The BBC is flooding the airwaves with pessimistic ‘analysis’ of the supposed Brexit fallout as it seeks to create a mood of despair and looming disaster #DuetoBrexit.
It’s not just what it reports, most of it false, but what it omits from its news bulletins that is designed to mislead the viewer and keep up the charade that Brexit is leading to armageddon of all kinds be it economic, social or cultural.
We’ve already noted the series of programmes that are outright EU propaganda, ‘The New World’ and ‘Imagining the truth’, indeed today we had another serving of the propaganda forced down our throats as an ardently pro-globalisation fan was commissioned to tell us why globalisation must continue…with all that entails…such as open borders and free movement of labour. He blatantly refused to accept the answers given to him and announced, in contradiction to what had been said, that all his guests thought globalisation was good, it might have a few problems but it was good. He told us in his trail for the programme that he was seeking to stop the backlash against globalisation…no bias there then.
What else did the BBC bring us recently? We know they hid the very good news about the manufacturing PMI figures in the darkest obscurity of the Business pages and kept the news off the airwaves when a slight drop in the same figures had previously resulted in headline news all day. The promising Service PMI figures released a few days later were similarly relegated to the same obscurity…anyone heard that Services were performing well?
What did hit the frontpage? Oh yes, as we’ve noted, the pro-EU Jamie Oliver’s Italian restaurants closing #duetoBrexit…even though that is complete tosh….the restaurants were roundly panned as overpriced and badly run in 2015.
What didn’t hit the BBC frontpage? The Times’ front page announced that ‘Britain has world’s top economy after Brexit’. You’d think the BBC would be trumpeting such a fantastic result from the rooftops as a sign of confidence in Britain…but no…it doesn’t even mention it on the website. There is also the report that the Bank of England and the ‘expert’ economists failed miserably to forecast the outcome of the Brexit vote and on the Today programme it wheeled in EU fan Vicky Pryce to rubbish the story [08:19:45]…not as if she didn’t have an interest in doing so…her own reputation at stake…[naturally the BBC fails to make clear Pryce’s interest in denying the story]…
A ‘no’ vote in the EU referendum would be ‘disastrous’ for the UK economy, according to economist Vicky Pryce.
‘There is a lot of confusion in people’s minds as to what it [a no vote] will mean,’ she said. ‘We will know after two years what it will mean, which will be disastrous for the economy, and after that even more so.
The BBC’s pro-Remain stooge, Kamal Ahmed, reports the story of the Bank of England’s ‘Michael Fish’ moment…and does so in a clear attempt to downplay the significance of the beating that the bank takes, along with all those ‘experts’….now we know...’Making judgements on that is always going to be a tricky, imprecise business.’ And that’s it folks….. none of the lurid headlines about fake news, post-truth eras and fact-free zones that the BBC pumps out when referring to the Leave campaign. Bizarre no? Remain made highly sensationalist predictions as to what the result of a Brexit vote would be, none of which came true [the fall in the pound was actually a bonus not a disaster] and yet the BBC absolutely refuses, even when faced with clear evidence, to admit that the Remain campaign was based upon melodramatic, scaremongering, shock inducing lies about economic armageddon and even claims that we would have a world war due to Brexit.
The BBC has another stab at reporting the ‘Michael Fish’ story…and misses out, deliberately hides?, a crucial claim by the Cambridge University study that said the Treasury predictions were ‘flawed and partisan’.…the BBC instead peddles Remain myths that the Treasury forecasts were purely objective economics…
The failure to predict the financial crisis was a “Michael Fish” moment for economists, the Bank of England’s chief economist has said.
Andy Haldane compared financial forecasts to the famously inaccurate forecast by the BBC weatherman, ahead of the UK’s great storm of 1987.
The Bank denies claims it gave gloomy forecasts to support the Remain side.
