It’s not just a BIASED broadcaster, it’s disreputable and a menace. BBC coverage of President Trump’s first week has been a scandal and as I write this it is foaming at the mouth about a non-existing ‘Muslim Ban”. Just about EVERY BBC presenter (including, lamentably Andrew Neil) is hostile to Trump and their studios are full of “experts” who come to damn Trump. There is NO pretence at balance, this is pure narrative and it sickens my stomach. You?

Bookmark the permalink.

53 Responses to BBC IN A FRENZY

  1. Peter Gray says:

    Trump has guts to do what he promised, unlike our politicians who have 5 years or more in government and don’t really ever do what was promised. The BBC should be ashamed of it’s behaviour.


    • john in cheshire says:

      One can only feel shame if one acknowledges having done something wrong. The sodding bbc doesn’t think it is doing anything wrong and hence will never be ashamed of its behaviour. It is not possible to reason with people like this who have such certainty that they are doing the right things. They are never going to change and the only way to deal with them is to sideline them. We can do that on a personal basis by not paying their tax but it needs the will of the government to deal with them in a decisive way that ends their tyranny.


    • kane says:

      The BBC were clinically dissected in David Vincent’s book “2030: Your Children’s Future in Islamic Britain” (Amazon and Kindle) which had one chapter devoted to the ideological pro-Islamic bent of their Middle East reporters like Jehad Jon Donnison, Orla Guerin, and Barbara Plett. The Conservatives think they can control the BBC by allowing its hard left propaganda go under the radar but then pile on the pressure for “balance” come general elections. Short sighted and doomed to catastrophe, once Labour gets back in power, and given the current demography they will eventually, they will have a finely tuned instrument of Marxist propaganda at their disposal and free speech will be a memory. They will rue the day, as will we all, that the licence fee was not abolished.


  2. foxcote7822 says:

    I know your pain ..but honestly, what can we do about it? I ask the question sincerely because I like you and probably millions of like-minded people are, quite frankly sick to the stomach of the BBC and its proliferating bias..


    • GCooper says:

      All we can do is make sure the BBC isn’t allowed to get away with it by challenging its opinions when they are regurgitated by the people we meet and correspond with. I realise that can be uncomfortable and in some cases professionally dangerous.

      We can also agitate online and work towards voting into power politicians who will curb this enormous abuse of the democratic process.


      • Expat John says:

        Mr.Cooper, I think that there may well come a time when we can – and will have to – do rather more than that.


        • Roland Deschain says:

          I think we’re there now. And I’m immensely frustrated because I haven’t a clue what I can, realistically, do.


          • Dogger Bank says:

            realistically we can stop watching live TV and therefore not be required to pay the licence fee. I am currently working on sowing the seed to do that, but of course I am not the only one in the house and not everyone feels comfortable with my suggestion. We are such law abiding citizens that it’s hard to convince others that cake programmes are linked to Marxist propaganda.


    • Deborahanother says:

      Complain complain complain.

      Eventually they will drown in the deluge .Its difficult I know but they depend on people giving up and not bothering .

      Email your MP .i never contacted my MP until Brexit.Now I do it all the time .Not that he ever gets back but I’m not stopping.

      We need to make our voices count .We pay for it !


  3. chrisH says:

    Got to say that the disdain for Trump is not confined to the BBC. I`ve heard the likes of Daniel Hannan and Juliet Hartley Brewer say the same thing.
    “I`d not have voted for him myself…but…”
    I suppose they mean it, and it certainly gets them brownie points from their BBC interrogators-but it`s fatal.
    They were not ASKED to vote for Trump-they are not Americans.
    He`s THEIR duly-elected President not ours, so deserves full respect for that. That is what democracy is meant to be isn`t it?
    So these effete Tories who sniff at the vulgarian are damaging their own cause.
    If you can`t face down an O Brien or a Neil-what the heck will you be like when Sharia comes along. These lighweights depend on Trump to do their heavy lifting as they sneer at his country and the good people of the USA. This is NATO and the UN once more-if Trump walks, they are stuffed.
    Maybe Ken Clarke or John Selwyn Gummer can protect them.
    Trump is the enema for that big elephant in the room the whole elite has ignored since 1973…I recognise it, they too will have to-or get swept away in the deluge of elephant diarrhoea coming their way very soon.


    • NCBBC says:

      I too recognised it in the early 70s. I thought we were stuffed, until the almost miraculous appearance of a real estate developer. Who wuda thunk it.


