to appear on programmes like Celeb University Challenge and clearly demonstrate that they no bugger all about bugger all. Perhaps the question could be answered if a mandatory IQ test was introduced before you could stand as an MP, then we would know if it was conspiracy or sheer stupidity that has led us down the road to perdiction.
Robinson actually highly trained, professional or fearless? Seems, like most BBC staff, the promotion system for his career path was based on the Peter Principle to a T.
What I want to know from that Starmer!
What was his involvement in the cover up, (non-prosecution for Labour ideological reasons), of the disgusting, horrendous, Islamic abuse, rape, trafficking of almost exclusively non-Islamic white under-age girls by their many thousands all across mostly Labour strongholds throughout our land?
Starmer is on speed-dial by the BBC. It is my impression that he is invariably introduced as ‘former Director of Public Prosecutions’ and that he is now a Labour MP almost never mentioned – irrespective of what he has been invited to talk about.
Former DPP, now Labour MP. Left office on 1 November 2013 and was chosen on 13 December 2014 as the Labour Party’s prospective parliamentary candidate.
That in itself should be a scandal.
Shhhussssh… you can’t say that in front of the children
BBC Breakfast presenters emphasise their BluePeter-like style this morning as they coo and cluck in enthusiasm for an upcoming animal report. The BBC bod in an anorak is down at Slimbridge bird sanctuary covering some cockamamy feather-brianed project where a bird in a motor powered parachute device will try to follow migrating swans down the Baltic coast from Russia. Why? Good question. ‘Conservationists’ are worried about declining numbers of swans. Shame. We have a rather prolonged report from the BBC covering the cold weather training for this gig and our reporter actually enters the large fridge-like training room where the ‘lucky’ woman chosen for this ‘scientific’ trip is practicing. Yet despite the time spent the BBC give precious little clue as how this female microlite jaunt will help understand ‘the dangers’ to the migrating birds.
What are us kiddies not being told by Auntie?
Not a dicky bird!
http://wildfowl.wwt.org.uk/index.php/wildfowl/article/view/1327
‘Impacts of wind farms on swans and geese: a review’
Click to access spatialplanning_tcm9-173109.pdf
‘Wind Turbines and Sensitive Bird Populations’
AsIseeit,
This just sounds like a stunt to me. Bird migration is monitored by satellite tracking these days and there are many studies involving deaths and injuries from wind turbines etc, carried out from the ground. No need to get up in some kind of microlite and risk colliding with a bird. ( Grant, BSc Zoology and bird enthusiast but not Bill Oddie and definitely not a twitcher ! ).
‘This just sounds like a stunt to me’
Absolutely. My guess is this wiil turn out to be some form of arse-covering for windmills – I can see the follow up now ‘Russian hunters shooting fowl… yes, I saw that. Wind turbines shredding our swans… nope, no sign of that’
Anything to do with booming human population?? (Loobyloo, BSc Zoology & Botany) On a different matter… nice to see the ultra PC Canadian poster boy PM giving his statement on the atrocious murder of a Canadian national in the Philippines ….by terrorists. Islamic not mentioned.
Looby,
Well done ! To Canada’s credit, they don’t pay ransoms. BBC website does refer to Islam and then asks the usual banal questions “Why are they ? “, “What do they want ? ” blah, blah. The BBC really do treat us as if we are imbeciles !
Pedant Alert. OK. Yes, I admit it, I’m a lert.
Not just swans, AISI, but Bewick swans. A cut above the average, white feathery delight, owned by HM, for bird crust throwing toddlers. 🙂
Up2,
More pedantry. Bewicks and Whoopers are migratory whereas Mute Swans tend to only move locally. I could go on but……… !
Here’s an interesting source of info.
https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/OverseasTradeStatistics/Pages/OTS.aspx
Don’t suppose the lazy students in the bBBC newsroom can be bothered to actually read this. So much easier to ‘trot’ out Jezza’s propaganda.
I note we exported £2.8bn of stuff to Germany last February and imported £5.3bn.
Now I know I’m a bit thick but who would be hurt most by some nice big trade barriers?
