The best that they could come up with was that he had failed to meet his target of reducing debt as a proportion of GDP….Huw Edwards said sagely that this was ‘significant’. [at 3 hrs 16] unfortunately Paul Johnson from the IFS was in the studio and pulled the rug from under Edwards by saying it was ‘economically not signifcant at all’…Edwards looked chastened and rolled his eyes but recovered with a ‘I meant politically significant of course’...and all his workmates chimed in with a similar line to help him out of his embarrasment, and funnily enough the BBC’s Kamal Ahmed made no mention of its ‘insignificance’ in this report.
Odd that the BBC should now think this figure significant because last year they were dismissing this way of measuring debt out of hand telling us it was an Osborne trick to cover up a failure to lower the deficit.
Huw Edwards wound back the clock as he interviewed Matt Hancock and stated that it was wrong to continue with austerity when the world economy was so weak when instead the government should be stimulating the economy. Heard that before from the BBC…in fact we heard it everyday for 5 years…it was called Plan B…and it was Labour’s policy.
He also thought it ‘illuminating’ that much of the surplus would come from cutting government spending and not massive growth….hmmm…this from the BBC that was warning us of massive cuts to come in this second Parliament for Cameron, cuts so bad they would take us back to the Thirties and the road to Wigan Pier…..the cuts were going to be ‘utterly terrifying‘….never mind that they would actually take us back to the level of government spending in 1998 under Labour….not the terrifying Thirties then?
To achieve the Office for Budget Responsibility’s forecast of a budget surplus of £23bn by 2019-20 would require “spending cuts on a colossal scale ..
If reductions in departmental spending were to continue at the same pace after the May 2015 election as they had over the past four years, welfare cuts or tax rises worth about £21bn a year would be needed by 2019-20, at a time when the Conservatives were committed to income tax cuts worth £7bn, according to the IFS.
We have always known that the surplus would come from cutting spending…it is not a surprise nor ‘illuminating’ to rediscover this today….the BBC wants us to think that Osborne’s plans are in chaos and that he is flailing around using ‘magic’ as Edwards suggested…..oddly the Guardian also uses that line….Budget 2016: magical thinking from charmed world of the chancellor.
As for the sugar tax….the jury is definitely out on that one, effectiveness wise, despite the BBC’s assertion that Mexico provided proof positive that a sugar tax works……however the studies done were funded by the people who lobbied the Mexican government to impose the sugar tax….and the New Zealand government has looked at this and concluded there is as yet no proof to suggest the tax works.
Jamie Oliver is all over the BBC celebrating his punitive sugar tax – but this is sweet hypocrisy. On his website, Jamie offers a series of recipes aimed at children. A bowl of granola for a child’s breakfast, advertised as “a healthy and delicious start to the day”, contains an unbelievable 20.9g of sugar. That’s 23% of an adult’s daily recommended intake, and this is supposed to be for a child.
Experts recommend 4-8 year olds should have 12g of sugar per day, teenagers should have 20-32 grams. A single serving of this Jamie recipe surpasses the maximum recommended teenager’s sugar allowance, and three times that of 8 year olds…
Oh and there’s this from Guido’s site…..gotta love it…..
Is the BBC still a member of the CBI? The BBC suspended its membership during the Scottish independence referendum when the CBI joined the No campaign…..did it renew its membership?
The CBI is now supporting staying in the EU though disingenuously not doing so ‘officially’….
80% of CBI members, when weighted to reflect its membership – including 71% of small and mid-sized business members – believe that the UK remaining a member of the EU would be best for their business. Overall, 5% say it is in their firms’ best interests for the UK to leave the EU, with 15% unsure.
I don’t have a list of all the members of the CBI but it would be interesting to see who these ‘businesses’ are exactly…if they are like the BBC then clearly their opinon is more political than economic….something Daniel Hannan suggested….
I once attended a regional CBI conference in my constituency. I’m pretty certain that the businesses – in the sense of organisations that had to make profits – were outnumbered by the charities, local government agencies and NGOs. There was even, I remember, a local Scout group. Yet this is the organisation which is represented by the BBC as the voice of British industry.