    • Emmanuel Goldstein says:

      When they say they wouldn’t vote for Trump, does that mean they support Hillary. Why are they not asked if they would vote for Clinton and if they support her policies.
      Last QT by the way, all five were anti Trump.


  4. petebogtrott says:

    Simple a £49 flat fee for the tv license,then subscription if you want to watch BBC programmes.End of problem then you will see if Auntie can live in the real world


    • taffman says:

      No representation – no fee – no licence! Privatise it .
      If its as good as it says it is, it will survive.


      • Dogger Bank says:

        Yes, it is in effect a political levy that we are paying to support anti-Brexit, far left propaganda.


    • Rick Bradford says:

      I would keep the licence fee at its present level, but make it voluntary. It would become a “suggested donation” to be made by those who agree with the BBC’s description of itself as a world-class broadcaster. The BBC would become the Oxfam of the airwaves.

      If there were to be some drop in revenue, then they could start by cutting some of the bloated salaries they pay; there are presenters being paid a quarter of a million quid a year, for a job that would be overpaid at thirty shillings a week.


      • taffman says:

        Rick Bradford
        Licence fee – dump it.
        If I don’t watch Al Beeb why should I pay for it? – simples.


      • Emmanuel Goldstein says:

        Rick, it’s like the NHS. It describes itself as ‘the envy of the world’.
        Strange how nobody else has copied the NHS model though.
        I suppose they just come here for free treatment.


      • honestus says:

        Rick, that would be thirty pieces of silver – for selling out the people who pay their wages.


  5. Lucy Pevensey says:

    For 3 years in the 1990’s I didn’t pay the licence. I hated the BBC then & I didn’t want to watch. I had a VHS though so I could watch my own videos. Then was advised by some work colleagues that you could get fined anyway just for owning the TV.
    That just made me hate them more. It highlighted to me that in reality they want to force you to watch whether you want it or not. Like most things socialist it’s a control issue.

    I can mostly live without telly. The other half has the flipping thing on all the time though so I grudgingly paid the licence again this year. My favourite thing about TV is the off button. Those arrogant hacks at the BBC just can’t fathom that people can live quite happily without them. I think I’ve mentioned it here before, I’d rather pay to stop them than to keep watching. I wouldn’t mind if President Trump squashed them like an insect.


    • Anthonies says:

      In the 1960’s I remember as a kid hearing my uncle say that the BBC were biased. It felt wrong to criticise them and it was the way we believed in “Auntie,” Blue Peter, Redifusion and Sandy Gall”. It felt truthful and honest and we all grew up feeling that way. But now? It feels like a communist or Arabic state broadcaster. Just like when I lived in Egypt it now seems like pre revolutionary bias. And it made me sign a petition to allow Mr Trump to come here. In disgust at the way they presume to coerce and think they know our feelings especially after the democratic Brexit vote. Live TV is an outdated habit, on it’s way out. I think I might give it another month on the monthly £7 instalments till I get all the legal stuff sorted and connections to use the internet only on the screen…It’s just the feelings of fear that they have DARED to make us feel.. ENOUGH…Go Away…How dare you continue to think you represent truth anymore. OOH I’m so MAD


  6. Edward says:

    The more the BBC hate Trump, the more I love him. That’s my answer.

    They (the BBC and the political Left) are having their noses rubbed in the shit of those they have constantly insulted: the people of Britain.

    The liberties the BBC has taken with its privileged position as our national broadcaster can only be judged as propaganda. Propaganda – a useful tool in times of war – is replaced with the metaphor “artistic licence”.

    The BBC is not alone in this. The Hollywood film industry is firmly in the market for producing films on the basis of “artistic licence”.

    The term “artistic licence” sounds democratic and liberating, but it opens the door to twisted logic and false information. It gives strength to those who can afford to pay for Hollywood distribution rights. You can’t get a producer until you get a distributor and you can’t get a distributor until you get a producer.

    Catch 22. Unless you already have the money and/or the contacts.

    This is the establishment. How does an individual break into the realms of Hollywood or the BBC?

    They don’t. The BBC and Hollywood choose them. I know, because I was once a part of it.


  7. Sir_Arthur_Strebe-Grebling says:

    Let’s see how long it takes the bBBC to report the President’s statement rather than their own drivel.


    • Grant says:


      Surely the BBC cannot fail to report this ? Or there will be a headline ” BBC fails to report….. “


  8. DickMart says:

    Trump is merely doing what all western governments should have done years ago. Rather than setting up an effective vetting system, they yielded to PC scruples and as a result several countries have experienced terrorist outrages and sexual abuse of their citizens on an industrial scale.