Bank of England Governor Mark Carney told the Treasury Select Committee last year that the Bank’s advice before the EU referendum had been “analytically based and objectively given”, adding: “It is not a political opinion, it is an economic opinion
Also highly amused to hear on ‘Wake up to money’ [21 mins] the presenters desperately trying to squeeze out of a guest that Brexit has been a disaster for her business as she kept insisting that it had been actually quite good as exports pick up. The BBC falls back on the old standby…that surely prices of her materials must have gone up?!! Have heard several business people given the same treatment as they keep telling us how their businesses are thriving. The BBC just doesn’t want to believe.
Predictable BBC, great piece by the way Alan.
BBC Bias
Remain good,Leave bad
Left wing good,Right wing bad
Palestine good,Isreal bad
Obama good,Trump bad
Non white good,white caucasian bad
Islam good, Christian Britain bad
Foreign culture good, British culture bad
Close down debate-political correctness good, Freedom of speech bad
Anything anti British good, pro British bad.
I think people have had enough of this disgusting broadcaster. I know I have.
No one listens anymore to what the BBC say, re Brexit, Trump, Farage, Syria or migration.
Except for those who report each others fussings via each others sounding boards. The Guardian and their wailing wall, whispering galleries throughout the public services, unis and quangos where the likes of Jo Cox find a berth.
In fact-this recent Huddersfield shooting only brings us back to Duggan.
Everybody KNOWS what the BBCs agenda is these days.
The BBC require compassion and digging at the police, the rest of us only remember just how evil and thick the BBC are. And how they wish to shaft this country.
No effect, no influence whatsoever. The young don`t listen, the Muslims don`t pay the license and its only the hideously white, nice and stupid of a certain age (like many of us) who stump up.
But they have no influence to anybody NOT dependent on them for their brains,their “steer for the day”.
#1 Vicky Pryce is another one who has her own set of BBC masterkeys
..she still had them in her hand when she was in jail.
#2 ‘Wake up to money’ What a great prog it always is when it is Micky Clarke and another bloke.. I’ve always heard news that is not covered anywhere else.
– BUT now due to virtue signalling we often have 2 dozy birds, pushing virtue signalling stories.
Not that I am sexist there are plenty of women who have character for presenting, but mostly they are not left wingers.
Only the BBC would think that we don`t know who Vicky Pryce is, was and whose arse she went to jail for. Also her lamentable “economics record”-she`s Greek is she not?
Who ELSE to ask, re probity, economic competence and “trust”?
Let the BBC continue to confuse our lack of fury with compliance.
As we showed last June, revenge is due.
And much more final and terminal to the BBC.
I mean, after the Berlin Wall and Ceausescu-does anybody fear Tony Hall or Chris Patten?
I suspect that the ‘sisters’ at the BBC perceive her to be a hard done by woman who’s only crime was standing by her feckless husband. It was a ‘victimless crime’ anyway. Who doesn’t lie in court, after all?
If my memory serves, the dozy cow didn’t stand by him at all. She made his crime public but didn’t realise that by so doing she was implicated too. That’s why she went to jail, for trying to stitch up her odious husband.
I watched the BBC4 documentary about Donald Campbell two nights ago, and it reminded me of a time when the BBC would always go over the top with how great Britain was. Anybody brought up watching Blue Peter and Tommorow’s World in the 50/60’s will recall such optimistic times.
What has happened to make the BBC Hate Britain so much? We can point and laugh at other country’s state broadcasters that pump out such self promoting rubbish, and yet here we are with our own state broadcaster that now pumps out self-loathing rubbish. The BBC must be the only state broadcaster in history that hates its state, and the thought that we are forced to pay for this is more obscene. The BBC has mastecised into something self destructive.
Is it too much to ask for our state broadcaster to be positive about our state, and be positive about the decisions made by the state’s people, the people who actually fund it?
“What has happened to make the BBC Hate Britain so much?”
The long march through the institutions, that’s what.
Depressingly successful.
The aim of the EU in all its manifestations, ostensibly, was to prevent recurrences of 1914-19 and 1939-45. The reason for these spats, in their view, was the nation state and its associated nationalism. So, they set about destroying it. Break up countries into regions, dilute the native populations with free movement and when this proved too slow, import those from an alien, violent and backward culture to accelerate the process. Pride in one’s country, culture and history was no longer taught except in negative terms as this was deemed to be racist, sexist, right wing etc. We have been taught to hate ourselves.
