Always interesting the BBC take on events…and it is a ‘take’ rather than actual news, the BBC’s version of most things being shaped by their own prejudices and bias.
Over the past weeks you may have noticed how the BBC has been hunting down Bradley Wiggins and how their reports on TUE’s in sport have concentrated on Sky and repeatedly insinuate and be very suggestive that Wiggins is guilty of drug abuse.
Sunday morning we had Gary Richardson interviewing one of the people investigating how TUEs are used and it was clear that Richardson was completely uninterested in how sport in general uses TUEs and was intent solely on targeting Sky and Wiggins. Any thought that it maybe that Sky is of course a big rival to the BBC in sport [and the BBC consistently attacks Sky’s funding of the Premier League] and that their arch-nemesis and bête noir, Rupert Murdoch, is deeply involved with Sky? Nah…just coincidence the BBC seem to be after Sky sporting interests.
Odd how when Mo Farrah’s coach was being investigated for using drugs the BBC announced loudly and often that of course Mo was entirely innocent and that there was absolutely no suggestion that he had taken any drugs….and yet the finger is being pointed at Wiggins very, very fast for using TUEs that are legal to use….and indeed Farrah has used them twice in his career as well...and yet…..silence about him. Perhaps Brad should convert to Islam and black up.
In a similar vein interesting how the BBC reports on Clinton and Trump.
Trump may be, in the BBC’s opinion, too loud, rude, crude, brash, sexist, vulgar and has patted a few butts [naturally not one of these ‘girls’ welcomed the attention of a multi-millionaire who could further their career…no not at all Mrs Merton] but what he did was not whilst in a public office and had absolutely no bearing on national security or trust.
In contrast Clinton has been in public office at a senior level for many years and has proved herself entirely untrustworthy in many respects. The BBC jumps up and down calling Trump racist [proof of that?] and yet ignores Clinton’s reported remarks such as ‘Fucking Jew’. The BBC also glides over her attempts to cover up for Banger Bill by attempting to discredit the women claiming he assaulted them and if that failed by trying to intimidate and bully them into silence.
Which is worse? Trump and his ‘laddish’ behaviour or someone who whilst in office carries on with huge disregard for national security, the law and protection of women?
Justin Webb on Saturday [08:32], in the belief that of course everybody thinks the same as he and his BBC chums do about Trump, was casually insulting and demonising him telling us that Trump was ‘uniquely ghastly’…really? So much more so than Clinton? He also said that it was a choice between a ‘racist, misogynist,, narcissistic thug’ and someone who was merely ‘secretive and dishonest about some emails’…it was ‘no contest’ thought Webb, completely ignoring the fact that Clinton’s failures must surely be a huge negative for someone wanting to be President whilst Trump’s are matters of taste and manners.
As David says in other posts the BBC is pushing the Democratic narrative and pointing the finger not at Clinton but at the FBI…Mardell on his programme today made no attempt to investigate the emails, talk to the FBI or any neutral commentator..instead he brought in a hard core Democrat to tell us how ill-judged, if not illegal, Comey’s actions were. No inkling that Clinton’s aide had told the FBI previously that she had handed over all emails….and yet thousands more were on her personal laptop.
No thoughts from the BBC as to why Comey didn’t press ahead with any action against Clinton previously and yet there is evidence that within the FBI that was a highly controversial move…and you can see that the Government [ie the Democrats] ‘warned’ Comey not to go further.
The Mail has a completely different perspective in things…
‘He talks about the damage that he’s done to himself and the institution [of the FBI], and how he’s been shunned by the men and women who he admires and work for him. It’s taken a tremendous toll on him.
‘The atmosphere at the FBI has been toxic ever since Jim announced last July that he wouldn’t recommend an indictment against Hillary,’ said the source, a close friend who has known Comey for nearly two decades, shares family outings with him, and accompanies him to Catholic mass every week.
‘Some people, including department heads, stopped talking to Jim, and even ignored his greetings when they passed him in the hall,’ said the source. ‘They felt that he betrayed them and brought disgrace on the bureau by letting Hillary off with a slap on the wrist.’
Comey’s decision to reopen the case was more than an effort to heal the wound he inflicted on the FBI.
He was also worried that after the presidential election, Republicans in Congress would mount a probe of how he had granted Hillary political favoritism.
So many at the FBI thought Comey had let Clinton off the hook…and he is worried it looks like political favouritism for Clinton…whereas the BBC are pushing hard that he is favouring Trump.
You can see why the BBC has steadfastly refused to concentrate on the email scandal throughout the campaign as Clinton’s lead vanishes on the latest revelations, the BBC preferring instead to traduce Trump rather than analyse the charges against Clinton.
