Switched the radio on and 10 minutes in the BBC had already managed to disseminate a stream of ludicrous but toxic, poisonous, messages of hate towards Trump. Guess I was just lucky to tune in at that time. So unusual for the BBC to be spreading such venomous fear, loathing and hostility about Trump.
They took a gleeful pleasure in reading out the Observer/Guardian view of Trump along with Saira Khan’s careful and reasoned thoughts [perhaps she was actually talking about Islam?]…
The Observer concludes that the president “cannot be trusted” on issues that affect Britain, describing him as “ignorant, prejudiced and vicious in ways that no American leader has been”.
Sunday Mirror columnist Saira Khan describes Trump’s policies as “damaging, isolationist, racist, sexist, Islamophobic, backward”, and likely to trigger an “economic arms race” of tit-for-tat tariffs.
The only ‘pro’- Trump newspaper quote came from Niall Ferguson, who was rabidly anti-Trump during the election and whose ‘pro’- Trump message was in fact a meaningless waffle that ended in ‘Maybe we shouldn’t judge quite yet..it’s early days’. Really hard hitting stuff then.
Then we had Lyse Doucet, an immmigrant who is given carte blanche to spread her own pro-immigration prejudice on the BBC, who told us that the reason Trump didn’t stop travellers from Saudi Arabia was because of his business interests there…never mind he hasn’t blocked those from Afghanistan [and so many, many other Muslim countries]….despite no business interests there. Hmmm…OK…so did Obama try to block the release of documents that showed Saudi was behind 9/11 because he had business interests there or was it due to geo-political considerations that meant the US weighed up the pros and cons and decided Saudi as an ally outweighed Saudi as an open enemy? Right or wrong, Trump and his advisers would have made exactly the same calculation…and the countries that are blocked are basically failed states that are rife with Islamic terrorists plus Iran which is openly a source of terror and anti-American aggression around the world. Doucet fails to apply the same standards to Obama as she does to Trump in what is a fairly outrageous slander of him. Funny how the BBC always dodges the huge amounts of money funnelled towards the Clintons by the Saudis as evidenced by the hacked emails that the BBC also refuses to investigate.
Doucet then articulated what is the BBC’s favourite tactic when trying to weaponise immigrants for the cause…personalise their stories…millions of immigrants are scary but ignore them and tell the tale of individual immigrants and pull the wool over the viewers’ eyes as to the consequences of millions of these people with their ‘heartwarming and compelling personal stories’ coming to a Europe near you. I’m sure everyone is absolutely wonderful in person but as a group bringing an ideology that is radically opposed to nearly all Western values? As a group the politics and dynamics are very, very different to what an individual might profess…they often put aside personal beliefs in the interest of the amorphous group interest…either through some inherent link to that group that generates an obligation or duty or by intense pressure to conform from the more determined and extreme which is impossible to avoid if you are in a ghettoised or closed off community. The BBC knows that and smothers the truth. Doucet thought Trump would come under pressure as more and more tales of personal suffering of those stopped from entering would hit the media…the BBC in particular no doubt….indeed as I type the BBC has a headline…
‘Trump has not seen our suffering’
Have no fear…the BBC will make sure it gets headline status.
The BBC naturally actively seeks to avoid the other side, the personal tales of the victims of immigrants…those murdered, raped, abused, robbed, assaulted or otherwise made victims of crime by immigrants. Nor indeed the less dramatic but no-less important tales of the ‘natives’ who can’t get into hospitals or to see the GP, or can’t get their child into the school of their choice, or get on the housing ladder because of immigration, or whose wages are undercut or who can’t even get a job.
The BBC website takes a similarly aggresive stance, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38786576
Part of the Cambridge online dictionary definition of propaganda runs thus,
“information, ideas, opinions, or images, often only giving one part of an argument, that are broadcast, published, or in some other way spread with the intention of influencing people’s opinions”
“Only one part of the argument” and this mindset infects the whole BBC, maybe an investigative journalist should be diiging deep instead of repeating the ignorance and prejudice mantra.
Personally I feel the restrictions could have been phased in much better for reasons of fairness, organisational logistics (but, like Brexit, it seems the US civil service had not read the manifesto the people voted for) and… PR.
However, that is for the US to sort out.
Meanwhile, in the UK, the BBC seems to have lost what was left of its , well, everything really…
Newsbeat
All you need to know about Donald Trump’s ‘Muslim ban’
All ‘we’ (in the UK?) ‘need to know’, eh? Has the BBC fact checking unit had a scope at all?
Newsbeat
Thousands of people have been protesting at US airports over president Trump’s clampdown on immigration. A judge has issued a temporary stop to the deportation of visa holders or refugees stranded.