The BBC has been infiltrated and topped up for years (as have all our institutions) with those of a similar mind set and working toward the same ends, no different to any other national broadcaster. The happenings of 2016 has merely slowed this process as would the election of any “right wing” leaders in other European countries. These people, cultural Marxists, have had our destination in sight since the 1920’s at least and play the long game and are not going anywhere any time soon.. Things would need to get a damn sight worse before it got better!
“The reason for these spats, in their view, was the nation state and its associated nationalism.”
Overlooking the fact that civil wars can be the most vicious.
Some historians reckon that WWI (38 million casualties)was merely a European “civil” war at its outset, Marion.
And what has EU policy done for the last few years except make the possibility of another civil war more likely, except this time it won’t just be Europeans fighting each other.
(European)Civil wars also tended to occur in times when populations were much smaller, making casualty lists a much greater percentage of those populations.
Most of the time, I would prefer to be younger. On the other hand, I am grateful for having been born at a time when people had at least some awareness of their culture and history, even though WW2 was a relatively recent memory.
Younger people now are luckier in some respects, but they also seem to be increasingly shallow and, in the worst cases, downright pathetic. They have easy access to more information than ever before but they seem to lack the curiosity to take advantage of it.
I’m sure that older generations have always thought along these lines, but logic doesn’t dictate that we must be wrong now.
They do have access to more information, Marion but how good is that information when and if they choose to access it?
I worked in junior schools after being forced into early retirement from my “proper” job, not having almond shaped eyes and sporting external genitalia was a disadvantage for the new millenium. 🙁
I saw first hand what passed for education and it was worrying, not so much with what was taught but just how much even those supposed to be teaching did not know. The go to site for information was the BBC school’s website and if you think that the BBC TV and radio is biased, their “teaching” content is in a different league! And this “information” was being drip fed to young and impressionable minds as if it was gospel. I lost track of the number of staff room “discussions” I got involved in regarding climate change and the British Empire, etc. Like you say, never has there been so much information available for easy access yet never have people, especially the young and I have graduate children, been less informed. I have a great sympathy for the young for what is being done to them.
Toobi,
The cause of both World Wars was the Germans and their dysfunctional national psyche and, as we see, it is still a problem today. Germany should have been totally dismembered at the end of WW2 so that it ceased to be a Nation State. Very serious error of judgement by the Allies and Europe is paying for the consequences.
Wow, what a staggeringly poor grasp of history. “Germany caused World War I” is the sure sign of someone who hasn’t even read a basic history book on the subject. There is no easily identifiable “culprit” who started World War I, though many (learned, ie not people on Internet message boards) people point the finger at Austria and Serbia.
Your notion of destroying Germany is dangerous and idiotic. One doesn’t have to look far to see the consequences of removing sovereignty from a group of people. Scotland and Ireland for instance. Hint: people don’t like it.
More,
Thanks for the compliments !
“One doesn’t have to look far to see the consequences of removing sovereignty from a group of people. Scotland ….”
Are you referring to 1707? Really?
Seems to have worked quite well for much of the time.
Marion,
It was we Scots who gave away our country or, at least, our failed elite did as a result of the idiotic Darien project. Dr. Johnson had it just about right. No Krankie and the SNP are going to make the same mistake in reverse. Crazy.
Had to laugh at the “learned” analysis of our history: “people don’t like it”.
Marion,
Yes , ” People don’t like it ” ! Depends on which people. Not sure I would call it an intellectual argument !
You say it’s not an “intellectual argument,” yet you seriously argue that “the Germans” are to blame for two world wars because you just think so. Irony.
Irony?
I think the word you were looking for is “hypocrisy”. Not a conclusion I agree with, but it certainly wasn’t irony.
Get a dictionary.
Odd – people here love crying about the EU and how it strips away sovereignty from member states. Yet members here are now suggesting Germany should have been completely destroyed after World War 2 and their sovereignty taken away.
