Here you go, a new Open Thread to detail the daily bias.
WEEKEND OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Nibor Nov 26, 23:29
Midweek 27th November 2024
Two aspects the BBC like to tell us . Britain sends more people to jail than any other Western European… - Fedup2 Nov 26, 22:48
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
Philip – despite the constant ‘awards’ spring gets – I reckon the deceitful CV has done her long term damage… - StewGreen Nov 26, 22:36
Midweek 27th November 2024
Link to Fed’s post near the end of the old thread It’s a DailyTelegraph article about BBC Verify - StewGreen Nov 26, 22:31
Midweek 27th November 2024
Battle of Ideas on BBC fact checking https://youtu.be/P4RUSjrfQWs - Northern Voter Nov 26, 22:23
Midweek 27th November 2024
The currency exchange rates provided on the Red button were useful here in France. It mean’t I could see what… - Up2snuff Nov 26, 22:07
Midweek 27th November 2024
… rely on anything the BBC says. If you really want to read my bletherings I have put up the… - Up2snuff Nov 26, 22:03
Midweek 27th November 2024
Fed, the edit facility is not working properly. I think it just my PC. That edit worked OK. For some… - Up2snuff Nov 26, 22:00
Start the Week 25th November 2024 -petition
TRIED TO POST THIS AT THE HEAD OF THE MIDWEEK THREAD BUT FOR SOME REASON THE EDIT FACILITY DID NOT… - Fedup2 Nov 26, 21:59
Midweek 27th November 2024
I’ve put a long piece about ‘bbc verilie’ at the end of the previous thread – it show how the… - Zephir Nov 26, 21:49
Midweek 27th November 2024
And, the democrats think they are above the law when stopped drunk in their cars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVmn2NJcxB4
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
Ok Battle of Jutland: The Navy’s Bloodiest Day. The BBc has a long tradition of getting military history a bit wrong, and they stikr again with this hash up. The battle of Jultland has interested me for some time so as a rarity I actually watched a BBc program, I also saw the last few seconds of Top gear which looked abysmal. It didn’t start well with Dr, Shini Somora asking how fast the shells come out. She’s an engineer as she tells us at least twice. The other presenter informs us there are no graves to visit in the North sea. We are then treated to a pointless exercise as a mode is made with representative internal bulkheads of a German ship which survived 24 hits as opposed to Queen Mary that took 7. It’s put in a water tank and filled with water to represent the amount of water the real ship took on and surprise it stays afloat just like in real life. Pointless because they don’t compare with a model of Queen Mary & pointless because Queen Mary blew up so it wouldn’t have mattered how much internal compartmentalisation it had. Instead they could have described how the The Queen Mary and other “Battle cruisers” were less armoured than dreadnoughts and were not designed to be used in the battle line like dreadnoughts. After much beating around the bush they get round to why the Queen Mary was probably sunk and that it was down to incorrect procedures with ammunition and charges, probably. They then gloss over the battle. Another history program riddled with the desire to demonstrate rather than concentrating on the history including some inaccuracies and some things that were just wrong. Why did I bother I should have known better.
Totally agree.It was almost infantile in its approach. and of course failed to explain the strategic reasons why the Germans wanted to risk their fleet by taking on the RN. Consequently the programme did not explain that whilst the RN lost more lives and ships than the German navy , because of the points you make above, the battle ended in a strategic defeat for Germany which forced them change to submarine warfare which in turn led to the USA entering the war and the ultimate defeat of the Central Powers.
Royal Navy losses: Men 6,100. Naval tonnage: 113,300.
Imperial German Fleet losses: Men 2,500. Naval tonnage: 62,300.
Hailed as a great victory for the Royal Navy at the time and evidently still to this day, as the chap with all the gold braid seemed to be telling us. Sad.
The ‘strategic defeat’ DT resulted in the British fleet committed to bottling in the German fleet – more of a stalemate than victory surely?
“The ‘strategic defeat’ DT resulted in the British fleet committed to bottling in the German fleet – more of a stalemate than victory surely? ”
Not really. Britain’s aim was to blockade Germany, and it worked. At Jutland the Germans tried to break the blockade, and failed. The High Seas Fleet retreated to port and never left. All the money Kaiser Wilhelm lavished on the High Seas Fleet was ultimately wasted, and when the sailors mutinied in November 1918 it spelt the end for his regime.