    Yet the BBC regard this as an open and closed issue. On the 1.00 pm Radio 4 News programme they paraded a whole string of people condemning Trump’ policy, but no-one defending it. Their lack of balance, impartiality and good judgement is outrageous.


    • Peter Grimes says:

      That man Orban knows a threat when he sees it –

      “As for national demographic policy, the European Union has no powers whatsoever in this area. It is a problem area for us, too. We cannot guarantee that our attempts to solve it by bolstering our family policy will be successful, but we do insist on fashioning our society ourselves as we see fit. This includes the discretion to decide with whom we desire to share our country. For centuries, we Hungarians have lived together with citizens hailing from various corners of Europe. No fewer than thirteen recognised minorities send delegate spokespersons to Hungary’s National Assembly. The Catholic cathedral in Budapest is just a stone’s throw away from the impressive building of the main Synagogue. Several generations have been raised in this cultural milieu, but they were free to fashion their social vision of the future on their own volition, rather than by obeying instructions handed down from a remote, faceless institution.

      For us, the challenge of mass migration equals a call to protect our culture, because we are a small country by American standars, and because this is what our traditions mandate us to do. Hungary’s cultural homogeneity – and I say cultural rather than ethnic homogeneity deliberately –, the sense that our culture is essentially cut from the same cloth, with the diversity of patterns subsumed in a greater unity, will serve us well in the future.”

      All of this is worth a read.


  9. TigerOC says:

    Been watching the hysteria all day. There are some dangerous situations starting to develop from this.

    The USA is a super power. Trump is now the President and Commander-in-Chief. Over the last few months he has been sending polite warnings to Europe including the UK that they need to get their act together. He told Merkel in no uncertain terms that what she had done was reckless endangerment. He has consistently said that NATO needs a major overhaul and the USA is tired of assuming the mantle of responsibility.

    If the abuse of the President continues then it will be taken as an insult not only by Trump but by his many millions of supporters. The morons calling for bans to visits are insulting the USA. There might come a point where he just says; listen, I have tried to warn you and I have encouraged you to be responsible but all you do is insult us. I am withdrawing military support from Europe. You’re on your own because we have our own problems to solve. Good luck and God speed.

    The UK in particular is incredibly vulnerable right now. Europe as a whole is under equipped and under manned to defend itself. If this comes to pass we will be royally screwed. I hope these morons realize what they are doing.


    • Grant says:


      Quite right. Without the USA, the Russians could just walk all over Europe if they wanted. I am tempted to say , what would happen to the Lefties’ beloved muslims then ?


      • Dave S says:

        Quite right and it could happen if the West goes on as it is. Not only is the West without the US unable to cope with a resurgent Russia but I do not think the West could stop a Turkish/Iranian assault on Europe. That is a possibility by the way.
        My favourite scenario is that Putin and President Trump agree to leave Europe to fend for itself but with Russia as the controlling power . Not an invasion but rather a mafia style offer that could not be refused.
        Europe has all but destroyed it’s future and for that liberalism and it’s extreme proponent Germany is to blame. Britain will survive intact but at some cost. Either at the command of Russia or the US.


        • Deborahanother says:

          So true.The EU leaders would have to have ten meetings before they decide on their strategy.Meanwhile Europens are stuffed.


    • NCBBC says:


      Europe is very vulnerable right now. But who can shoulder the cost of rapid re-arming. Only Germany. But if Germany started rearming, there would be a hue and cry – France, the Netherlands, Eastern Europe, Russia, Italy and all the rest will be up in arms. The very idea of a rearmed Germany is the stuff of nightmares. Germany too is too scared of rearming, considering what happened to it. Twice.

      So here we are. Only the USA can do the job. No one else. Germany thought it was a powerful nation, but I believe its beginning to realize that it has to fall in line. No option but.


      • Al Shubtill says:

        I don’t think the Russians would invade Europe. They just don’t like having NATO right up to their border – which was what President George Bush (Snr) told them WOULDN’T happen.
        The Russians have their own potential enemy at the gate (the back gate in this case): China.

        The Chinese have a huge population and limited natural resources, the Russians have a relatively low population and massive natural resources; for them to become involved in a European land war would make them vulnerable to Chinese expansion and they could end up fighting on two fronts, thousands of miles apart.


        • Grant says:


          i quite agree about Russia, but why take the risk ? They might not like NATO right up to their border but Finland, Estonia etc don’t like Russia on their border.