Ergo are Germany really going to want to cut off their noses to spite their faces if we Brexit?
I also note we import more from China than we do from France. Just remind me which of those two are in the EU?
Sluff, it is interesting how few politicians and how few media presenters & journalists appear to understand how ‘trade barriers’, ie. tariffs, work. The cost isn’t to an exporting nation. It isn’t to the importing nation, either. It is to the customers in the importing nation. They are the ones who pay.
(Yes, I do realise there are economic effects to it that spread more widely – as well as others that mitigate any negative effect, eg. premium creation – and I could explain them but it would take time that I do not have right now and take up a lot of space n here. But, broadly speaking, a trade war with the US while we are at the back of the line, er.. queue .. er, um line, would not hurt the UK where the US had customers wanting a British good but find their USG slapping a 25%, 33%, 50% whatever, price increase on it just because it is British.)
If I recall correctly, the evidence that Patrick Minford gave to a House of Commons Committee of Inquiry on the EU sets this out quite clearly.
It is consistently overlooked or ignored by politicians and media.
It is the sluff and snuff show,
Add international trade and economics to the long list of subjects that most politicians and journalists are totally ignorant of. These two groups must be the least well informed in the UK. And don’t get me started on science !!!
Another thing they gloss over is the fact that we don’t currently have a trade deal with the US, so waiting another decade won’t make the slightest difference. I own a business that exports around the world, and my single biggest market is the US, which imposes tariffs on my goods. The customers are still buying though.
I used to send quite a bit to mainland Europe, but that market is all but f***ed because the Euro is worthless, and the folk haven’t got 2 of them to rub together.
Interestingly, outside of the US, my biggest growing market seems to be Australia, New Zealand and the Caribbean. I don’t recall any of these being EU members…..
Thanks for that Sluff – brilliant statistics for the ammo required to negate the constant ‘REMAIN’ propaganda that we lose economically by BREXIT.
The truth is we hold the Ace cards in re-negotiating EU trade deals, especially with Germany, France, Holland, our largest EU friends.
It is like Defence, when I was working in NATO HQ, it was the Brits who were the main contributors behind the US. But what on earth is EU doing setting up / duplicating the mainstay of European security for a generation now since WW2?
Charlatans,
The Remainers never point out that the UK has a trade deficit with the other EU countries ( Assuming they know what that means, which is a big assumption ). That alone answers the economy question. The media don’t seem to ask them, presumebly because they don’t know what it means either.
The problem is that the Remainers want to stay in whatever the cost. They love the EU more than they love their own country. They are traitors.
Canadian citizen beheaded by RoPers in the Philippines.
Maybe the useful idiot Trudeau will stop praying to Allah and take a serious look at his responsibility to Canadian citizens.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-36136608
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/variety/2016/01/12/Video-shows-Canadian-PM-Trudeau-praying-at-mosque.html
I didn’t know Trudeau was a muslim. If not, why would he be praying at a mosque ? Is he mentally deranged ?
In answer to your questions, Trudeau is certainly a dhimmi, and he is without doubt mentally deranged. He may also find out that by praying in their mosque, he is now considered a muslim, so had better get used to a life without Canadian bacon and wine, unless he wants to end up like Theo van Gogh.
Rob,
LOL ! Having lived in two predominately muslim countries, I can say that muslims would be very puzzled by his behaviour. They would certainly not understand why a non-muslim would pray to Allah. I was just calling a muslim friend in Gambia and mentioned this to him. His response, pretty much what I expected ” What ? Are you joking ? He must be crazy ! “.
Many moons ago a mate and I were jaunting around Asia, and decided to visit a tropical island Philippines paradise. In those days that meant a domestic flight, several hour bus ride and then canoe.
We’d paid so were not going to be put off by an advisory that commie guerrillas were active in the region. Ah, youth.
As we bumped along in the charabanc, it stopped to pick up a huge crew cut guy with a rucksack walking along the road. Joining us, we discovered he was Canadian. We told him he was lucky as the insurgents were targeting Americans.
He lifted his rucksack and showed us a small flag on the side: “It’s alright, I’m Canadian”.