I can’t remember who said it, but it’s a fair summary of Jutland:
“The High Seas Fleet broke out of jail and assaulted its jailer, but is now safely behind bars again.”
Going to be a few eyebrows raised here:
As the postal voting packs go out.
First they sent a leaflet on the public tab, and the BBC didn’t raise an eyebrow
Then they sent an Electoral Commission guide and the BBC yawned
Then they rigged the ballot instructions and the BBC nudged and winked
Finally they came for the BBC, and instead made it the superstate broadcaster as a thank you
And so there really was no one but the left to hold power to account.
New Top Gear: abysmal.
Al Shubtill
Al Beeb: abysmal, you and I are forced to pay for it even if we don’t watch it .
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36410559
The mere fact that the first reaction is to check if it true, rather than dismiss Trump’s statement straight away; tells you how much the BBC is out of touch with ordinary people.I also like the way that the BBC seem to omit the word ”illegal” from the headline.
Trump wants to rid America of ILLEGAL migrants. Another word for illegal is criminals. So, hopefully one day the headline will appear: ”Trump wants to throw Foreign Criminals out of America.”
https://bbcwatch.org/2016/05/30/examining-the-facts-behind-a-claim-from-bbc-complaints/
Maybe BBC Fact Check could adopt a Eurovision diversion to work their impartial magic ‘analysing’ this?
“NUANCE” = hating Hilary or saying she belongs in prison ………. according to BBC r4Today 7.05am
Beeboid John Sople : (At The Bikers Rally where Trump spoke) “The crowd cheered enthusiastically though some we spoke to (using our child finding camera technology) were rather more NUANCED
…Do you like Trump ?
Biker 1 : “He is the lesser of all the evils” (Hilary ?) : “She’s trash she belongs in prison”
Do you like Trump ?
Biker 2 : “that’s immaterial,.. I don’t like who his opponent is going to be”
Chapter 76 in the ‘special stuff’ under the counter version of the BBC Editorial Guidelines.
Apparently (chapter 3).
Good to hear on toady that Sadiq Khan has finally managed to get his long overdue seat on The Morons “Make Britain Luton” Battlebus.
Hopefully Davey boy will have a non alcoholic version of his Louis Roederer Champagne to share with his new chum. I predict much merriment for these two arseholes on their sleeve laughing tour.
So different yet so similar. Both intent on forcing England down the toilet pan of history as quickly as possible.
What do you do when you have nothing intelligent left to say and nothing more to contribute to a debate? when you are absolutely out of ideas?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36407388
“Chocolate cake hits German MP Sahra Wagenknecht”
Absolutely incredible that anyone would think this is an appropriate way to conduct themselves, cowardly *ucke* makes a hasty retreat too, should have hung around to explain why they thought that was acceptable behaviour at the very least, nasty t*at.
A slot on the planned post Ref Euro GBBO is surely assured?
Drizzle on, MacDuff!
A “protest”, the BBC says? Surely it’s an assault by cake?
After all, what’s good enough for the bacon…
BBC Editorial Guidelines, and integrity, have the discrepancy well covered.
They have a real handle on food-related adornment techniques.
Draping charcuterie quietly over door furniture… the horror!
Slamming stuff in a person’s face… the process by which a cake reaches its hit point, apparently.. Carry On Clowning!
I was going to say I’m waiting with baited breath for this to be discussed on the bbc,but i cant hold it quite that long…..
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/674792/proof-Britain-will-not-lose-trade-deals-leave-EU-Chancellor-George-Osborne
Nails the lie of the trade deal ‘renegotiation’ after brexit
Liars one and all
Liars? You can always ask them to substantiate… oh, hang on…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/29/bbc-in-transparency-row-over-refusal-to-answer-more-than-a-third/
Taxpayers’ Alliance: Sugar tax will hit poorest hardest
Not so much bias but just parrot-fashion reporting – quoting someone else but not really exploring the real issues. The article does not really explain to me why this tax is regressive. Do the poorest families frequent Costa Coffee and other such establishments? What are we really dealing with here? Is it beyond every single poor family to change their habits? Are we actually talking about addiction? Do parents who cannot change their children’s drinking habits need some sort of counseling (or just a kick up the backside)? We know the government have taken the ‘if you can’t fix it, tax it’ approach just as they did with cigarettes but the real issues are not discussed here. As usual the bbc just deal with the symptoms and not the cause.
What are the odds on this getting a mention on al Beeb?