Are you affected by the immigration ban? We’d like to hear from you. Let us know your story?or please send us a message.
Who needs HYS?
This, from a link kindly provided at ITTB, is worth a surf:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2017/01/most-claims-about-trumps-visa-executive-order-are-false-or-misleading/
An immigrant says and the BBC agrees of course “Trump has not seen our suffering” Maybe President Donald Trump Has a far greater grasp of history both recent and over the last 1400 years of muslim imperialism
Maybe the BBC should stop buying or more correctly stop wasting our [Funded by the EU or anyone who still pays the BBC viewing tax} on the failing tax evading Al-Guardian and its Sunday parrot the observer and ibuy some history books instead and read and understand them, Then the BBC will find all the suffering it wanted. But the real history would not fit in with the pro islam , pro muslim immigration and anti west / civilisation / Israel / democracy etc agenda that the BBC has. They say the truth hurts and the BBC is certainly unfamiliar with the truth and if the BBC ever did become aquainted with the truth it might learn to understand just why President Trump has so much support not just in the US but here in the UK, Europe and further afield and why so many people support President Trump and wish they had leaders with the same attributes as President Trump in looking after the interests of their countries and their peoples first rather than bending to the demands of fake news outlets like the BBC, CNN, Al-Guardian and the rest of the increasingly irrelevant MSM along with the islamic and lefttard useful idiots
The incitement to hate by going on and on against Trump is dangerous. The BBC doesn’t mind exaggerating ideas against a person or regime that can cause intense anger and hatred which may lead to violence. Ironically, equally so it is unable to even mention or tell the truth about the behaviour of some immigrants as it doesn’t want to incite hatred against them. How mad is that ?
The late Daniel Patrick Moynihen was UN Ambassador and is quoted as saying “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts” The BBC’s emotional opinions create their own facts. .
I’m sure most BBC journalists might be quite nice people in person.
If only they could find some refuge from the tyranny of the BBC, the people who determine and direct the news agenda for the UK.
The trouble is they come in nasty, rabid bigoted packs, ready to tear apart anyone who challenges the groupthink.
Best keep them all out of the country I think. It’s called the precautionary principle and works for genetically modified foods, fracking and ‘green’ issues in general, so is fully BBC-approved.
The protesters will protest whatever Trump does or says,let them get on with it,they will go home in the end. we must not allow them to overthrow democracy. Trump must be allowed to visit this country,why should he not?
Wild,
He has visited this country many times. If he was banned now and retaliated , who would be the losers ? Him or Britain ?
For years Christians in Muslim lands, were persecuted – beaten, killed , their daughters and mothers raped, their elderly women stripped naked, and made to walk in public. Churches burnt, and pastors beaten and killed, by a mob screaming “Allahu Ackbar”. The BBC had nothing to say about it. They hid this news – the filthy animals. Sorry – retract “animals”.
Nor the continuous barbarity of Islam for 1400 years.
In the UK, Muslims don’t need to wipe their arses. The BBC will do it, voluntarily, and with pleasure.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/01/29/times-journo-calls-for-assassination-of-president-trump/
Seems she may have been triggered by Laura K.
It’s what Tony Hall would have wanted?
Guest,
Surely that is a criminal offence and she should be arrested ? I am not a lawyer but is that not incitement ?
After various bacon-related versus incidents or opinions that I would deem slightly more serious in the great ‘triggering a loon’ scheme of things, I could not honestly offer a sensible guess as to what these days if offensive, criminal, incitement of just folk being folk as far as the police, judiciary, media or government in the UK are concerned.
It seems to depend on who you are and who follows you on twitter mostly.
I must check if @OneLaw4Them is taken.
Obama had already flagged up those same countries and had passed travel restrictions to include banning visits. Trump was just carrying on with what Obama had started:
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/01/29/news-bulletin-the-list-of-muslim-nations-in-trumps-socalled-muslim-ban-are-ones-obama-choose-n2278021
The sheer intensity and venom of the BBC’s biased reporting on the latest US president has been evident ever since his unexpected (to the Beeb) election win. It’s now reached a level that’s virtually obsessive with Trump’s introduction of the entry ban on citizens of seven predominantly Muslim (try daring to be anything else if you live in one of them) failed states. Six of which are currently experiencing internal violence amounting to civil war and the seventh being the mediaeval theocracy, Iran.
The BBC’s coverage of this latest executive order of Trump’s has been so unremittingly hostile and the preponderance of negative viewpoints quoted and interviews with persons opposed to the measure, so huge (I’d assess it as at least 95%) that it’s difficult to see how the BBC can claim plausibly to have even tried to abide by its charter obligations. The corporation has now gone so far on its news channel as to screen for sustained periods, an insert of the recent petition to parliament calling for Trump’s forthcoming state visit to be cancelled. The most parsimonious explanation for this being so viewers can watch the total number of signatories figure tick upwards in real time.