It does represent some industries, of course, especially the large multi-nationals that are most adept at reaching accommodations with governments. Mega-corporations generally love Brussels, intuiting that the system was made for them. They have invested a great deal of time and money in getting regulations that suit them at the expense of their smaller rivals. The last thing they want is to have to start all over again.
NGO’s, charities, the BBC maybe, and even a scout group…..I’m grateful to the CBI for doing the hard work canvassing their opinions on the EU but don’t present them to us as ‘businesses’ who are completely apolitical.
If the BBC is once again a member perhaps it should consider resuspending itself….for good.
Roger Harrabin’s grip on the BBC’s science output must have slipped as the below is something he would definitely not approve of…..no coincidence perhaps that it is an ITV journalist who made the programme…
Is science quite as scientific as it’s supposed to be? ITV Science Correspondent Alok Jha takes a look at how science research is really carried out, to find out if it is really as rigorous as scientists would like us to think.
In the second and concluding part of this series, Alok looks at the practices and cultures undermining the integrity of scientific research.
Are scientists being pushed into shortcuts and unethical behaviour by the competitiveness of their field?
That is part two, I didn’t hear part one, but no mention of climate change so perhaps Roger’s still influencing coverage for the worse.
We heard that scientific journals like Nature and Science want exciting, positive science stories that don’t upset the applecarts of the vested interests but ultimately end up distorting the real science because they don’t publish the negative papers that contradict the ‘good news’.
We are told that genetics is a robust field because it publishes its data and such data transparency is not practised in other fields…such as climate change perhaps? Such openness promotes better science as the criticism and exchanges mean the science is constantly improved….science happens by disagreement and challenge……as every good english graduate should know.
Science has to be rescued from the business it has become….[and rescued from the politics]. Scientists have so much invested in their ‘science’ being accepted, careers, reputation and lucrative grants, that temptation to close down debate and protect your own ‘science’ can be overwhelming.
Shame at least one BBC environmental ‘journalist’ has made it his business to use the BBC to campaign about climate change for over 20 years and has been extraordinarilty successful at closing down debate and in creating a powerful, unstoppable narrative that promotes his own views on climate change regardless of the science and did everything he could to support climate scientists to hide their data and excuse their unethical behaviour.
The EU as we know has saved the world from another world war and, possibly less known to us all, has saved the environment from the depredations of the savage, heathen Brittunculi.
From Roman Snails and Great Crested Newts in East Anglia to the lemon sole of the English Channel and the wind turbines of Fife, European legislation has a significant impact on the look and health of our wildlife and landscape.
Tom Heap examines the potential impact on the British environment of an exit from the European Union.
Is there no end to the BBC’s imaginative doom-mongering? We didn’t get hit by a massive cosmic meteor this year….was that due to some EU regulation defying gravity? We didn’t find ourselves enslaved by the Saudi Arabians [Yet], was that down to the powerful, brave and swift action by Jean-Claude Juncker rapidly deploying his finest, haughtiest, supercilliest [?] sneer of contempt? We haven’t all been forced to kill our first born…this can only be because of the enlightened and humane, progressive, liberal attitude instilled into us by many years of being educated as to how to be a better human being by the European Union.
None of this would have been possible without the fine auspices of the EU edifice overseeing our development as the finest race of humans on earth….er…..
Shame such explorations of the EU question are few and far between on the BBC….though I should say it is difficult to assess the BBC’s coverage as it is vast and spread widely….however it is rare to hear such negative thoughts about the EU and the government propaganda on the BBC…..it all too readily slips into ‘we’re doomed’ if we leave the EU mode by default as they talk to interviewees whose pro-Stay views don’t get challenged as they slip in comments that Brexit will ‘slow the economy’ or paint a gloomy picture of worst case scenarios when talking of other subjects.
Neil says that Turkey has no tariffs imposed upon it despite not being a member of the EU…and of course has no ‘freedom of movement’.
How times change…except for the weak and useless EU.
Curious how the BBC treated Obama’s attack on Cameron over Libya…..the BBC seemed to be reluctant to go along with the attack, underplayed it and justified Cameron’s position.