Care to explain this contradiction, Grant?
More,
Not all Nations and peoples are the same ! Study your history ! It is not a matter of ideology, it is a matter of practicality and reality.
Oh I see – so it’s just who YOU think should be destroyed and sovereignty stripped from. For a second there I thought you were going to create a convincing argument!
If you seriously think that completely silencing and removing the German voice from German people would solve more problems than it caused you may well be a certifiable imbecile. History, facts and evidence is on my side here – the suppression of people never ends well.
More,
Ok, Happy New Year !!
No matter how much I agree with another’s viewpoint or arguments, More HH, I find it difficult to do so when these arguments or views are accompanied by abuse or personal attacks on those with differing views, they negate any good points the holder may have made.
As to German sovereignty, this was less than 50 years old at the start of WWI, the component kingdoms and states, etc., only unifying under Bismarck and the Prussians in 1871. This, some write , led to the young Germany suffering from a sense of insecurity, paranoia even, at being surrounded by older, imperial, more powerful, and none too friendly countries, France for instance having been invaded by the Prussians just before (and responsible for according to some) the unification under Bismarck, (who wrote “good” letters.)
These same Prussians filled all the positions in the war ministry, officer class and training colleges, the same Prussians who drafted the terms that the Austro Hungarians presented to the Serbs, knowing full well that it would be impossible for those terms to be accepted. The rest as they say is history.
Would stripping the sovereignty have had such an effect on a country as young as Germany after WWI? That really would have been a vindictive peace and still would not have prevented WWII, the seeds having been sown.
Toobi,
Agree with what you say about personal abuse .
Going back to WW1 and the anticedents. What exactly were the political, military and economic threats to Germany ?
No reply button to your question, Grant.
From extensive reading I think that the threats facing a young Germany were more perceived than actual. They had embarked on a massive warship building program, to project national power and protect its overseas interests and they were worried that this would have brought them into conflict with the UK, who had at that time, the largest navy in the world, used for protecting its imperial interests and sorting out the odd tyrant or despot (aahh, those were the days!).
This expansion hadn’t gone unnoticed by the French, who had not forgotten the Prussian away days in 1870 when they had lost parts of Eastern France in the process and were itching for a rematch to get them back.
Their policy of lebenstraum didn’t win them many friends either , so they decided that attack was the best form of defence, as they thought, it was only a matter of time before a neighbouring country took steps to give them a kicking. The trouble in Sarajevo gave them the excuse to put their plans into action. They never expected or wanted to go to war with the UK, entente cordiale not being grounds for such action. One of the great “what ifs” is would we have entered the war if the Germans hadn’t violated Belgium? We will never know!
The voice of the German people was arguably more eloquent and beneficial for the world before it was unified into a militaristic state. The argument that it should have been dismantled after its defeat and returned to a bunch of small states is not a ridiculous one.
MHH
Exactly.
This is exactly the attitude discussed above with regard to “Education” a la BBC.
I left school believing a lot of nonsense, including an incorrect view of c20 political events. As intended by the inculcators.
Nothing about Poland invading the Ukraine in 1920, nothing about Poland helping themselves to part of Czechoslovakia. Nothing about the Polish intransigence about the Polish Corridor. Nothing about the Polish guarantee “the pages of history can be scoured and ransacked without finding a more stupid decision” Paraphrase of Churchill. Nothing about the UK not declaring war on the USSR after their invasion of Poland. Nothing about Versailles and how Wilson and Co really excelled themselves. Nothing about the French invading German states every fifty years for almost a millennium.
Nothing, like the truth about almost everything.
How can anyone see clearly through the BBC Marxist bollox described so clearly, frequently and cogently here on BBC and not realise that the anti German attitudes acquired therethrough are more of the same?
Truth,
Are you saying that Germans were never the aggressors in Europe ? Are they the victims ?
TS
“How can anyone see clearly through the BBC Marxist bollox described so clearly, frequently and cogently here on BBC and not realise that the anti-German attitudes acquired there through are more of the same?”