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/05/29/dirty-tricks-brexiteers-protest-councils-postal-voting-guide-telling-voters-to-vote-remain/
Utterly disgusting, and probably a flagrant disregard for electoral commission rules. However, the damage is already done, so no sanction could ever be appropriate. They are so desperate to remain that they don’t care what rules/laws they have to break in their quest.
For the remainders, there is no lie too big to be told, no trick too dirty to use and no mud too shitty to throw.
They are so desperate to safeguard their future earnings and pensions that they don’t give a hoot about democracy, freedom and the welfare of the British people. It’s disgusting but par for the course for the Innards.
Solid post, Demon.
Demon,
I was about to post similar. If I were undecided, I would vote leave just because the “leaders ” of remainers are so dishonest and ruthless. Worthless people. Not a single redeeming feature among the whole lot of them.
Bias by omission.
A quick look at the sports page on bbc.con this morning reveals a distinct lack of reporting on Wales’s defeat to England B at Twickenham yesterday. A couple of token references in the form of Ford’s poor kicking and an injury to a Welsh flanker are made but anything of real substance is conspicuous by its absence.
Such is the lack of motivation by the biased bbc that not even the finger of racism could be pathetically pointed at anyone in regard to the red-shirted Romany front rower.
And the match commentator was that impartial paragon of balanced professionalism…….Eddie Butler, no less. The BBC’s first choice to endow any England performance with grudging credit and transparent, institutional bias. Arseholes.
Interesting to see the Dave & Sadiq show this morning, surrounded by the barely out of nappies, fresh and spotty faced, aligned with the obligatory grinning blonde. Most of this lot really were still in nappies, or hadn’t been thought of when we first signed up in the 70’s.
If they really want to make a difference, then manning our coastline would be the way to go right now !! No need to fetch kids from the camp in Calais when they’ve started to arrive on our doorstep.
And a distinct lack of ties on display. I wonder if Cameron’s decision not to wear one is the same as Sadiq Khan’s?
Camerscum appearing with Khan shows what a completely unprincipled creature he is; a simply awful b@st@rd.
On a related point: where’s Essexmanchild lately?
Al,
You got it. Dave, unprincipled, dishonest, venal, thick, a coward…… I could go on , but what is the point ?
Al Shubtill
Essexman has joined the Coastguard and UKIP.
Why the British veto over Turkish accession doesn’t actually mean anything:
Yes, we have a veto on Turkey joining the EU, but the EU has already granted visa free travel to Turks wishing to enter the free movement area as part of the migrant return deal. Turkey just has to meet the remaining 7 conditions (out of 72) outlined in the deal, and any Turkish citizen can come to any of the 26 EU countries outside the UK and Eire. In practice, that means they will also be coming to the UK.
Accession to the EU is not needed – the Turks are effectively here already. Sure, they won’t have the same rights to work as full E citizens, but neither do large numbers of workers currently in the UK.
The EU buckled very rapidly, not only granting visa free travel to Turkey but also putting Turkish membership of the EU back on a fast track, while coincidentally also ignoring legally UN human rights agreements.
I don’t believe anyone can be certain that Turkey won’t enjoy a relatively swift accession to EU membership, and even if it doesn’t, it is highly likely that the EU will liberalise restrictions of Turkish citizens within the EU
Thoughtful,
I think Mad Merkel panicked when she realised what a cock-up she had made over the migrant issue. Stupid woman. Much as I love Turkey and Turks and lived there, there is no way that they should be allowed in the EU. If they do join , they will replace Germany as the dominant power in the EU. And , don’t forget, their military is far superior to any in Europe. I don’t necessarily mean training and equipment , but in sheer numbers and willingness to take casualties. And that is a bargaining chip in Realpolitik.
On another thread, I responded to one of our resident Beboids laughable accusations that we on here don’t like Shakespeare as we’re all racists and actors aren’t etc. etc. I replied that most actors are left-wing, mindless extremists (and often anti-semitic as well) but I still like Shakespeare. I booked up a few plays at the Globe the day tickets went on sale, as I normally do, when I was told by my sister that the new artistic director is a lesbian (fair enough) but forces her misanderist attitudes into her work (not acceptable – it would be just like the Last Night of the Proms last year ruined by the conductress Alsop who tried to turn it into a left-wing misanderist show. Obviously to make up for the fact she is only slightly talented and would not have got the job if she had been male with that little talent. It was the worst Last Night I ever remember).