This might raise a few eyebrows as the BBC normally blames the Libyan ‘adventure’ as one of the reasons for helping to radicalise Muslims, the rise of ISIS and the immigration crisis, putting the boot well into Cameron. But not this time.
Could it be that Cameron and his reputation must be protected, at least temporarily, until the EU referendum is over and the gloves can then come off again?
Ed Stourton gave Obama short shrift on The World at One, Cameron getting the benefit of the doubt…as he should really…Libya was a UN sanctioned operation to stop a massacre…and the civil war had already broken out before any outsiders intervened. Cameron and Co could only help Libya back onto its feet if there was an organised and effective government in place, and this didn’t happen…and without boots on the ground Cameron and Co couldn’t make that happen…and boots on the ground were not on the agenda and never were…Obama himself strongly opposing such measures when in fact it is the only way to bring peace and stability….and now ISIS have a foothold because of dithering by Obama who holds the real keys to the kingdom….massive military force that the UK and France just don’t have.
The Secretary-General’s special adviser for post conflict planning in Libya, Ian Martin, arrived in the Libya capital, Tripoli, on Saturday and began discussions with representatives of the country’s interim authorities on the form of assistance the transitional body will require.
Mr. Martin’s mission to Tripoli for talks with the National Transitional Council (NTC) follows the International Conference in Support of the New Libya in Paris on Thursday when Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon pledged the United Nations continued assistance to Libya tackle its humanitarian challenges and build a democratic and stable nation.
Who was responsible for the war?…
Mr. Ban told the gathering in Paris that the immediate challenge is on the humanitarian front, with some 860,000 people having left the country since February, when opposition forces rose up against the regime of Colonel Muammar al-Qadhafi as part of a wider pro-democracy movement across North Africa and the Middle East.
Not Cameron or Hollande then? So why are they responsible for reconstruction?
What exactly did Obama do to stabilise Libya? Nothing…he says he left it to the Europeans….in other words he ducked the issue and refused to take any responsibility….however he does want to interfere in the EU referendum……curious that the Libyans think he is the one responsible for their plight…
To Obama: First, I want to say that Libya will always be a friend to America. We will always thank President Obama for liberating us from Gadhafi’s murderous regime. It is also with great despair that our people watched the cruel murder of your martyr Ambassador [Christopher] Stevens.
We too hoped for a “new beginning” with America, just like in President Obama said in his speech. Now, we just pray that your people will not see Libya as a problem, a place of war or oil. We need you to see Libya, especially our young Libyans, as potential partners. We need America’s hope now more than ever, and we know that when we save Libya, we will repay America and be an equal, a partner for America in all of the Muslim world.
Here an Iraqi says America made mistakes in Iraq but that America must help too defend it, and its democracy, now…..the Iraq that Obama abandoned and withdrew the troops from that would have kept ISIS at bay….
Ali — 19-year-old soldier in Iraqi military, Iraq
To Obama: America made many mistakes in Iraq. It is difficult for us to forget these mistakes or to forgive them. But now we face a bigger threat that we share with IS. We hope that the U.S. will give more support to the Iraqi military to defend our country from terrorists.
My family and friends still believe in the Iraq that the U.S. claims it was trying to help create. We want a democracy, and we want to live without fear of car bombs and terrorists. We need America to keep its promises to make that dream happen for Iraq.
Only Obama had the muscle and money to tackle Libya, and Syria, but he lacked the essential will and now the world pays a heavy price….The Europe Obama seems to love so much he wants the UK to stay in its clutches he allows to be destabilised by massive immigration from Syria…caused, or rather allowed to be caused, by his refusal to act in the main.
Putin has in the main fled Syria after his ‘gunboat diplomacy’ showboating, and the Islamists are gleefully claiming they defeated him. Obama is left looking a weak and vascillating President…but with Putin withdrawing he now has the chance to really effect change by putting boots on the ground, the only way to deal with Syria, ISIS and Libya and stem the flow of migrants which will have a far more damaging effect on Europe than any possible damage Brexit could be claimed to do. Assad has absolutely no reason to stop fighting and negotiate unless his airforce is neutralised and his armour penned in and no fly zones and safe zones for refugees set up….only Obama can do that.