It’s not just the BBC, the entire liberal media still think it can use its straw man bread and circus tactics to hoodwink the American people. There were journalists boasting on Twitter about how they have more tapes that they’re saving to ruin Trump’s campaign, which would suggest that they are in fact completely nebulous and trivial historical examples of what we already know about him – that’s he’s brash, crude, and a bit awkward around females. The fact that they still have the arrogance to believe that this tactic which has completely failed to work in all previous attempts will now work at a point when Clinton is in complete and utter freefall is totally laughable. Trump was already good odds to win before this scandal broke and the BBC knows it, despite their best efforts to distort it otherwise. Now, he’s looking at an absolute blowout and anyone who values democracy and transparency should be delighted if such an event occurs, regardless of their personal feelings towards Trump, because of the wall of deceit and corruption that has been replete in his opposition.
Great post ALM.
This is a way of life for the propagandists at Al Shabeeb, they are fighting for their very identity. To lose another battle to their enemies, and one that looked impossible to them just months ago, will in my opinion be unrecoverable.
As soon as Trump wins, the silent majority will begin to ask why…especially as the Islamic Al Beeb will revert to the hate filled, bigoted totalitarists they are, and constantly attack the result and the man….just like these traitorous bastards did with Brexit…..and people will again see something isn’t right, do their own research (like the people on this website), and realise that Trump was right all along, and that our biased, British hating national broadcasters have deceive them all along….then realise it’s all they have always done.
Once the veil is pulled from Al Shabeeb, it can never go back on. The fanatasism and relentlessness cult Al Beeb have championed certain causes will be their down fall, as it’s shown to everyone that this vile, dying organisation is solely focused on anti white, anti British agenda, and is actively trying to force the British to accept them, using whatever means necessary
Take a look at some pics of the young Trump. Tall, good looking, and very rich. Girls would have been throwing themselves at him. And we are talking here of NY girls, notorious in America as man eaters. This was known long before Sex and the City.
Is it a surprise that Donald Trump thought he could get any girl he wanted.
But the Clintons – amazing how they have managed to get away with it.
Trump’s policies are far better. He loves America, while the Clintons, as any Marxist, would like to destroy the last remaining bulwark against Socialism.
PS: Alan & David
You both are in great form.
The idea that women might be attracted a millionaire is acceptable for Lefty comedians and BBC to repeat ad infinitum as Caroline Ahern’s one joke.
But somehow they would think it unPC if it came from Trump.
Agree NCBBC. I have been sending links of this website to work colleagues almost daily…and they have all responded with how brilliant the articles have been. I’m trying to expose as many people as possible….and they are all responding brilliantly
The facts are impossible to deny. The work we are all doing on this website is magnificent. People are seeing something isn’t right but have been told for so long that they will be racist, bigoted, Islamaphobic, thick…if the challenge the state narrative….the clever bastards have brainwashed the silent majority for so long it’s making them frightened to say “hold on…that’s not right..”…..looking at this website is the gateway to the information the unexposed are being withheld
….this website gives those who feel somethings not right, confidence. This websites use of facts, links and expert analysis…the fact posters are not frightened to tell the truth… Great work all of you
If there was any more dirt on Trump the MSM would have used it by now. Many states are already voting, so material like that is a diminishing asset.
My belief is that the MSM are essentially gutless. They must now see that Trump has an excellent chance of winning, and there is no point in picking a fight with him at this stage. Mind you, if they think that, they are wrong, because Trump despises them and has made no secret of it.
The thought processes in the MSM at present are horrendous. The Clinton Foundation aka Clinton Inc is taking hundreds of millions of $US from various foreign powers and no analysis???????????????? Why would any foreign power primarily in the ME “donate” this kind of money to the Clintons without the expectation of returns. This is bribery and corruption at its most contemptuous.
Can you imagine the reaction to May if this happened here. Look at the reaction to Cameron’s off shore accounts.
The attitude to the perversion of democracy in totality is astounding. You have the EU, UN and Clintons openly behaving as demagogues and the media supports this?
Are we so sure it isn’t happening here,TigerOC?
It is most likely happening here and I would suspect the hand of Saud is all over it and has been for years. Iraq, Libya and Syria?
Without this latest excitement with the emails – could Trump still have won? If he had, it would have again highlighted (ie like Brexit and our last General Election) the nonsense of the polls and how the polls say what the main stream media want them to say.
Also perhaps I am being thick. But could someone tell me in words of one syllable why Hillary having her own server is something that the American people won’t like? Imagine it was Boris – and he had had his own server pre Brexit – would anyone in the UK have cared? I know that Hillary’s friend Mrs Weiner was close to the Muslim Brotherhood and that Hillary’s emails could have leaked to them. But I cannot imagine a similar thing here causing a brouhaha and changing the way people would vote.
My understanding is that Americans are generally patriotic, and less embarrassed about their patriotism than the average Briton.
As they are patriotic they value national security, and generally respect their armed forces, the guarantors of national security.
They don’t like the idea that a candidate for POTUS who also becomes commander in chief of the US armed forces may have compromised national security (and broken the law) by conducting State Department business via an insecure email connection, rather than using the State Departments own, secure email system.
Hilary is again being investigated by the FBI over allegations that she did just this, there are also now suspicions that she has been less than straight about the way evidence has been presented to the FBI investigators during a previous investigation.