However, I thought I would give this Globe woman the benefit of the doubt (and I had already bought the tickets and made arrangements with other people. But, I just looked up the cast of Taming of the Shrew, which I will be attending soon, and saw it is deliberately (i.e. politically) 50% female despite there being mostly male roles. Even that’s not a problem despite the sexist intent behind it. Then I saw that all the cast are Irish (again not a problem if their accents are not too strong so they are difficult to understand with English ears). But the icing on the cake is that she has moved the setting to the Easter Rising of 1916!!!
The points I made about actors (and directors) being left-wing, extremist racists has been proved beyond any doubt and I am not so looking forward to my first Globe outing this year as I was and hope the other ones will be better. It’s a shame as Shrew is a very funny play – I saw it the other year with the wonderful (although I believe left-wing herself) Sam Spiro and laughed most of the way through. Why this person has to make these terrorist-loving points rather than stick to the beauty of Shakespeare’s ideas is a very unpleasant thought.
Good points.
The arrogance of the Left has no limits – they cannot keep their political obsessions out of their work, whatever it may be, Ken Loach being one of the worst examples.
That’s one of the many reasons I like classical music. I know that opera directors are some of the worst offenders (many opera directors do not have a classical music background and the worst ones don’t even seem to understand the genre at all – they’re parasitic on the backs of the composer’s fame) but, that aside, there’s no such thing as a left or right wing performance of, say, a Beethoven or Mahler symphony. Furthermore, playing a musical instrument presents many down to earth practical challenges that, IMO, deters some of the worst excesses found in the theatre and the film studio. It’s not so easy to be a political activist when you have to practise several hours a day, spend hours travelling on public transport with an instrument which can be very unwieldy and just plain unwelcome on many airlines (in the case of rank and file musicians), and in the case of instruments like the french horn, deal with the difficulties of relatively complex plumbing.
And fancy casting Matt Lucas as a Bottom. That’s utter stereotyping.
No surprise that I like Classical music too and have tickets already for a number of Proms. Although, as you say, the playing of a symphony can hardly be used to make political points, the speech at the Last Night was last year. Also the selections of pieces to play can be influenced by political urges, for example Shostakovich’s Leningrad Symphony which can, and no doubt is, used to “warn” against fascism. That’s fair enough, we all hate fascists (even the left who behave like them also claim to be anti-fascist) but it is also a piece that glorifies Stalinism and the evil brutality that goes with that. The genius of Shostakovich, however, transcends it and it is a very impressive work – one of the greatest symphonies (imo) of the 20th Century. But put it together with other “suitable” pieces and you could have a left-wing programme that could be used to subtly indoctrinate the young and feeble-minded (who tend to vote left anyway).
“The genius of Shostakovich, however, transcends it and it is a very impressive work – one of the greatest symphonies (imo) of the 20th Century.”
Agree. Not an expert on Shostakovich but, correct me if I’m wrong, there always seems to be an element of doubt about where he stood with regard to Stalin. With so much irony, it never seems to be 100% clear who his criticisms are aimed at.
His rarely performed comedy opera, Paradise Moscow (Cheryomushki), is recommended if you haven’t already come across it. Opera North toured with it a few years ago. Sharp satire aimed at housing shortages and bureaucracy. Believe me, it’s much funnier than it sounds! Good evening out for people who don’t think they like opera.
> I responded to one of our resident Beboids laughable accusations that we on here don’t like Shakespeare as we’re all racists and actors aren’t etc. etc.
Who said that, where?
Are you doing Thougthful’s thing of making up stuff because you can’t be bothered to engage with the truth?
What a shame you have to lie and lie and lie again in order to feel superior. Have you ever tried telling the truth? It doesn’t hurt, you know. Why are you so afraid to tell the truth? Are you frightened that David Vance will tan your hide if you’re caught _not_ lying?
And if you decide to abandon the Globe because you’re too busy obsessing about whether or not the artistic director is a lesbian, well goodbye. It’s not as if there aren’t plenty of other people with rational heads on their shoulders who aren’t as vile as you ready to watch the shows. One insignificant little lying bigot won’t exactly be missed.
Jerrod, you might well have been taking lessons from Dr Goebbels that a Lie told often enough becomes the truth, but the reality is that is was you who were caught out lying and just because you state the contrary doesn’t make it the truth!
If you regard the people here are ‘lying’, ‘vile’, and ‘bigotted’ then why are you reading their posts?
Thoughtful,
Self-flagellation is the in-thing in Islington these days. Didn’t you know ?