The worst refugee crisis since the second world war…then perhaps it should be treated like a war and the army mobilised…and conscript all those vigorous and fighting fit ‘refugees’ to fight for their own country…..then let’s see how many want to come to Europe….might find they suddenly don’t want to come here. Why should they benefit from the peace, stability and prosperity that millions of Europeans died for when they aren’t prepared to do the same for their own country and instead look for handouts from Europe? Remember the Free French, the Poles, the Czechs the Hungrians and so on who fled to Britain and joined the army to fight Hitler? Why are we not conscripting a ‘Free Arab’ army to liberate and stabilise North Africa and Syria?
And on a related note….funny how we get ‘refugees’ from Afghanistan and Iraq…and yet Northern Afghanistan is perfectly safe and many Iraqis head back to Iraq once they realise life isn’t wonderful in Europe….so just why are they classed as ‘refugees’…refugees from what if they can have a safe place in their own country?
Jailed Norwegian mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik has given a Nazi salute upon returning to court to argue that his isolation violates his rights.
The right-wing extremist says he is being held in inhuman conditions but the state rejects this.
Why is he not ‘Far-Right’? The BBC spends a lot of time and effort to disassociate Muslims from Islamist extremism and frequently doesn’t mention the words ‘Islam’ or ‘Muslim’ in many reports on Islamically inspired extremist and yet here they are casually associating Breivik with the general ‘Right-wing’ when no ‘right-wing’ person would condone his actions or incite them whereas the Koran specifically charges Muslims to kill and conquer to please Allah and make his religion supreme.
If the BBC is going to fence off Islam from criticism despite what it teaches and what so many of its followers do, as Islamic governments, as groups that represent Muslims, as individuals, and as violent extremists, then it should make even more of an effort to not smear those on the ‘Right’ by linking them by association to Breivik as they in no way condone, incite or encourage violence such as his.
The BBC is deliberately linking mass murder with ‘Right-wing’, encouraging people to make that association and thereby attempting to discredit and undermine anyone subsequently described as ‘Right-wing’ however innocuous their views actually are.
How different the BBC’s tone to the one they used with self-confessed Muslim extremists Moazzam Begg and Babar Ahmad who were feted as victims of an unjust war on terror having fought against the brutal oppression of the Muslim world by the West.
Can’t imagine Victoria Derbyshire will be giving Breivik a lovely little interview that hardly breaks the mask.
Just by coincidence I came across this by Daniel Hannan…
Leftist readers may by now be seething. Whenever I touch on this subject, it elicits an almost berserk reaction from people who think of themselves as progressives and see anti-fascism as part of their ideology. Well, chaps, maybe now you know how we conservatives feel when you loosely associate Nazism with “the Right”.
My beef with many (not all) Leftists is a simpler one. By refusing to return the compliment, by assuming a moral superiority, they make political dialogue almost impossible. Using the soubriquet “Right-wing” to mean “something undesirable” is a small but important example.
Next time you hear Leftists use the word fascist as a general insult, gently point out the difference between what they like to imagine the NSDAP stood for and what it actually proclaimed.
The BBC reports the CBI saying its members overwhelmingly support staying in the EU…..what the BBC makes no mention of is that the real reason they want to stay is the flow of cheap labour that is made available to them to import which saves them the cost of paying proper wages and of having to train British workers as they can poach those already trained by their home countries….odd how the pay and conditions and the ability to get work is suddenly of no concern to the BBC which spent the run-up to the election peddling Labour’s economic narrative of low wages and a work force on the scrap heap….and on another subject, funny how Osborne’s daft adoption of Miliband’s ‘predistribution’ is now not such a good idea raising costs for businesses and costing jobs when it was never so criticised when proposed by Miliband.
The BBC doesn’t report this survey of global businesses that suggests Brexit will have little effect on how they deal with the UK….
A British breakaway from the European Union this summer will do little damage to the country’s business ties with the rest of the world, according to a new survey conducted by CNBC.