At 100m an AK can easily detect the difference.
One of the Quebec Darwins we figured.
Well done Tiffany Sweeney, just as the frenzied search in the pool of sexual sub groups begins to look exhausted Tiff pokes around in the twilight zone and finds this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/35983098/asexuality-i-have-no-desire-to-experience-sexual-attraction-and-never-have
They don’t do ‘it’ and they don’t care, does anyone care? Extra points for Tiff as Rob fits into more than one section of the big BBC Venn diagram of alphabet soup sexual orientation, who would have thought the majority of the population hetrosexual? Not anyone reading/watching the BBC that’s for sure. On the plus side I don’t think AVEN is publicly funded.
Look forward to many more fascinating pieces about people not doing things.
“ I have no desire to experience sexual attraction and never have”
Well, bully for you. But what makes you think the rest of us want to hear about it?
Seriously, what goes through the mind of someone like that, where they go to the BBC thinking this is something that’s of great import to the general population?
It is funny that it was just a few days ago that I wondered what the BBC would move on to once they got bored with transgenders and, lo and behold ……… !!!
I got up this morning, made my wife the usual cup of tea in bed, went downstairs and heard the news, what a state this country is in and the youngsters apparently all want to stay in the EU. O’Bummer has threatened Britain, the supine BBC interviewer asked no interrogative follow up ‘Andrew Neil’ questions,Frank Field has warned Labour of UKIP taking their vote share (which is good news), and the bookies now make Remain 2/5 odds on favourites. Blinkin heck! I thought.
I then opened my curtains and the sun was shining in my eyes, and with this gleaming light some optimistic thoughts entered into my mind. What if Remain win!
The Tory vote is so split that they will have to elect a eurosceptic candidate in order to keep the party together, especially as Cameron is now so very toxic, I was ashamed that he allowed O’Bummer to threaten us and say nothing in our defence. Most of my Tories friends absolutely detest him. If they put Osborne in, UKIP will benefit, come think of it, UKIP will benefit anyway.
Labour will lose voters to UKIP, see below. The Bennites (Tony) eurosceptics, are at odds with the Blairites -Remainers.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36135768
Mind you, I had to laugh at Labour’s pathetic half hearted pro EU stance which has a budget of just 75k pounds, a paltry sum, to argue the case for the EU.
Austria have just proven that the right wing parties are having a greater influence. There are protests in Germany against the TTIP introductory talks, Turkey’s demands for EU membership have been strengthened by the idiot Merkel.
Even if we vote to Remain it’s going to blow up in our faces as we face a Muslim invasion, greater contributions to the failing EU community, more immigrants, and TTIP behemoth unhindered in its introduction destroying the NHS and out of our control.
So in soothsaying mode, I suggest that the following will happen if the country foolishly votes for Remain,
1. USA influence will grow in Europe, Europe will attempt to grow it own power base with Germany at its head (look at its history),end result will be conflict.
2. Internal fighting within the EU countries over race/religion
3. UKIP will strengthen and there will be shouts for a another referendum amidst anger that the last referendum was a fix.
4. MP’s will be in denial that they voted to Remain on Question Time
5. We will have to leave the EU due to its level of internal strife and probably choose to side as the poodle of USA.
Looks like a nice day, I’ll spend it digging the garden.
We haven’t heard from Essexman for a while, and I’d be genuinely interested to get his take on watching a Conservative Prime Minister behave as he did with Obama. I don’t think the Conservatives can survive the split on Europe over this, given some of the reprehensible behaviour of the government and would hope the grass roots are busy planning deselections.
It would be nice to think the Leave section plan to do something about the BBC’s bias over the EU referendum, but that would be hoping too much.
Wronged, Try this. Remain wins with a landslide. Gutless Tories rally around Cameron. UKIP have a self destructive leadership battle and as support declines they are branded as racists, neo fascists or whatever, and a united media advise us to shun them. Universities will no platform nationalists and patriotic speakers. Khan becomes Mayor of London and the Met focus on stamping out Islamophobia. A similar pattern will be seen in other EU countries: far right (linked to Nazis of course) parties will face the full might of the state and the youth, and will remain a minority subject to endless prosecutions for hate crimes. Criticism of the open borders policy will be outlawed. Meanwhile in the US Cruz and Trump will do so much harm to each other that Hillary will easily walk into the White House.