> the reality is that is was you who were caught out lying and just because you state the contrary doesn’t make it the truth!
Poor Thoughtful – so wrapped up in a web of lies of its own making, that it has to falsely accuse others of the same in an increasingly desperate attempt to save its own lying little face.
There was a love in with Salman Rushdie on the World at One on Radio 4 today and the closing headlines were that he was warning the migration crisis could lead to the rise of right wing parties. It seems all he’s concerned about is people having different political opinions to those he holds – never mind doing something to prevent people drowning in their attempts to migrate, prevent the import of terrorism, prevent the overwhelming of welfare systems.
Salman Rushdie was protected at great expense to the British taxpayer-and he continued to refer to Mrs Thatcher( she who funded his protection) as Mrs Torture..so we can gather he`s an entitled, miserable lefty with no sense of what will become of him if the Sunni come over here in droves, and decide that taking his head from his shoulders might get a down payment on a decent phone.
Maybe Rushdie could be employed as a border guard, by way of welcoming refugees.
Clueless, lefty eejit who deserves his fate if he`s prepared to be THIS stupid.
I’ve not seen any of the latest kerfuffle to which you seem to refer, re Salman Rushdie.
However, I’ll dip a toe in the water and venture some words on The Rushdie affair of long ago.
Bear in mind…that opinions expressed here, may not agree with your views.
The original Satanic Verses debacle was the root of today’s liberal lefty love-in with muzzies.
Whilst he may or not be an absolute arsehole, however objectiobable he may be, his right to free expression in his book of the verses is inviolable.
Why the hell would most of the country sit back and hardly give a toss that he had a fatwah issued against him, for writing something which most of the objectors not only hadnt, but couldnt read.
He was protctd, yes, and by a team, one of whom penned a serialised piece for the Sunday Times , spelling out what a little shit he was/is.
Whether the inteligentsia of the time were fearful themselves of ‘outing’ islam as the barbarity it truly is, I dont know, but Rushdie got no sympathy from anywhere as far as I can remember..
Sending that message to the savages of the Islamic world was a tragic mistake.
Some years after the book was published I bought a copy, out of curiosity. It was crap, I put it down after a dozen pages.
Our response to the Rushdie Fatwah showed the muzzie world what a bunch of knobs our liberal lefties were and still are, even if he is objectionable.
Quite right DC!
He was perfectly entitled to write his unreadable book, and we really ought to have left Islam in no doubt that we put the right to free expression way above the grievance hustling morons of Teheran.
Well remember that book getting put out to no fuss in 87/8…but(like the Danish cartoons) a bunch of Muslim shills in need of bloodlust and a a feature in Sharia Today concocted the non-story of Rushdies book.
Which-I repeat had already been out for some time-but a dying Khomeini wanted a poltical row with the West, and this crap little book would have to do…and on Valentines Day 89, the fatwa was issued.
A souffle of a story-but the quisling Islington Left bottled it, the likes of Sacranie and Bunglawala were galvanised and sniffed the wests craven fear-and things have never been the same since.
We ought to have nobbled the Islamists and Khomeini for threatening a British citizen-wanker though he was.
As I think on the 80s, the Soviets in Afghanistan, Sadat,Barzoft, Achille Lauro/Klinghoffer, Sharon in the Lebanon, Beirut/US bombings, Honeyford/Bradford etc, etc….hard to say what fulcrum turned us from a proud west that stood against Islamic bullies, into a halal-compliant mad camel disease carrier/vector as we are today.
As a teacher-I`d say Honeyford was vital-we lost that one and never recovered…and the likes of Siddiqi and Hasan are benefitting in the vacuum.
One mystery though-how come the Sunnis were involved in hounding down Rushdie?-for they never listened to much else that Khomeini said…..
Oh….I’ve just seen Cranmers post above….doesnt really alter much if the previous issues, even if he has now gone mad.
June 1st example of BBC anti Brexit bias :-
1pm News at 1 (Radio 4) first item on headline news :
“TUC warns leaving EU would result in wages dropping by £38 a week”
FAILED TO MENTION THAT THAT WOULD BE BY 2030 !!!
But see actual quote : –
“A split from the EU would send the UK’s manufacturing sector into steep decline and see workers’ wages drop, according to the Trades Union Congress (TUC). The group’s latest anti-Brexit warning predicts that pay packets would drop by £38 ($55, €49) a week on average by 2030.
(yet another totally speculative long term forecast !)