Chief financial officers (CFOs) from some of the world’s biggest firms were largely sanguine on the outcome of a “Brexit” and how that could affect any current or future trading conditions with the island nation.
Over 70 percent of global CFOs – across a wide range of industries – said there would be “no change” on their perspective on how likely they would be to do business with the U.K. in the event of an exit.
However, 14.6 percent of respondents said they would be “slightly less likely” to do business with the country and 2.1 percent said they would be “significantly less likely.” Conversely, 2.1 percent said they would be “slightly more likely” to form ties with a breakaway nation.
From Tony Blair over the Iraq dossier, to the parliamentary expenses cheats who ended in jail, the last resort of any scoundrel is to claim that he acted in “good faith”.
Today, we witness this age-old excuse in daring new territory. The Victoria Derbyshire show on BBC Two will introduce us to Britain’s first-ever “good faith” supporter of Osama bin Laden.
Not the first time the BBC has allowed itself to be gulled….
The Trojan Horse plotters and their allies on Twitter have been getting touchingly excited about a BBC report into a secret meeting on Wednesday between officials of Birmingham City Council and the heads of the 21 schools involved. Alas, their claims that it “proved” the plot was a “hoax” don’t stand up to scrutiny.
Ahmad gives us two excuses for pleading guilty…one that it was a plea bargain….and two that he was guilty under US law so he had no choice really….which is it? He also compares himself to Nelson Mandela….but then again so did Mark Easton who thinks ‘extremists’ like Ahmad have a lot to teach us.
He also told us that he wouldn’t believe a non-Muslim when deciding if Bin Laden did 9/11….he’d rather go with the extremist, presumably however bad he was, just because he was Muslim…..kind of tells us where the loyalties really lie.
He claims he has PTSD caused due to how the British police treated him as they arrested him….and yet this is a man who fought in Bosnia and must have seen, and possibly done, some bloody deeds….speaking of which he claims that his support for the Taliban arose out of the way Muslims were treated in Bosnia…the massacre at Srebrenica…..Derbyshire didn’t intervene.
We’ve already looked at how the BBC have misled the public on Srebrenica but let me just remind you of why Srebrenica happened….it happened because the Muslim forces slaughtered the non-Muslims in surrounding villages….
In 1995 around 8000 Bosnian Muslims were killed in a massacre by Bosnian Serb forces.
This has become a ‘genocide’, a ‘Holocaust’…..a deadly narrative pushed by Muslims and picked up by the BBC and promoted with a relentless and deadly determination….a narrative that serves to radicalise Muslims.
There is another narrative….’the crimes were quite “extraordinary in the region committed by those Muslim soldiers made the Serbs’ desire for revenge inevitable…… the Muslim commander in Srebrenica, Naser Oric, “engaged in attacks during Orthodox (Christian) holidays and destroyed villages, massacring all the inhabitants. He stated… “One can’t be bothered with prisoners”
Shortly before the Bosnian Serb attack on Srebrenica, the Muslim troops stationed in that enclave carried out murderous attacks on nearby Serb villages. These attacks were certain to incite Serb commanders to retaliate against the Srebrenica garrison.
And…
Here is the report of French General Philippe Morillon, the UNPROFOR commander who first called international attention to the Srebrenica enclave, he is adamant that the crimes were quite “extraordinary in the region committed by those Muslim soldiers made the Serbs’ desire for revenge inevitable. He testified at The Hague Tribunal on February 12, 2004, that the Muslim commander in Srebrenica, Naser Oric, “engaged in attacks during Orthodox (Christian) holidays and destroyed villages, massacring all the inhabitants. This created a degree of hatred that was quite extraordinary in the region.”
Morillon also recounts how “the Serbs took me to a village to show me the evacuation of the bodies of the inhabitants that had been thrown into a hole, a village close to Bratunac. And this made me understand the degree to which this infernal situation of blood and vengeance […] led to a situation when I personally feared that the worst would happen if the Serbs of Bosnia managed to enter the enclaves and Srebrenica…I feared that the Serbs, the local Serbs, the Serbs of Bratunac, these militiamen, they wanted to take their revenge for everything that they attributed to Naser Oric. It wasn’t just Naser Oric that they wanted to revenge, take their revenge on; they wanted to revenge their dead on Orthodox Christians.”