        • TigerOC says:

          Apologies in advance for the following long post. This is what Frank Gardner should be doing.
          On Russia. I don not believe that Russia has any aggressive intentions. Russia is desperately trying to recover from decades of neglect of its own people which is a recipe for civil war. They have big internal problems of have nots. They are trying to re-balance wealth distribution. That was started by Glasnost.

          The Ukraine was provocation by the EU knowing NATO had its back. The Ukraine is a mongrel state. The West is “European” and the East “Russian”. The problem here was that the situation threatened Russia’s Mediterranean access. She was not going to lie down quietly and accept this situation. This is historically Russian territory and she will defend it. Everyone should recognize a natural territorial claim on this. This was Obama testing using proxies.

          On a geopolitical level. The threat is the Middle East. The USA, Russia and China recognize the threat. The threat comes from dwindling oil wealth. Again we come back to unfair wealth distribution. The Middle East oil reserves are evaporating. The wealth has been held by the elite and the masses have been bribed by a free lunch. The free lunch is getting smaller by the day but they have not used their wealth wisely by creating industries that will replace oil. Britain and Japan are fine examples of economies that have thrived through their people’s skills in using their skills to create things using raw materials imported from other regions.

          The Middle East does not have the capacity to provide for its people and escalating discontent and violence will only get worse.

          Through history leaders have used war to funnel energy away from internal problems into a perceived external threat and thereby welding a nation into closer bonds. Hitler’s period is the classic example of this. The Middle East is no different. Iraq did a similar thing invading Kuwait and then Iran. The various elite are using versions of Islam as a vehicle to focus discontent away from themselves on to someone else. The target has been Israel for many years. The populations are too big now and so the focus has to move towards Europe.

          Putin recognizes this and wants to combat the problem at source not on his border. He already has a problem with Chechnya. China is starting to encounter similar problems in its Western regions. Trump recognizes the problem. Europe is trying desperately hard to ignore the problem and are being influenced by big globalists.

          Europe through geography and population density has reached an apex population and hence the populations are not growing. This is a natural biological mechanism. In past times population densities would have caused friction by space infringement and a war would have erupted reducing population density and then start again. Contraception has led to a re-balancing.

          All the current actors Putin, Trump and Chinese leaders are correct. The Middle East has to be contained where they are and let them sort themselves out. That means physical barriers.


  10. CranbrookPhil says:

    Only voice of common sense & lack of hysteria was from Jacob Rees Mogg on Radio 4’s Westminster Hour this evening.


  11. NCBBC says:

    The BBC, like the MSM in America, had taken Donald Trump for granted.

    Trump is like that hurricane that caused so much damage in Britain. And the MSM is like Michael Fish, who never saw it, because he thought it was tempest in a tea pot – a fool of no importance. Thus when Hurricane Trump swept in, the BBC/MSM never knew what hit them. Their boats capsized, their houses flooded, and now they are all bleating that it was Putin who did it.


  12. Guest Who says:

    The USA is around 350+ Million souls.

    There is a vast civil service to ‘handle’ their governance.

    There is one President. The one chosen by the people based on policies outlined.

    Now there seems to be some executive error in not appreciating a supertanker cannot turn on a dime.

    However, just as Whitehall mandarins did not even think of contingency for a ‘Leave’ vote from the public, so those in Washington and other state capitals appear to have totally blanked out the manifesto promises of what has turned out to be the people’s choice of candidate.


  13. Guest Who says:

    And it’s goodnight from him…


    • NCBBC says:

      There isnt a Muslim ban.

      But its time there should be. Its time to state the truth that Islam cannot coexjst with any other. Draw the battle lines, and let events take their natural course.


    • Dystopian says:

      I hope that has been shared on (snow)Flakebook?


  14. Lucy Pevensey says:

    ANOTHER thing that doesn’t make sense about all the leftist outrage- “Islamic terror isn’t representative of all Moslems Yadda Yadda” Really? OK. Still, where is all the outrage over the Muslims that ARE terrorists? Why aren’t you people out demonstrating about ISIS/Al Nusra/Hezbollah/Mad lorry drivers/ child rapists/ etc etc etc. Why aren’t you people demanding our governments put a stop to all this? These “distorters of the Islamic faith” Why vilify Trump, Farage & Wilders instead of screaming about Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi? Unreasonable, irrational, hypocrites. Full of misplaced hatred. Full of sh!t.


    • Dadad says:

      Whenever there is a muslim atrocity, where are the thousands of ‘peaceful’ muslims marching the streets chanting ‘not in my name’ ?