In fact, this petition has been given three separate de facto advertisements on BBC news in just the last 90 minutes (to 10:15am)! All despite the fact that the BBC had itself reported (again in a discernibly hostile way and with input from an (unchallenged) opposition, but no government spokesperson) that Downing Street has already rejected the petition outright. This was not mentioned at all in the most recent undisguised ”plug” for the petition and the conclusion must be that the BBC is encouraging as many people to sign as is possible before it is removed from the parliamentary petition website.
I’ve now ”had it” with the BBC. I am no great fan of Trump, or Obama before him, tbh. Yet the palpable switch in the BBC’s US coverage from uncritical, fawning respect for Obama to open contumely and derision for Trump, quite apart from the equally marked shift in editorial ‘slant’ re the presentation of substantive news reports concerning each man, has led me to conclude once and for all that our ”national broadcaster” is simply no longer worthy of the title. That the sooner the British Public are freed from having to fund it as such on pain of prosecution, before being able to access any broadcast media whatsoever, the better.
It may be that my own experience in direct sales and sales management over three decades has made this worse as I can spot from a mile away every technique the BBC resort to in their deliberate, consistent adherence to a palpably biased agenda. However, over the period to date from last June 24th onward, and especially from November 9th, there’s been a step change so immense that even I’m astounded. I’m now determined to become more active in opposing the travesty the BBC has irrevocably become and would therefore be grateful if respondents could supply some links to organisations that may be seeking volunteers to assist them in holding it to account.
Squire,
You have summed it up perfectly. What took you so long !!!
Cheers. Although the extent to which the Beeb has thrown caution to the winds over the last seven months is so obvious as to be amazing and it doesn’t take much effort to work out why.
Squire, you are right. Once the BBC realised that they will never be regulated and the Tories are to feeble to do anything, they just don’t care anymore. Mind you that could backfire because, surely, more and more people will notice. I hope !
SquirePraggerstope
Cause of the venom ?
Trump is draining the Swamp.
Allow me to go a little crazy for a moment, but –
I really do get the impression there is an unofficial political cartel who circulate influence within top brass, Westminster, the BBC, and other media circles. This is like some inner circle running parallel to real society which has been highlighted by their abject opposition to both Brexit and Trump democratic election victories. The cynic in me is suggesting that they want to reverse both democractic national votes!? Coincidentally, the same said organization has Russia in its sights as the enemy (arms industries?), but ironically not so intensely with Islam!?
I’ve got it all wrong, surely?
James, I’ve thought the very same myself for some time. Like Squire above, I’ve been knocking about the business world for enough decades now to be able to sniff out something dodgy without even needing any firm evidence…a bit of a sixth sense one accidentally acquires. There’s some very dodgy stuff going on behind the political scenes which, for all the manic reading I’ve been doing on the net in the last 18 months, I don’t think I’ll ever get to the bottom of. Mind you, the stuff which IS accessible is scary enough! (The appalling numbers of murders by the Clintons, Soros’s foul antics, the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan, world population cull, etc etc)
The good news is that the likes of Soros and his NGOs are being banned slowly and surely by more and more countries. The desperation of the left is hilarious. I would love to attend the BBC new permanent Reality Check team meetings: ” If it trends on “twitta” all must be true! “
Shapster, you are bang on the money. I too am in business, in fact two businesses exporting all over the World and like you, I’ve got more than a sniff of something is going on here. I like you have looked at the internet and viewed the same things as yourself and tried to get verification of those items I found. Yes it is very scary, especially when you find stuff on the Clintons and Soros. The mass hysteria I’m seeing by the media and Trump is deeply worrying and I wonder just who is behind it all? This is now getting beyond me as I simply see it as the madness of the mad. But as you say, just what is going on here? can it really be the U.N’s Agenda 30 that we are now looking at?
Thanks for the comment Oldbloke. You’re quite right, the mass hysteria is very worrying especially when you consider that all Trump wants to do is protect America and further it’s interests in the world – and what is more, his goals are staringly obvious to anyone with a modicum of common sense. He sure isn’t doing it for fame and wealth – he had those in bucket loads years ago. And of course the same goes for Brexit – the common sense of ordinary people caused an unpleasant but necessary decision to be made yet the howls of those against it simply will not die down….surely a sign that there is more to this than they simply disagree.
Have the touchy feely amongst us really been brainwashed so extensively by the Soroses of this world to carry out their foul deeds in blind ignorance?