Here is the Sky News video telling of the Muslim atrocities and the infiltration of Europe by fanatical Islamists….long before the Iraq war that the BBC blames for radicalising Muslims……..
When you think of those Islamists seeking to infiltrate Europe via the Balkans [Ignored by the BBC], the British Trojan Horse plot carried out by a senior MCB official [denied by the BBC] and the mass migration of Muslims into Europe now consider this Islamic State strategy that Der Spiegel spells out…how to infiltrate and take over a society…….naturally this being ISIS having the use of guns is a handy shortcut to power….but it is the use of Islamic educational and information institutions that should be of interest in the way they are used to spread the word and establish an Islamic ‘bridgehead’ in a society much as the Saudis do in the UK and elsewhere…..
An Iraqi officer planned Islamic State’s takeover in Syria and SPIEGEL has been given exclusive access to his papers. They portray an organization that, while seemingly driven by religious fanaticism, is actually coldly calculating.
What Bakr put on paper, page by page, with carefully outlined boxes for individual responsibilities, was nothing less than a blueprint for a takeover. It was not a manifesto of faith, but a technically precise plan for an “Islamic Intelligence State” — a caliphate run by an organization that resembled East Germany’s notorious Stasi domestic intelligence agency.
This blueprint was implemented with astonishing accuracy in the ensuing months. The plan would always begin with the same detail: The group recruited followers under the pretense of opening a Dawah office, an Islamic missionary center. Of those who came to listen to lectures and attend courses on Islamic life, one or two men were selected and instructed to spy on their village and obtain a wide range of information. To that end, Haji Bakr compiled lists such as the following:
List the powerful families.
Name the powerful individuals in these families.
Find out their sources of income.
Name names and the sizes of (rebel) brigades in the village.
Find out the names of their leaders, who controls the brigades and their political orientation.
Find out their illegal activities (according to Sharia law), which could be used to blackmail them if necessary.
The spies were told to note such details as whether someone was a criminal or a homosexual, or was involved in a secret affair, so as to have ammunition for blackmailing later. “We will appoint the smartest ones as Sharia sheiks,” Bakr had noted. “We will train them for a while and then dispatch them.” As a postscript, he had added that several “brothers” would be selected in each town to marry the daughters of the most influential families, in order to “ensure penetration of these families without their knowledge.”
The spies were to find out as much as possible about the target towns: Who lived there, who was in charge, which families were religious, which Islamic school of religious jurisprudence they belonged to, how many mosques there were, who the imam was, how many wives and children he had and how old they were. Other details included what the imam’s sermons were like, whether he was more open to the Sufi, or mystical variant of Islam, whether he sided with the opposition or the regime, and what his position was on jihad. Bakr also wanted answers to questions like: Does the imam earn a salary? If so, who pays it? Who appoints him? Finally: How many people in the village are champions of democracy?
The agents were supposed to function as seismic signal waves, sent out to track down the tiniest cracks, as well as age-old faults within the deep layers of society — in short, any information that could be used to divide and subjugate the local population.
The expansion of IS began so inconspicuously that, a year later, many Syrians had to think for a moment about when the jihadists had appeared in their midst. The Dawah offices that were opened in many towns in northern Syria in the spring of 2013 were innocent-looking missionary offices, not unlike the ones that Islamic charities have opened worldwide.
When a Dawah office opened in Raqqa, “all they said was that they were ‘brothers,’ and they never said a word about the ‘Islamic State’,” reports a doctor who fled from the city. A Dawah office was also opened in Manbij, a liberal city in Aleppo Province, in the spring of 2013. “I didn’t even notice it at first,” recalls a young civil rights activist. “Anyone was allowed to open what he wished. We would never have suspected that someone other than the regime could threaten us. It was only when the fighting erupted in January that we learned that Da’ish,” the Arab acronym for IS, “had already rented several apartments where it could store weapons and hide its men.”