My school had WWI on the curriculum for a number of years, fitted in between the Vikings and the Romans (in that order, sod timelines).
The recommended “source” material for WWI was Black Adder Goes Forth, I kid you not. Major tongue biting time or I wouldn’t have been allowed to accompany the kids to the Somme etc., on educational visits.
The Germans of WWI were not the same as Nazis of WWII, Grant. The causes of WWI are still being debated today also, not as simple as the assassination of a prospective leader of a dying empire and what this set in motion. WWI was only the first half of the game, WWII being the second, which was made inevitable by the sanctions, reparations, etc., imposed by the victors, especially the French, who understandably, wanted more punitive measures imposed.
Simply put, WWI was set in motion by the German military, not the Kaiser or politicians, who needed to knock out France before turning their attention to the slower mobilising Russians, allies of the Serbs who had been blamed for the assassination of the Austro Hungarian prince in waiting, erstwhile allies of the Germans. Obvious wasn’t it 🙂
After WWII, Germany was broken up into two countries, before unifying in 1990 and the Germans are still paying for this reunification as well as reparations for the holocaust, the Greek bailout and now the “refugee” self-imposed crisis and the tax payer is sick of it.
Europe is still paying the price for WWI in particular but this is largely due to how the victors carved up the old empires post WWI, especially the Turkish in the Middle East, paying no heed to tribal or religious boundaries. Yugoslavia post WWII another case in point.
Some other time I’ll go into detail how Standard Oil (SO or Esso)brought about the downfall of the Czar because he refused them a licence to drill in the newly discovered deposits around the Black Sea, having already given it the Royal Dutch, which became Shell
Every war, over the last 300 years will either have a bank or oil company at the back of it if one looks hard enough.
Toobi,
Yes, I have read many books on the subject, and my father was a senior member of the Control Commission, so I learned a lot from him. But I still see the Germans as the main problem.
The future problems will come from the “new” Germans, Grant.
Toobi,
Well I agree with that ! But who is letting them into Germany ?
It’s not those who follow the orders (Nuremburg defence not applicable here) It’s those who gives them. Merkel, et al are merely working to an old script.
Toobi,
Yes, exactly !
Good analyses lads.
Just the sort of Big Question that a previous generation would have been able to handle.
Both “The Great War” and “The Second World War” are masterclasses.
And-much though I could fume at AJP Taylor etc-He was punchy,learned and would have valued the arguments.
God know that we still have Ferguson, Roberts and Starkey-let alone a Schama, Montefiore etc-who could surely do something good and contemporary on OUR big issues
1. The Euro
2. The Frankfurt School
3. The BBC and how it turned from then…to what it is now
4. The Nazi-Soviet Pact
5. History of the Middle East..from say, Nasser via Qutb to Rushdie and Tariq Ramadan.
6. Feminism from Germaine Greer to Charlotte Proudman
7. How we got Trump from Nixon
8. How we got Farage from Delors.
There`d be loads of others.
Guess I`m reading about the Barbed Wire Universities of Changi under the Japs in WW2-Stalag Courses by brave and courageous men at daily risk of death, but chose to teach important things, hold out hope and reason amidst the barbarities of the Gestapo, Brown shirts, Kempeitai and the IJA.
Learning matters-why the hell does the BBC simply die each day on sucking its own chaff?
Thank GOD that you lads above are arguing the big stuff, we ourselves need to stay with the big trends-Trump, Farage and the Death of the Political classes here-and not fall for Gompertz, Hutton or Toynbee with their fuckwit flea circuses.
cH,
Yes ! Love the last 3 words of your post. Sums these people up.
The current problems with Iran could be traced back to the pre WW! era when the Royal Navy started to switch from coal to oil see Queen Elizabeth class super-dreadnoughts the oil supplies being obtained from Iran via Anglo-Persian Oil Co now BP
Good programme wasn`t it?
I had Donald Campbell down as a daddys boy and a joke, vainglorious.
Had his faults alright-but the pressures on him by business, sponsors to “up his game”, to risk his very life, were new to me.
Reminded me a bit of the Challenger story of 1986.