      Course there aren’t, and never will be. They all acquiesce in it.


      • Grant says:


        And , even if they did, they would be punished. All muslims live in fear. It is a religion of chains and slavery not freedom.


  15. Deborahanother says:

    If we had had the guts to ban the hate preachers all those years ago maybe we wouldn’t have had the Islamic atrocities here.

    I used to work in Finsbury Park Mosque area and it was chaos in the streets much of the time while the hate preaching took place . MP Jeremy Corbyn did nothing.


  16. shelly says:

    Shami Chuckyabutty just on. Stream of emotive invective clouding the facts.
    No mention of the temperarory ban imposed by Obama obviously. She had her sullen, angry face on.
    It strikes me that “the people” are more outraged by this than they were by last years terror attacks.
    Theres been a shooting in a Mosque in Canada, I’m sorry to say. No need to worry though, the culprit has already been identified as Donald Trump.


    • boohanna says:

      “the culprit has already been identified as Donald Trump.”

      Why are you blaming Putin?


    • honestus says:

      Also on the same BBC news report – numerous lingering images of on-line petition to prevent D Trump (POTUS no less) from admission to the UK. I watched for 40 mins or so and there were at least three separate screen shots showing the on-line page and how the number had increased while on air.
      I have recently signed at least a dozen petitions on line relating to Brexit/BBC Charges and a Knighthood for Johnny Johnson, last of the Dambusters. These have never been featured once, let alone rammed home, although they garnered significant support, they were clearly off message.
      This illustrates how the MINORITY liberal viewpoint (which the BBC have always reflected) can subvert and misuse their pole position within the media echelon to PROMOTE and PROPAGANDISE to their captured audience.
      Unfortunately, many normal minded people buy into this because it is the BBC and, amazingly and undeservedly, they are still trusted by a sizable chunk of their audience.


      • NCBBC says:

        The BBC had ONLINE streaming of the petition numbers. But they didn’t link to the button just below, which gives the location of the petitioners.

        Surprise surprise, most of petitioners are from Londonistan and Birminghalal. It wont be long before the numbers are so high that even CNN would be proud of them.

        These sort of ONLINE petitions should have another button that registers people who are opposed to the petition’s plea.


  17. JamesEdwards says:

    I find the BBC’s narrative on this breathtaking, they have gone way past the bogus impartiality yarn. On their website today – the BBC is actually making a comparison on how many have voted on the government petition site FOR a ban on Trump, compared to other campaigns. It is actually an advert!

    Incredible material.

    The BBC are arrogant, who fear nothing, as no one at the top is prepared to dismantle this absolute dictating broadcaster. Even the PM is answerable to the BBC.


    • NCBBC says:

      If Donald Trump was our PM, the BBC news team would be “FIRED”. Their pensions confiscated as part compensation for the damage they have done to Britain, then put on trial for harming the realm.


  18. JamesEdwards says:

    The West was supposed to be ‘the world model’ for democracy, UNTIL that is – the public both here in the UK with BREXIT, and in the US with TRUMP decided to defend their homelands via formal democratic processes. And yet, we find the establishment here (esp BBC) garning support to apparently thwart these democratic outcomes, primarily in the form of highly publicized street protests.

    The coverage is grotesquely excessive and deliberate.

    Are they really attempting to overturn the power of the ballot box!?


  19. Alicia Sinclair says:

    Disgraceful chiselling and truffle hunting by Humphrys this morning.
    John Craven in all senses.
    The little shit was asking some chinless nomark about “protocols” “conventions” “traditions” in regard of Trump coming to this country. like a veritable Norman St john Stevas or some other florid, camp equerry with a Debretts in one hand and a Household Cavalry guard in the other.
    But that`s the odious toadying disgusting and unhinged BBC for you-they confuse interviewing Patti Smith at the South Bank with REAL rebellion.
    And that is Trump.
    If May etc don`t rein in the BBC, they will cause her incalculable damage.
    All Trump has to do is go where he IS wanted and where his life will NOT be deliberately put at risk by fired up Islamists hiding under Batmanghedghlis caftan.
    So no trade deal, no NATO and no US companies getting their innovations into the UK. Why the US should bother their arses with THIS country as represented by Rudd, Johnson and the BBC is beyond me.
    After all that Farage has done-this is dangerous. Trump will neuter the US media-when the heck will we turn on OURS?
    Their liberal drive by shit is getting nasty and a worry. The BBC need to know WE despise them.