Looks like a freezing cold day. I am going to have a bonfire in my garden in the hope that it will contribute a little to global wsrming
Naz Shah, the insightful Labour MP for Bradford West, has thought up a brilliant plan to transport all Jews out of the middle east. No doubt she was impressed with Hitler’s Jewish solution and its resourceful use of state owned railways to remove Jews from German life.
She has issued an apology (of course) ‘This post from two years ago was made before I was an MP, does not reflect my views and I apologise for any offence it has caused.’
Now, unkind people are wondering how the statement being two years old is any defence, nor that she wisely said it before becoming an MP is any kind of explanation.
It might be worth a quick read over her Wiki page. Her father ran off with a sixteen-year-old girl, at 12 – what is it about Muslims and young girls? Naz was sent to Pakistan to avoid her mother’s violent partner. Was Pakistan the safest place for a girl to escape violent men you might ponder. Well as it turned out she was then forced into marrying some pervert whilst still legally a child, (she was 15). Meanwhile back at home, in another typical British family event, Naz’s mum poisoned her new partner because she feared he was going to have sex with her young children.
It’s like an episode of Terry and June isn’t it?
Here is the BBC’s defence of Naz:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35839823
Scribbling,
Amazing ! Why would she make a post which does not reflect her views. She is clearly insane but, with a background like that, it is hardly surprising.
..Blimey GWF if you’re right it’s euthanasia for me.
What are the chances of Cameron being the President of the EU for services rendered?
No, I’m still thinking positive and sun is still shining here where I live.
Wronged, I am urging you to prove my predictions are unlikely.
Sorry in not replying sooner GWF, after a spot of gardening, the good lady wife has kept me a bit busy today, walking around shops, awful business. Thank goodness it’s only once a week.
As to your urgings, yes I agree, worrying is the fact that all of your scenario’s are more than possible and you highlight them very well.
This country has changed so much in attitude, the younger generation have been so brainwashed by the left wing universities and BBC that i despair for it’s future identity and independence. In my day, people would never have considered giving up democracy so easily. It would have angered so many, but young people don’t seem to care.
The Labour Party now support big business/Corporation/Banks and are happy to relinquish democracy. Boy are they dumb.
The Tory party have surrendered the best chance of putting the BBC in its place and done zilch. Shame on them. The leader – Cameron is probably on a par with Blair in terms of achievements. Cameron is weak, cowardly and a traitor. This is how history will view him.
Liberals are finished, thank god.
Which leaves UKIP who will struggle because of Cameron’s inactivity on seeking a fair minded BBC. BBC will try and destroy them.
The country is finished when Cameron could have done something positive to put it right but he failed.
If there are any Tories on this site who disagree with my comments, I don’t wish to offend, I’m just calling it as I see it. Feel free to criticise my views.
Blimey GWF you have got me into mood of pessimism when earlier i was so optimistic.
The label on Tetleys tea says to get the best flavour one has to ‘agitate the bag’, I might just go and do that after dragging me around the shops.
Naz Shah, the insightful Labour MP for Bradford West, has thought up a brilliant plan to transport all Jews out of the middle east. No doubt she was impressed with Hitler’s Jewish solution and its resourceful use of state owned railways to remove Jews from German life.
She has issued an apology (of course) ‘This post from two years ago was made before I was an MP, does not reflect my views and I apologise for any offence it has caused.’
Now, unkind people are wondering how the statement being two years old is any defence, nor that she wisely said it before becoming an MP is any kind of explanation. I am glad they are not her views as racists will be absurdly concerned that she defended the statement in several tweets
It might be worth a quick read over her Wiki page. Her father ran off with a sixteen-year-old girl, at 12 – what is it about Muslims and young girls? Naz was sent to Pakistan to avoid her mother’s violent partner. Was Pakistan the safest place for a girl to escape violent men you might ponder. Well as it turned out she was then forced into marrying some pervert whilst still legally a child, (she was 15). Meanwhile back at home, in another typical British family event, Naz’s mum poisoned her new partner because she feared he was going to have sex with her young children.