On a different scale, many people in the UK are in jobs in which faulty data protection can lead to dismissal, I guess it’s the same in the US, this plays into the suspicion that it’s one rule for those in power and another for those that aren’t…..this doesn’t play well when competence in government combined with the common touch and personal integrity are being presented as a candidates strengths, in this case as Hilary’s strengths.
I suspect that the American people, just like us, are less concerned about insecure communications than they are about being systematically lied to and patronised by a condescending and dangerously unpatriotic demigod wannabe.
Here is the deal with email servers.
Each address is unique and is covered by password protection. On a private server there is no guarantee that the person retrieving mail is the person defined. On a State server it is possible to not only define the user by name and password but also by a defined IP address. i.e. only that person can collect mail using their password on a defined computer on the network.
This matters where classified material is concerned because this ensures that the transactions are defined by time and location which can be tracked via logs.
The drama going on at the moment looks like they are concerned that classified material has been forwarded to a third party account (Abedin) and then possibly been seen by her husband. Neither may have clearance on the contents of the material. This could not occur on the State server because they can block the sending of material out of that network.
Hope this clarifies this.
Hilary Clinton is Secretary of State, it is alleged that she was using her own server for official business. At the bottom end of the scale that means that her emails would be hidden from freedom of information requests – everything is ‘off the record’. At the top end of the scale it is most likely that official communications will carry a security classification, meaning that they should be protected from those without ‘a need to know’. Such communications should only be made via secure government systems, not private black boxes. Ordinary civil servants and military personnel would be sacked, if not prosecuted, for a single breach of this elementary security breach yet the ‘commander-in-chief’s’ right-hand woman systematically avoided using the systems put in place to safeguard the nation that she is supposed to serve, and hopes to lead.
To me the fact that her e-mail system was insecure is of less imporance than the fact that it was set up in the first place. To put this in a British context (as Deborah requested) imagine that Boris, as Foreign Secretary, had set up a secret communications system so that he could hide from other members of the Cabinet and from Parliamentary Select Committees any activity that he wanted to keep hidden. It wouldn’t matter what he’d wanted to hide, the mere creation of the system would be enough to destroy him
Clinton constructed a mechanism that allowed her to deny anything that might be embarassing, inconvenient or illegal – she could lie with impunity. If she wasn’t going to lie she didn’t need a non-government server.
Yes it was an extremely political decision not to prosecute her in the first place..so I have no hope of her being prosecuted over for this Weiner material. Meanwhile they are still not reporting ProjectVeritas and Wikileaks catching Team Hillary absolutely red handed.
This also leads to the Podesta Wikileaks hacks which they blame on the Russians and Trump of course.
The reality is that Podesta fell for the commonest trick in the book on hacking; failure to properly authenticate a security alert.
The hacker mocked up a gmail alert (happens everyday to me) saying that attempts to access his email account had be noticed. After consulting an IT expert (appears not very expert in any sense) he went ahead and clicked the link. Hacker hit pay dirt big time.
Now any IT expert would have advised; if you’re concerned go to your gmail account settings and change your password.
Muppets deserve everything they get.
I’m waiting for Beebileaks to come out, there needs to be a system to help the whistleblowers and guarantee that they keep their pension when the BBC managers pensions are confiscated before they go to jail.
Thanks everybody for their responses.
Who is Huma?
The media is prone to ignore all things Muslim /Islamic danger to the West, on the well known grounds that to do so is racist, Islam is the RoP etc.
But the reality is that Islam is at war with us. It intends to enslave us by any means – demographic being the important one at the moment. Terrorism is just another tool.
http://tundratabloids.com/2016/10/what-does-bill-clinton-anthony-weiner-and-huma-abedin-have-in-common/
Scroll down to the video.
And while we’re on the subject, WHERE is Huma? Will she be returning to Saudi Arabia?
The BBC seems keen not to name her, because of her Muslim Brotherhood links perhaps.
And while we’re on the subject, WHERE is Huma? Will she be returning to Saudi Arabia?
1. Under a bus?
2.Can she return to Saudi Arabia? Saudi Arabia goes not grant citizenship the way the UK does.
Trump was always going to win in my opinion and I have been posting it on several sites for months. I’ve been following the goings on avidly in the States and the people have woken up to the corruption /cronyism in their politics on both sides. They call it the Uniparty because they have become interchangeable. Trump gives a real choice.
Trump being a complete outsider and not bought by special interests is the main driver .And his patriotism which became a dirty word under Obama.
Obama remains a God to the BBC but they seem to have no idea how reviled he is for much of America He has been a disaster for the poor ,middle class and blacks.All people who trusted him.Most people who voted for him really believed in his hope and change slogan and the bitterness they feel is stronger because of it turning out to be just words.
Hillary is more of the same. Majority of people don’t want that.
Wth regard to Huma ,some think her many years of closeness to Hillary before and as Secretary of State held influence over her agenda in Muslim countries and support of Muslim brotherhood