The situation was similar in the towns of al-Bab, Atarib and Azaz. Dawah offices were also opened in neighboring Idlib Province in early 2013, in the towns of Sermada, Atmeh, Kafr Takharim, al-Dana and Salqin. As soon as it had identified enough “students” who could be recruited as spies, IS expanded its presence.
The BBC never goes beyond the face value that Muslims like Babar Ahmad presents to them…Derbyshire in particular is extremely reluctant to challenge Muslim speakers who are clearly not your everyday members of the Public so slick and practiced are their arguments….the BBC in fact supports the very narrative put forward by the Islamists of it being Western foreign policy that is to blame for all the world’s ills and thereby feeds the propaganda that drives the recruitment of yet more radicalised Muslims.
The BBC needs to start asking what are the consequences for Western society that has an ever increasing number of Muslims within. Of course it won’t ask that as the answer is one they don’t want to hear or to be allowed to be heard.
The BBC seems entirely unconcerned, and indeed seems to want to hide, Labour’s problems with anti-Semitism and other extremist beliefs.
Last week the BBC ignored a very high profile comment from Cameron on PMQs denouncing Labour for allowing Gerry Downing back into the Party but this week as the storm builds they have had to report a similar instance of someone with very dubious views being, not only allowed back into the Party, but placed in a senior position after she Tweeted that ISIS should attack Israel amongst other nasties. The trouble is you have to look fairly hard to find the report of that and the one about yet another investigation into Labour related anti-Semitism… buried as they are on the ‘Politics’ page.
Corbyn has many links with various dodgy Islamists, as does Labour’s London Mayoral candidate Sadiq Khan, Livingstone also has such links and is known to make unpleasant remarks to Jewish reporters, McDonnell is a fan of the IRA and Shameless Milne….well let’s not go there.
Any news organisation worth its salt would be tearing Corbyn’s Labour Party apart….the BBC would certainly be putting the Tories on the rack if there were people with similar views about Muslims as Labour Party members have about Jews….it would be front page news for days, if not weeks, with freedom of information ‘scoops’ and leaks of more horrors being reported with relish.
Not so with the Labour Party and the Jews…..why not? Does the BBC have a ‘secret’ liking for Labour and a dislike of the Israelis?
Just what could be the reason for the lack of interest?
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
JohnC April 29, 2024 at 9:38 am on Start the Week 29th April 2024If someone upset Gordon when he was cancellor, he would have a tantrum and refuse to speak. Eventually they would...
JohnC April 29, 2024 at 9:25 am on Start the Week 29th April 2024https://www.facebook.com/reel/987765536252463 And so it starts. Does Sunak actually think this is going to win him the next election ?. The....
tomo April 29, 2024 at 9:21 am on Start the Week 29th April 2024https://twitter.com/GeoffBuysCars/status/1784582491392590330
AsISeeIt April 29, 2024 at 9:20 am on Start the Week 29th April 2024New dawn fades and more bad news for Tory MPs edition For a brief moment this morning it seemed as...
Zephir April 29, 2024 at 9:09 am on Start the Week 29th April 2024just for informatioin: I would draw your attention to the 2.15 time frame in the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP0fqULFaDk
Fedup2 April 29, 2024 at 9:02 am on Start the Week 29th April 2024A prize will be given to the first accurate report of the demise of Hamas SNP …. I reckon he...
Fedup2 April 29, 2024 at 8:57 am on Start the Week 29th April 2024Zeph - I sympathise / empathise more than you ll ever know …. If I was in that position I’d...
Zephir April 29, 2024 at 8:47 am on Start the Week 29th April 2024Look on the bright side, she got a dog to say "sausages" If I did that on national TV I...
Zephir April 29, 2024 at 8:24 am on Start the Week 29th April 2024@ Fed There is, and I am being urged to do so by my solictor and family. and it is...
Fedup2 April 29, 2024 at 8:22 am on Start the Week 29th April 2024Today I thought I’d dip in to listen to the mourning over their SNP Hamas … But got BBC royalty...