It’s like an episode of Terry and June isn’t it?
Here is the BBC’s defence of Naz:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35839823
Naz Shah, the insightful Labour MP for Bradford West, has thought up a brilliant plan to transport all Jews out of the middle east. No doubt she was impressed with Hitler’s Jewish solution and its resourceful use of state owned railways to remove Jews from German life.
She has issued an apology (of course) ‘This post from two years ago was made before I was an MP, does not reflect my views and I apologise for any offence it has caused.’
Now, unkind people are wondering how the statement being two years old is any defence, nor that she wisely said it before becoming an MP is any kind of explanation. I am glad they are not her views, as racists will absurdly be concerned that she defended the statement in several tweets
It might be worth a quick read over her Wiki page. Her father ran off with a sixteen-year-old girl – what is it about Muslims and young girls? Naz was sent to Pakistan when 12 years old to avoid her mother’s violent partner. Was Pakistan the safest place for a girl to escape violent men you might ponder. Well, as it turned out she was then forced into marrying some pervert whilst still legally a child, (she was 15). Meanwhile back at home, in another typical British family event, Naz’s mum poisoned her new partner because she feared he was going to have sex with her young children.
It’s like an episode of Terry and June isn’t it?
Here is the BBC’s defence of Naz:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35839823
sorry about the triple post, it isn’t worth reading three times, it is just that I thought I was editing it when I was actually reposting.
Her anti-Semitism should do a lot to shore up her RoP vote in that constituency.
Just as Sadiq Khan’s dodgy dealings are going to help him.
More multiculturalism for us all to celebrate.
Notice how the Beeb dumps this news in the Politics section. If you enter the website and look at the news, even drilling down to the England section, you will not see any reference/links to Naz story, but you will be told that Lennry Henry is to receive a BAFTA honour, so everythings ok. The BBC news the envy of the world.
We’ve had the Hillsborough verdicts. The bBBC will be in full victimhood emote mode and no doubt the ‘Thatcher era’ will get a mention.
What won’t get a mention is the football hooliganism of the time. That’s why Hillsborough had the steel barricade fencing to keep opposing fans apart, and to prevent pitch invasions, and in this case tragically also preventing escape for those poor people being crushed at the front of that stand.
And I don’t remember the entire population of Liverpool being equally supportive of the victims of the Heisel stadium disaster, largely created by their own team’s supporters only four years earlier.
The context was utterly utterly different from that of today, and by judging those events through the prism of soft liberal modern sensitivities and hindsight, we are deluding ourselves.
Hands up anyone who would have liked to be in Duckenfield’s shoes on that day.
Not only an endless narrative of victimhood, but the start of an endless pursuit for ‘compensation’ by the victims’ families (who, of course, must receive our sympathy for their loss). However, it is abundantly clear that the primary cause of the disaster, i.e. the thing that sparked it off, was the behaviour of the crowd outside the ground, some of who WERE drunk – or at least had been drinking. There was an interview shown on the BBC at the time, where a father of one of the crowd said “yes, my son has been drinking, but so what?” The police were put in an impossible situation – either stop the fans entering the ground and causing possible deaths from crushing there, or let them in. However, it seems the police were to blame for allowing far too many fans into a cage too small to hold them, when there were under-occupied parts of the ground available. I never expected a balanced verdict (as also in the previous Inquiry), but I do expect a continuation of partial reporting by the BBC turning a blind eye to the fans behaviour.
“That’s why Hillsborough had the steel barricade fencing to keep opposing fans apart, and to prevent pitch invasions, and in this case tragically also preventing escape for those poor people being crushed at the front of that stand.”
Exactly. Much is made of the fact that those crushed at the front did not test positive for alcohol, which was never the issue. Nobody is saying that they pushed themselves. (Everybody knows that Thatcher instructed the police to push from the back.)