Good programme, and from another era that`s worth a look.
I don’t think the BBC understand the cost to them of their endless propaganda.
I grew up trusting the BBC. It took a long while to realise just how corrupt they are.
But once you realise you never trust them again. They’ve now done this with millions. It made Brexit possible. But they still don’t realise how much they are hurting themselves.
The strength of the BBC is not its 4 billion budget. It’s their reputation for objectivity. Once lost, it’s lost forever. And they are now despised as the exact British equivalent to ‘Pravda’.
But I really think that unlike the boys at Pravda, the BBC doesn’t know what they’ve done: http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-bbc-is-not-biased.html
In the USSR Pravda called it propaganda, In the UK the BBC calls it news its the same thing realy
I read an article on the website of that English “fun jumper” who recently died trying to dart from one train to another in Paris! One of his first remarks on his website concerning his biggest disappointments in life was those who voted Bexit in the referendum! Regarded Brexitiers as being full of hatred and are unsociable to our neighbours!
So it seems that many remoaners even take their hatred to the grave?!
But I will regard his death as sad and upsetting – RIP my friend!
Just got a glimpse of Chris Pattens eulogy to Ted Heath.
On Parliament Channel just now.
Patten cites National Disasters and Humiliations as being Suez, Iraq War and “The Brexit Vote”.
Our BOB for the day. What a hopeless hyper, but the BBC and the Eu fund him for this guff. Why do we tolerate this?
Won`t our children be next?
Alicia,
Pass the sick bag. Who gives a damn what Patten thinks about anything. He is a total failure.
Irish Times headline today.. UK doesn’t know it’s own brexit plan.
Yes we bloody well do, it’s a simple plan called ‘leave the EU’.
The Irish can go to hell. They’re terrified they’re going to be expected to pay even more into the EU coffers.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/theresa-may-snubs-marr/
The competition for BBC Bucket of Warm Sick Editor is, of course, intense, given the market rates.
Clearly if the BOE’s forecast was, to quote Carney “analytically based and objectively given”, adding: “It is not a political opinion, it is an economic opinion”, he and his team have shown themselves to be totally inept and should be sacked for being not fit for purpose.
Dogger,
Carney always gets everything wrong . He is useless. But then so is Treezer. They both should go .
Alan, one of the points I would make to Jim O’Neill is that the EU is essentially anti-globalist in nature. I am in favour of globalisation – I can make a case as O’Neill did for the benefits of globalisation – so one of the reasons for my voting Leave was to enable Britain to enjoy more benefits of globalisation, not to avoid it altogether.
The fact is that if you are, or consider yourself to be, a victim of globalisation, it is more likely that you are in all honesty a victim of our various Governments of the past 40 years but especially the Blair & Brown administrations, our Civil Service and the EU or what they (Government & Civil Service) make of it in shaping policies that affect all our lives.
Another point I would make to O’Neill is that fiscal & socio-economic manipulation policies disadvantaged many in the UK when the benefits of globalisation could and should have been shared widely and more in proportion to need.
Totally agree UTS . One minute our powers that be were telling us to think in worldwide terms , the next would be policies they enacted as though the rest of the world didn’t exist . Our civil service is not the best in the world at anything except as the best incompetent traitors . In a way , thank goodness they AREso indolent .
A friend of mine has always been a staunch supporter of the BBC, however the grotesque coverage of the Huddersfield shooting has opened his eyes. We were watching the news last night and he was very dismissive, as were others in the club. We live in West Yorkshire and are quite familiar with the likes of Yaqub.
Let us face it, the EU has become a poor attempt to enforce a United States of Europe which is a closet Fourth Reich. It is about to fail because “her” East German Wundermädchen has let so many incomers into the country. The BBC support her, of course, but do their best to conceal the fact that in her youth she was an apparatchik in the East German Communist youth movement.
charm,
I agree, it is still the same old German stuff that we have had for centuries. Can’t quite think of Merkel as ” Wundermadchen “, but the mentality of Germans has no changed in centuries. The Ancient Romans knew that !