The result is entirely predictable; nothing else would have been acceptable. To those who will argue that the verdict must be fair as a result of the thoroughness of the investigation, expertise involved etc, I have just one word – Macpherson.
I tend to avoid anything remotely connected with football. To me, it’s a deeply unappealing game in almost all respects. Now we’ll have the sorry spectacle of ex coppers being hounded because they failed to cope with an impossible situation. It will be impossible to avoid this over the next few days so I’m avoiding TV altogether.
The situation at Hillsborough was unremarkable for the time. Fans turning up late for the game and jostling at the turnstiles was just what happened back then. It was a perfectly reasonable decision to open the gates for the fans, the mistake was not to funnel them to the side pens, which had space, but to the central pen, which did not. One terrible mistake by a senior police officer who did not have the experience or training to be in charge of a match like this, and who then compounded his error by lying about it.
And that’s Hillsborough, in a lot less than two years.
Absolutely right Rob. I wonder how many of those on the jury ever attended a match in those days. Crushing was part of the norm. I was involved in several games as a youngster and remember being passed bodily over the crowd to get me away from the problem. Somehow the fans being responsible seems to have been turned in to – did any of the 96 fans contribute to their own deaths – which is clearly nonsense. If there was no pressure from fans trying to get in to the ground why would anyone have opened an exit gate to let them in and relieve the pressure. Look at the videos of police shouting at the fans to back off. A police officer under extreme pressure made an error in judgment. This was compounded by the problems with the ground and and the general behaviour of large numbers of fans from most clubs at the time. Hence the fence barriers and the police thinking that people trying to escape were actually trying to invade the pitch. Having said that If evidence was altered after the fact then that is criminal and those responsible should be prosecuted.
As for that opportunist piece of excrement Andy Burnham doing the rounds expressing his disgust at an alleged cover-up three words – Staffordshire NHS Trust. A lowlife if ever there was one.
7. Behaviour of the supporters:
Was there any behaviour on the part of the football supporters which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?
Jury’s answer: No
Words fail me
MrMeggo,
Inquries and reports in the UK are not worth the paper they are printed on. The result is decided in advance for political purposes then a report is written to justify it. Totally meaningless.
They are either slow in deciding the result in the Chilcot one then……….. or the typist is extremely slow.
Grant,
“Inquries and reports in the UK are not worth the paper they are printed on. The result is decided in advance for political purposes then a report is written to justify it. Totally meaningless.”
It wasn’t an Inquiry or a Report; it was an Inquest, with a jury. You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about.
And another factor forgotten about was that Hillsborough was extensively refurbished for the 1966 World Cup. It was state of the art for the time with more seating than most grounds, and regularly hosted FA Cup semi-finals (in 80, 81, 87,88). In fact it was so good one of the World Cup quarter finals was held there – July 23, 1966. Standing on the terraces was a norm, for that era, so to have so many seats was quite advanced for the times.
But with a jury of 6 women, no doubt all ready to get out the hankies, can we be surprised?
Policeman on the scene lets in rather raucous mob arriving late and in a momentary misjudgement or through ignorance mistakenly sends them into already full part of the ground. 27 years later he is judged wrong, by a group of mainly women sitting cosily in an office.
I agree Mr Meggo except to add that in circumstances in which all supporters were inside the ground prior to kick off, then it might be possible to understand the jurys position on this question.
The recommended time to “take up your position in the ground” was 15 mins before kick off and this was printed on the tickets, next to a map of the ground )see image by scrolling down on http://www.leftlion.co.uk/articles.cfm/title/april-15–1989/id/2479 ) and on the day of the disaster, the gates opened as early as midday.
But everyone knows that there were large numbers of latecomers seeking entry to the ground close to kick off time, so it is difficult to understand the jurys view point.
The police shouldn`t have opened the gates…. they shouldn`t have needed to, but they did so because there were still people seeking entry… but we are asked to believe that that behaviour by football supporters, arriving late, did not contribute “to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles” .
MrMeggo,
“Jury’s answer: No
Words fail me”
“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled” (Mark Twain)”